Christian Mysticism Part 19

The doctrine of the Divine spark (_synteresis_) is held by Law, but in a more definitely Christian form than by Eckhart. "If Christ was to raise a new life like His own in every man, then every man must have had originally in the inmost spirit of his life a seed of Christ, or Christ as a seed of heaven, lying there in a state of insensibility, out of which it could not arise but by the mediatorial power of Christ.... For what could begin to deny self, if there were not something in man different from self?... The Word of G.o.d is the hidden treasure of every human soul, immured under flesh and blood, till as a day-star it arises in our hearts, and changes the son of an earthly Adam into a son of G.o.d." Is not this the Platonic doctrine of _anamnesis_, Christianised in a most beautiful manner?

Very characteristic of the later Mysticism is the language which both Bohme and Law use about the future state. "The soul, when it departs from the body," Bohme writes, "needeth not to go far; for where the body dies, there is heaven and h.e.l.l. G.o.d is there, and the devil; yea, each in his own kingdom. There also is Paradise; and the soul needeth only to enter through the deep door in the centre." Law is very emphatic in a.s.serting that heaven and h.e.l.l are states, not places, and that they are "no foreign, separate, and imposed states, adjudged to us by the will of G.o.d." "d.a.m.nation," he says, "is the natural, essential state of our own disordered nature, which is impossible, in the nature of the thing, to be anything else but our own h.e.l.l, both here and hereafter." "There is nothing that is supernatural," he says very finely, "in the whole system of our redemption. Every part of it has its ground in the workings and powers of nature, and all our redemption is only nature set right, or made to be that which it ought to be.[354] There is nothing that is supernatural but G.o.d alone.... Right and wrong, good and evil, true and false, happiness and misery, are as unchangeable in nature as time and s.p.a.ce. Nothing, therefore, can be done to any creature supernaturally, or in a way that is without or contrary to the powers of nature; but every thing or creature that is to be helped, that is, to have any good done to it, or any evil taken out of it, can only have it done so far as the powers of nature are able, and rightly directed to effect it.[355]"

It is difficult to abstain from quoting more pa.s.sages like this, in which Faith, which had been so long directed only to the unseen and unknown, sheds her bright beams over this earth of ours, and claims all nature for her own. The laws of nature are now recognised as the laws of G.o.d, and for that very reason they cannot be broken or arbitrarily suspended. Redemption is a law of life. There will come a time[356], "the time of the lilies," as Bohme calls it, when all nature will be delivered from bondage. "All the design of Christian redemption," says Law, "is to remove everything that is unheavenly, gross, dark, wrathful, and disordered from every part of this fallen world." No text is oftener in his mouth than the words of St. Paul which I read as the text of this Lecture. That "dim sympathy" of the human spirit with the life of nature which Plotinus felt, but which mediaeval dualism had almost quenched, has now become an intense and happy consciousness of community with all living things, as subjects of one all-embracing and unchanging law, the law of perfect love.

Magic and portents, apparitions and visions, the raptures of "infused contemplation" and their dark Nemesis of Satanic delusions, can no more trouble the serenity of him who has learnt to see the same G.o.d in nature whom he has found in the holy place of his own heart.

It was impossible to separate Law from the "blessed Behmen," whose disciple he was proud to profess himself. But in putting them together I have been obliged to depart from the chronological order, for the Cambridge Platonists, as they are usually called, come between. This, however, need cause no confusion, for the Platonists had no direct influence upon Law. Law, Nonjuror as well as mystic, remained a High Churchman by sympathy, and hated Rationalism; while the Platonists sprang from an Evangelical school, were never tired of extolling Reason, and regarded Bohme as a fanciful "enthusiast.[357]" And yet, we find so very much in common between the Platonists and William Law, that these party differences seem merely superficial. The same exalted type of Mysticism appears in both.

The group of philosophical divines, who had their centre in some of the Cambridge colleges towards the middle of the seventeenth century, furnishes one of the most interesting and important chapters in the history of our Church. Never since the time of the early Greek Fathers had any orthodox communion produced thinkers so independent and yet so thoroughly loyal to the Church. And seldom has the Christian temper found a n.o.bler expression than in the lives and writings of such men as Whichcote and John Smith.[358]

These men made no secret of their homage to Plato. And let it be noticed that they were students of Plato and Plotinus more than of Dionysius and his successors. Their Platonism is not of the debased Oriental type, and is entirely free from self-absorbed quietism. The _via negativa_ has disappeared as completely in their writings as in those of Bohme; the world is for them as for him the mirror of the Deity; but, being philosophers and not physicists, they are most interested in claiming for religion the whole field of _intellectual_ life. They are fully convinced that there can be no ultimate contradiction between philosophy or science and Christian faith; and this accounts not only for their praise of "reason," but for the happy optimism which appears everywhere in their writings. The luxurious and indolent Restoration clergy, whose lives were shamed by the simplicity and spirituality of the Platonists, invented the word "Lat.i.tudinarian"

to throw at them, "a long nickname which they have taught their tongues to p.r.o.nounce as roundly as if it were shorter than it is by four or five syllables"; but they could not deny that their enemies were loyal sons of the Church of England.[359] What the Platonists meant by making reason the seat of authority may be seen by a few quotations from Whichcote and Smith, who for our purpose are, I think, the best representatives of the school. Whichcote answers Tuckney, who had remonstrated with him for "a vein of doctrine, in which reason hath too much given to it in the mysteries of faith";--"Too much" and "too often" on these points! "The Scripture is full of such truths, and I discourse on them too much and too often! Sir, I oppose not rational to spiritual, for spiritual is most rational." Elsewhere he writes, "He that gives reason for what he has said, has done what is fit to be done, and the most that can be done." "Reason is the Divine Governor of man's life; it is the very voice of G.o.d." "When the doctrine of the Gospel becomes the reason of our mind, it will be the principle of our life." "It ill becomes us to make our intellectual faculties Gibeonites.[360]" How far this teaching differs from the frigid "common-sense" morality prevalent in the eighteenth century, may be judged from the following, which stamps Whichcote as a genuine mystic. "Though liberty of judgment be everyone's right, yet how few there are that make use of this right! For the use of this right doth depend upon self-improvement by meditation, consideration, examination, prayer, and the like. These are things antecedent and prerequisite." John Smith, in a fine pa.s.sage too long to quote in full, says: "Reason in man being _lumen de lumine_, a light flowing from the Fountain and Father of lights ... was to enable man to work out of himself all those notions of G.o.d which are the true groundwork of love and obedience to G.o.d, and conformity to Him.... But since man's fall from G.o.d, the inward virtue and vigour of reason is much abated, the soul having suffered a [Greek: pterorryesis], as Plato speaks, a _defluvium pennarum_.... And therefore, besides the truth of natural inscription, G.o.d hath provided the truth of Divine revelation.... But besides this outward revelation, there is also an inward impression of it ... which is in a more special manner attributed to G.o.d.... G.o.d only can so shine upon our gla.s.sy understandings, as to beget in them a picture of Himself, and turn the soul like wax or clay to the seal of His own light and love. He that made our souls in His own image and likeness can easily find a way into them. The Word that G.o.d speaks, having found a way into the soul, imprints itself there as with the point of a diamond.... It is G.o.d alone that acquaints the soul with the truths of revelation, and also strengthens and raises the soul to better apprehensions even of natural truth, G.o.d being that in the intellectual world which the sun is in the sensible, as some of the ancient Fathers love to speak, and the ancient philosophers too, who meant G.o.d by their _Intellectus Agens_[361] whose proper work they supposed to be not so much to enlighten the object as the faculty."

The Platonists thus lay great stress on the inner light, and identify it with the purified reason. The best exposition of their teaching on this head is in Smith's beautiful sermon on "The True Way or Method of attaining to Divine Knowledge." "Divinity," he says, "is a Divine life rather than a Divine science, to be understood rather by a spiritual sensation than by any verbal description. A good life is the _prolepsis_ of Divine science--the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Divinity is a true efflux from the eternal light, which, like the sunbeams, does not only enlighten, but also heat and enliven; and therefore our Saviour hath in His beat.i.tudes connext purity of heart to the beatific vision." "Systems and models furnish but a poor wan light," compared with that which shines in purified souls. "To seek our divinity merely in books and writings is to seek the living among the dead"; in these, "truth is often not so much enshrined as entombed." "That which enables us to know and understand aright the things of G.o.d, must be a living principle of holiness within us. The sun of truth never shines into any unpurged souls.... Such as men themselves are, such will G.o.d Himself seem to be.... Some men have too bad hearts to have good heads.... He that will find truth must seek it with a free judgment and a sanctified mind."

Smith was well read in mystical theology, and was aware how much his ideal differed from that of Dionysian Mysticism. His criticism of the _via negativa_ is so admirable that I must quote part of it. "Good men ... are content and ready to deny themselves for G.o.d. I mean not that they should deny their own reason, as some would have it, for that were to deny a beam of Divine light, and so to deny G.o.d, instead of denying ourselves for Him.... By self-denial, I mean the soul's quitting all its own interest in itself, and an entire resignation of itself to Him as to all points of service and duty; and thus the soul loses itself in G.o.d, and lives in the possession not so much of its own being as of the Divinity, desiring only to be great in G.o.d, to glory in His light, and spread itself in His fulness; to be filled always by Him, and to empty itself again into Him; to receive all from Him, and to expend all for Him; and so to live, not as its own, but as G.o.d's." Wicked men "maintain a _meum_ and _tuum_ between G.o.d and themselves," but the good man is able to make a full surrender of himself, "triumphing in nothing more than in his own nothingness, and in the allness of the Divinity. But, indeed, this his being nothing is the only way to be all things; this his having nothing the truest way of possessing all things.... The spirit of religion is always ascending upwards; and, spreading itself through the whole essence of the soul, loosens it from a self-confinement and narrowness, and so renders it more capacious of Divine enjoyment.... The spirit of a good man is always drinking in fountain-goodness, and fills itself more and more, till it be filled with all the fulness of G.o.d." "It is not a melancholy kind of sitting still, and slothful waiting, that speaks men enlivened by the Spirit and power of G.o.d. It is not religion to stifle and smother those active powers and principles which are within us.... Good men do not walk up and down the world merely like ghosts and shadows; but they are indeed living men, by a real partic.i.p.ation from Him who is indeed a quickening Spirit."

"Neither were it an happiness worth the having for a mind, like an hermit sequestered from all things else, to spend an eternity in self-converse and the enjoyment of such a diminutive superficial nothing as itself is.... We read in the Gospel of such a question of our Saviour's, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? We may invert it, What do you return within to see? A soul confined within the private and narrow cell of its own particular being? Such a soul deprives itself of all that almighty and essential glory and goodness which shines round about it, which spreads itself throughout the whole universe; I say, it deprives itself of all this, for the enjoying of such a poor, petty, and diminutive thing as itself is, which yet it can never enjoy truly in such retiredness."

The English Platonists are equally sound on the subject of ecstasy.

Whichcote says: "He doth not know G.o.d at all as He is, nor is he in a good state of religion, who doth not find in himself at times ravishings with sweet and lovely considerations of the Divine perfections." And Smith: "Who can tell the delights of those mysterious converses with the Deity, when reason is turned into sense, and faith becomes vision? The fruit of this knowledge is sweeter than honey and the honeycomb.... By the Platonists' leave, this life and knowledge (that of the 'contemplative man') peculiarly belongs to the true and sober Christian. This life is nothing else but an infant-Christ formed in his soul. But we must not mistake: this knowledge is here but in its infancy." While we are here, "our own imaginative powers, which are perpetually attending the best acts of our souls, will be breathing a gross dew upon the pure gla.s.s of our understandings."

"Heaven is first a temper, then a place," says Whichcote, and Smith says the same about h.e.l.l. "Heaven is not a thing without us, nor is happiness anything distinct from a true conjunction of the mind with G.o.d." "Though we could suppose ourselves to be at truce with heaven, and all Divine displeasure laid asleep; yet would our own sins, if they continue unmortified, make an aetna or Vesuvius within us.[362]"

This view of the indissoluble connexion between holiness and blessedness, as between sin and d.a.m.nation, leads Smith to reject strenuously the doctrine of imputed, as opposed to imparted, righteousness. "G.o.d does not bid us be warmed and filled," he says, "and deny us those necessities which our starving and hungry souls call for.... I doubt sometimes, some of our dogmata and notions about justification may puff us up in far higher and goodlier conceits of ourselves than G.o.d hath of us, and that we profanely make the unspotted righteousness of Christ to serve only as a covering wherein to wrap our foul deformities and filthy vices, and when we have done, think ourselves in as good credit and repute with G.o.d as we are with ourselves, and that we are become Heaven's darlings as much as we are our own.[363]"

These extracts will show that the English Platonists breathe a larger air than the later Romish mystics, and teach a religion more definitely Christian than Erigena and Eckhart. I shall now show how this happy result was connected with a more truly spiritual view of the external world than we have met with in the earlier part of our survey. That the laws of nature are the laws of G.o.d, that "man, as man, is averse to what is evil and wicked," that "evil is unnatural,"

and a "contradiction of the law of our being," which is only found in "wicked men and devils," is one of Whichcote's "gallant themes." And Smith sets forth the true principles of Nature-Mysticism in a splendid pa.s.sage, with which I will conclude this Lecture:--

"G.o.d made the universe and all the creatures contained therein as so many gla.s.ses wherein He might reflect His own glory. He hath copied forth Himself in the creation; and in this outward world we may read the lovely characters of the Divine goodness, power, and wisdom....

But how to find G.o.d here, and feelingly to converse with Him, and being affected with the sense of the Divine glory shining out upon the creation, how to pa.s.s out of the sensible world into the intellectual, is not so effectually taught by that philosophy which professed it most, as by true religion. That which knits and unites G.o.d and the soul together can best teach it how to ascend and descend upon those golden links that unite, as it were, the world to G.o.d. That Divine Wisdom, that contrived and beautified this glorious structure, can best explain her own art, and carry up the soul back again in these reflected beams to Him who is the Fountain of them.... Good men may easily find every creature pointing out to that Being whose image and superscription it bears, and climb up from those darker resemblances of the Divine wisdom and goodness, shining out in different degrees upon several creatures, till they sweetly repose themselves in the bosom of the Divinity; and while they are thus conversing with this lower world ... they find G.o.d many times secretly flowing into their souls, and leading them silently out of the court of the temple into the Holy Place.... Thus religion, where it is in truth and power, renews the very spirit of our minds, and doth in a manner spiritualise this outward creation to us.... It is nothing but a thick mist of pride and self-love that hinders men's eyes from beholding that sun which enlightens them and all things else.... A good man is no more solicitous whether this or that good thing be mine, or whether my perfections exceed the measure of this or that particular creature; for whatsoever good he beholds anywhere, he enjoys and delights in it as much as if it were his own, and whatever he beholds in himself, he looks not upon it as his property, but as a common good; for all these beams come from one and the same Fountain and Ocean of light in whom he loves them all with an universal love.... Thus may a man walk up and down the world as in a garden of spices, and suck a Divine sweetness out of every flower. There is a twofold meaning in every creature, a literal and a mystical, and the one is but the ground of the other; and as the Jews say of their law, so a good man says of everything that his senses offer to him--it speaks to his lower part, but it points out something above to his mind and spirit. It is the drowsy and muddy spirit of superst.i.tion which is fain to set some idol at its elbow, something that may jog it and put it in mind of G.o.d.

Whereas true religion never finds itself out of the infinite sphere of the Divinity ... it beholds itself everywhere in the midst of that glorious unbounded Being who is indivisibly everywhere. A good man finds every place he treads upon holy ground; to him the world is G.o.d's temple; he is ready to say with Jacob, 'How dreadful is this place! this is none other than the house of G.o.d, this is the gate of heaven.'"

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 316: In R.L. Nettleship's _Remains_.]

[Footnote 317: In addition to pa.s.sages quoted elsewhere, the following sentence from Luthardt is a good statement of the symbolic theory: "Nature is a world of symbolism, a rich hieroglyphic book: everything visible conceals an invisible mystery, and the last mystery of all is G.o.d." Goethe's "Alles vergangliche ist nur ein Gleichniss" would be better without the "nur," from our point of view.]

[Footnote 318: Recejac, _Essai sur les Fondements de la Connaissance Mystique_.]

[Footnote 319: In the _Edinburgh Review_, October 1896. The article referred to, on "The Catholic Mystics of the Middle Ages," is beautifully written, and should be read by all who are interested in the subject.]

[Footnote 320: This is Kant's use of the word. See Bosanquet, _History of aesthetic_, p. 273: "A symbol is for Kant a perception or presentation which represents a conception neither conventionally as a mere sign, nor directly, but in the abstract, as a scheme, but indirectly though appropriately through a similarity between the rules which govern our reflection in the symbol and in the thing (or idea) symbolised." "In this sense beauty is a symbol of the moral order."

Goethe's definition is also valuable: "That is true symbolism where the more particular represents the more general, not as a dream or shade, but as a vivid, instantaneous revelation of the inscrutable."]

[Footnote 321: Or rather of power and dignity; for in some early Byzantine works even Satan is represented with a nimbus.]

[Footnote 322: Emerson says rightly, "Mysticism (in a bad sense) consists in the mistake of an accidental and individual symbol for an universal one."]

[Footnote 323: The distinction which Ruskin draws between the _fancy_ and the _imagination_ may help us to discern the true and the false in Symbolism. "Fancy has to do with the outsides of things, and is content therewith. She can never _feel_, but is one of the most purely and simply intellectual of the faculties. She cannot be made serious; no edge-tool, but she will play with: whereas the imagination is in all things the reverse. She cannot but be serious; she sees too far, too darkly, too solemnly, too earnestly, ever to smile.... There is reciprocal action between the intensity of moral feeling and the power of imagination. Hence the powers of the imagination may always be tested by accompanying tenderness of emotion.... Imagination is quiet, fancy restless; fancy details, imagination suggests.... All egotism is destructive of imagination, whose play and power depend altogether on our being able to forget ourselves.... Imagination has no respect for sayings or opinions: it is independent" (_Modern Painters_, vol. ii.

chap. iii.).]

[Footnote 324: Cf. Harnack, _History of Dogma_, vol. ii. p. 144: "What we nowadays understand by 'symbols' is a thing which is not that which it represents; at that time (in the second century) 'symbol' denoted a thing which, in some kind of way, is that which it signifies; but, on the other hand, according to the ideas of that period, the really heavenly element lay either in or behind the visible form without being identical with it. Accordingly, the distinction of a symbolic and realistic conception of the Lord's Supper is altogether to be rejected." And vol. iv. p. 289: "The 'symbol' was never a mere type or sign, but always embodied a mystery." So Justin Martyr uses [Greek: symbolikos eipein] and [Greek: eipein en mysterio] as interchangeable terms; and Tertullian says that the name of Joshua was _nominis futuri sacramentum_.]

[Footnote 325: So some thinkers have felt that "the Word" is not the best expression for the creative activity of G.o.d. The pa.s.sage of Goethe where Faust rejects "Word," "Thought," and "Power," and finally translates, "In the beginning was the _Act_," is well known. And Philo, in a very interesting pa.s.sage, says that Nature is the language in which G.o.d speaks; "but there is this difference, that while the human voice is made to be _heard_, the voice of G.o.d is made to be _seen_: what G.o.d says consists of acts, not of words" (_De Decem Orac_. II).]

[Footnote 326: Aquinas says of the sacraments, "efficiunt quod figurant." The Thomists held that the sacraments are "causae" of grace; the Scotists (Nominalists), that grace is their inseparable concomitant. The maintenance of a real correspondence between sign and significance seems to be essential to the idea of a sacrament, but then the danger of degrading it into magic lies close at hand.]

[Footnote 327: In the case of irregular Baptism, the maxim holds: "Fieri non debuit; factum valet." Cf. Bp. Churton, _The Missionary's Foundation of Doctrine_, p. 129. The reason for this difference between the two sacraments is quite clear.]

[Footnote 328: It is, of course, difficult to decide how far such statements were meant to be taken literally. But there is no doubt that both Baptism and the Eucharist were supposed to _confer_ immortality. Cf. Tert. _de Bapt._ 2 (621, Oehl.), "nonne mirandum est lavacro dilui mortem?"; Gregory of Nyssa, _Or. cat. magn._ 35, [Greek: me dynasthai de phemi dicha tes kata to loutron anagenneseos en anastasei genesthai ton anthropon]. Basil, too, calls Baptism [Greek: dynamis eis ten anastasin]. Of the Eucharist, Ignatius uses the phrase quoted, [Greek: pharmakon tes athanasias], and [Greek: antidotos tou me apothanein]; and Gregory of Nyssa uses the same language as about Baptism. See, further, in Appendices B and C.]

[Footnote 329: E.g. [Greek: metallaxis] (Theodoret), [Greek: metabole] (Cyril), [Greek: metapoiesis] (Gregory Naz.), [Greek: metastoicheiosis] (Theophylact). The last-named goes on to say that "we are in the same way _transelementated_ into Christ." The Christian Neoplatonists naturally regard the sacrament as symbolic. Origen is inclined to hold that _every_ action should be sacramental, and that material symbols, such as bread and wine, and partic.i.p.ation in a ceremonial, cannot be necessary vehicles of spiritual grace; this is in accordance with the excessive idealism and intellectualism of his system. Dionysius calls the elements [Greek: symbola, eikones, ant.i.typa, aistheta tina anti noeton metalambanomena]; and Maximus, his commentator, defines a symbol as [Greek: aistheton ti anti noetou metalambanomenon].]

[Footnote 330: Harnack (_History of Dogma_, vol. vi. p. 102, English edition) says: "In the centuries before the Reformation, a growing value was attached not only to the sacraments, but to crosses, amulets, relics, holy places, etc. As long as what the soul seeks is not the rock of a.s.surance, but means for inciting to piety, it will create for itself a thousand holy things. It is therefore an extremely superficial view that regards the most inward Mysticism and the service of idols as contradictory. The opposite view, rather, is correct." I have seldom found myself able to agree with this writer's judgments upon Mysticism; and this one is no exception. The "most inward Mysticism" does not occupy itself much with external "incitements to piety," nor is this the motive with which a mystic could ever (e.g.) receive the Eucharist. The use of amulets, etc., which Harnack finds to have been spreading before the Reformation, and which was certainly very prevalent in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, had very little to do with "the most inward Mysticism." My view as to the place of magic in the history of Mysticism is given in this Lecture; I protest against identifying it with the essence of Mysticism. Symbolic Mysticism soon outgrew it; introspective Mysticism never valued it. The use of visible things as stimulants to piety is another matter; it has its place in the systems of the Catholic mystics, but as a very early stage in the spiritual ascent. What I have said as to the inconsistency of a high sacramental doctrine with the favourite injunctions to "cast away all images," which we find in the mediaeval mystics, is, I think, indisputable.]

[Footnote 331: The most recent developments of German idealistic philosophy, as set forth in the cosmology of Lotze, and still more of Fechner, may perhaps be described as an attempt to preserve the truth of Animism on a much higher plane, without repudiating the universality of law.]

[Footnote 332: I refer especially to Huysmans' two "mystical" novels, _En Route_ and _La Cathedrale_. The naked Fetishism of the latter book almost pa.s.ses belief. We have a Madonna who is good-natured at Lourdes and cross-grained at La Salette; who likes "pretty speeches and little coaxing ways" in "paying court" to her, and who at the end is apostrophised as "our Lady of the Pillar," "our Lady of the Crypt." It may perhaps be excusable to resort to such expedients as these in the conversion of savages; but there is something singularly repulsive in the picture (drawn apparently from life) of a profligate man of letters seeking salvation in a Christianity which has lowered itself far beneath educated paganism. At any rate, let not the name of Mysticism be given to such methods.]

[Footnote 333: I refer especially to the horrors connected with the belief in witchcraft, on which see Lecky, _Rationalism in Europe_, vol. i. "Remy, a judge of Nancy, boasted that he had put to death eight hundred witches in sixteen years." "In the bishopric of Wartzburg, nine hundred were burnt in one year." As late as 1850, some French peasants burnt alive a woman named Bedouret, whom they supposed to be a witch.]

[Footnote 334: The degradation of Mysticism in the Roman Church since the Reformation may be estimated by comparing the definitions of Mysticism and Mystical Theology current in the Middle Ages with the following from Ribet, who is recognised as a standard authority on the subject: "La Theologie mystique, au point de vue subjectif et experimental, nous semble pouvoir etre definie; une attraction surnaturelle et pa.s.sive de l'ame vers Dieu, provenant d'une illumination et d'un embras.e.m.e.nt interieurs, qui previennent la reflexion, surpa.s.sent l'effort humain, _et peuvent avoir sur le corps un retentiss.e.m.e.nt merveilleux et irresistible_." "Au point de vue doctrinal et objectif, la mystique peut se definir: la science qui traite _des phenomenes surnaturels_, soit intimes, _soit exterieurs_, qui preparent, accompagnent, et suivent la contemplation divine." The time is past, if it ever existed, when such superst.i.tions could be believed without grave injury to mental and moral health.]

[Footnote 335: This language about the teaching of the Roman Church may be considered unseemly by those who have not studied the subject.

Those who have done so will think it hardly strong enough. In self-defence, I will quote one sentence from Schram, whose work on "Mysticism" is considered authoritative, and is studied in the great Catholic university of Louvain: "Quaeri potest utrum daemon per turpem concubitum possit violenter opprimere marem vel feminam cuius obsessio permissa sit ob finem perfectionis et contemplationis acquirendae." The answer is in the affirmative, and the evidence is such as could hardly be transcribed, even in Latin. Schram's book is mainly intended for the direction of confessing priests, and the evidence shows, as might have been expected, that the subjects of these "phenomena" are generally poor nuns suffering from hysteria.]

[Footnote 336: At a time when many are hoping to find in the study of the obscurer psychical phenomena a breach in the "middle wall of part.i.tion" between the spiritual and material worlds, I may seem to have brushed aside too contemptuously the floating ma.s.s of popular beliefs which "spiritualists" think worthy of serious investigation. I must therefore be allowed to say that in my opinion psychical research has already established results of great value, especially in helping to break down that view of the _imperviousness_ of the ego which is fatal to Mysticism, and (I venture to think) to any consistent philosophy. Monadism, we may hope, is doomed. But the more popular kind of spiritualism is simply the old hankering after supernatural manifestations, which are always dear to semi-regenerate minds.]

[Footnote 337: It is, I think, significant that the word "imagination"

was slow in making its way into psychology. [Greek: Phantasia] is defined by Aristotle (_de Anima_, iii. 3) as [Greek: kinesis hypo tes aistheseos tes kat energeian gignomene], but it is not till Philostratus that the creative imagination is opposed to [Greek: mimesis]. Cf. _Vit. Apoll._ vi. 19, [Greek: mimesis men demiourgesei ho eiden, phantasia de kai ho me eiden].]

[Footnote 338: Reuchlin, _De arte cabbalistica_: "Est enim Cabbala divinae revelationis ad salutiferam Dei et formarum separatarum contemplationem traditae symbolica receptio, quam qui coelesti sortiumtur afflatu recto nomine Cabbalici dic.u.n.tur, eorum vero discipulos cognomento Cabbalaeos appellabimus, et qui alioquin eos imitari conantur, Cabbalistae nominandi sunt."]

[Footnote 339: The mystical Rabbis ascribe the Cabbala to the angel Razael, the reputed teacher of Adam in Paradise, and say that this angel gave Adam the Cabbala as his lesson-book. There is a clear and succinct account of the main Cabbalistic docrines in Hunt, _Pantheism and Christianity_, pp. 84-88.]

[Footnote 340: But the notion that the deepest mysteries should not be entrusted to writing is found in Clement and Origen; cf. Origen, _Against Celsus_, vi. 26: [Greek: ouk akindynon ten ton toiouton sapheneian pisteusai graphe]. And Clement says: [Greek: ta aporreta, kathaper ho theos, logo pisteuetai ou grammati]. The curious legend of an oral tradition also appears in Clement (_Hypolyp. Fragm._ in Eusebius, _H.E._ ii. I. 4): [Greek: Iakobo to dikaio kai Ioane kai Petro meta ten anastasin paredoke ten gnosin ho kyrios, outoi tois loipois apostolois paredokan, oi de loipoi apostoloi tois hebdomekonta, on eis en kai Barnabas.] Origen, too, speaks of "things spoken in private to the disciples."]

[Footnote 341: The following extract from Pico's _Apology_ may be interesting, as ill.u.s.trating the close connexion between magic and science at this period: "One of the chief charges against me is that I am a magician. Have I not myself distinguished two kinds of magic?

One, which the Greeks call [Greek: goeteia], depends entirely on alliance with evil spirits, and deserves to be regarded with horror, and to be punished; the other is magic in the proper sense of the word. The former subjects man to the evil spirits, the latter makes them serve him. The former is neither an art nor a science; the latter embraces the deepest mysteries, and the knowledge of the whole of Nature with her powers. While it connects and combines the forces scattered by G.o.d through the whole world, it does not so much work miracles as come to the help of working nature. Its researches into the sympathies of things enable it to bring to light hidden marvels from the secret treasure-houses of the world, just as if it created them itself. As the countryman trains the vine upon the elm, so the magician marries the earthly objects to heavenly bodies. His art is beneficial and G.o.dlike, for it brings men to wonder at the works of G.o.d, than which nothing conduces more to true religion."]

[Footnote 342: This was a very old theory. Cf. Lecky, _Rationalism in Europe_, vol. i. p. 264. "The _Clavis_ of St. Melito, who was bishop of Sardis, it is said, in the beginning of the second century, consists of a catalogue of many hundreds of birds, beasts, plants, and minerals that were symbolical of Christian virtues, doctrines, and personages."]

[Footnote 343: The a.n.a.logy between allegorism in religion and the hieroglyphic writing is drawn out by Clement, _Strom._ v. 4 and 7.]

[Footnote 344: The distinction, however, would be unintelligible to the savage mind. To primitive man a _name_ is a symbol in the strictest sense. Hence, "the knowledge, invocation, and vain repet.i.tion of a deity's name const.i.tutes in itself an actual, if mystic, union with the deity named" (Jevons, _Introduction to the History of Religion_, p. 245). This was one of the chief reasons for making a secret of the cultus, and even of the name of a patron-deity.

To reveal it was to admit strangers into the tutelage of the national G.o.d.]