diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-0.txt | 21198 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-0.zip | bin | 426530 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-h.zip | bin | 589303 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-h/50206-h.htm | 23693 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 35589 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-h/images/frontispiece.jpg | bin | 70495 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/50206-h/images/titlepage.jpg | bin | 18217 -> 0 bytes |
10 files changed, 17 insertions, 44891 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8c1d8dc --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #50206 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50206) diff --git a/old/50206-0.txt b/old/50206-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index c680e09..0000000 --- a/old/50206-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21198 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Mystical Element of Religion, as -studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa , by Baron Friedrich von Hügel - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: The Mystical Element of Religion, as studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa and her friends, Volume 2 (of 2) - -Author: Baron Friedrich von Hügel - -Release Date: October 14, 2015 [EBook #50206] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION, VOL 2 *** - - - - -Produced by Julie Barkley and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - -TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE: Volume I is available as Project Gutenberg ebook -number 50205. - - - - - - THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT - OF RELIGION - - _All rights reserved._ - - [Illustration: _The Venerable Battista Vernazza - (Tommasina Vernazza) - 1497-1587._] - - THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT - OF RELIGION AS STUDIED - IN SAINT CATHERINE OF - GENOA AND HER FRIENDS - - BY BARON FRIEDRICH VON HÜGEL - MEMBER OF THE CAMBRIDGE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY - - [Illustration] - - VOLUME SECOND - CRITICAL STUDIES - - LONDON: J. M. DENT & CO. - NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO. - MCMVIII - - RICHARD CLAY & SONS, LIMITED, - BREAD STREET HILL, E.C., AND - BUNGAY, SUFFOLK. - - - - -CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME - - -The frontispiece consists of a reduced facsimile, in photogravure, of -a lithograph by F. Scotto, entitled “Ven. Batta. Vernazza,” which -was printed and owned by the firm of Gervasoni, and which appeared -in the large 4to volume, _Ritratti, ed Elogi di Liguri Illustri_, -with the text printed by Ponthenier, all in Genoa. This book was -published there, in monthly parts, from 1823 to 1830. Scotto’s highly -characteristic lithograph no doubt reproduces an authentic likeness; -and probably the original portrait was, in the first instance, owned -by the Canonesses of S. Maria delle Grazie, Battista’s own convent -in Genoa. The picture now in the possession of the Nuns of S. Maria -in Passione, the successors of those Canonesses, is of a quite -conventional, secondary type. - - PAGE - - PART III.--CRITICAL - - CHAPTER IX.--PSYCHO-PHYSICAL AND TEMPERAMENTAL QUESTIONS 3-61 - - Introductory 3-9 - - I. Catherine’s Third Period, 1497-1510 9-13 - - II. Conclusions concerning Catherine’s Psycho-physical - Condition during this Last Period 14-21 - - III. Catherine’s Psycho-physical Condition, its Likeness and - Unlikeness to Hysteria 22-27 - - IV. First Period of Catherine’s Life, 1447-1477, in its Three - Stages 28-32 - - V. The Second, Great Middle Period of Catherine’s Life, - 1477-1499 32-40 - - VI. Three Rules which seem to govern the Relations between - Psycho-physical Peculiarities and Sanctity in general 40-47 - - VII. Perennial Freshness of the Great Mystics’ Main Spiritual - Test, in Contradistinction to their Secondary, Psychological - Contention. Two Special Difficulties 47-61 - - CHAPTER X.--THE MAIN LITERARY SOURCES OF CATHERINE’S - CONCEPTIONS 62-110 - - Introductory 62, 63 - - I. The Pauline Writings: the Two Sources of their - Pre-Conversion Assumptions; Catherine’s Preponderant - Attitude towards each Position 63-79 - - II. The Joannine Writings 79-90 - - III. The Areopagite Writings 90-101 - - IV. Jacopone da Todi’s “Lode” 102-110 - - V. Points common to all Five Minds; and Catherine’s Main - Difference from her Four Predecessors 110 - - CHAPTER XI.--CATHERINE’S LESS ULTIMATE THIS-WORLD DOCTRINES 111-181 - - Introductory 111, 112 - - I. Interpretative Religion 112-121 - - II. Dualistic Attitude towards the Body 121-129 - - III. Quietude and Passivity. Points in this Tendency to be - considered here 129-152 - - IV. Pure Love, or Disinterested Religion: its Distinction - from Quietism 152-181 - - CHAPTER XII.--THE AFTER-LIFE PROBLEMS AND DOCTRINES 182-258 - - I. The Chief Present-day Problems, Perplexities, and - Requirements with Regard to the After-Life in General 182-199 - - II. Catherine’s General After-Life Conceptions 199-218 - - III. Catherine and Eternal Punishment 218-230 - - IV. Catherine and Purgatory 230-246 - - V. Catherine and Heaven--Three Perplexities to be considered 246-258 - - CHAPTER XIII.--THE FIRST THREE ULTIMATE QUESTIONS 259-308 - - I. The Relations between Morality and Mysticism, Philosophy - and Religion 259-275 - - II. Mysticism and the Limits of Human Knowledge and Experience 275-290 - - III. Mysticism and the Question of Evil 290-308 - - CHAPTER XIV.--THE TWO FINAL PROBLEMS: MYSTICISM AND PANTHEISM, - THE IMMANENCE OF GOD, AND SPIRITUAL PERSONALITY, HUMAN AND - DIVINE 309-340 - - Introductory 309, 310 - - I. Relations between the General and the Particular, God and - Individual Things, according to Aristotle, the Neo-Platonists, - and the Medieval Strict Realists 310-319 - - II. Relations between God and the Human Soul 319-325 - - III. Mysticism and Pantheism: their Differences and Points of - Likeness 325-335 - - IV. The Divine Immanence; Spiritual Personality 336-340 - - CHAPTER XV.--SUMMING-UP OF THE WHOLE BOOK. BACK THROUGH - ASCETICISM, SOCIAL RELIGION, AND THE SCIENTIFIC HABIT OF MIND, - TO THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION 341-396 - - I. Asceticism and Mysticism 341-351 - - II. Social Religion and Mysticism 351-366 - - III. The Scientific Habit and Mysticism 367-386 - - IV. Final Summary and Return to the Starting-point of the Whole - Inquiry: the Necessity, and yet the Almost Inevitable Mutual - Hostility, of the Three Great Forces of the Soul and of the - Three Corresponding Elements of Religion 387-396 - - INDEX 397 - - - - -THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION - - - - -PART III - -CRITICAL - - - - -CHAPTER IX - -PSYCHO-PHYSICAL AND TEMPERAMENTAL QUESTIONS - - -INTRODUCTORY. - - -1. _Plan of Part Three._ - -The picture of Catherine’s life and teaching which was attempted in the -previous volume will, I hope, have been sufficiently vivid to stimulate -in the reader a desire to try and go deeper, and to get as near as may -be to the driving forces, the metaphysical depths of her life. And -yet it is obvious that, if we would understand something of these, we -must proceed slowly and thoroughly, and must begin with comparatively -superficial questions. Or rather, we must begin by studying her -temperamental and psycho-physical endowment and condition, and then the -literary influences that stimulated and helped to mould these things, -as though all this were not secondary and but the material and occasion -of the forces and self-determinations to be considered later on. - - -2. _Defects of ancient psycho-physical theory._ - -Now as to those temperamental and neural matters, to which this chapter -shall be devoted, the reader will, no doubt long ago, have discovered -that it is precisely here that not a little of the _Vita e Dottrina_ -is faded and withered beyond recall, or has even become positively -repulsive to us. The constant assumption, and frequent explicit -insistence, on the part of more or less all the contributors, upon the -immediate and separate significance, indeed the directly miraculous -character, of certain psycho-physical states--states which, taken -thus separately, would now be inevitably classed as most explicable -neural abnormalities,--all this atmosphere of nervous high-pitch and -tremulousness has now become a matter demanding a difficult historical -imagination and magnanimity, if we would be just to those who held such -views, and would thus benefit to the full from these past positions and -misconceptions. - -Thus when we read the views of perhaps all her educated attendants: -“this condition, in which her body remained alive without food or -medicine, was a supernatural thing”; “her state was clearly understood -to be supernatural when, in so short a time, so great a change was -seen”; and “she became yellow all over,--a manifest sign that her -humanity was being entirely consumed in the fire of divine love”:[1] -we feel indeed that we can no more follow. And when we read, as part -of one of the late additions, the worthless legends gathered from, or -occasioned by, the uneducated Argentina: “in proof that she bore the -stigmata within her,--on putting her hands in a cup of cold water, the -latter became so boiling hot that it greatly heated the very saucer -beneath it”:[2] we are necessarily disgusted. And when, worst of all, -she is made, by a demonstrable, probably double misinterpretation of an -externally similar action, to burn her bare arm with a live charcoal -or lighted candle, with intent to see which fire, this external one or -that interior one of the divine love, were the greater:[3] we can, even -if we have the good fortune of being able, by means of the critical -analysis of the sources, to put this absurd story to the discredit of -her eulogists, but feel the pathos of such well-meant perversity, which -took so sure a way for rendering ridiculous one who, take her all in -all, is so truly great.[4] - - -3. _Slow growth of Neurology._ - -We should, of course, be very patient in such matters: for -psycho-physical knowledge was, as yet, in its very infancy, witness -the all-important fact that the nerves were, in our modern sense of -the term, still as unknown as they were to the whole of Graeco-Roman -antiquity, with which “neuron” and “nervus” ever meant “muscle” or -“ligament” and, derivatively, “energy,” but never consciously what -they now mean in the strict medical sense. Thus the _Vita_ (1551) -writes: “There remained no member or muscle (nervo) of her body that -was not tormented by fire within it”; “one rib was separated from -the others, with great pains in the ligaments (_nervi_) and bones”; -and “all her body was excruciated and her muscles (_nervi_) were -tormented”:[5] where, in the first and last case, visible muscular -convulsive movements are clearly meant. St. Teresa, in her own _Life_ -(1561 or 1562), writes: “Nervous pains, according to the physicians, -are intolerable; and all my nerves were shrunk”; and “if the rapture -lasts, all the nerves are made to feel it.”[6] Even Fénelon (died -1715) can still write of the human body: “The bones sustain the flesh -which envelops them; the nerves” (ligaments, minor muscles) “which -are stretched along them, constitute all their strength; and the -muscles, by inflation and elongation at the points where the nerves -are intertwined with them, produce the most precise and regular -movements.”[7] Here the soul acts directly upon the muscles, and, -through these and their dependent ligaments, upon the bones and the -flesh. - - -4. _Permanent values of the ancient theory._ - -And yet that old position with regard to the rarer psycho-physical -states has a right to our respectful and sympathetic study. - -For one thing, we are now coming again to recognize, more and more, -how real and remarkable are certain psycho-physical states and facts, -whether simply morbid or fruitfully utilized states, so long derided, -by the bulk of Scientists, as mere childish legend or deliberate -imposture; and to see how natural, indeed inevitable it was, that -these, at that time quite inexplicable, things should have been -attributed to a direct and discontinuous kind of Divine intervention. -We, on our part, have then to guard against the Philistinism both -of the Rationalists and of the older Supernaturalists, and will -neither measure our assent to facts by our ability to explain them, -nor postulate the unmediated action of God wherever our powers of -explanation fail us. On this point we have admirable models of -sympathetic docility towards facts, in the works of Prof. Pierre Janet, -in his medico-psychological investigations of present-day morbid -cases; of Hermann Gunkel and Heinrich Weinel, in their examination of -mostly healthy psycho-physical phenomena in early Christian times and -writings; and of William James, in his study of instances of various -kinds, both past and present.[8] - -And next, these (at first sight physical) phenomena are turning out, -more and more, to be the direct or indirect consequence of the action -of mind: no doubt, in the first instance, of the human mind, but still -of mind, both free-willing and automatically operative. And at the same -time this action is, more and more, seen to be limited and variously -occasioned by the physical organism, and to be accompanied or followed, -in a determinist fashion, by certain changes in that organism. Yet if -we have now immeasurably more knowledge than men had, even fifty years -ago, of this latter ceaselessly active, limiting, occasioning influence -of the body upon the mind, we have also immeasurably more precise and -numerous facts and knowledge in testimony of the all but boundless -effect of mind over body. Here, again, Prof. Janet’s writings, those -of Alfred Binet, and the Dominican Père Coconnier’s very sensible book -register a mass of material, although of the morbid type.[9] - -And further, such remarkable peripheral states and phenomena are -getting again to be rightly looked for in at least some types of -unusual spiritual insight and power (although such states are found to -be indicative, in exact proportion to the spiritual greatness of their -subject, of a substantially different mental and moral condition of -soul). Witness again the Unitarian Prof. James’s _Varieties_, and the -Church-Historical works of the Broad Lutheran German scholars Weinel, -Bernoulli, and Duhm.[10] - -And lastly, the very closeness with which modern experimental and -analytical psychology is exploring the phenomena of our consciousness -is once more bringing into ever-clearer relief the irrepressible -metaphysical apprehensions and affirmations involved and implied by -the experience of every human mind, from its first dim apprehension -in infancy of a “something,” as yet undifferentiated by it into -subjective and objective, up to its mature and reflective affirmation -of the trans-subjective validity of its “positions,” or at least of its -negations--pure scepticism turning out to be practically impossible. -Here we have, with respect to that apprehension, such admirable workers -as Henri Bergson in France, and Professors Henry Jones and James -Ward in England; and, for this affirmation, such striking thinkers -as the French Maurice Blondel, and the Germans Johannes Volkelt and -Hugo Münsterberg. And Mgr. Mercier of Louvain, now Cardinal Mercier, -has contributed some valuable criticism of certain points in these -positions.[11] - - -5. _Difficulties of this inquiry._ - -Now here I am met at once by two special difficulties, the one -personal to myself and to Catherine, and the other one of method. -For, with regard to those three first sets of recent explorations of -a psycho-physical kind, I am no physician at all, and not primarily -a psychologist. And again, in Catherine’s instance, the evidence as -to her psycho-physical states is not, as with St. Teresa and some few -other cases, furnished by writings from the pen of the very person who -experienced them, and it is at all copious and precise only for the -period when she was admittedly ill and physically incapacitated.--And -yet these last thirteen years of her life occupy a most prominent -place in her biography; it is during, and on occasion of, those -psycho-physical states, and largely with the materials furnished by -them, that, precisely in those years, she built up her noblest legacy, -her great Purgatorial teaching; the illness was (quite evidently) of a -predominantly psychical type, and concerns more the psychologist than -the physician, being closely connected with her particular temperament -and type of spirituality, a temperament and type to be found again and -again among the Saints. All this and more makes it simply impossible -for me to shrink from some study of the matter, and permits me to hope -for some success in attempting, slowly and cautiously, to arrive at -certain general conclusions of a spiritually important kind. - -But then there is also the difficulty of method. For if we begin -the study of these psycho-physical peculiarities and states by -judging them from the temperamental and psychological standpoint, -we can hardly escape from treating them, at least for the moment, -as self-explanatory, and hence from using these our preliminary -conclusions about such neural phenomena as the measure, type, and -explanation of and for all such other facts and apprehensions as our -further study of the religious mind and experience may bring before -us. In this wise, these our psychological conclusions would furnish -not only a negative test and positive material, but also the exclusive -standard for all further study. And such a procedure, until and unless -it were justified in its method, would evidently be nothing but a -surreptitious begging of the question.--Yet to begin with the fullest -analysis of the elementary and normal phenomena of consciousness and -of its implications and inviolable prerequisites, would too readily -land us in metaphysics which have themselves to operate in and with -those immediate and continuous experiences; and hence these latter -experiences, whether normal and healthy, or, as here, unusual and in -part _maladif_, must be carefully studied first. We have, however, -to guard most cautiously against our allowing this, our preliminary, -analysis and description of psycho-physical states from imperceptibly -blocking the way to, or occupying the ground of, our ultimate analysis -and metaphysical synthesis and explanation. Only this latter will be -able, by a final movement from within-outwards, to show the true place -and worth of the more or less phenomenal series, passed by us in review -on our previous movement from outside-inwards. - -6. _Threefold division._ - -I propose, then, in this chapter, to take, as separately as is -compatible with such a method, the temperamental, psycho-physical side -of Catherine’s life. I shall first take those last thirteen years -of admitted illness, as those which are alone at all fully known to -us by contemporary evidence.--I shall then make a jump back to her -first period,--to the first sixteen years up to her marriage, with -the next ten years of relaxation, and the following four years of -her conversion and active penitence. I take these next, because, -of these thirty years, we have her own late memories, as registered -for us by her disciples, at the time of her narration of the facts -concerned.--And only then, with these materials and instruments thus -gathered from after and before, shall I try to master the (for us -very obscure) middle period, and to arrive at some estimate of her -temperamental peripheral condition during these twenty years of her -fullest expansion.--I shall conclude the chapter by taking Catherine -in her general, lifelong temperament, and by comparing and contrasting -this type and modality of spiritual character and apprehension with the -other rival forms of, and approaches to, religious truth and goodness -as these are furnished for us by history. - -The ultimate metaphysical questions and valuation are reserved for the -penultimate chapter of my book. - - -I. CATHERINE’S THIRD PERIOD, 1497 TO 1510. - - -1. _Increasing illness of Catherine’s last years._ - -Beginning with her third and last period (1497-1510), there can be no -doubt that throughout it she was ill and increasingly so. Her closest -friends and observers attest it. It is presumably Ettore Vernazza who -tells us, for 1497, “when she was about fifty years of age, she ceased -to be able to attend either to the Hospital or to her own house, owing -to her great bodily weakness. Even on Fast-days she was obliged, after -Holy Communion, to take some food to sustain her strength.” Probably -Marabotto it is who tells us that, in 1499, “after twenty-five years -she could no further bear her spiritual loneliness, either because of -old age or because of her great bodily weakness.” We hear from a later -Redactor that, “about nine years before her death (_i.e._ about 1501), -there came to her an infirmity.” And then, especially from November -1509, May 1510, and August 1510 onwards, she is declared and described -as more and more ill.[12] Indeed she herself, both by her acts and by -her words, emphatically admits her incapacitation. For it is clearly -ill-health which drives her to abandon the Matronship and even all -minor continuous work for the Hospital. In her Wills we find indeed -that, as late as May 21, 1506, she was able to get to the neighbouring -Hospital for Incurables; and that even on November 27, 1508 she was -“healthy in mind and body.” But her Codicil of January 5, 1503, was -drawn up in the presence of nine witnesses at midnight,--a sure sign of -some acute ill-health. Indeed already on July 23, 1484, she is lying -“infirm in bed, in her room in the Women’s quarter of the Hospital, -oppressed with bodily infirmity.”[13] - - -2. _Abnormal sensations, impressions and moods._ - -Her attendants are all puzzled by the multitude and intensity, the -mobility and the self-contradictory character of the psycho-physical -manifestations. Perhaps already before 1497 “she would press thorny -rose-twigs in both her hands, and this without any pain”; and so -late as about three weeks before her death “she remained paralyzed -(_manca_),” and no doubt anaesthetic “in one (the right) hand and in -one finger of the other hand.”--Probably again before 1497 “her body -could not,” at times, “be moved from the sitting posture without the -application of force.” In February or March 1510 “she could not move -out of her bed”; in August, “on some occasions she could not move -the lips or the tongue, or the arms or legs, unless helped to do -so,--especially on the left side,--and this would, at times, last three -or four hours.”--In December 1509 “she suffered from great cold,” as -part of her peculiar condition; on September 4, 1510, “she suffered -from great cold in the right arm.”[14] - -On other occasions she is, on the contrary, intensely hyper-aesthetic. -Some time in February or March 1510, “for a day and a night, her flesh -could not be touched, because of the great pain that such touching -caused her.” At the end of August “she was so sensitive, that it was -impossible to touch her very bedclothes or the bedstead, or a single -hair on her head, because in such case she would cry out as though she -had been grievously wounded.”--These states seem to have been usually -accompanied by sensations of great heat: for on the former occasion -“she seemed like a creature placed in a great flame of fire”; whilst on -the latter “she had her tongue and lips so inflamed, that they seemed -as though actual fire.” - -And movement appears to have been more often increased than diminished. -In the last case indeed “she did not move nor speak nor see; but, when -thus immovable, she suffered more than when she could cry out and -turn about in her bed.” But in the former instance “she could not be -kept in bed”; and in April 1510 “she cried aloud, and could not keep -herself from moving about, on her bed, on hands and feet.”--There -are curious localizations of apparently automatic movements. During -an attack somewhere in March 1510 “her flesh was all in a tremble, -particularly the right shoulder”; on later occasions “an arm, a leg, a -hand would tremble, and she would seem to have a spasm within her, with -all-but-unbroken acute pains in the flanks, the shoulders, the abdomen, -the feet and the brain.” On an earlier occasion “her body writhed in -great distress.” On another day “she seemed all on fire and lost her -power of speech, and made signs with her head and hands.” On one day -in February or March 1510 “she lost both speech and sight, though not -her intelligence”; and on September 12 “her sight was so weak, that she -could hardly any further distinguish or recognize her attendants.”--The -heat is liable to be curiously localized. Early in September 1510 “she -had a great heat situated in and on her left ear, which lasted for -three hours; the ear was red and felt very hot to the touch of others.” - -Various kinds of haemorrhage are not uncommon. On the last-mentioned -occasion bloody urine is passed; bleeding of the nose, with loss of -bile, occurs in December 1509; very black blood is lost by the mouth, -whilst black spots appear all over her person, on September 12, 1510; -and more blood is evacuated on the following day. In February or March -1510 “there were in her flesh certain places which had become concave, -like as paste looks where a finger has been put into it.” At the end of -August 1510 “her skin became saffron-yellow all over.” - -Troubles of breathing and of heart-action are frequently acute. -Somewhere about March 1510 “she had such a spasm in her throat and -mouth as to be unable, for about an hour, to speak or to open her -eyes, and that she could hardly regain her breath.” “Cupping-glasses -were applied to her side, to ease her heart, and lung-action, but with -little effect.” On one occasion “she made signs indicative of feeling -as though burning pincers were seizing her heart”; and on a day soon -after “she felt like a hard nail at her heart.”[15] - -Disturbances of the power of swallowing and of nutrition are often -grave and sudden, and in curious contradiction to her abnormally acute -and shifting longing for and revulsion from certain specific kinds of -food. On August 22, 1510, “she was so thirsty that she felt as though -she could drink up the very ocean”; “yet she could not,” in fact, -“manage to swallow even one little drop of water.” On September 10 -“her attendants continuously gave her drinking water; but she would -straightway return it from her mouth.” And on September 12, “whilst -her mouth was being bathed, she exclaimed, ‘I am suffocating,’--and -this because a drop of water had trickled down her throat--a drop which -she was unable to gulp down.” And on a day in August “she saw a melon -and had a great desire to eat it; but hardly did she have some of it -in her mouth, when she rejected it with intense disgust.” So too with -odours. A little later, “on one day the smell of wine would please -her, and she would bathe her hands and face in it with great relish; -and next day she would so much dislike it, that she could not bear to -see or smell it in her room.”--And so too with colours. On September -2 “a physician-friend came to visit her in his scarlet robes; and she -bore the sight a little, so as not to pain him.” But she then declared -that she could no longer bear it; and he went, and returned to her in -his ordinary black habit. And yet we have seen, from the Inventory of -her effects, that she loved to have vermilion colour upon her bed and -person.[16] - -And her emotional moods are analogously intense and rapidly shifting. -In the spring of 1510 “she cried aloud because of the great pain: this -attack lasted a day and a night”; in the night of August 10 “she tossed -about with many exclamations”; and at the beginning of September “she -cried out with a loud voice.” At other times, she laughs for joy. So at -the end of April “she would laugh without speaking”; on August 11 “she -fixed her eyes steadily on the ceiling; and for about an hour she abode -all but immovable, and spoke not, but kept laughing in a very joyous -fashion”; on August 17 great interior jubilation “expressed itself in -merry laughter”; and on the evening of September 7 “her joy appeared -exteriorly in laughter which lasted, with but small interruptions, -for some two hours.”--And her entire apparent condition would shift -from one such extreme to the other with extraordinary swiftness. In -the autumn of 1509 “she many times remained as though dead; and at -other times she would appear as healthy,--as though she had never had -anything the matter with her.” Already in December 1509 she herself, -after much vomiting and loss of blood, had sent for her Confessor and -had declared that “she felt as though she must die in consequence of -these many accidents.” Yet even on September 10, 1510, “when she was -not being oppressed and tormented by her accidents (attacks), she -seemed to be in good health; but when she was being suffocated by them, -she seemed as one dead.”[17] - - -II. CONCLUSIONS CONCERNING CATHERINE’S PSYCHO-PHYSICAL CONDITION DURING -THIS LAST PERIOD. - - -1. _Her illness not primarily physical. Her self-diagnosis._ - -Now we saw, at the beginning of this chapter, how readily her -attendants concluded, from all these extreme, multiple, swift-changing -and self-contradictory states, to their directly and separately -supernatural origin.--And indeed the diagnosis and treatment of her -case showed clearly that it was not primarily physical. So in the -case, probably in November 1509, of the cupping-glasses, when “she got -medically treated for a bodily infirmity, whilst her real trouble was -fire of the spirit”; so with a medicine given to her by the resident -Hospital physician, some time in April 1510, “from taking which she -nearly died”; so with Giovanni Boerio’s three-weeks’ treatment of her, -in May 1510, a treatment which led to no other results than momentary -additional distress; and so with the declaration of the ten Physicians -who, even on September 10, four days before her death, “could find no -trace of disease in her pulse, secretions, or any other symptom,” and -who consequently abstained from prescribing anything. And hence, more -or less throughout her last nine years, “there was confusion in the -management of her, not on her own part, but on that of those who served -her.”[18] - -For--and these two further points are of primary importance--the -tending of her, as distinct from physic, was throughout held by herself -to be of great importance; and yet this care was declared by her to -be often useless or harmful, owing to the powers of discrimination -possessed by her attendants being as much below their good-will, as her -own knowledge as to the differences between her healthy and _maladif_ -states exceeded her power of herself acting upon this knowledge against -these sickly conditions. “She would often appear to be asleep; and -would awake from such a state, at one time, quite refreshed, and, at -another time, so limp and broken down as to be unable to move. Those -that served her knew not how to distinguish one state from the other; -and on recovering from an attack of the latter sort, she would say to -them: ‘Why did you let me continue in that state of quiet, from which -I have all but died?’” So, on September 5, “she cried aloud on waking -from a state of quiet, which had appeared to be (healthy) quietude, but -had not been so.” And indeed, already on January 10 previous, she had -shut herself off from her Confessor, “because it seemed to her that he -bore with her too much in her sayings and doings.” - -Yet, at least after this time, Marabotto does oppose her sometimes. -Thus on two, somewhat later, occasions she respectively makes signs, -and asks, that Extreme Unction be given her; but only some four months -later did she actually receive it. In these cases, then, she either -had not, even at bottom, a correct physical self-knowledge; or her -requests had been prompted, at the time, by her secondary, _maladif_ -consciousness alone.--When first visited by Boerio, she takes pleasure -in the thought of getting possibly cured by him; but “in the following -night, when great pain came upon her, she reproved herself, saying, -‘You are suffering this, because you allowed yourself to rejoice -without cause.’” But this declaration distinctly falls short of -any necessary implication of a directly supernatural origin of her -malady, as the _Vita_ here will have it, and but refers, either to the -continuance of earthly existence not deserving such joy, or to her -persistent fundamental consciousness that the phenomena were partly -the fruitful, profitable occasions, and partly the price paid, for the -mind’s close intercourse with things divine. - -Indeed her (otherwise unbroken) attitude is one, both of quiet -conviction that physic cannot help her, and of gentle readiness to let -the physicians try whatever they may think worth the trying: so with -the cupping-glasses, and the various examinations and physickings. -Especially is this disposition clear in her short dialogue with Boerio, -where, in answer to his assertion that she ought to beware of giving -scandal to all the world by saying that her infirmity had no need of -remedies, and that she ought to look upon such an attitude as “a kind -of hypocrisy,” she declares: “I am sorry if any one is scandalized -because of me; and I am ready to use any remedy for infirmity, -supposing that it can be found.”[19] - - -2. _Her preoccupation with the spiritual suggestions afforded by the -phenomena._ - -It would, indeed, be a grave misreading of her whole character -and habits of mind to think of her as at all engrossed in her -psycho-physical states as such, and as having ever formally considered -and decided that they must either come directly from God or be -amenable to medicine. On the contrary, she is too habitually absorbed -in the consideration and contemplation of certain great spiritual -doctrines and realities, to have the leisure or inclination for any -such questions.--Indeed it is this very absorption in those spiritual -realities which has ended by suggesting, with an extraordinary -readiness, frequency and vividness, through her mind to her senses, -and by these back to her mind, certain psycho-physical images and -illustrations for those very doctrines, until her whole psycho-physical -organism has been, all but entirely, modified and moulded into an apt -instrument and manifestation for and of that world unseen. - -Thus, after her greatest psycho-physical and spiritual experience -in November 1509, she declares to Vernazza, when he urges her to -let him write down the graces she has received from God, that “it -would, strictly speaking, be impossible to narrate those interior -things; whilst, of exterior ones, few or none have happened to -me.” And she never entirely loses her mental consciousness in any -state not recognized by herself as _maladif_. So, on a day of great -psycho-physical trouble in February or March 1510, “they thought she -must expire; but, though she lost both sight and speech, she never -lost her intelligence.” And even on September 11 and 12, amidst -foodlessness and suffocations, her intelligence still persists.--In -the March previous “her mind appeared to grow daily in contentment.” -Some days later, her attendants “saw how, after an hour of spasm and -breathlessness, and then a great restriction of all her being, she -returned to her normal condition, and addressed many beautiful words -to them.” And later on, “her attendants were amazed at seeing a body, -which seemed to be healthy, in such a tormented condition.” But “soon -after she laughed and spoke as one in health, and told them not to -distress themselves about her, since she was very contented; but that -they should see to it that they did much good, since the way of God is -very narrow.”[20] - - -3. _Interaction and mutual suggestion of her spiritual and physical -states._ - -As to the extraordinary closeness and readiness for mutual response -between her sensible impressions and her thoughts and emotions--her -sensations turning, all but automatically, into religious emotions, -and her thoughts and feelings translating themselves into appropriate -psycho-physical states--we have a mass of interesting evidence. - -Thus when, about the end of November 1509, in response to her seeing, -on some wall of the Hospital, a picture of Our Lord at the Well of -Samaria, and to her asking Him for one drop of that Divine water, -“instantly a drop was given to her which refreshed her within and -without.” The spiritual idea and emotion is here accompanied and -further stimulated by the keenest psycho-physical impression of -drinking. And such an impression can even become painful through -its excessive suggestiveness. Thus she herself explains to Maestro -Boerio, on September 2, 1510, that she cannot long bear the sight -of his scarlet robe “because of what it suggests (represents) to my -memory,”--no doubt the fire of divine love. Three days later, on the -contrary, “she mentally saw herself lying upon a bier, surrounded by -many Religious robed in black,” and greatly rejoiced at the sight. Here -the very impression of black, the colour of death, will have conveyed, -during this special mood of hers, a downright psycho-physical pleasure, -somewhat as Boerio’s reappearance, on the former occasion, in a black -gown, had been a sensible relief to her. - -So also with scents. When, certainly after 1499, “she perceived, on -the (right) hand of her Confessor, an odour which penetrated her very -heart,” and “which abode with her and restored both mind and body for -many days,” we have again a primarily mental act and state which she -herself knows well to be untransferable, even to Don Marabotto himself. -Here the association of ideas was, no doubt, the right hand of the -Priest and her daily reception, by means of it, of the Holy Eucharist. -For the latter, “the Bread from heaven, having within it all manner -of delight,” is already connected in her mind with an impression of -sweet odour. “One day, on receiving Communion, so much odour and -sweetness came to her, that she seemed to herself to be in Paradise.” -Probably the love for, and then the disgust at, the smell of wine, was -also connected with her Eucharistic experiences. Certainly “one day, -having received Holy Communion, she was granted so great a consolation -as to fall into an ecstasy, so that when the Priest wanted to give -her to drink from the Chalice (with unconsecrated wine) she had to be -brought back by force to her ordinary consciousness.” Vivid memories -of both sets of psycho-physical impressions are, I think, at work -when she says: “If a consecrated Host were to be given to me amongst -unconsecrated ones, I should be able to distinguish it by the very -taste, as I do wine from water.” And as the sight of red rapidly became -painful from the very excess of its mental suggestiveness, so will the -smell of wine have been both specially dear and specially painful to -her.[21] - -Indeed her psycho-physical troubles possess, for the most part, a -still traceable, most delicate selectiveness as to date, range, form, -combination, and other peculiarities. Thus some of the most acute -attacks coincide, in their date of occurrence and general character, as -the biographers point out, with special saint’s and holy days: so in -the night leading into St. Lawrence’s day, August 9 and 10, 1510; so -on the Vigil of St. Bartholomew’s day, August 24; and so in the night -previous to and on the Feast (August 28) of St. Augustine, special -Patron of her only sister’s Order and of the Convent in which her own -Conversion had taken place thirty-seven years before. Yet we have also -seen how that these synchronisms did not rise to the heights which -were soon desired by her biographers, for we know that she died, not -(as they would have it) on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, -September 14, but early on the day following. - -Thus too as to her incapacity to swallow and retain food, we find that, -up to the end, with the rarest exceptions of a directly physical kind, -she retained the most complete facility in receiving Holy Communion: -so on September 2, 1510, when “all ordinary food was returned, but -the Holy Eucharist she retained without any difficulty”; and so too -on September 4, when, after “lying for close upon twelve hours with -closed eyes, speechless and all but immovable,” Marabotto himself -feared to communicate her, but “she made a sign to him, with a joyous -countenance, to have no fear, and she communicated with ease, and -soon after began to speak, owing to the vigour given to her by the -Sacrament.” Yet here too the abnormality is not complete: some ordinary -food is retained, now and then; so, minced chicken, specially mentioned -for December 1509, and on September 3, 1510. - -As to her heat-attacks and the corresponding extreme--the sense of -intense cold,--it is clear how close is their connection with her -profound concentration upon the conception of God as Love, and upon the -image of Love as fire. It is these sudden and intense psycho-physical, -spiritually suggestive because spiritually suggested, heat-attacks -which are, I think, always meant by the terms “assault” (_assalto_), -“stroke” (_ferita_), and “arrow” (_saetta_): terms which already -indicate the mental quality of these attacks. And these heats are -mostly localized in a doctrinally suggestive manner: they centre in and -around the heart, or on the tongue and lips, or they envelop the whole -person “as though it were placed in a great flame of fire,” or “in a -glowing furnace.” Indeed these heats are often so described, by her -attendants or herself, as to imply their predominantly psycho-physical -nature: “it was necessary, with a view to prolonging her life, to -use many means for lightening the strain of that interior fire upon -her mind”; and “I feel,” she says herself, on occasion of such an -attack, “so great a contentment on the part of the spirit, as to be -unutterable; whilst, on the part of my humanity, all the pains are, so -to say, no pains.” - -As to her boundless thirst, her inability to drink, and her sense of -strangulation, their doctrinal suggestions are largely clear. Thus -when “she was so thirsty as to feel able to drink up all the waters -of the sea,” and when she calls out “I am suffocating” (drowning, _io -affogo_), we are at once reminded of her great saying: “If the sea -were all so much love, there would not live man or woman who would -not go to drown himself in it (_si affogasse_).” And when, at the end -of August 1510, unable to drink, she herself declares “all the water -that is on earth could not give me the least refreshment,” there is, -perhaps, an implied contrast to that “little drop of divine water” -which had so much refreshed her a year before. - -And finally, the various paralyses and death-like swoons seem, at least -in part, to follow from, and to represent, the death of the spirit -to the life of the senses, and to mirror the intensity with which -perfection has been conceived and practised as “Love going forth out -of self, and abiding all in God and separated from man.” Thus when, on -August 22, 1510, “she had a day of great heat, and abode paralyzed in -one hand and in one finger of the other hand for about sixteen hours, -and she was so greatly occupied (absorbed), that she neither spoke, nor -opened her eyes, nor could take any food.”[22] - - -4. _Only two cases of spiritually unsuggestive impressions._ - -It is indeed profoundly instructive to note how that, in exact -proportion as a human-mental mediation and suggestion of a religious -kind is directly traceable or at least probable in any or all of -these things, is that thing also worthy of being considered as having -ultimately the Divine Spirit Itself for its first cause as well as last -end; and that, in exact proportion as this kind of human mediation -and suggestion is impossible or unlikely, the thing turns out to be -unworthy of being attributed, in any special sense, to the spirit of -God Himself. - -Of such spiritually opaque, religiously unused and apparently -unuseable, hysteriform impressions, I can, even during the last -days of these nine years of admitted infirmity, find but two clear -instances,--instances which, by their very unlikeness to the mass of -her spiritually transparent, readily used impressions, strongly confirm -our high estimate of the all but totality of her psycho-physical -states, as experienced and understood and used by herself. On September -7, 1510, after having seen and wisely utilized the spiritually -suggestive image of “a great ladder of fire,” she ends by having so -vivid an hallucination of the whole world being on fire “that she asked -whether it were not so, and caused her windows to be opened that the -facts might be ascertained;” and “she abode the whole night, possessed -by that imagination,” as the _Vita_ itself calls this impression. At -night, on September 11, she complained of a very great heat, and cast -forth from her mouth very black blood; and black spots came out all -over her body. And on the 13th, “she was seen with her eyes fixed upon -the ceiling, and with much movement of the lips and hands; and she -answered her attendants’ queries as to what she was seeing with ‘Drive -away that beast.…’ the remaining words being inaudible.”[23] - -Here we have, I think, the only two merely factual, unsuggestive, and -hence simply delusive, impressions really experienced by herself and -recorded in the _Vita_, a book whose very eagerness to discover things -of this kind and readiness to take them as directly supernatural is a -guarantee that no other marked instances of the kind have been omitted -or suppressed. And these two impressions both take place within a week -of her death, and respectively four days before, and two days after, -the first clear case of organic disease or lesion to be found anywhere -in the life. - - -III. CATHERINE’S PSYCHO-PHYSICAL CONDITION, ITS LIKENESS AND UNLIKENESS -TO HYSTERIA. - -Only by a quite unfair magnifying or multiplying of the two incidents -just described could we come to hold, with Mr. Baring-Gould, that -Catherine was simply a sufferer from hysteria, and that the Roman -Church did well to canonize her on the ground of her having, in spite -of this malady, managed to achieve much useful work amongst the sick -and poor.[24] Here we shall do well to consider three groups of facts. - - -1. _Misapprehensions as to hysteria._ - -The first group gives the reasons why we should try and get rid of the -terror and horror still so often felt in connection with the very name -of this malady. This now quite demonstrably excessive, indeed largely -mythical, connotation of the term springs from four causes. - -First, the very name still tends to suggest, as the causes or -conditions of the malady, things fit only for discussion in medical -reviews. But then, ever since 1855, all limitation to, or special -connection with, anything peculiarly female, or indeed generally -sexual, has been increasingly shown to be false, until now no serious -authority on the matter can be found to espouse the old view. The -malady is now well known to attack men as well as women, and to have no -special relation to things of sex at all.[25] - -Next, probably as a consequence from the initial error, this disorder -was supposed to predominantly come from, or to lead to, moral impurity, -or at least to be ordinarily accompanied by strong erotic propensions. -But here the now carefully observed facts are imperatively hostile: -of the 120 living cases most carefully studied by Prof. Janet, only -four showed the predominance of any such tendencies, a proportion -undoubtedly not above the percentage to be found amongst non-hysterical -persons.[26] - -And again, the term was long synonymous with untruthfulness and deceit. -But here again Prof. Janet shows how unfounded is this prejudice, since -it but springs from the misplaced promptitude with which the earlier -observers refused to believe what they had not as yet sufficiently -examined and could not at all explain, and from the malady being itself -equivalent to a more or less extensive breaking-up of the normal -inter-connection between the several, successive or simultaneous -states, and, as it were, layers of the one personality. He is convinced -that real untruthfulness is no commoner among such patients than it is -among healthy persons.[27] - -And, finally, it is no doubt felt that, apart from all such -specifically moral suspicions, the malady involves all kinds of fancies -and inaccuracies of feeling and of perception, and that it frequently -passes into downright insanity. And this is no doubt the one objection -which does retain some of its old cogency. Still, it is well to note -that, as has now been fully established, the elements of the human mind -are and remain the same throughout the whole range of its conditions, -from the sanest to the maddest, whilst only their proportion and -admixture, and the presence or absence and the kind of synthesis -necessary to hold them together differentiate these various states of -mind. In true insanity there is no such synthesis; in hysteria the -synthesis, however slight and peculiar, is always still traceable -throughout the widespread disgregation of the elements and states.[28] -And it is this very persistence of the fundamental unity, together with -the strikingly different combination and considerable disaggregation -of its elements, that makes the study of hysteria so fruitful for -the knowledge of the fully healthy mind and of its unity; whilst the -continuance of all the elements of the normal intelligence, even in -insanity, readily explains why it is apparently so easy to see insanity -everywhere, and to treat genius and sanctity as but so much degeneracy. - - -2. _Hysteriform phenomena observable in Catherine’s case._ - -The second group of facts consists in the phenomena which, in -Catherine’s case, are like or identical to what is observable in cases -of hysteria. - -There is, perhaps above all else, the anaesthetic condition, which was -presumably co-extensive with her paralytic states. “Anaesthesia,” says -Prof. Janet, “can be considered as the type of the other symptoms of -hysteria; it exists in the great majority of cases, it is thoroughly -characteristic of the malady. In its most frequent localization -(semi-anaesthesia) it affects one of the lateral halves of the body, -and this half is usually the left side.” Or, “a finger or hand will be -affected.” Such “insensibility can be very frequent and very profound”; -but “it disappears suddenly” and even “varies from one moment to -another.”[29] - -Then there is the corresponding counter-phenomenon of hyper-aesthesia. -“The slightest contact provokes great pains, exclamations, and spasms. -The painful zones have their seat mostly on the abdomen or on the -hips.” And “sensation in these states is not painful in itself, by its -own intensity, but by its quality, its characteristics; it has become -the signal, by association of ideas, for the production of a set of -extremely painful phenomena.” So, with the colour-sense: “one patient -adores the colour red, and sees in its dullest shade ‘sparkling rays -which penetrate to her very heart and warm her through and through.’” -But “another one finds this ‘a repulsive colour and one capable -of producing nausea.’” And similarly with the senses of taste and -odour.[30] - -Then, too, the inability to stand or walk, with the conservation, -at times, of the power to crawl; the acceptance, followed by the -rejection, of food, because of certain spasms in the throat or stomach, -and the curious, mentally explicable, exceptions to this incapacity; -the sense, even at other times, of strangulation; heart palpitations, -fever heats, strange haemorrhages from the stomach or even from the -lung; red patches on the skin and emotional jaundice all over it, and -one or two other peculiarities.[31] - -Then, as to a particular kind of quietude, from which Catherine warns -her attendants to rouse her, we find a patient who “ceases her reading, -without showing any sign of doing so. She gets taken to be profoundly -attentive; it is, however, but one of her attacks of ‘fixity.’ And she -has promptly to be shaken out of this state, or, in a few minutes, -there will be no getting her out of it.” - -As to Catherine’s consciousness of possessing an extraordinary fineness -of discrimination between sensibly identical objects, we see that -“if one points out, to some of these patients, an imaginary portrait -upon a plain white card, and mixes this card with other similar ones, -they will almost always find again the portrait on the same card.” And -similarly as to her attaching a particular quasi-sensible perception -to Marabotto’s hand alone, we find that, if M. Janet touches Léonie’s -hand, he having suggested a nosegay to her, she will henceforth, when -he touches the hand, see that nosegay; whereas, if another person -touches that same hand, Léonie will see nothing special. - -As to Catherine’s feelings of criminality and of being already dead, M. -Janet quotes M., who says, “I am like a criminal about to be punished”; -and R., who declares, “It seems to me that I am dead.” As to the -hallucination of a Beast, Marcelle suffers from the same impression.[32] - -And,--perhaps the most important of all these -surface-resemblances,--there is Catherine’s apparent freedom from all -emotion at the deaths of her brothers and sister, and her extraordinary -dependence upon, and claimfulness towards, her Confessor alone. “These -patients rapidly lose the social feelings: Berthe, who for some time -preserved some affection for her brother, ends by losing all interest -in him; Marcelle, at the very beginning of her illness, separates -herself from every one.” “It is always their own personality which -dominates their thoughts.” Yet these patients have “an extraordinary -attachment to their physician. For him they are resolved to do all -things. In return, they are extremely exacting,--he is to occupy -himself entirely with each one alone. Only a very superficial observer -would ascribe this feeling to a vulgar source.”[33] - - -3. _Catherine’s personality not disintegrated._ - -But a third group of facts clearly differentiates Catherine’s case, -even in these years of avowed ill-health, from such patients; and these -facts become clearer and more numerous in precise proportion as we move -away from peripheral, psycho-physical phenomena and mechanisms, and -dwell upon her practically unbroken mental and moral characteristics, -and upon the use and meaning, the place and context of these things -within her ample life. - -For as to her relations with her attendants, even now it is still she -who leads, who suggests, who influences; a strong and self-consistent -will shows itself still, under all this shifting psycho-physical -surface. Thus Don Marabotto now administers, it is true, all her money -and charitable affairs for her. But it is she who insists, alone and -unaided, upon the true spiritual function of that impression of odour -on his hand.--Vernazza, no doubt, has now to help her in the fight -against subtle scruples, on occasion of her deepest depressions. But -her far more frequent times of light and joy are in nowise occasions -of a simply subjective self-engrossment or of a purely psycho-physical -interest, for her mind is absorbed if in but a few, yet in -inexhaustibly fruitful and universally applicable ideas and experiences -of a spiritual kind, such as helped to urge this friend on to his -world-renewing impulses and determinations.--Her closest relations and -friends, one must admit, succeed by their action, taken eighteen months -and then again two days before her death, in getting her to desist -from ordering her burial by the side of her husband. But we have seen, -in the one case, how indirectly, and, in the other case, how suddenly -and even then quite informally, they had to gain their point.--Her -attendants in general, and Marabotto in particular, certainly paid her -an engrossed attention, and the all but endlessness of her superficial -fancies and requirements have been chronicled by them with a naïve and -wearisome fulness. But then she herself is well aware that, had they -but the requisite knowledge as to how and when to apply them, some -sturdy opposition and a greater roughness of handling would, on their -part, be of the greatest use to her, in this her psychical infirmity; -indeed her shutting herself away from Marabotto, as late as January -1510, is directly caused by her sense and fear of being spoilt by him. - -It is true again that, already in 1502, we hear, in a probably -exaggerated but still possibly semi-authentic account, of her -indifference of feeling with regard to the deaths of two brothers and -of her only sister; and that, from January 1510 onwards, she gradually -excludes all her attendants from her sick-room, with, eventually, the -sole exceptions of Marabotto or Carenzio and Argentina. But her Wills -show conclusively how persistent were her detailed interest in, and -dispositions for, the requirements of her surviving brother, nephews, -and nieces; of poor Thobia and the girl’s hidden mother; of her -priest-attendants, and of each and all of her humblest domestics; of -the natives in the far-away Greek Island of Scios; and, above all, of -the Hospital and its great work which she had ever loved so well. - -We have indeed found two cases, both from within the last week of her -life, of mentally opaque and spiritually unsuggestive and unutilized -impressions which are truly analogous to those characteristic of -hysteria. But we have also seen how forcibly these two solitary cases -bring out, by contrast, the spiritual transparency and fruitfulness of -her usual, finely reflective picturings of these last years. For here -it is her own deliberate and spiritual mind which joyously greets, and -straightway utilizes and transcends, the psycho-physical occurrences; -and it does so, not because these occurrences are, or are taken to be, -the causes or requisites or objects of her faith and spiritual insight, -but because, on the contrary, they meet and clothe an already exuberant -faith and insight--spiritual certainties derived from quite another -source. - -And finally, if the monotony and superficial pettiness of the sick-room -can easily pall upon us, especially when presented with the credulities -and hectic exaggerations which disfigure so much of the _Vita’s_ -description of it; we must, in justice, as I have attempted to do in my -seventh and eighth chapters, count in, as part of her biography, her -deep affection for and persistent influence with Ettore and Battista -Vernazza, and the exemplification of her doctrine by these virile -souls, makers of history in the wide, varied world of men.[34] - -In a word, it is plain at once that, given the necessarily limited -number of ways in which the psycho-physical organism reacts under -mental stimulations, certain neural phenomena may, in any two cases, -be, in themselves, perfectly similar, although their respective mental -causes or occasions may be as different, each from the other, as -the Moonlight Sonata of Beethoven, or the working out of the Law of -Gravitation by Newton, or the elaboration of the implications of the -Categorical Imperative by Kant, are different from the sudden jumping -of a live mouse in the face of an hysterically-disposed young woman, or -as the various causes of tears and laughter throughout the whole world. - - -IV. FIRST PERIOD OF CATHERINE’S LIFE, 1447 TO 1477, IN ITS THREE STAGES. - -If we next go back to the first period of her life, in its three stages -of the sixteen years of her girlhood, 1447-1463, the first ten years -of her married life, 1463-1473, and the four years of her Conversion -and active Penitence, 1473-1477, we shall find, I think, in the matter -of temperament and psycho-physical conditions, little or nothing -but a rare degree of spiritual sensitiveness, and an extraordinary -close-knittedness of body and mind. - - -1. _From her childhood to her conversion._ - -Thus, already in her early childhood, that picture of the Pietà seems -to have suggested religious ideas and feelings with the suddenness -and emotional solidity of a physical seizure--an impression still -undimmed when she herself recounted it, some fifty years later, to her -two intimates.--It is true that during those first, deeply unhappy -ten years of marriage, we cannot readily find more than indications -of a most profound and brooding melancholy, the apparent result of -but two factors,--a naturally sad disposition and acutely painful -domestic circumstances. Yet it is clear, from the sequel, that more -and other things lay behind. It is indeed evident that she possessed -a congenitally melancholy temperament; that nothing but the rarest -combination of conditions could have brought out, into something like -elastic play and varied exercise, her great but few and naturally -excessive qualities of mind and heart; that these conditions were not -only absent, but were replaced by circumstances of the most painful -kind; and that she will hardly, at this time, have had even a moment’s -clear consciousness of any other sources than just those conditions for -her deep, keen, and ever-increasing dissatisfaction with all things, -her own self included: all peace and joy, the very capacity for either -seemed gone, and gone for ever. But it is only the third stage, with -its sudden-seeming conversion on March 20, 1473, and the then following -four years of strenuously active self-immolation and dedication to the -humblest service of others, which lets us see deep into those previous -years of sullen gloom and apparently hopeless drift and dreary wastage. - -The two stages really belong to one another, and the depth of the -former gloom and dreariness stood in direct proportion and relation to -the capacities of that nature and to the height of their satisfaction -in the later light and vigour brought to and assimilated by them. It -was the sense, at that previous time still inarticulate, but none the -less mightily operative, of the insufficiency of all things merely -contingent, of all things taken as such and inevitably found to be -such, that had been adding, and was now discovered to have added, a -quite determining weight and poignancy to the natural pressure of her -temperament and external lot. And this temperament and lot, which had -not alone produced that sadness, could still less of themselves remove -it, whatever might be its cause. Her sense of emptiness and impotence -could indeed add to her sense of fulness and of power, once these -latter had come; but of themselves the former could no more give her -the latter, than hunger, which indeed makes bread to taste delicious, -can give us real bread and, with it, that delight. - -And it was such real bread of life and real power which now came to -her. For if the tests of reality in such things are their persistence -and large and rich spiritual applicability and fruitfulness, -then something profoundly real and important took place in the -soul of that sad and weary woman of six-and-twenty, within that -Convent-chapel, at that Annunciation-tide. Her four years of heroic -persistence; her unbroken Hospital service of a quarter of a century; -her lofty magnanimity towards her husband, Thobia and Thobia’s -mother; her profound influence upon Vernazza, in urging him on to -his splendid labours throughout Italy, and to his grand death in -plague-stricken Genoa; her daringly original, yet immensely persuasive, -doctrine,--nearly all this dates back, completely for her consciousness -and very largely in reality, to those few moments on that memorable day. - - -2. _Her conversion not sudden nor visionary._ - -But two points, concerning the manner and form of this experience, -are, though of but secondary spiritual interest, far more difficult -to decide. There is, for one thing, the indubitable impression, for -her own mind and for ours, of complete suddenness and newness in her -change. Was this suddenness and newness merely apparent, or real as -well? And should this suddenness, if real, be taken as in itself and -directly supernatural? - -Now it is certain that Catherine, up to ten years before, had been -full of definitely religious acts and dispositions. Had she not, -already at thirteen, wanted to be a Nun, and, at eight or so, been -deeply moved by a picture of the dead Christ in His Mother’s lap? -Hence, ideas and feelings of self-dedication and of the Christ-God’s -hatred of sin and love for her had, in earlier and during longer times -than those of her comparative carelessness, soaked into and formed her -mental and emotional bent, and will have in so far shaped her will, -as to make the later determination along those earlier lines of its -operation, comparatively easy, even after those years of relaxation and -deviation. Yet it is clear that there was not here, as indeed there -is nowhere, any mere repetition of the past. New combinations and an -indefinitely deeper apprehension of the great religious ideas and facts -of God’s holiness and man’s weakness, of the necessity for the soul to -reach its own true depth or to suffer fruitlessly, and of God having -Himself to meet and feed this movement and hunger which He has Himself -implanted; new combinations and depths of emotion, and an indefinite -expansion and heroic determination of the will: were all certainly -here, and were new as compared with even the most religious moments in -the past. - -As to the suddenness, we cannot but take it as, in large part, simply -apparent,--a dim apprehension of what then became clear having been -previously quite oppressively with her. And, in any case, this -suddenness seems to belong rather to the temperamental peculiarities -and necessary forms of her particular experiences than to the essence -and content of her spiritual life. For, whatever she thinks, feels, -says or does throughout her life, she does and experiences with actual -suddenness, or at least with a sense of suddenness; and there is -clearly no more necessary connection between such suddenness and grace -and true self-renouncement, than there is between gradualness and mere -nature; both suddenness and gradualness being but simple modes, more or -less fixed for each individual, yet differing from each to each, modes -in which God’s grace and man’s will interact and manifest themselves in -different souls.[35] - -And then there is the question as to whether or not this -conversion-experience took the form of a vision. We have seen, in -the Appendix, how considerable are the difficulties which beset the -account of the Bleeding Christ Vision in the Palace; and how the story -of the previous visionless experience in the Chapel is free from all -such objections. But, even supposing the two accounts to be equally -reliable, it is the first, the visionless experience, which was -demonstrably the more important and the more abidingly operative of the -two. More important, for it is during those visionless moments that -her conversion is first effected; and more abiding, for, according to -all the ancient accounts, the impression of the Bleeding Christ Vision -disappeared utterly at the end of at longest four years, whereas the -memory of the visionless conversion moments remained with her, as an -operative force, up to the very last. Witness the free self-casting of -the soul into painful-joyous Purgation, into Love, into God (without -any picturing of the historic Christ), which forms one of the two -constituents of her great latter-day teaching; and how entirely free -from directly historic elements all her recorded visions of the middle -period turn out to be.[36] - - -3. _Peculiarities of her Active Penitence._ - -As to the four years of Active Penitence, we must beware of losing -the sense of the dependence, the simple, spontaneous instrumentality, -in which the negative and restrictive side of of her action stood -towards the positive and expansive one. An immense affirmation, an -anticipating, creative buoyancy and resourcefulness, had come full -flood into her life; and had shifted her centre of deliberate interest -and willing away from the disordered, pleasure-seeking, sore and -sulky lesser self in which her true personality had for so long been -enmeshed. Thus all this strenuous work of transforming and raising her -lower levels of inclinations and of habit to the likeness and heights -of her now deliberate loftiest standard was not taking place for the -sake of something which actually was, or which even seemed to be, less -than what she had possessed or had, even dimly, sought before, nor with -a view to her true self’s contraction. But, on the contrary, the work -was for the end of that indefinite More, of that great pushing upwards -of her soul’s centre and widening out of its circumference, which she -could herself confirm and increase only by such ever-renewed warfare -against what she now recognized as her false and crippling self. - -And it is noticeable how soon and how largely, even still within this -stage, her attitude became “passive.” She pretty early came to do these -numerous definite acts of penance without any deliberate selection -or full attention to them. As in her third period her absorption in -large spiritual ideas spontaneously suggests certain corresponding -psycho-physical phenomena, which then, in return, stimulate anew the -apprehensions of the mind; so here, towards the end of the first -period, penitential love ends by quite spontaneously suggesting -divers external acts of penitence, which readily become so much fresh -stimulation for love. - -I take this time to have been as yet free from visions or ecstasies--at -least of the later lengthy and specific type. For the Bleeding Christ -experience, even if fully historical, occurred within the first -conversion-days, and only its vivid memory prolonged itself throughout -those penitential years; whilst all such other visions, as have been -handed down to us, do not treat of conversion and penance, at least in -any active and personal sense. And only towards the end of these years -do the psycho-physical phenomena as to the abstention from food begin -to show themselves. The consideration of both the Visions and the Fasts -had, then, better be reserved for the great central period. - - -V. THE SECOND, GREAT MIDDLE PERIOD OF CATHERINE’S LIFE, 1477 TO 1499. - -It is most natural yet very regrettable that we should know so little -as to Catherine’s spiritual life, or even as to her psycho-physical -condition, during these central twenty-two years of her life. It is -natural, for she had, at this time, neither Physician nor Confessor -busy with her, and the very richness and balanced fulness of this epoch -of her life may well have helped to produce but little that could have -been specially seized and registered by either. Yet it is regrettable, -since here we have what, at least for us human observers, constitutes -the culmination and the true measure of her life, the first period -looking but like the preparation, and the third period, like the price -paid for such a rich expansion.--Yet we know something about three -matters of considerable psycho-physical and temperamental interest, -which are specially characteristic of this time: her attitude towards -food; her ecstasies and visions; and certain peculiarities in her -conception and practice of the spiritual warfare. - - -1. _Her extraordinary fasts._ - -As to food, it is clear that, however much we may be able or bound to -deduct from the accounts, there remains a solid nucleus of remarkable -fact. During some twenty years she evidently went, for a fairly equal -number of days,--some thirty in Advent and some forty in Lent, seventy -in all annually,--with all but no food; and was, during these fasts, -at least as vigorous and active as when her nutrition was normal. -For it is not fairly possible to make these great fasts end much -before 1496, when she ceased to be Matron of the Hospital; and they -cannot have begun much after 1475 or 1476: so that practically the -whole of her devoted service and administration in and of that great -institution fell within these years, of which well-nigh one-fifth was -covered by these all but total abstentions from food. Yet here again -we are compelled to take these things, not separately, and as directly -supernatural, but in connection with everything else; and to consider -the resultant whole as the effect and evidence of a strong mind and -will operating upon and through an immensely responsive psycho-physical -organism. - -For here again we easily find a significant system and delicate -selectiveness both in the constant approximate synchronisms--these -incapacities occurring about Advent and Lent; and in the foods -exempted--since there is no difficulty in connection with the daily -Holy Eucharist, with the unconsecrated wine given to her, as to all -Communicants in that age at Genoa, immediately after Communion, or with -water when seasoned penitentially with salt or vinegar. And if the -actual heightening of nervous energy and balance, recorded as having -generally accompanied these two fasts, is indeed a striking testimony -to the extraordinary powers of her mind and will, we must not forget -that these fruitful fasts were accompanied, and no doubt rendered -possible, by the second great psychical peculiarity of these middle -years, her ecstasies. - - -2. _Her ecstasies and visions._ - -It is indeed remarkable how these two conditions and functions, her -fasts and her ecstasies of a definite, lengthy and strength-bringing -kind, arise, persist and then fade out of her life together. And since, -in ecstasy, the respiration, the circulation, and the other physical -functions are all slackened and simplified; the mind is occupied with -fewer, simpler, larger ideas, harmonious amongst themselves; and -the emotions and the will are, for the time, saved the conflict and -confusion, the stress and strain, of the fully waking moments; and -considering that Catherine was peculiarly sensitive to all this flux -and friction, and that she was now often in a more or less ecstatic -trance from two up to eight hours: it follows that the amount of food -required to heal the breach made by life’s wear and tear would, by -these ecstasies, be considerably reduced. And indeed it will have been -these contemplative absorptions which directly mediated for her those -accessions of vigour: and that they did so, in such a soul and for the -uses to which she put this strength, is their fullest justification as -thoroughly wholesome, at least in their ultimate outcome, in and for -this particular life. - -And the visions recorded have these two characteristics, that they all -deal with metaphysical realities and relations--God as source and end -of all things, as Light and food of the soul, and similar conceptions, -and never directly with historical persons, scenes, or institutions; -and that, whereas the non-ecstatic picturings of her last period -are grandly original, and demonstrably based upon her own spiritual -experience, these second-period ecstatic visions are readily traceable -to New Testament, Neo-Platonist, and Franciscan precursors, and have -little more originality than this special selection from amongst other -possible literary sources. - - -3. _Special character of her spiritual warfare._ - -Catherine’s ecstasies lead us easily on to the special method of her -spiritual warfare, which can, I think, be summed up in three maxims: -“One thing, and only one at a time”; “Ever fight self, and you -need not trouble about any other foe”; and “Fight self by an heroic -indirectness and by love, for love,--through a continuous self-donation -to Pure Love alone.” - -Studying here these great convictions simply in their temperamental -occasions, colouring, and limitations, we can readily discover how the -“one thing at a time” maxim springs from the same disposition as that -which found such refreshment in ecstasy. For here too, partly from a -congenital incapacity to take things lightly, partly from an equally -characteristic sensitiveness to the conflict and confusion incident -to the introduction of any fresh multiplicity into the consciousness, -she requires, even in her non-ecstatic moments, to have her attention -specially concentrated upon one all-important idea, one point in the -field of consciousness. And, by a faithful wholeness of attention to -the successive spiritually significant circumstances and obligations, -interior impressions and lights, which her praying, thinking, -suffering, actively bring round to her notice, she manages, by such -single steps, gradually to go a very long way, and, by such severe -successiveness, to build up a rich simultaneity. For each of these -faithfully accepted and fully willed and utilized acts and states, -received into her one ever-growing and deepening personality, leave -memories and stimulations behind them, and mingle, as subconscious -elements, with the conscious acts which follow later on. - - -4. _Two remarkable consequences of this kind of warfare._ - -There were two specially remarkable consequences of this constant -watchful fixation of the one spiritually significant point in each -congeries of circumstances, and of the manner in which (partly perhaps -as the occasion, but probably in great part as the effect of this -attention) one interior condition of apparent fixity would suddenly -shift to another condition of a different kind but of a similar -apparent stability. There was the manner in which, during these years, -she appears to have escaped the committing of any at all definite -offences against the better and best lights of that particular moment; -and there was the way in which she would realize the faultiness and -subtle self-seeking of any one state, only at the moment of its -disappearing to make room for another. - -I take the accounts of both these remarkable peculiarities to be -substantially accurate, since, if the first condition had not obtained, -we should have found her practising more or less frequent Confession, -as we find her doing in the first and third, but not in this period; -and if the second condition had not existed, we should have had, for -this period also, some such vivid account of painful scruples arising -from the impression of actually present unfaithfulnesses, such as has -been preserved for her last years. And indeed, as soon as we have -vividly conceived a state in which a soul (by a wise utilization of the -quite exceptional successiveness and simplification to which it has -been, in great part, driven by its temperamental requirements, and by -a constant heroic watchfulness) has managed to exclude from its life, -during a long series of years, all fully deliberate resistances to, or -lapses from, its contemporaneous better insight: one sees at once that -a consciousness of faultiness could come to her only at those moments -when, one state and level giving place to another, she could, for the -moment, see the former habits and their implicit defects in the clear -light of their contrast to her new, deeper insights and dispositions. - -Now it is evident that here again we have in part (in the curious -quasi-fixity of each state, and then the sudden replacement of it -by another) something which, taken alone, is simply psychically -peculiar and spiritually indifferent. The persistent sense of gradual -or of rapid change in the midst of a certain continuity and indeed -abidingness, characteristic of the average moments of the average soul, -is, taken in itself, more true to life and to the normal reaction of -the human mind, and not less capable of spiritual utilization, than is -Catherine’s peculiarity. Her heroic utilization of her special psychic -life for purposes of self-fighting, and the degree in which, as we -shall find in a later chapter, she succeeded in moulding this life into -a shape representative of certain great spiritual truths: these things -it is which constitute here the spiritually significant element. - -And her second peculiarity of religious practice was her great -simplification and intensification of the spiritual combat. -Simplification: for she does not fight directly either the Devil or the -World; she directly fights the “Flesh” alone, and recognizes but one -immediate opponent, her own lower self. Hence the references to the -world are always simply as to an extension or indefinite repetition -of that same self, or of similar lower selves; and those to the devil -are, except where she declares her own lower self “a very devil,” -extraordinarily rare, and, in their authentic forms, never directly and -formally connected with her own spiritual interests and struggles. -And Intensification: for she conceives this lower self, against which -all her fighting is turned, as capable of any enormity, as actually -cloaking itself successively in every kind of disguise, and as more or -less vitiating even the most spiritual-seeming of her states and acts. - -And here again we can, I think, clearly trace the influence of her -special temperament and psycho-physical functioning, yet in a direction -opposite to that in which we would naturally expect it. For it is not -so much that this temperament led her to exaggerate the badness of her -false self, or to elaborate a myth concerning its (all but completely -separate) existence, as that, owing in large part to that temperament -and functioning, her false self _was_ both unusually distinct from her -true self and particularly clamorous and claimful. It would indeed be -well for hagiography if, in all cases, at least an attempt were made to -discover and present the precise and particular good and bad selves, -worked for and fought by the particular saint: for it is just this -double particularization of the common warfare in every individual soul -that gives the poignant interest and instructiveness, and a bracing -sense of reality to these lonely yet typical, unique yet universal -struggles, defeats, and victories. - -And in Catherine’s case her special temperament; her particular -attitude during the ten years’ laxity, and again during the last years’ -times of obscurity and scruple; even some of her sayings probably -still belonging to this middle period; but above all the precise point -and edge of her counter-ideal and _attrait_: all indicate clearly -enough what was her congenital defect. A great self-engrossment of -a downrightly selfish kind; a grouping of all things round such a -self-adoring _Ego_; a noiseless but determined elimination from -her life and memory of all that would not or could not, then and -there, be drawn and woven into the organism and functioning of this -immensely self-seeking, infinitely woundable and wounded, endlessly -self-doctoring “I” and “Me”: a self intensely, although not sexually, -jealous, envious and exacting, incapable of easy accommodation, of -pleasure in half successes, of humour and brightness, of joyous -“once-born” creatureliness: all this was certainly to be found, in -strong tendency at least, in the untrained parts and periods of her -character and life. - -And then the same peculiarity and sensitiveness of her psycho-physical -organism which, in her last period, ended by mirroring her mental -spiritual apprehensions and picturings in her very body, and which, -even at this time, has been traced by us in the curious long fixities -and rapid changes of her fields of consciousness, clearly operates -also and already here, in separating off this false self from the good -one and in heightening the apprehension of that false self to almost a -perception in space, or to an all but physical sensation. - -We thus get something of which the interesting cases of “doubleness -of personality,” so much studied of late years, are, as it were, -purely psychical, definitely _maladif_ caricatures; the great -difference consisting in Catherine herself possessing, at all times, -the consciousness and memory of both sides, of both “selves,” and of -each as both actual and potential, within the range of her one great -personality. Indeed it is this very multiplicity thus englobed and -utilized by that higher unity, which gives depth to her sanity and -sanctity.[37] - - -5. _Precise object and end of her striving._ - -And all this is confirmed and completed, as already hinted, by the -precise object of her ideal, the particular means and special end of -the struggle. Here, at the very culmination of her inner life and -aim, we find the deepest traces of her temperamental requirements; -and here, in what she seeks, there is again an immense concentration -and a significant choice. The distinctions between obligation and -supererogation, between merit and grace, are not utilized but -transcended; the conception of God having anger as well as love arouses -as keen a sense of intolerableness as that of God’s envy aroused in -Plato, and God appears to her as, in Himself, continuously loving. - -This love of God, again, is seen to be present everywhere, and, of -Itself, everywhere to effect happiness. The dispositions of souls are -indeed held to vary within each soul and between soul and soul, and to -determine the differences in their reception, and consequently in the -effect upon them, of God’s one universal love: but the soul’s reward -and punishment are not something distinct from its state, they are but -that very state prolonged and articulated, since man can indeed go -against his deepest requirements but can never finally suppress them. -Heaven, Purgatory, Hell are thus not places as well as states, nor do -they begin only in the beyond: they are states alone, and begin already -here. And Grace and Love, and Love and Christ, and Christ and Spirit, -and hence Grace and Love and Christ and Spirit are, at bottom, one, and -this One is God. Hence God, loving Himself in and through us, is alone -our full true self. Here, in this constant stretching out and forward -of her whole being into and towards the ocean of light and love, of -God the All in All, it is not hard to recognize a soul which finds -happiness only when looking out and away from self, and turning, in -more or less ecstatic contemplation and action, towards that Infinite -Country, that great Over-Againstness, God. - -And, in her sensitive shrinking from the idea of an angry God, we -find the instinctive reaction of a nature too naturally prone itself -to angry claimfulness, and which had been too much driven out of -its self-occupation by the painful sense of interior self-division -consequent upon that jealousy, not to find it intolerable to get out -of that little Scylla of her own hungry self only to fall into a great -Charybdis, an apparent mere enlargement and canonization of that same -self, in the angry God Himself. - -And if her second peculiarity, the concentration of the fight upon an -unusually isolated and intense false self, had introduced an element of -at least relative Rigorism and contraction into her spirituality, this -third peculiarity brings a compensating movement of quasi-Pantheism, -of immense expansion. Here the crushed plant expands in boundless -air, light and warmth; the parched seaweed floats and unfolds itself -in an immense ocean of pure waters--the soul, as it were, breathes -and bathes in God’s peace and love. And it is evident that the great -super-sensible realities and relations adumbrated by such figures, did -not, with her, lead to mere dry or vague apprehensions. Even in this -period, although here with a peaceful, bracing orderliness and harmony, -the reality thus long and closely dwelt on and lived with was, as it -were, physically seen and felt in these its images by a ready response -of her immensely docile psycho-physical organism. - - -6. _Catherine possessed two out of the three conditions apparently -necessary for stigmatization._ - -And in this connection we should note how largely reasonable was -the expectation of some of her disciples of finding some permanent -physical effects upon her body; and yet why she not only had not the -stigmata of the Passion, but why she could not have them. For, of the -three apparently necessary conditions for such stigmatization, she had -indeed two--a long and intense absorption in religious ideas, and a -specially sensitive psycho-physical temperament and organization of -the ecstatic type; but the third condition, the concentration of that -absorption upon Our Lord’s Passion and wounds, was wholly wanting--at -least after those four actively penitential and during those twenty-two -ecstatic years. We can, however, say most truly that although, since -at all events 1477, her visions and contemplations were all concerning -purely metaphysical, eternal realities, or certain ceaselessly -repeated experiences of the human soul, or laws and types derived from -the greatest of Christian institutions, her daily solace, the Holy -Eucharist: yet that these verities ended by producing definite images -in her senses, and certain observable though passing impressions upon -her body, so that we can here talk of sensible shadows or “stigmata” of -things purely spiritual and eternal. - -And if, in the cases of some ecstatic saints, mental pathologists of -a more or less materialistic type have, at times, shown excessive -suspicion as to some of the causes and effects of these saints’ -devotion to Our Lord’s Humanity under the imagery and categories of -the Canticle of Canticles--all such suspicions, fair or unfair, have -absolutely no foothold in Catherine’s life, since not only is there -here no devotion to God or to Our Lord as Bridegroom of the Bridal -soul: there is no direct contemplative occupation with the historic -Christ and no figuring of Him or of God under human attributes -or relations at all. I think that her temperament and health had -something to do with her habitual dwelling upon Thing-symbols of God: -Ocean--Air--Fire--picturings which, conceived with her psycho-physical -vividness, must, in their expanse, have rested and purified her in a -way that historical contingencies and details would not have done. The -doctrinal and metaphysical side of the matter will be considered later -on. - - -VI. THREE RULES WHICH SEEM TO GOVERN THE RELATIONS BETWEEN -PSYCHO-PHYSICAL PECULIARITIES AND SANCTITY IN GENERAL. - -If we next inquire how matters stand historically with regard to the -relations between ecstatic states and psycho-physical peculiarities -on the one hand, and sanctity in general on the other hand, we shall -find, I think, that the following three rules or laws really cover, in -a necessarily general, somewhat schematic way, all the chief points, -at all certain or practically important, in this complex and delicate -matter. - - -1. _Intense spiritual energising is accompanied by auto-suggestion and -mono-ideism._ - -It is clear, for one thing, that as simply all and every mental, -emotional, and volitional energizing is necessarily and always -accompanied by corresponding nerve-states, and that if we had -not some neural sensitiveness and neural adaptability, we could -not--whilst living our earthly life--think, or feel, or will in -regard to anything whatsoever: a certain special degree of at least -potential psycho-physical sensitiveness and adaptability must be -taken to be, not the productive cause, but a necessary condition for -the exercise, of any considerable range and depth of mind and will, -and hence of sanctity in general; and that the actual aiming at, -and gradual achievement of, sanctity in these, thus merely possible -cases, spiritualizes and further defines this sensitiveness, as the -instrument, material, and expression of the soul’s work.[38] And this -work of the heroic soul will necessarily consist, in great part, in -attending to, calling up, and, as far as may be, both fixing and ever -renovating certain few great dominant ideas, and in attempting by every -means to saturate the imagination with images and figures, historical -and symbolic, as so many incarnations of these great verities. - -We get thus what, taken simply phenomenally and without as yet any -inquiry as to an ultimate reality pressing in upon the soul,--a divine -stimulation underlying all its sincere and fruitful action,--is a -spiritual mono-ideism and auto-suggestion, of a more or less general -kind. But, at this stage, these activities and their psycho-physical -concomitants and results will, though different in kind, be no -more abnormal than is the mono-ideism and auto-suggestion of the -mathematician, the tactician, and the constructive statesman. Newton, -Napoleon, and Richelieu: they were all dominated by some great -central idea, and they all for long years dwelt upon it and worked -for it within themselves, till it became alive and aflame in their -imaginations and their outward-moving wills, before, yet as the means -of, its taking external and visible shape. And, in all the cases -that we can test in detail, the psycho-physical accompaniments of -all this profound mental-volitional energy were most marked. In the -cases of Newton and Napoleon, for instance, a classification of their -energizings solely according to their neural accompaniments would -force us to class these great discoverers and organizers amongst -psycho-physical eccentrics. Yet the truth and value of their work and -character has, of course, to be measured, not by this its neural fringe -and cost, but by its central spiritual truth and fruitfulness. - - -2. _Such mechanisms specially marked in Philosophers, Musicians, Poets, -and Mystical Religionists._ - -The mystical and contemplative element in the religious life, and the -group of saints amongst whom this element is predominant, no doubt give -us a still larger amount of what, again taking the matter phenomenally -and not ultimately, is once more mono-ideism and auto-suggestion, -and entails a correspondingly larger amount of psycho-physical -impressionableness and reaction utilized by the mind. But here also, -from the simplest forms of the “prayer of quiet” to absorptions of an -approximately ecstatic type, we have something which, though different -in kind and value, is yet no more abnormal than are the highest flights -and absorptions of the Philosopher, the Musician, and the Poet. And -yet, in such cases as Kant and Beethoven, a classifier of humanity -according to its psycho-physical phenomena alone would put these great -discoverers and creators, without hesitation, amongst hopeless and -useless hypochondriacs. Yet here again the truth of their ideas and the -work of their lives have to be measured by quite other things than by -this their neural concomitance and cost. - - -3. _Ecstatics possess a peculiar psycho-physical organization._ - -The downright ecstatics and hearers of voices and seers of visions -have all, wherever we are able to trace their temperamental and neural -constitution and history, possessed and developed a definitely peculiar -psycho-physical organization. We have traced it in Catherine and -indicated it in St. Teresa. We find it again in St. Maria Magdalena -dei Pazzi and in St. Marguerite Marie Alacocque, in modern times, -and in St. Catherine of Siena and St. Francis of Assisi in mediaeval -times. For early Christian times we are too ignorant as regards the -psycho-physical organization of St. Ignatius of Antioch, Hermas, -and St. Cyprian, to be able to establish a connection between their -temperamental endowments and their hearing of voices and seeing of -visions--in the last two cases we get much that looks like more or less -of a mere conventional literary device.[39] - -We are, however, in a fair position for judging, in the typical and -thoroughly original case of St. Paul. In 2 Cor. xiii, 7, 8, after -speaking of the abundant revelations accorded to him, he adds that -“lest I be lifted up, a thorn” (literally, a stake) “in the flesh was -given to me, an Angel of Satan to buffet me.” And though “I thrice -besought the Lord that it might depart from me, the Lord answered -me, ‘My grace is sufficient for thee; for grace is perfected in -infirmity.’” And he was consequently determined “rather” to “glory in -his infirmities, so that the power of Christ may dwell within” him. -And in Gal. iv, 14, 15, written about the same time, he reminds his -readers how he had “preached to them through the infirmity of the -flesh,” commending them because they “did not despise nor loathe their -temptation in his flesh” (this is no doubt the correct reading), “but -had received him as an Angel of God, as Christ Jesus.” - -Now the most ancient interpretation of this “thorn” or “stake” is some -kind of bodily complaint,--violent headache or earache is mentioned by -Tertullian de Pudicitia, 13, and by St. Jerome, Comm. in Gal. _loc. -cit._ Indeed St. Paul’s own description of his “bodily presence” as -“weak,” and his “spoken word” as “contemptible” (2 Cor. x, 10), points -this way. It seems plain that it cannot have been carnal temptations -(only in the sixth century did this interpretation become firmly -established), for he could not have gloried in these, nor could they, -hidden as they would be within his heart, have exposed him to the -contempt of others. Indeed he expressly excludes such troubles from his -life, where, in advising those who were thus oppressed to marry, he -gives the preference to the single life, and declares, “I would that -all men were even as myself” (1 Cor. vii, 7). - -The attacks of this trouble were evidently acutely painful: note the -metaphor of a stake driven into the live flesh and the Angel of Satan -who buffeted him. (And compare St. Teresa’s account: “An Angel of God -appeared to me to be thrusting at times a long spear into my heart and -to pierce my very entrails”; “the pain was so great that it made me -moan”; “it really seems to the soul as if an arrow were thrust through -the heart or through itself; the suffering is not one of sense, neither -is the wound physical”; and how, on another occasion, she heard Our -Lord answer her: “Serve thou Me, and meddle not with this.”)[40] - -These attacks would come suddenly, even in the course of his public -ministry, rendering him, in so far, an object of derision and of -loathing. (Compare here St. Teresa’s declaration: “During the rapture, -the body is very often perfectly powerless; it continues in the -position it was in when the rapture came upon it: if sitting, sitting; -if the hands were open, or if they were shut, they will remain open or -shut”; “if the body” was “standing or kneeling, it remains so.”)[41] - -Yet these attacks were evidently somehow connected, both in fact and -in his consciousness, with his Visions; and they were recurrent. The -vision of the Third Heaven and his apparently first attack seem to have -been practically coincident,--about A.D. 44. We find a second attack -hanging about him for some time, on his first preaching in Galatia, -about A.D. 51 or 52 (see 1 Thess. ii, 18; 1 Cor. ii, 3). And a third -attack appears to have come in A.D. 57 or 58, when the Second Epistle -to the Corinthians and that to the Galatians were written; note the -words (2 Cor. i, 9), “But” (in addition to his share in the public -persecution) “we ourselves had the sentence of death within ourselves, -in order that we might not trust in ourselves but in God who raiseth -the dead to life.” (And compare here St. Teresa: in July 1547 “for -about four days I remained insensible. They must have regarded me as -dead more than once. For a day and a half the grave was open in my -monastery, waiting for my body. But it pleased Our Lord I should come -to myself.”)[42] Dr. Lightfoot gives as a parallel the epileptiform -seizures of King Alfred, which, sudden, acutely painful, at times -death-like, and protracted, tended to render the royal power despicable -in the eyes of the world.[43] Yet, except for the difference of sex and -of relative privacy, St. Teresa’s states, which I have given here, are -more closely similar, in so much as they are intimately connected with -religious visions and voices. - -And, amongst Old Testament figures, we can find a similar connection, -on a still larger scale, in the case of Ezekiel, the most definitely -ecstatic, though (upon the whole) the least original, of the literary -Prophets. For, as to the visionary element, we have his own records -of three visions of the glory of Jahve; of five other ecstasies, -three of which are accompanied by remarkable telepathic, second-sight -activities; and of twelve symbolic (better: representative) prophetic -actions, which are now all rightly coming to be considered as having -been externally carried out by him.[44] And we get psycho-physical -states, as marked as in any other ecstatic saint. For we hear how Jahve -on one occasion says to him: “But thou, son of man, lay thyself on -thy left side” (_i.e._ according to Jewish orientation, towards the -North) “and I shall lay the guilt of the house of Israel” (the Northern -Kingdom) “upon thee; the number of days that thou shalt lie upon it, -shalt thou bear their guilt. But I appoint unto thee the years of their -guilt, as a (corresponding) number of days, (namely) one hundred and -fifty days.… And, when thou hast done with them, thou shalt lay thyself -on thy right side” (_i.e._ towards the South), “and thou shalt bear the -guilt of the house of Judah” (the Southern Kingdom); “one day for each -year shall I appoint unto thee. And behold I shall lay cords upon thee, -that thou shalt be unable to turn from one side to the other, till thou -hast ended the days of thy boundness” (iv, 4-8). Krätzschmar, no doubt -rightly, finds here a case of hemiplegia and anaesthesia, functional -cataleptic paralysis lasting during five months on the left side, and -then shifting for about six weeks to the right side. And the _alalia_ -(speechlessness), which no doubt accompanied this state, is referred -to on three other occasions: xxiv, 27; xxix, 31; xxxiii, 22. And note -how Jahve’s address to Ezekiel, “son of man,” which occurs in this book -over ninety times, and but once in the whole of the rest of the Old -Testament (Dan. viii, 17), evidently stands here for the sense of his -creaturely nothingness, so characteristic of the true ecstatic.[45] - -Now, at this last stage, the analogy of the other non-religious -activities of the healthy mind and of their psycho-physical conditions -and effects forsakes us; but not the principle which has guided us -all along. For here, as from the very first, some such conditions -and effects are inevitable; and the simple fact of this occurrence, -apart from the question of their particular character, is something -thoroughly normal. And here again, and more than ever, the emphasis -and decision have to lie with, and to depend upon, the mental and -volitional work and the spiritual truth and reality achieved in and for -the recipient, and, through him, in and for others. - -Even at the earlier stages, to cling to the form, as distinct from -the content and end, of these things was to be thoroughly unfair -to this their content and end, within the spacious economy of the -spirit’s life; at this stage such clinging becomes destructive of all -true religion. For if the mere psycho-physical forms and phenomena of -ecstasy, of vision, of hearing of voices is, in proportion to their -psycho-physical intensity and seeming automatism and quasi-physical -objectivity, to be taken as necessarily a means and mark of sanctity or -of insight, or, at least, as something presumably sent direct by God -or else as diabolical, something necessarily super- or preter-natural: -then the lunatic asylums contain more miracles, saints, and sages, or -their direct, strangely similar antipodes, than all the most fervent or -perverted churches, monasteries, and families upon God’s earth. For in -asylums we find ecstasies, visions, voices, all more, not less marked, -all more, not less irresistibly objective-seeming to the recipient, -than anything to be found outside. - -Yet apply impartially to both sets the test, not of form, but of -content, of spiritual fruitfulness and of many-sided applicability--and -this surface-similarity yields at once to a fundamental difference. -Indeed all the great mystics, and this in precise proportion to their -greatness, have ever taught that, the mystical capacities and habits -being but means and not ends, only such ecstasies are valuable as -leave the soul, and the very body as its instrument, strengthened and -improved; and that visions and voices are to be accepted by the mind -only in proportion as they convey some spiritual truth of importance to -it or to others, and as they actually help it to become more humble, -true, and loving. - -And there can be no doubt that these things worked thus with such -great ecstatic mystics as Ezekiel, the man of the great prophetic -schemes and the permanently fruitful picturing of the Good Shepherd; -as St. Paul, the greatest missionary and organizer ever given to the -Christian Church; as St. Francis of Assisi, the salt and leaven and -light of the Church and of society, in his day and more or less ever -since; as St. Catherine of Siena, the free-spoken, docile reinspirer -of the Papacy; as Jeanne d’Arc, the maiden deliverer of a Nation; as -St. Teresa, reformer of a great Order. All these, and countless others, -would, quite evidently, have achieved less, not more, of interior -light and of far-reaching helpfulness of a kind readily recognized by -all specifically religious souls, had they been without the rest, the -bracing, the experience furnished to them by their ecstasies and allied -states and apprehensions. - - - - -VII. PERENNIAL FRESHNESS OF THE GREAT MYSTICS’ MAIN SPIRITUAL TEST, IN -CONTRADISTINCTION TO THEIR SECONDARY, PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTENTION. TWO -SPECIAL DIFFICULTIES. - - -1. _A false and a true test of mystical experience._ - -Now it is deeply interesting to note how entirely unweakened, indeed -how impressively strengthened, by the intervening severe test of -whole centuries of further experience and of thought, has remained -the main and direct, the spiritual test of the great Mystics, in -contradistinction to their secondary psychological contention with -respect to such experiences. The secondary, psychological contention -is well reproduced by St. Teresa where she says: “When I speak, I go -on with my understanding arranging what I am saying; but, if I am -spoken to by others, I do nothing else but listen without any labour.” -In the former case, “the soul,” if it be in good faith, “cannot -possibly fail to see clearly that itself arranges the words and utters -them to itself. How then can the understanding have time enough to -arrange these locutions? They require time.”[46] Now this particular -argument for their supernaturalness derived from the psychological -form--from the suddenness, clearness, and apparent automatism of these -locutions--has ceased to carry weight, owing to our present, curiously -recent, knowledge concerning the subconscious region of the mind, and -the occasionally sudden irruption of that region’s contents into the -field of that same mind’s ordinary, full consciousness. In the Ven. -Battista Vernazza’s case we have a particularly clear instance of such -a long accumulation,--by means of much, in great part full, attention -to certain spiritual ideas, words, and images,--in the subconscious -regions of a particularly strong and deeply sincere and saintly mind; -and the sudden irruption from those regions of certain clear and -apparently quite spontaneous words and images into the field of her -mind’s full consciousness.[47] - -But the reference to the great Mystics’ chief and direct test, upon -which they dwell with an assurance and self-consistency far surpassing -that which accompanies their psychological argument,--the spiritual -content and effects of such experiences,--this, retains all its -cogency. St. Teresa tells us: “When Our Lord speaks, it is both word -and work: His words are deeds.” “I found myself, through these words -alone, tranquil and strong, courageous and confident, at rest and -enlightened: I felt I could maintain against all the world that my -prayer was the work of God.” “I could not believe that Satan, if he -wished to deceive me, could have recourse to means so adverse to his -purpose as this, of rooting out my faults, and implanting virtues and -spiritual strength: for I saw clearly that I had become another person, -by means of these visions.” “So efficacious was the vision, and such -was the nature of the words spoken to me, that I could not possibly -doubt that they came from Him.” “I was in a trance; and the effects of -it were such, that I could have no doubt it came from God.” On another -occasion she writes less positively even of the great test: “She never -undertook anything merely because it came to her in prayer. For all -that her Confessors told her that these things came from God, she never -so thoroughly believed them that she could swear to it herself, though -it did seem to her that they were spiritually safe, because of the -effects thereof.”[48] This doctrine is still the last word of wisdom in -these matters. - - -2. _First special difficulty in testing ecstasies._ - -Yet it is only at this last stage that two special difficulties occur, -the one philosophical, the other moral. The philosophical difficulty -is as follows. As long as the earlier stages are in progress, it is -not difficult to understand that the soul may be gradually building up -for herself a world of spiritual apprehensions, and a corresponding -spiritual and moral character, by a process which, looked at merely -phenomenally and separately, appears as a simple case of mono-ideism -and auto-suggestion, but which can and should be conceived, when -studied in its ultimate cause and end, as due to the pressure and -influence of God’s spirit working in and through the spirit of -man,--the Creator causing His own little human creature freely to -create for itself some copy of and approach to its own eternally -subsisting, substantial Cause and Crown. There the operation of such an -underlying Supreme Cause, and a consequent relation between the world -thus conceived and built up by the human soul and the real world of the -Divine Spirit, appears possible, because the things which the soul is -thus made to suggest to itself are ideas, and because even these ideas -are clearly recognized by the soul as only instruments and approaches -to the realities for which they stand. But here, in this last stage, we -get the suggestion, not of ideas, but of psycho-physical impressions, -and these impressions are, apparently, not taken as but distantly -illustrative, but as somehow one with the spiritual realities for which -they stand. Is not, _e.g._, Catherine’s joy at this stage centred -precisely in the downright feeling, smelling, seeing, of ocean waters, -penetrating odours, all-enveloping light; and in the identification of -those waters, odours, lights, with God Himself, so that God becomes at -last an object of direct, passive, sensible perception? Have we not -then here at last reached pure delusion? - -Not so, in proportion as the mystic is great and spiritual, and as -he here still clings to the principles common to all true religion. -For, in proportion as he is and does this, will he find and regard the -mind as deeper and more operative than sense, and God’s Spirit as -penetrating and transcending both the one and the other. And hence he -will (at least implicitly) regard those psycho-physical impressions -as but sense-like and really mental; and he will consider this mental -impression and projection as indeed produced by the presence and -action of the Spirit within his mind or of the pressure of spiritual -realities upon it, but will hold that this whole mental process, with -these its spacial- and temporal-seeming embodiments, these sights and -sounds, has only a relation and analogical likeness to, and is not -and cannot be identical with, those realities of an intrinsically -super-spacial, super-temporal order.--And thus here as everywhere, -although here necessarily more than ever, we find again the conception -of the Transcendent yet also Immanent Spirit, effecting in the human -spirit the ever-increasing apprehension of Himself, accompanied in -this spirit by an ever keener sense of His incomprehensibility for all -but Himself. And here again the truth, and more especially the divine -origin of these apprehensions, is tested and guaranteed on and on by -the consequent deepening of that spiritual and ethical fruitfulness and -death to self, which are the common aspirations of every deepest moment -and every sincerest movement within the universal heart of man. - -Thus, as regards the mentality of these experiences, Catherine -constantly speaks of seeing “as though with the eyes of the body.” And -St. Teresa tells us of her visions with “the eyes of the soul”; of -how at first she “did not know that it was possible to see anything -otherwise than with the eyes of the body”; of how, in reality “she -never,” in her true visions and locutions, “saw anything with her -bodily eyes, nor heard anything with her bodily ears”; and of how -indeed she later on, on one occasion, “saw nothing with the eyes of -the body, nothing with the eyes of the soul,”--she “simply felt Christ -close by her,”--evidently again with the soul. Thus, too, Catherine -tells us, that “as the intellect exceeds language, so does love exceed -intellection”; and how vividly she feels that “all that can be said of -God,” compared to the great Reality, “is but tiny crumbs from the great -Master’s table.”[49] - -And, as to the inadequacy of these impressions, the classical authority -on such things, St. John of the Cross, declares: “He that will rely on -the letter of the divine locutions or on the intelligible form of the -vision, will of necessity fall into delusion; for he does not yield to -the Spirit in detachment from sense.” “He who shall give attention to -these motes of the Spirit alone will, in the end, have no spirituality -at all.” “All visions, revelations, and heavenly feelings, and whatever -is greater than these, are not worth the least act of humility, bearing -the fruits of that charity which neither values nor seeks itself, -which thinketh well not of self but of all others.” Indeed “virtue -does not consist in these apprehensions. Let men then cease to regard, -and labour to forget them, that they may be free.” For “spiritual -supernatural knowledge is of two kinds, one distinct and special,” -which comprises “visions, revelations, locutions, and spiritual -impressions”; “the other confused, obscure, and general,” which “has -but one form, that of contemplation which is the work of faith. The -soul is to be led into this, by directing it thereto through all the -rest, beginning with the first, and detaching it from them.” - -Hence “many souls, to whom visions have never come, are incomparably -more advanced in the way of perfection than others to whom many -have been given”; and “they who are already perfect, receive these -visitations of the Spirit of God in peace; ecstasies cease, for they -were only graces to prepare them for this greater grace.” Hence, too, -“one desire only doth God allow and suffer in His Presence: that of -perfectly observing His law and of carrying the Cross of Christ. In -the Ark of the Covenant there was but the Book of the Law, the Rod of -Aaron, and the Pot of Manna. Even so that soul, which has no other aim -than the perfect observance of the Law of God and the carrying of the -Cross of Christ, will be a true Ark containing the true Manna, which -is God.” And this perfected soul’s intellectual apprehensions will, -in their very mixture of light and conscious obscurity, more and more -approach and forestall the eternal condition of the beatified soul. -“One of the greatest favours, bestowed transiently on the soul in this -life, is to enable it to see so distinctly and to feel so profoundly, -that it cannot comprehend Him at all. These souls are herein, in -some degree, like the Saints in Heaven, where they who know Him most -perfectly perceive most clearly that He is infinitely incomprehensible; -for those who have the less clear vision do not perceive so distinctly -as the others how greatly He transcends their vision.”[50] - - -3. _Second special difficulty in testing ecstasies._ - -The second special difficulty is this. Have not at least some of the -saints of this definitely ecstatic type shown more psycho-physical -abnormality than spiritually fruitful origination or utilization of -such things, so that their whole life seems penetrated by a fantastic -spirit? And have not many others, who, at their best, may not have been -amenable to this charge, ended with shattered nerve- and will-power, -with an organism apparently incapable of any further growth or use, -even if we restrict our survey exclusively to strength-bringing ecstasy -and to a contemplative prayer of some traceable significance? - -(1) As a good instance of the apparent predominance of psycho-physical -and even spiritual strangeness, we can take the Venerable Sister -Lukardis, Cistercian Nun of Ober-Weimar, born probably in 1276. -Her life is published from a unique Latin MS. by the Bollandists -(_Analecta_, Vol. XVIII, pp. 305-367, Bruxelles, 1899), and presents us -with a mediaevally naïve and strangely unanalytic, yet extraordinarily -vivid picture of things actually seen by the writer. “Although,” say -the most competent editors, “we know not the name nor profession of -the Author, whether he belonged to the Friars or to the Monks,[51] it -is certain that he was a contemporary of Lukardis, that he knew her -intimately, and that he learnt many details from her fellow-nuns. And -though we shall be slow to agree with him when he ascribes all the -strange things which she experienced in her soul and body to divine -influence, yet we should beware of considering him to be in bad faith. -For, though he erred perchance in ascribing to a divine operation -things which are simply the work of nature, such a vice is common -amongst those who transmit such things.”[52] I take the chief points in -the order of their narration by the _Vita_. - -“Soon after Lukardis had, at twelve years of age, taken the Cistercian -habit, her mother died,” over twelve English miles away, at Erfurt, yet -Lukardis “saw the scene” in such detail “in the spirit,” that, when -her sister came to tell her, she, Lukardis, “anticipated her with an -account of the day, the place and hour of the death, of the clothes -then being worn by their mother, of the precise position of the bed and -of the hospital, and of the persons present at the time.” - -She soon suffered from “stone” in the bladder; “quartan, tertian, and -continuous fevers,” and from fainting fits; also from contraction of -the muscles (_nervi_) of the hands, so that the latter were all but -useless and could not even hold the staff on which she had to lean in -walking, till they had been “tightly wrapped round in certain clothes.” -Yet “she would, at times, strike her hands so vehemently against each -other, that they resounded as though they had been wooden boards.” -“When lying in bed she would sometimes, as it were, plant her feet -beneath her, hang her head down” backwards, “and raise her abdomen and -chest, making thus, as it were, a highly curved arch of her person.” -Indeed sometimes “she would for a long while stand upon her head and -shoulders, with her feet up in air, but with her garments adhering to -her limbs, as though they had been sewn on to them.” “Often, too, by -day or night, she was wont to run with a most impetuous course;--she -understood that, by this her course, she was compensating Christ for -His earthly course of thirty-three years.”[53] - -“On one occasion she had a vision of Christ, in which He said to her: -‘Join thy hands to My hands, and thy feet to My feet, and thy breast -to My breast, and thus shall I be aided by thee to suffer less.’ And -instantly she felt a most keen pain of wounds,” in all three regions, -“although wounds did not as yet appear to sight.” But “as she bore -the memory of the hammering of the nails into Christ upon the Cross -within her heart, so did she exercise herself in outward deed. For she -was frequently wont, with the middle finger of one hand, impetuously -to wound the other in the place appropriate to the stigmata; then to -withdraw her finger to the distance of a cubit, and straightway again -impetuously to wound herself. Those middle fingers felt hard like -metal. And about the sixth and ninth hour she would impetuously wound -herself with her finger in the breast, at the appropriate place for the -wound.”--After about two years “Christ appeared to her in the night of -Blessed Gregory, Pope” (St. Gregory VII, May 26?), “pressed her right -hand firmly in His, and declared, ‘I desire thee to suffer with Me.’ -On her consenting, a wound instantly appeared in her right hand; about -ten days later a wound in the left hand; and thus successively the five -wounds were found in her body.” “The wounds of the scourging were also -found upon her, of a finger’s length, and having a certain hard skin -around them.”[54] - -“At whiles she would lie like one dead throughout the day; yet her -countenance was very attractive, owing to a wondrous flushed look. And -even if a needle was pressed into her flesh, she felt no pain.”--“On -one occasion she was carried upon her couch by two sisters into the -Lady Chapel, to the very spot where her body now reposes. After having -been left there alone for about an hour, the Blessed Virgin appeared -to her, with her beloved Infant, Jesus, in her arms, and suckling Him. -And Lukardis, contrary to the law of her strength”--she had, by now, -been long confined to a reclining posture--“arose from her couch and -began to stand upright. And at this juncture one of the Sisters opened -the Chapel door a little, and, on looking in, marvelled at Lukardis -being able to stand, but withdrew and forbade the other Sisters from -approaching thither, since she feared that, if they saw her standing -thus, they might declare her to be quite able, if she but chose, to -arise and stand at any time. Upon the Blessed Virgin twice insisting -upon being asked for some special favour, and Lukardis declaring, ‘I -desire that thou slake my thirst with that same milk with which I now -see thee suckling thy beloved Son,’ the Blessed Virgin came up to her, -and gave her to drink of her milk.” And when later on Lukardis was -fetched by the Sisters, she was “found reclining on her couch. And for -three days and nights she took neither food nor drink, and could not -see the light of day. And as a precaution, since her death was feared, -Extreme Unction was administered to her. And, later on, the Sister who -had seen her standing in the Chapel, gradually drew the whole story -from her.”[55] - -“After she had lain, very weak, and, as it were, in a state of -contracture, for eleven years, it happened that, about the ninth hour -of one Good Friday, the natural bodily heat and colour forsook her; -she seemed nowise to breathe; her wounds bled more than usual; she -appeared to be dead. And her fellow-Sisters wept greatly. Yet about -Vesper-time she opened her eyes and began to move; and her companions -were wondrously consoled. And then in the Easter night, about the hour -of Christ’s Resurrection, as, with the other sick Sisters, she lay in -her bed placed so as to be able to hear the Divine Office, she felt -all her limbs to be as it were suffused with a most refreshing dew. -And straightway she saw stretched down to her from Heaven a hand, as -it were of the Blessed Virgin, which stroked her wounds and all the -painful places, the ligaments and joints of her members, gently and -compassionately. After which she straightway felt how that all her -members, which before had for so long been severely contracted, and how -the knots, formed by the ligaments (_nervi_), were being efficaciously -resolved and equally distended, so that she considered herself freed -from her hard bondage. She arose unaided from her couch, proceeded to -the near-by entrance to the Choir, and prostrated herself there, in -fervent orison, with her arms outstretched in cross-form, for a very -long hour. And then, commanded by the Abbess to rise, she readily arose -without help, stood with pleasure, and walked whithersoever she would.” -“At all times she ever suffered more from the cold than any of her -companions.”[56] - -“As, during those eleven years that she lay like one paralyzed, she was -wont, on every Friday, to lie with her arms expanded as though on the -Cross, and her feet one on the top of the other; so, after the Lord had -so wonderfully raised her on that Paschal day, she, on every Friday -and every Lenten day, would stand erect with her arms outstretched, -crosswise, and, without any support, on one foot only, with the -other foot planted upon its fellow, from the hour of noon to that of -Vespers.”--“Whilst she was still uncured, and required some delicate -refection which the Convent could not afford, there came to her,” one -day, “the most loving Infant, bearing in His Hand the leg of a chicken, -newly roasted, and begging her to eat it for His sake.” She did so, -and was wonderfully strengthened. Apparently late on in her life “they -procured, with much labour and diligence, all kinds of drinkables from -different and even from distant places for her. But she, having tasted -any one of them, would straightway shake her head, close her lips, and -then declare that she could not drink it up.” “However delicious in -itself, it seemed to be so much gall and wormwood when applied to her -mouth.”[57] - -And if we look, not at seemingly childish fantasticalness in certain -mystical lives, but at the later state of shattered health and -apparently weakened nerve- and will-power which appears so frequently -to be the price paid for the definitely ecstatic type of religion, even -where it has been spiritually fruitful, our anxiety is readily renewed. -Look at the nine, possibly thirteen, last years of Catherine’s, or at -the last period of St. Margaret Mary’s life; note the similar cases -of SS. Maria Magdalena de Pazzi and Juliana Falconieri. And we have -a figure of all but pure suffering and passivity in St. Lidwina of -Schiedam (1380-1433), over which M. Huysmans has managed to be so -thoroughly morbid. - -(2) And if such lives strike us as too exceptional to be taken, with -whatever deductions, as a case in point, we can find a thoroughly fair -instance in the life of Father Isaac Hecker. Here we have a man of -extraordinary breadth, solidity, and activity of mind and character, -and whose mysticism is of the most sober and harmonious kind. Yet his -close companion and most faithful chronicler, Father Walter Elliott, -tells us: “From severe colds, acute headaches, and weakness of the -digestive organs, Father Hecker was at all times a frequent sufferer. -But, towards the end of the year 1871, his headaches became much more -painful, his appetite forsook him, and sleeplessness and excitability -of the nervous system were added to his other ailments. Remedies of -every kind were tried, but without permanent relief. By the summer -of 1872 he was wholly incapacitated.” “The physical sufferings of -those last sixteen” (out of the sixty-nine) “years of his life were -never such as to impair his mental soundness … though his organs of -speech were sometimes too slow for his thoughts.” His digestion and -nervous system had been impaired by excessive abstinence in early -manhood, and by excessive work in later life, “till at last the body -struck work altogether. During the sixteen years of his illness every -symptom of bodily illness was aggravated by the least attention to -community affairs or business matters, and also by interior trials,” -although he still managed, by heroic efforts, at times directly to -serve his congregation and to write some remarkable papers. Yet this -state continued, practically unbroken, up to the end, on December 22, -1888.[58] And although the various proximate causes, indicated by -Father Elliott, had no doubt been operative here, there can, in view of -the numerous similar cases, be no question that the most fundamental -of the reasons of this general condition of health was his strongly -mystical type and habit of mind and his corresponding psycho-physical -organization. - -(3) In view of those fantasticalnesses and of these exhaustions, we -cannot but ask whether these things are not a terrible price to pay -for such states? whether such states should not be disallowed by -all solid morality, and should not prompt men of sense to try and -stamp them out? And, above all, we seem placed once more, with added -anxiety, before the question whether what is liable to end in such sad -general incapacitation was not, from the first, directly productive -of, and indeed simply produced by, some merely subjective, simply -psycho-physical abnormality and morbidness? - -(4) Three points here call for consideration. Let us, for one thing, -never forget that physical health is not the true end of human life, -but only one of its most important means and conditions. The ideal man -is not, primarily and directly, a physical machine, perfect as such -in its development and function, to which would be tacked on, as a -sort of concomitant or means, the mental, moral, and spiritual life -and character. But the ideal man is precisely this latter life and -character, with the psycho-physical organism sustained and developed in -such, and only such, a degree, direction, and combination, as may make -it the best possible substratum, stimulus, instrument, material, and -expression for and of that spiritual personality.[59] Hence, the true -question here is not whether such a type of life as we are considering -exacts a serious physical tribute or not, but whether the specifically -human effects and fruits of that life are worth that cost. - -No one denies that mining, or warfare, or hospital work, both spiritual -and medical, involve grave risks to life, nor that the preparation -of many chemicals is directly and inevitably injurious to health. -Yet no one thinks of abolishing such occupations or of blaming those -who follow them, and rightly so; for instant death may and should be -risked, the slow but certain undermining of the physical health may be -laudably embarked on, if only the mind and character are not damaged, -and if the end to be attained is found to be necessary or seriously -helpful, and unattainable by other means. - -The simple fact, then, of frequent and subsequent, or even of universal -and concomitant ill-health in such mystical cases, or even the proof -of this ill-health being a direct consequence or necessary condition -of that mystical life, can but push back the debate, and simply raises -the question as to the serious value of that habit and activity. Only -a decision adverse to that serious value would constitute those facts -into a condemnation of that activity itself. - -And, next, it must be plain to any one endowed with an appreciable dose -of the mystical sense, and with a sufficiently large knowledge of human -nature and of religious apprehension in the past and present,--that, if -it is doubtless possible quite erroneously to treat all men as having -a considerable element of mysticism in them, and hence to strain and -spoil souls belonging to one of the other types: it is equally possible -to starve those that possess this element in an operative degree. -Atrophy is as truly a malady as plethora. - -And here the question is an individual one: would that particular -temperament and psycho-physical organism congenial to Sister Lukardis, -to Catherine Fiesca Adorna, to Marguerite Marie Alacocque, and to Isaac -Hecker, have--taking the whole existence and output together--produced -more useful work, and have apprehended and presented more of abiding -truth, had their ecstatic states or tendencies been, if possible, -absent or suppressed? Does not this type of apprehension, this, as -it were, incubation, harmonization, and vivifying of their otherwise -painfully fragmentary and heavy impressions, stand out,--in their -central, creative periods,--as the one thoroughly appropriate means and -form of their true self-development and self-expression, and of such -an apprehension and showing forth of spiritual truth as to them,--to -them and not to you and me,--was possible? And if we are bound to admit -that, even in such cases, ecstasy appears, psycho-physically, as a kind -of second state, and that these personalities find or regain their -fullest joy and deepest strength only in and from such a state; yet we -know too that such ecstasy is not, as in the trances of hysteria and -of other functional disorders, simply discontinuous from the ordinary, -primary state of such souls; and that,--again contrary to those -_maladif_ trances,--whenever the ecstasy answers to the tests insisted -upon by the great mystics, viz. a true and valuable ethico-spiritual -content and effect, it also, in the long run, leaves the very body -strengthened and improved. - -And if, after this, their productive period, some of these persons end -by losing their psycho-physical health, it is far from unreasonable -to suppose that the actual alternative to those ecstasies and this -break-up, would, _for them_, have been a lifelong dreary languor and -melancholy self-absorption, somewhat after the pattern of Catherine’s -last ten pre-conversion years. Thus for her, and doubtless for most of -the spiritually considerable ecstatics, life was, taken all in all, -indefinitely happier, richer, and more fruitful in religious truth and -holiness, with the help of those ecstatic states, than it would have -been if these states had been absent or could have been suppressed. - -And thirdly, here again, even from the point of view of psycho-physical -health and its protection, it is precisely the actual practice and, -as interpreted by it, the deepest sayings of the standard Christian -mystics which are being most powerfully confirmed,--although -necessarily by largely new reasons and with important modifications -in the analysis and application of their doctrine,--by all that we -have gained, during the last forty years, in definite knowledge of -the psycho-physical regions and functions of human nature, and, -during two centuries and more, in enlargement and precision of our -religious-historical outlook. - -If we consider the specific health-dangers of this way, we shall find, -I think, that their roots are ever two. These dangers, and with them -the probability of delusion or at least of spiritual barrenness, always -become actual, and often acute, the minute that we allow ourselves to -attach a primary and independent importance to the psycho-physical -form and means of these things, as against their spiritual-ethical -content, suggestions, and end; or that we take the whole man, or at -least the whole of the religious man, to consist of the specifically -mystical habits and life alone. Now the first of these dangers has -been ceaselessly exposed and fought by all the great ethical and -Christian mystics of the past, _e.g._ St. John of the Cross and St. -Teresa; and the latter has been ever enforced by the actual practice, -as social religionists, of these same mystics, even if and when some -of their sayings, or the logical drift of their speculative system, -left insufficient room or no intrinsic necessity and function for such -things. - -(5) And everything that has happened and is happening in the world -of psychological and philosophical research, in the world of -historico-critical investigation into the past history and modalities -of religion, and in the world of our own present religious experience -and requirements, has but brought to light fresh facts, forces, -and connections, in proof both of the right and irreplaceableness -of the Mystical element in life and religion, and of the reality -and constant presence of these its two dangers. For, as to these -dangers, we now know, with extraordinary clearness and certainty, how -necessary, constant and far-reaching is, on its phenomenal surface, -the auto-suggestive, mono-ideistic power and mechanism of the mind; -yet how easily, in some states, too much can be made of such vivid -apprehensions and quasi-sensible imagings of invisible reality,--things -admirable as means, ruinous as ends. And we also know, with an -astonishing universality of application, how great a multiplicity in -unity is necessarily presented by every concrete object and by every -mental act and emotional state of every sane human being throughout -every moment of his waking life; and how this unity is actually -constituted and measured by the multiplicity of the materials and -by the degree of their harmonization.--Hence, not the absence of -the Mystical element, but the presence both of it and of the other -constituents of religion, will turn out to be the safeguard of our -deepest life and of its sanity, a sanity which demands a balanced -fulness of the soul’s three fundamental pairs of activities: sensible -perception and picturing memory; reflection, speculative and analytic; -and emotion and volition, all issuing in interior and exterior acts, -and these latter, again, providing so much fresh material and occasions -for renewed action and for a growing unification in an increasing -variety, on and on. - -The metaphysical and faith questions, necessarily raised by the -phenomenal facts and mechanisms here considered, but which cannot -be answered at this level, will be discussed in a later chapter. -Here we can but once more point out, in conclusion, that no amount -of admitted or demonstrated auto-suggestion or mono-ideism in the -phenomenal reaches and mechanism of the mind decides, of itself, -anything whatsoever about, and still less against, the objective truth -and spiritual value of the ultimate causes, dominant ideas, and final -results of the process; nor as to whether and how far the whole great -movement is, at bottom, occasioned and directed by the Supreme Spirit, -God, working, in and through man, towards man’s apprehension and -manifestation of Himself.[60] - - - - -CHAPTER X - -THE MAIN LITERARY SOURCES OF CATHERINE’S CONCEPTIONS - - -INTRODUCTORY. - - -1. _The main literary sources of Catherine’s teaching are four._ - -The main literary sources of Catherine’s conceptions can be grouped -under four heads: the New Testament, Pauline and Joannine writings; -the Christian Neo-Platonist, Areopagite books; and the Franciscan, -Jacopone da Todi’s teachings. And here, as in all cases of such -partial dependence, we have to distinguish between the apparently -accidental occasions (her seemingly fortuitous acquaintance with these -particular writings), and the certainly necessary causes (the intrinsic -requirements of her own mind and soul, and its special reactions under, -and transformations of, these materials and stimulations). And during -this latter process this mind’s original trend itself undergoes, in its -turn, not only much development, but even some modification. She would -no doubt owe her close knowledge of the first two sets of writings to -the Augustinian Canonesses, (her sister Limbania amongst them,) and to -their Augustinian-Pauline tradition; her acquaintance with the third -set, to her Dominican cousin; and her intimacy with the fourth, to the -Franciscans of the Hospital. Yet only her own spiritual affinity for -similar religious states and ideals, and her already at least partial -experience of them, could ever have made these writings to her what -they actually became: direct stimulations, indeed considerable elements -and often curiously vivid expressions, of her own immediate interior -life. - - -2. _Plan of the following study of these sources._ - -I shall, in this chapter, first try to draw out those characteristics -of each group, which were either specially accepted or transformed, -neglected or supplanted by her, and carefully to note the particular -nature of these her reactions and refashionings. And I shall end up -by a short account of what she and all four sets have got in common, -and of what she has brought, as a gift of her own, to that common -stock which had given her so much. And since her distinct and direct -use of the Pauline and Joannine writings is quite certain, whereas -all her knowledge of Neo-Platonism seems to have been mediated by -pseudo-Dionysius alone, and all her Franciscanism appears, as far as -literary sources go, to take its rise from Jacopone, I shall give four -divisions to her chief literary sources, and a fifth section to the -stream common to them all.[61] - - -I. THE PAULINE WRITINGS: THE TWO SOURCES OF THEIR PRE-CONVERSION -ASSUMPTIONS; CATHERINE’S PREPONDERANT ATTITUDE TOWARDS EACH POSITION. - -It is well that the chronological order requires us to begin with -St. Paul, for he is probably, if not the most extensive, yet the -most intense of all these influences upon Catherine’s mind. I here -take the points of his experience and teaching which thus concern -us in the probable order of their development in the Apostle’s own -consciousness,--his pre-conversion assumptions and positions, first -and the convictions gained at and after his conversion or clarified -last;[62] and under each heading I shall group together, once for all, -the chief reactions of Catherine’s religious consciousness. - -Now those Pauline pre-conversion assumptions and positions come from -two chief sources--Palestinian, Rabbinical Judaism, (for he was the -disciple of the Pharisee, Gamaliel, at Jerusalem), and a Hellenistic -religiousness closely akin to, though not derived from, Philo, (for he -had been born in the intensely Hellenistic Cilician city Tarsus, at -that time a most important seat of Greek learning in general and of -the Stoic philosophy in particular). And we shall find that Catherine -appropriates especially this, his Hellenistic element; indeed, that at -times she sympathizes rather with the still more intensely Hellenistic -attitude exemplified by Philo, than with the limitations introduced by -St. Paul. - - -1. _St. Paul’s Anthropology in general._ - -If we take the Pauline Anthropology first, we at once come upon a -profoundly dualistic attitude. - -(1) There is, in general, “the outer” and “the inner” man, 2 Cor. iv, -16; and the latter is not the exclusive privilege of the redeemed,--the -contrast is that between the merely natural individual and the moral -personality. And this contrast, foreign to the ancient Hebrews, is -first worked out, with clear consciousness, by Plato, who, _e.g._, -in his _Banquet_, causes one of the characters to say: “Socrates has -thrown this Silenus-like form around himself externally, as in the case -of those Silenus-statues which enclose a statuette of Apollo; but, when -he is opened, how full is he found to be of temperance within”; and who -treats this contrast as typical of the dualism inherent to all human -life here on earth.[63]--This contrast exists throughout Catherine’s -teaching as regards the thing itself, although her terms are different. -She has, for reasons which will appear presently, no one constant term -for “the inner man,” but “the outer man” is continuously styled “la -umanità.” - -(2) The “outer man” consists for St. Paul of the body’s earthly -material, “the flesh”; and of the animating principle of the flesh, -“the psyche,” which is inseparably connected with that flesh, and -which dies for good and all at the death of the latter; whereas the -form of “the body” is capable of resuscitation, and is then filled out -by a finer material, “glory.”[64]--Here Catherine has no precise or -constant word for the “psyche”; her “umanità” generally stands for the -“psyche” _plus_ body and flesh, all in one; and her “anima” practically -always means part or the whole of “the inner man,” and mostly stands -for “mind.” And there is no occasion for her to reflect upon any -distinction between the form and the matter of the body, since she -nowhere directly busies herself with the resurrection. - -The “inner man” consists for St. Paul in the Mind, the Heart, and the -Conscience. The Mind (_noûs_), corresponding roughly to our theoretical -and practical Reason, has a certain tendency towards God: “The -invisible things of God are seen by the mind in the works of creation,” -Rom. i, 20; and there is “a law of the mind” which is fought by “the -law of sin,” Rom. vii, 23; and this, although there is also a “mind -of the flesh,” Col. ii, 18; “a reprobate mind,” Rom. i, 28; and a -“renovation of the mind,” Rom. xii, 2.--Catherine clings throughout -most closely to the Pauline use of the term, as far as that use is -favourable: note how she perceives invisible things “colla mente mia.” - -The Heart is even more accessible to the divine influence,--at least, -it is to it that God gives “the first fruits of the Spirit” and “the -Spirit of His Son, crying Abba, Father,” Gal. iv, 6; 2 Cor. i, 22. As -an organ of immediate perception it is so parallel to the Mind, that we -can hear of “eyes of the heart”; yet it is also the seat of feeling, -of will, and of moral consciousness, Eph. i, 18; 2 Cor. ii, 4; 1 Cor. -iv, 5; Rom. ii, 15. It can stand for the inner life generally; or, -like the Mind, it can become darkened and impenitent; whilst again, -over the heart God’s love is poured out, God’s peace keeps guard, and -we believe with the heart, 1 Cor. xiv, 25; Rom. i, 21; ii, 5; v, 5; -Phil. iv, 7; Rom. x, 9.--All this again, as far as it is favourable, is -closely followed by Catherine; indeed the persistence with which she -comes back to certain effects wrought upon her heart by the Spirit, -Christ,--effects which some of her followers readily interpreted as so -many physical miracles,--was no doubt occasioned or stimulated by 2 -Cor. iii, 3, “Be ye an epistle of Christ, written by the Spirit of the -living God … upon the fleshly tables of the heart.” - -And Conscience, “Syneidēsis”--that late Greek word introduced -by St. Paul as a technical term into the Christian -vocabulary--includes our “conscience,” but is as comprehensive as -our “consciousness.”--Catherine practically never uses the term: no -doubt because, in the narrower of the two senses which had become -the ordinary one, it was too predominantly ethical to satisfy her -overwhelmingly religious preoccupations. - -(3) Now, with regard to this whole dualism of the “outer” and the -“inner man,” its application to the resurrection of the body in -St. Paul and in St. Catherine shall occupy us in connection with -her Eschatology; here I would but indicate the two Pauline moods -or attitudes towards the earthly body, and Catherine’s continuous -reproduction of but one of these. For his magnificent conception of the -Christian society, in which each person, by a different specific gift -and duty, co-operates towards the production of an organic whole, a -whole which in return develops and dignifies those its constituents, -is worked out by means of the image of the human earthly body, in -which each member is a necessary part and constituent of the complete -organism, which is greater than, and which gives full dignity to, -each and all these its factors (1 Cor. xii). And he thus, in his most -deliberate and systematic mood, shows very clearly how deeply he has -realized the dignity of the human body, as the instrument both for the -development of the soul itself and for the work of that soul in and -upon the visible world. - -But in his other mood, which remains secondary and sporadic throughout -his writings, his attitude is acutely dualistic. His one direct -expression of it occurs in 2 Cor. v, 1-4: “For we know that, if our -earthly house of this tent be dissolved, we have a building of God, a -house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this also we -groan, desiring to be clothed upon with our habitation that is from -heaven. We who are in this tabernacle do groan, being burthened.” Now -this passage is undoubtedly modelled by St. Paul upon the Book of -Wisdom, ix, 15: “For the corruptible body is a load upon the soul, and -the earthly habitation presseth down the mind that museth upon many -things.” And this latter saying again is as certainly formed upon Plato -(_Phaedo_, 81 _c_): “It behoves us to think of the body as oppressive -and heavy and earthlike and visible. And hence the soul, being of -such a nature as we have seen, when possessing such a body, is both -burthened and dragged down again into the visible world.”[65] And it is -this conception of the Hellenic Athenian Plato (about 380 B.C.) which, -passing through the Hellenistic Alexandrian Jewish Wisdom-writer (80 -B.C.?) and then through the Hellenistically tinctured ex-Rabbi, Paul -of Tarsus (52 A.D.), still powerfully, indeed all but continuously, -influences the mind of the Genoese Christian Catherine, especially -during the years from A.D. 1496 to 1510. - -Catherine’s still more pessimistic figure of the body as a prison-house -and furnace of purification for the soul, is no doubt the resultant of -suggestions received, probably in part through intermediary literature, -from the following three passages:--(1) Plato, in his _Cratylus_ -(400 B.C.), makes Socrates say: “Some declare that the body (_sōma_) -is the grave (_sēma_) of the soul, as she finds herself at present. -The Orphite poets seem to have invented the appellation: they held -that the soul is thus paying the penalty of sin, and that the body is -an enclosure which may be likened to a prison, in which the soul is -enclosed until the penalty is paid.” (2) St. Matt. v, 25, 26, gives -Our Lord’s words: “Be thou reconciled with thine adversary whilst he -is still with thee on the way … lest the Judge hand thee over to the -prison-warder, and thou be cast into prison.… Thou shalt not go forth -thence, until thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.” And (3) St. -Paul declares, 1 Cor. iii, 15: “Every man’s work shall be tested by -fire. If a man’s work be burnt, he shall suffer loss; yet he himself -shall be saved, yet so as by fire.” These three passages combined will -readily suggest, to a soul thirsting for purification and possessed of -an extremely sensitive psycho-physical organization with its attendant -liability to fever heats, the picture of the body as a flame-full -prison-house,--a purgatory of the soul. - - -2. _St. Paul’s conception of “Spirit.”_ - -A very difficult complication and varying element is introduced into -St. Paul’s Anthropology by the term into which he has poured all -that is most original, deepest, most deliberate and abiding in his -teaching,--the Spirit, “Pneuma.” For somewhat as he uses the term -“Sarx,” the flesh, both in its loose popular signification of “mankind -in general”; and in a precise, technical sense of “the matter which -composes the earthly body”; so also he has, occasionally, a loose -popular use of the term “spirit,” when it figures as but a fourth -parallel to “mind,” “heart,” and “conscience”; and, usually, a very -strict and technical use of it, when it designates the Spirit, God -Himself. - -(1) Now it is precisely in the latter case that his doctrine attains -its fullest depth and its greatest difficulty. For here the Spirit, -the Pneuma, is, strictly speaking, only one--the Spirit of God, God -Himself, in His action either outside or inside the human mind, Noûs. -And in such passages of St. Paul, where man seems to possess a distinct -pneuma of his own, by far the greater number only apparently contradict -this doctrine. For in some, so in 1 Cor. ii, the context is dominated -by a comparison between the divine and the human consciousness, so -that, in v. 11, man’s Noûs is designated Pneuma, and in v. 16, and -Rom. xi, 34, the Lord’s Pneuma is called His Noûs. And the “spirit of -the world” contrasted here, in v. 11, with the “Spirit of God,” is -a still further deliberate laxity of expression, similar to that of -Satan as “the God of this world,” 2 Cor. iv, 4. In other passages,--so -Rom. viii, 16; i, 9; viii, 10, and even in 1 Cor. v, 5 (the “spirit” -of the incestuous Corinthian which is to be saved),--we seem to have -“spirit” either as the mind in so far as the object of the Spirit’s -communications, or as the mind transformed by the Spirit’s influence. -And if we can hear of a “defilement of the spirit,” 2 Cor. vii, 1, we -are also told that we can forget the fact of the body being the temple -of the holy Spirit, 1 Cor. vi, 19; and that this temple’s profanation -“grieves the holy Spirit,” Eph. iv, 30. Very few, sporadic, and short -passages remain in which “the spirit of man” cannot clearly be shown to -have a deliberately derivative sense. - -Catherine, in this great matter, completely follows St. Paul. For she -too has loosely-knit moods and passages, in which “spirito” appears -as a natural endowment of her own, parallel to, or identical with, -the “mente.” But when speaking strictly, and in her intense moods, -she means by “spirito,” the Spirit, Christ, Love, God, a Power which, -though in its nature profoundly distinct and different from her entire -self-seeking self, can and does come to dwell within, and to supplant, -this self. Indeed her highly characteristic saying, “my Me is God,” -with her own explanations of it, expresses, if pressed, even more than -this. In these moods, the term “mente” is usually absent, just as in -St. Paul. - -Now in his formally doctrinal _Loci_, St. Paul defines the Divine -Pneuma and the human sarx, not merely as ontologically contrary -substances, but as keenly conflicting, ethically contradictory -principles. An anti-spiritual power, lust, possesses the flesh and the -whole outer man, whilst, in an indefinitely higher degree and manner, -the Spirit, which finds an echo in the mind, the inner man, is a -spontaneous, counter-working force; and these two energies fight out -the battle in man, and for his complete domination, Rom. vi, 12-14; -vii, 22, 23; viii, 4-13. And this dualistic conception is in close -affinity to all that was noblest in the Hellenistic world of St. Paul’s -own day; but is in marked contrast to the pre-exilic, specifically -Jewish Old Testament view, where we have but the contrast between -the visible and transitory, and the Invisible and Eternal; and the -consciousness of the weakness and fallibility of “flesh and blood.” And -this latter is the temper of mind that dominates the Synoptic Gospels: -“The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak”; and “Father, -forgive them, for they know not what they do,” are here the divinely -serene and infinitely fruitful leading notes.--And Catherine, on this -point, is habitually on the Synoptist side: man is, for her, far more -weak and ignorant than forcibly and deliberately wicked. Yet her -detailed intensity towards the successive cloaks of self-love is still, -as it were, a shadow and echo of the fierce, and far more massive, -flesh-and-spirit struggle in St. Paul. - - -3. _The Angry and the Loving God._ - -And, as against the intense wickedness of man, we find in St. Paul an -emphatic insistence--although this is directly derived from the Old -Testament and Rabbinical tradition--upon the anger and indignation -of God, Rom. ii, 8, and frequently.--Here Catherine is in explicit -contrast with him, in so far as the anger would be held to stand for -an emotion not proceeding from love and not ameliorative in its aim -and operation. This attitude sprang no doubt, in part, from the strong -influence upon her of the Dionysian teaching concerning the negative -character of evil; possibly still more from her continuous pondering -of the text, “As a father hath compassion upon his children, so hath -the Lord compassion on them that fear Him; for He knoweth our frame, He -remembereth that we are dust,” Ps. ciii, 13, 14,--where she dwells upon -the fact that we are all His children rather than upon the fact that -we do not all fear Him; but certainly, most of all, from her habitual -dwelling upon the other side of St. Paul’s teaching, that concerning -the Love of God. - -Now the depth and glow of Paul’s faith and love goes clearly back to -his conversion, an event which colours and influences all his feeling -and teaching for some thirty-four years, up to the end. And similarly -Catherine’s conversion-experience has been found by us to determine the -sequence and all the chief points of her Purgatorial teaching, some -thirty-seven years after that supreme event. - -Already Philo had, under Platonic influence, believed in an Ideal -Man, a Heavenly Man; had identified him with the Logos, the Word -or Wisdom of God; and had held him to be in some way ethereal and -luminous,--never arriving at either a definitely personal or a simply -impersonal conception of this at one time intermediate Being, at -another time this supreme attribute of God. St. Paul, under the -profound impression of the Historic Christ and the great experience -on the road to Damascus, perceives the Risen, Heavenly Jesus as -possessed of a luminous, ethereal body, a body of “glory,” Acts xxii, -11. And this Christ is, for St. Paul, identical with “the Spirit”: -“the Lord is the Spirit,” 2 Cor. iii, 17; and “to be in Christ” and -“Christ is in us” are parallel terms to those of “to be in the Spirit” -and “the Spirit is within us” respectively. In all four cases we get -Christ or the Spirit conceived as an element, as it were an ocean of -ethereal light, in which souls are plunged and which penetrates them. -In Catherine we have, at her conversion, this same perception and -conception of Spirit as an ethereal light, and of Christ as Spirit; -and up to the end she more and more appears to herself to bathe, to be -submerged in, an ocean of light, which, at the same time, fills her -within and penetrates her through and through. - -But again, and specially since his conversion, St. Paul thinks of God -as loving, as Love, and this conception henceforth largely supplants -the Old Testament conception of the angry God. This loving God is -chiefly manifested through the loving Christ: indeed the love of Christ -and the love of God are the same thing. And this Christ-Love dwells -within us.[66] And Catherine, since her mind has perceived Love to be -the central character of God, and has adopted fire as love’s fullest -image, cannot but hold,--God and Love and Christ and Spirit being all -one and the same thing,--that Christ-Spirit-Fire is in her and she -in It. The yellow light-image, which all but alone typifies God’s -friendliness in the Bible, is thus turned into a red fire-image. And -yet this latter in so far retains with Catherine something of its older -connotation of anger, that the Fire and Heat appear in her teaching -more as symbols of the suffering caused by the opposition of man’s -at least partial impurity to the Spirit, Christ, Love, God, and of -the pain attendant upon that Spirit’s action, even where it can still -purify; whereas the Light and Illumination mostly express the peaceful -penetration of man’s spirit by God’s Spirit, and the blissful gain -accruing from such penetration. - - -4. _The Risen Christ and the Heavenly Adam._ - -St. Paul dwells continuously upon the post-earthly, the Risen Christ, -and upon Him in His identity with the pre-earthly, the Heavenly Man: -so that the historical Jesus tends to become, all but for the final -acts in the Supper-room and upon the Cross, a transitory episode;--a -super-earthly biography all but supplants the earthly one, since His -death and resurrection and their immediate contexts are all but the -only two events dwelt upon, and form but the two constituents of one -inseparable whole.--Here Catherine is deeply Pauline in her striking -non-occupation with the details of the earthly life (the scene -with the Woman at the Well being the single exception), and in her -continuous insistence upon Christ as the life-giving Spirit. Indeed, -even the death is strangely absent. There is but the one doubtful -contrary instance, in any case a quite early and sporadic one, of the -Vision of the Bleeding Christ. The fact is that, in her teaching, -the self-donation of God in general, in His mysterious love for each -individual soul, and of Christ in particular, in His Eucharistic -presence as our daily food, take all their special depth of tenderness -from her vivid realization of the whole teaching, temper, life, and -death of Jesus Christ; and that teaching derives its profundity of -feeling only from all this latter complexus of facts and convictions. - - -5. _Reconciliation, Justification, Sanctification._ - -(1) St. Paul has two lines of thought concerning Reconciliation. In -the objective, juridical, more Judaic conception, the attention is -concentrated on the one moment of Christ’s death, and the consequences -appear as though instantaneous and automatic; in the other, the -subjective, ethical, more Hellenistic conception, the attention -is spread over the whole action of the Christ’s incarnational -self-humiliation, and the consequences are realized only if and when we -strive to imitate Him,--they are a voluntary and continuous process. -Catherine’s fundamental conversion-experience and all her later -teachings attach her Reconciliation to the entire act of ceaseless -Divine “ecstasy,” self-humiliation, and redemptive immanence in Man, -of which the whole earthly life and death of Christ are the centre -and culmination; but though the human soul’s corresponding action is -conceived as continuous, once it has begun, she loves to dwell upon -this whole action as itself the gift of God and the consequence of His -prevenient act. - -(2) As to Justification, we have again, in St. Paul, a preponderatingly -Jewish juridical conception of adoption, in which a purely vicarious -justice and imputed righteousness seem to be taught; and an ethical -conception of immanent justice, based on his own experience and -expressed by means of Hellenistic forms, according to which “the -love of God is poured out in our hearts,” Rom. v, 5. And he often -insists strenuously upon excluding every human merit from the moment -and act of justification, insisting upon its being a “free gift” of -God.--Catherine absorbs herself in the second, ethical conception, -and certainly understands this love of God as primarily God’s, the -Spirit’s, Christ’s love, as Love Itself poured out in our hearts; and -she often breaks out into angry protests against the very suggestion of -any act, or part of an act, dear to God, proceeding from her natural or -separate self, indeed, if we press her expressions, from herself at all. - -(3) As to Sanctification, St. Paul has three couples of contrasted -conceptions. The first couple conceives the Spirit, either Old -Testament-wise, as manifesting and accrediting Itself in extraordinary, -sudden, sporadic, miraculous gifts and doings--_e.g._ in ecstatic -speaking with tongues; or,--and this is the more frequent and the -decisive conception,--as an abiding, equable penetration and spiritual -reformation of its recipient. Here the faithful “live and walk in the -spirit,” are “driven by the spirit,” “serve God in the spirit,” are -“temples of the Spirit,” Gal. v, 25; Rom. viii, 14; vii, 6; 1 Cor. -vi, 19: the Spirit has become the creative source of a supernatural -character-building.[67]--Here Catherine, in contrast to most of her -friends, who are wedded to the first view, is strongly attached to the -second view, perhaps the deepest of St. Paul’s conceptions. - -The second couple conceives Sanctification either juridically, and -moves dramatically from act to act,--the Sacrifice on the Cross and -the Resurrection of the Son of God, the sentence of Justification and -the Adoption as sons of God; or ethically, and presupposes everywhere -continuous processes,--beginning with the reception of the Spirit, and -ending with “the Lord of the Spirit.”--Here Catherine has curiously -little of the dramatic and prominently personal conception: only in -the imperfect soul’s acutely painful moment, of standing before and -seeing God immediately after death, do we get one link in this chain, -in a somewhat modified form. For the rest, the ethical and continuous -conception is present practically throughout her teaching, but in a -curious, apparently paradoxical form, to be noticed in a minute. - -And the third couple either treats Sanctification as, at each moment of -its actual presence, practically infallible and complete: “We who have -died to sin, how shall we further live in it?” “Freed from sin, ye have -become the servants of Justice”; “now we are loosed from the law of -death, so as to serve in newness of spirit”; “those who are according -to the flesh, mind the things of the flesh; but they that are according -to the Spirit, mind the things of the Spirit,” Rom. vi, 2, 18; vii, 6; -viii, 5. Or it considers Sanctification as only approximately complete, -so long as man has to live here below, not only in the Spirit, Rom. -viii, 9, but also in the flesh, Gal. ii, 20. The faithful have indeed -crucified the flesh once for all, Gal. v, 24: yet they have continually -to mortify their members anew, Col. iii, 5, and by the Spirit to -destroy the works of the flesh, Rom. viii, 13. The “fear of the Lord,” -“of God,” does not cease to be a motive for the sanctified, 2 Cor. v, -11; vii, 1. To “walk in the Spirit,” “in the light,” has to be insisted -on (1 Thess. v, 4-8; Rom. xiii, 11-14; 2 Cor. vi, 14), as long as the -eternal day has not yet arisen for us. And even in Romans, chapter -vi, we find admonitions, vv. 12, 13, 19, which, if we press the other -conception, are quite superfluous.[68] - -And here Catherine, in her intense sympathy with each of these -contrasted conceptions, offers us a combination of both in a state -of unstable equilibrium and delicate tension. I take it that it is -not her immensely impulsive and impatient temperament, nor survivals -of the Old Testament idea as to instantaneousness being the special -characteristic of divine action, but her deep and noble sense of the -givenness and pure grace of religion, and of God’s omnipotence being, -if possible, exceeded only by His overflowing, self-communicative -love, which chiefly determine her curious presentation and emotional -experience of spiritual growth and life as a movement composed of -sudden shiftings upwards, with long, apparently complete pauses in -between. For here this form (of so many instants, of which each is -complete in itself) stands for her as the least inadequate symbol, as a -kind of shattered mirror, not of time at all, but of eternity; whilst -the succession and difference between these instants indicates a growth -in the apprehending soul, which has, in reality, been proceeding also -in between these instants and not only during them. And this remarkable -scheme presents her conviction that, in principle, the work of the -all-powerful, all-loving Spirit cannot, of itself, be other than final -and complete, and yet that, as a matter of fact, it never is so, in -weak, self-deceptive, and variously resisting man, but ever turns -out to require a fresh and deeper application. And this succession -of sudden jerks onwards and upwards, after long, apparently complete -pauses between them, gives to her fundamentally ethical and continuous -conception something of the look of the forensic, dramatic series, -with its separate acts,--a series which would otherwise be all but -unrepresented in her picture of the soul’s life on this side of death -and of its life (immediately after its vivid sight of God and itself, -and its act of free-election) in the Beyond. - - -6. _Pauline Social Ethics._ - -As to Social Ethics, St. Paul’s worldward movement is strongly -represented in Catherine’s teaching. Her great sayings as to God being -servable not only in the married state, but in a camp of (mercenary) -soldiers; and as to her determination violently to appropriate the -monk’s cowl, should this his state be necessary to the attainment of -the highest love of God, are full of the tone of Rom. xiv, 14, 20, -“nothing is common in itself, but to him who considereth anything to be -common, to him it is common,”--“all things are clean”; and of 1 Cor. -x, 26, 28, “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.” And her -sense of her soul’s positive relation to nature, _e.g._ trees, was no -doubt in part awakened by that striking passage, Rom. viii, 19, “the -expectation of the creature awaiteth the revelation of the sons of God; -for the creature was made subject to vanity not willingly.” - -On the other hand, it would be impossible confidently to identify -her own attitude concerning marriage with that of St. Paul, since, -as we know, her peculiar health and her unhappiness with Giuliano -make it impossible to speak here with any certainty of the mature -woman’s deliberate judgment concerning continence and marriage. Yet -her impulsive protestation, in the scene with the monk, against any -idea of being debarred by her state from as perfect a love of God as -his,--whilst, of course, not in contradiction with the Pauline and -generally Catholic positions in the matter, seems to imply an emotional -attitude somewhat different from that of some of the Apostle’s -sayings. Indeed, in her whole general and unconscious position as to -how a woman should hold herself in religious things it is interesting -to note the absence of all influence from those Pauline sayings which, -herein like Philo (and indeed the whole ancient world) treat man alone -as “the (direct) image and glory (reflex) of God,” and the woman as but -“the glory (reflex) of the man,” 1 Cor. xi, 7. Everywhere she appears -full, on the contrary, of St. Paul’s other (more characteristic and -deliberate) strain, according to which, as there is “neither Jew nor -Gentile, bond nor free” before God, so “neither is the man without the -woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord,” 1 Cor. xi, 11.--And -in social matters generally, Catherine’s convert life and practice -shows, in the active mortifications of its first penitential part, in -her persistent great aloofness from all things of sense as regards -her own gratification, and in the ecstasies and love of solitude -which marked the zenith of her power, a close sympathy with, and no -doubt in part a direct imitation of, St. Paul’s Arabian retirement, -chastisement of his body, and lonely concentration upon rapt communion -with God. Yet she as strongly exemplifies St. Paul’s other, the -outward movement, the love-impelled, whole-hearted service of the -poorest, world-forgotten, sick and sorrowing brethren. And the whole -resultant rhythmic life has got such fine spontaneity, emotional and -efficacious fulness, and expansive joy about it, as to suggest at once -those unfading teachings of St. Paul which had so largely occasioned -it,--those hymns in praise of that love “which minds not high things -but consenteth to the humble,” Rom. xii, 16; “becomes all things to -all men,” 1 Cor. ix, 22; “weeps with those that weep and rejoices with -those that rejoice,” _ibid._ xii, 26; and which, as the twin love of -God and man, is not only the chief member of the central ethical triad, -but, already here below, itself becomes the subject which exercises the -other two virtues, for it is “love” that “believeth all things, hopeth -all things,” even before that eternity in which love alone will never -vanish away, _ibid._ xiii, 7, 8. Here Catherine with Paul triumphs -completely over time: their actions and teaching are as completely -fresh now, after well-nigh nineteen and four centuries, as when they -first experienced, willed, and uttered them. - - -7. _Sacramental Teachings._ - -In Sacramental matters it is interesting to note St. Paul’s close -correlation of Baptism and the Holy Eucharist: “All (our fathers) were -baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same -spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink,” 1 Cor. x, 3; -“in one Spirit we have all been baptized into one body, and we have all -been made to drink one Spirit,” Christ, His blood, _ibid._ xii, 13. -And Catherine is influenced by these passages, when she represents the -soul as hungering for, and drowning itself in, the ocean of spiritual -sustenance which is Love, Christ, God: but she attaches the similes, -which are distributed by St. Paul among the two Rites, to the Holy -Eucharist alone. Baptism had been a grown man’s deliberate act in -Paul’s case,--an act immediately subsequent to, and directly expressive -of, his conversion, the culminating experience of his life; and, as a -great Church organizer, he could not but dwell with an equal insistence -upon the two chief Sacraments. - -Catherine had received baptism as an unconscious infant, and the event -lay far back in that pre-conversion time, which was all but completely -ousted from her memory by the great experience of some twenty-five -years later. And in the latter experience it was (more or less from the -first and soon all but exclusively) the sense of a divine encirclement -and sustenance, of an addition of love, rather than a consciousness of -the subtraction of sins or of a divine purification, that possessed -her. In her late, though profoundly characteristic Purgatorial -teaching, the soul again plunges into an ocean; but now, since the soul -is rather defiled than hungry, and wills rather to be purified than -to be fed, this plunge is indeed a kind of Baptism by Immersion. Yet -we have no more the symbol of water, for the long state and effects -to which that swift act leads, but we have, instead, fire and light, -and, in one place, once again bread and the hunger for bread. And -this is no doubt because, in these Purgatorial picturings, it is her -conversion-experience of love under the symbols of light and of fire, -and her forty years of daily hungering for the Holy Eucharist and Love -Incarnate, which furnish the emotional colours and the intellectual -outlines. - - -8. _Eschatological matters._ - -In Eschatological matters the main points of contact and of contrast -appear to be four; and three of the differences are occasioned by St. -Paul’s preoccupation with Christ’s Second Coming, with the Resurrection -of the body, and with the General Judgment, mostly as three events in -close temporal correlation, and likely to occur soon; whilst Catherine -abstracts entirely from all three. - -(1) Thus St. Paul is naturally busy with the question as to the Time -when he shall be with Christ. In 1 Thess. iv, 15, he speaks of “we -who are now living, who have been left for the coming of the Lord,” -_i.e._ he expects this event during his own lifetime; whilst in Phil. -i, 23, he “desires to be dissolved and to be with Christ,” _i.e._ he -has ceased confidently to expect this coming before his own death. -But Catherine dwells exclusively, with this latter conception, upon -the moment of death, as that when the soul shall see, and be finally -confirmed in its union with, Love, Christ, God; for into her earthly -lifetime Love, Christ, God, can and do come, but invisibly, and she may -still lose full union with them for ever. - -(2) As to the Place, it is notoriously obscure whether St. Paul thinks -of it, as do the Old Testament and the Apocalypse, as the renovated -earth, or as the sky, or as the intervening space. The risen faithful -who “shall be caught in the clouds to meet Christ,” 1 Thess. iv, 16, -seem clearly to be meeting Him, in mid-air, as He descends upon earth; -and “Jerusalem above,” Gal. iv, 26, may well, as in Apoc. iii, 12; xxi, -2, be conceived as destined to come down upon earth. But Catherine, -though she constantly talks of Heaven, Purgatory, Hell as “places,” -makes it plain that such “places” are for her but vivid symbols for -states of soul. God Himself repeatedly appears in her sayings as “the -soul’s place”; and it is this “place,” the soul’s true spiritual -birthplace and home, which, ever identical and bliss-conferring in -itself, is variously experienced by the soul, in exact accordance -with its dispositions,--as that profoundly painful, or that joyfully -distressing, or that supremely blissful “place” which respectively we -call Hell, and Purgatory, and Heaven. - -(3) As to the Body, we have already noted St. Paul’s doctrine, -intermediate between the Palestinian and Alexandrian Jewish teaching, -that it will rise indeed, but composed henceforth of “glory” and -no more of “flesh.” It is this his requirement of a body, however -spiritual, which underlies his anxiety to be “found clothed, not -naked,” at and after death, 2 Cor. v, 3. Indeed, in this whole passage, -v, 1-4, “our earthly house of this habitation,” and “a building of God -not made with hands,” no doubt mean, respectively, the present body -of flesh and the future body of glory; just as the various, highly -complex, conceptions of “clothed,” “unclothed,” “clothed upon,” refer -to the different conditions of the soul with a body of flesh, without a -body at all, and with a body of glory.--Now this passage, owing to its -extreme complication and abstruseness of doctrine, has come down to us -in texts and versions of every conceivable form; and this uncertainty -has helped Catherine towards her very free utilization of it. For she -not only, as ever, simply ignores all questions of a risen body, and -transfers the concept of a luminous ethereal substance from the body to -the soul itself, and refers the “nakedness,” “unclothing,” “clothing,” -and “clothing upon” to conditions obtaining, not between the soul and -the body, but between the soul and God; but she also, in most cases, -takes the nakedness as the desirable state, since typical of the soul’s -faithful self-exposure to the all-purifying rays of God’s light and -fire, and interprets the “unclothing” as the penitential stripping from -off itself of those pretences and corrupt incrustations which prevent -God’s blissful action upon it. - -(4) And, finally, as to the Judgment, we have in St. Paul a double -current,--the inherited Judaistic conception of a forensic retribution; -Christ, the divine Judge, externally applying such and such statutory -rewards and punishments to such and such good and evil deeds,--so -in Rom. ii, 6-10; and the experimental conception, helped on to -articulation by Hellenistic influences, of the bodily resurrection and -man’s whole final destiny as the necessary resultant and manifestation -of an internal process, the presence of the Spirit and of the power -of God,--so in the later parts of Romans, in Gal. vi, 8, and in 1 -Cor. vi, 14; 2 Cor. xiii, 4.--Among Catherine’s sayings also we -find some passages--but these the less characteristic and mostly -of doubtful authenticity,--where reward and punishment, indeed the -three “places” themselves, appear as so many separate institutions -of God, which get externally applied to certain good and evil deeds. -But these are completely overshadowed in number, sure authenticity, -emotional intensity, and organic connection with her other teachings, -by sayings of the second type, where the soul’s fate is but the -necessary consequence of its own deliberate choice and gradually -formed dispositions, the result, inseparable since the first from -its self-identification with this or that of the various possible -will-attitudes towards God. - -(5) We can then sum up the main points of contact and of difference -between Paul and Catherine, by saying that, in both cases, everything -leads up to, or looks back upon, a great culminating, directly -personal experience of shortest clock-time duration, whence all -their doctrine, wherever emphatic, is but an attempt to articulate -and universalize this original experience; and that if in Paul there -remains more of explicit occupation with the last great events of -the earthly life of Jesus, yet in both there is the same insistence -upon the life-giving Spirit, the eternal Christ, manifesting His -inexhaustible power in the transformation of souls, on and on, here and -now, into the likeness of Himself. - - -II. THE JOANNINE WRITINGS. - -On moving now from the Pauline to the Joannine writings, we shall -find that Catherine’s obligations to these latter are but rarely as -deep, yet that they cover a wider reach of ideas and images. I take -this fresh source of influence under the double heading of the general -relations of the Joannine teaching to other, previous or contemporary, -conceptions; and of this same teaching considered in itself.[69] - - -1. _Joannine teaching contrasted with other systems._ - -(1) As to the general relations towards other positions, we get here, -towards Judaism and Paganism, an emphatic insistence upon the novelty -and independence of Christianity as regards not only Paganism, but even -the previous Judaism, “The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth -came by Jesus Christ,” i, 17; and upon the Logos, Christ, as “the Light -that enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world,” “unto his -own,” _i.e._ men in general; for this Light “was in the world, and the -world was made by Him,” i, 9-11. There is thus a divinely-implanted, -innate tendency towards this light, extant in man prior to the explicit -act of faith, and operative outside of the Christian body: “Every -man who is from the truth, heareth my voice,” xviii, 37: “he who -doeth the truth, cometh to the light,” in, 21: “begotten,” as he is, -not of man but “of God,” i, 13; 1 John iii, 9. And thus Samaritans, -Greeks, and Heathens act and speak in the best dispositions, iv, 42; -xii, 20-24; x, 16; whilst such terms and sayings as “the Saviour of -the World,” “God so loved the world,” iv, 42, iii, 16, are the most -universalistic declarations to be found in the New Testament.--And -this current dominates the whole of Catherine’s temper and teaching: -this certainty as to the innate affinity of every human soul to the -Light, Love, Christ, God, gives a tone of exultation to the musings -of this otherwise melancholy woman. Whereas the Joannine passages of -a contrasting exclusiveness and even fierceness of tone, such as “all -they that came before Me, were thieves and robbers,” x, 8; “ye are -from your father, the devil,” viii, 44; “ye shall die in your sins,” -viii, 21; “your sin remains,” ix, 41, are without any parallel among -Catherine’s sayings. Indeed it is plain that Catherine, whilst as sure -as the Evangelist that all man’s goodness comes from God, nowhere, -except in her own case, finds man’s evil to be diabolic in character. - -(2) With regard to Paulinism, the Joannine writings give us a -continuation and extension of the representation of the soul’s mystical -union with Christ, as a local abiding in the element Christ. Indeed -it is in these writings that we find the terms “to abide in” the -light, 1 John ii, 10, in God, 1 John iv, 13, in Christ, 1 John ii, 6, -24, 27, iii, 6, 24, and in His love, John xv, 9, 1 John iv, 16; the -corresponding expressions, “God abideth in us,” 1 John iv, 12, 16, -“Christ abideth in us,” 1 John iii, 24, and “love abideth in us,” 1 -John iv, 16; the two immanences coupled together, where the communicant -“abideth in Me and I in him,” vi, 56, and where the members of His -mystical body are bidden to “abide in Me and I in you,” xv, 4; and the -supreme pattern of all these interpenetrations, “I am in the Father, -and the Father is in Me,” xiv, 10.--And it is from here that Catherine -primarily gets the literary suggestions for her images of the soul -plunged into, and filled by, an ocean of Light, Love, Christ, God; and -again from here, more than from St. Paul, she gets her favourite term -μένειν (It. _restare_), around which are grouped, in her mind, most of -the quietistic-sounding elements of her teaching. - -(3) As to the points of contact between the Joannine teaching and -Alexandrianism, we find that three are vividly renewed by Catherine. - -Philo had taught: “God ceases not from acting: as to burn is the -property of fire, so to act is the property of God,” _Legg. Alleg._ I, -3. And in John we find: “God is a Spirit,” and “My Father worketh ever -and I work ever,” iv, 24; v, 17. And God as pure Spiritual Energy, as -the _Actus Purus_, is a truth and experience that penetrates the whole -life of Catherine. - -The work of Christ is not dwelt on in its earthly beginnings; but it is -traced up and back, in the form of a spiritual “Genesis,” to His life -and work as the Logos in Heaven, where He abides “in the bosom of the -Father,” and whence He learns what He “hath declared” to us, i, 18; -just as, in his turn, the disciple whom Jesus loved “was reclining” at -the Last Supper “on the bosom of Jesus,” and later on “beareth witness -concerning the things” which he had learnt there, xiii, 23; xxi, 24. So -also Catherine transcends the early earthly life of Christ altogether, -and habitually dwells upon Him as the Light and as Love, as God in His -own Self-Manifestation; and upon the ever-abiding sustenance afforded -by this Light and Life and Love to the faithful soul reclining and -resting upon it. - -And the contrast between the Spiritual and the Material, the Abiding -and the Transitory, is symbolized throughout John, in exact accord -with Philo, under the spacial categories of upper and lower, and of -extension: “Ye are from below, I am from above,” viii, 23; “He that -cometh from above, is above all,” iv, 31; and “in my Father’s house,” -that upper world, “there are many mansions,” abiding-places, xiv, -2. Hence all things divine here below have descended from above: -regeneration, iii, 3; the Spirit, i, 32; Angels, i, 51; the Son of God -Himself, iii, 13: and they mount once more up above, so especially -Christ Himself, iii, 13; vi, 62. And the things of that upper world -are the true things: “the true light,” “ the true adorers,” “the -true vine,” “the true bread from Heaven,” i, ix; iv, 23; xv, 1; vi, -32: all this in contrast to the shadowy semi-realities of the lower -world.--Catherine is here in fullest accord with the spacial imagery -generally; she even talks of God Himself, not only as in a place, but -as Himself a place, as the soul’s “loco.” But she has, for reasons -explained elsewhere, generally to abandon the upper-and-lower category -when picturing the soul’s self-dedication to purification, since, for -this act, she mostly figures a downward plunge into suffering; and -she gives us a number of striking sayings, in which she explicitly -re-translates all this quantitative spacial imagery into its underlying -meaning of qualitative spiritual states. - -(4) As to the Joannine approximations and antagonisms to Gnosticism, -Catherine’s position is as follows. In the Synoptic accounts, Our Lord -makes the acquisition of eternal life depend upon the keeping of the -two great commandments of the love of God and of one’s neighbour, Luke -x, 26-28, and parallels. In John Our Lord says: “this is eternal life, -that they may know Thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom Thou -hast sent,” xvii, 3. To “know,” γινώσκειν, occurs twenty-five times in -1 John alone. Here the final object of every soul is to believe and to -know: “they received and knew truly and believed,” xvii, 8; “we have -believed and have known,” vi, 69; or “we have known and have believed,” -1 John iv, 16. And Catherine also lays much stress upon faith ending, -even here below, in a certain vivid knowledge; but this knowledge is, -with her, less doctrinally articulated, no doubt in part because there -was no Gnosticism fronting her, to force on such articulation. - -And the Joannine writings compare this higher mental knowledge to the -lower, sensible perception: “He who cometh from heaven, witnesseth to -what he hath seen and heard,” iii, 31; “when He shall become manifest, -we shall see Him as He is,” 1 John iii, 2. And they have three special -terms, in common with Gnosticism, for the object of such knowledge: -Life, Light, and Fulness (_Plerōma_),--the latter, as a technical term, -appearing in the New Testament only in John i, 16, and in the Epistles -to the Colossians and Ephesians. Catherine, also, is ever experiencing -and conceiving the mental apprehensions of faith, as so many -quasi-sensible, ocular, perceptions; and Life and Light are constantly -mentioned, and Fulness is, at least, implied in the psycho-physical -concomitants or consequences of her thinkings. - -On the other hand, she does not follow John in the intensely dualistic -elements of his teaching,--the sort of determinist, all but innate, -distinction between “the darkness,” “the men who loved the darkness -rather than the light,” and the Light itself and those who loved it, i, -4, 5; iii, 19,--children of God and children of the devil--the latter -all but incapable of being saved, viii, 38-47; x, 26; xi, 52; xiv, -17. Rather is she like him in his all but complete silence as to “the -anger of God,”--a term which he uses once only, iii, 36, as against the -twenty-two instances of it in St. Paul. - -And she is full to overflowing of the great central, profoundly un- and -anti-Gnostic, sensitively Christian teachings of St. John: as to the -Light, the only-begotten Son, having been given by God, because God so -loved the world; as to Jesus having loved his own even to the end; as -to the object of Christ’s manifestation of His Father’s name to men, -being that God’s love for Christ, and indeed Christ Himself, might -be within them; and as to how, if they love Him, they will keep His -commandments,--His commandment to love each other as He has loved them, -iii, 21; iii, 16; xiii, 1; xvii, 26; xiv, 15; xv, 17. In this last -great declaration especially do we find the very epitome of Catherine’s -life and spirit, of her who can never think of Him as Light and -Knowledge only, but ever insists on His being Fire and Love as well; -and who has but one commandment, that of Love-impelled, Love-seeking -loving. - -(5) And lastly, in relation to organized, Ecclesiastical Christianity, -the Joannine writings dwell, as regards the more general principles, on -points which, where positive, are simply presupposed by Catherine; and, -where negative, find no echo within her. - -The Joannine writings insist continually upon the unity and -inter-communion of the faithful: “There shall be one fold, one -shepherd”; Christ’s death was in order “that He might gather the -scattered children of God into one”; He prays to the Father that -believers “may be one, as we are one”; and He leaves as His legacy -His seamless robe, x, 16; xi, 52; xvii, 21; xix, 24. And these same -writings have a painfully absolute condemnation for all outside of -this visible fold: “The whole world lies in evil”; its “Prince is the -Devil”; “the blood of Jesus cleanseth us from all sin,” within the -community alone; false prophets, those who have gone forth from the -community, are not to be prayed for, are not even to be saluted, 1 -John, v, 19; John xii, 31; John i, 7; v, 16; 2 John, 10. For the great -and necessary fight with Gnosticism has already begun in these writings. - -But Catherine dies before the unity of Christendom is again in jeopardy -through the Protestant Reformation, and she never dwells--this is -doubtless a limit--upon the Christian community, as such. And her -enthusiastic sympathy with the spiritual teachings of Jacopone da -Todi, who, some two centuries before, had, as one of the prophetic -opposition, vehemently attacked the intensely theocratic policy of -Pope Boniface VIII, and had suffered a long imprisonment at his hands; -her tender care for the schismatic population of the far-away Greek -island of Chios; and her intimacy with Dre. Tommaso Moro, who, later -on, became for a while a Calvinist; all indicate how free from all -suspiciousness towards individual Catholics, or of fierceness against -other religious bodies and persons, was her deeply filial attachment to -the Church. - -In the Synoptists Our Lord declares, as to the exorcist who worked -cures in His name, although not a follower of His, that “he that is -not against us, is for us,” and refuses to accede to His disciples’ -proposal to interfere with his activity, Mark ix, 38-41; and He points, -as to the means of inheriting eternal life, to the keeping of the -two great commandments, as these are already formulated in the Old -Testament, and insists that this neighbour, whom here we are bidden -to love, is any and every man, Luke x, 25-37. The Joannine writings -insist strongly upon the strict necessity of full, explicit adhesion: -the commandment of love which Our Lord gives is here “My commandment,” -“a new commandment,” one held “from the beginning”--in the Christian -community; and the command to “love one another” is here addressed to -the brethren in their relations to their fellow-believers only, xiii, -34; xiii, 35; xv, 12, 17. Catherine’s feeling, in this matter, is -clearly with the Synoptists. - - -2. _Joannine teaching considered in itself._ - -If we next take the Joannine teachings in themselves, we shall find the -following interesting points of contact or contrast to exist between -John and Catherine. - -(1) In matters of Theology proper, she is completely penetrated by -the great doctrine, more explicit in St. John even than in St. Paul, -that “God is Love,” 1 John iv, 8; and by the conceptions of God and of -Christ “working always” as Life, Light, and Love.--But whereas, in the -first Epistle of John, God Himself is “eternal life” and “light,” v, -20; i, 5; and, in the Gospel, it is Christ Who, in the first instance, -appears as Life and as Light, xi, 25; viii, 12: Catherine nowhere -distinguishes at all between Christ and God. And similarly, whereas in -St. John “God doth not give” unto Christ “the Spirit by measure”; and -Christ promises to the disciples “another Paraclete,” _i.e._ the Holy -Spirit, iii, 34; xiv, 16; and indeed the Son and the Spirit appear, -throughout, as distinct from one another as do the Son and the Father: -in Catherine we get, practically everywhere, an exclusive concentration -upon the fact, so often implied or declared by St. Paul, of Love, -Christ, being Himself Spirit. - -(2) The Joannine Soteriology has, I think, influenced Catherine as -follows. Christ’s redemptive work appears, in the more original current -of that teaching, under the symbols of the Word, Light, Bread, as -the self-revelation of God. For in proportion that this Logos-Light -and Bread enlightens and nourishes, does He drive away darkness and -weakness, and, with them, sin, and this previously to any historic -acts of His earthly life. And, in this connection, there is but little -stress laid upon penance and the forgiveness of sins as compared -with the Synoptic accounts, and the term of turning back, στρέφειν, -is absent here.--But that same redemptive work appears, in the more -Pauline of the two Joannine currents, as the direct result of so many -vicarious, atoning deeds, the historic Passion and Death of Our Lord. -Here there is indeed sin, a “sin of the world,” and specially for this -sin is Christ the propitiation: “God so loved the world, as to give His -only-begotten Son”--Him “the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of -the world,” i, 29; 1 John ii, 2; John ii, 16; i, 29, 36. - -Catherine, with the probably incomplete exception of her Conversion -and Penance-period, concentrates her attention, with a striking degree -of exclusiveness, upon the former group of conceptions. With her too -the God-Christ is--all but solely--conceived as Light which, in so far -as it is not hindered, operates the healing and the growth of souls. -And in her great picture of all souls inevitably hungering for the -sight of the One Bread, God, she has operated a fusion between two of -the Joannine images, the Light which is seen and the Bread which is -eaten: here the bare sight (in reality, a satiating sight) of the Bread -suffices. If, for the self-manifesting God-Christ, she has, besides the -Joannine Light-image, a Fire-symbol, which has its literary antecedents -rather in the Old Testament than in the New, this comes from the fact -that she is largely occupied with the pain of the impressions and -processes undergone by already God-loving yet still imperfectly pure -souls, and that fierce fire is as appropriate a symbol for such pain as -is peaceful light for joy. - -Now this painfulness is, in Catherine’s teaching, the direct result -of whatever may be incomplete and piecemeal in the soul’s state and -process of purification. And this her conception, of Perfect Love being -mostly attained only through a series of apparently sudden shifts, -each seemingly final, is no doubt in part moulded upon the practically -identical Joannine teaching as to Faith. - -True, we have already seen that her conception of the nature of God’s -action upon the soul, and of the soul’s reaction under this His -touch, is more akin to the rich Synoptic idea of a disposition and -determination of the soul’s whole being, (a cordial trust at least as -much as an intellectual apprehension and clear assent), than to the -Joannine view, which lays a predominant stress upon mental apprehension -and assent. And again, she nowhere presents anything analogous to the -Joannine, already scholastic, formulations of the object of this Faith -and Trust,--all of them explicitly concerned with the nature of Christ. - -But, everywhere in the Joannine writings, the living Person and Spirit -aimed at by these definitions is considered as experienced by the -soul in a succession of ever-deepening intuitions and acts of Faith. -Already at the Jordan, Andrew and Nathaniel have declared Jesus to be -the Christ, the Son of God, i, 41, 49; yet they, His disciples, are -said to have believed in Him at Cana, in consequence of His miracle -there, ii, 11. Already at Capernaum Peter asserts for the twelve, “We -have believed and known that Thou art the Holy One of God,” vi, 69; -yet still, at the Last Supper, Christ exhorts them to believe in Him, -xiv, 10, 11, and predicts future events to them, in order that, when -these predictions come true, their faith may still further increase, -xiii, 19; xiv, 29. And, as far on as after the Resurrection we hear -that the Beloved Disciple “saw” (the empty tomb) “and believed,” xx, -8, 29. We thus get in John precisely the same logically paradoxical, -but psychologically and spiritually most accurate and profound, -combination of an apparent completeness of Faith at each point of -special illumination, with a sudden re-beginning and impulsive upward -shifting of the soul’s Light and Believing, which is so characteristic -of Catherine’s experience and teaching as to the successive levels of -the soul’s Fire, Light and Love. And the opposite movement--of the -fading away of the Light and the Faith--can be traced in John, as the -corresponding doctrine of the going out of the Fire, Light and Love -within the Soul can be found in Catherine. - -Again, both John and Catherine are penetrated with the sense that this -Faith and Love is somehow waked up in souls by a true touch of God, a -touch to which they spontaneously respond, because they already possess -a substantial affinity to Him. “His,” the Good Shepherd’s, “sheep hear -His voice,” x, 16; they hear it, because they are already His: the -Light solicits and is accepted by the soul, because the soul itself -is light-like and light-requiring, and because it proceeds originally -from this very Light which would now reinforce the soul’s own deepest -requirements. This great truth appears also in those profound Joannine -passages: “No man can come to Me, unless the Father Who sent Me draw -him”; and “I have manifested Thy name, to those men whom Thou didst -give Me from out of the world,” vi, 44; xvii, 6. - -And this attractive force is also a faculty of Christ: “I shall draw -all men unto Myself,” xii, 32. And note how Catherine, ever completely -identifying God, Christ, Light, Love, and, where these work in -imperfectly pure souls, Fire, is stimulated by the last-quoted text -to extend God’s, Christ’s, Love’s drawing, attraction, to all men; -to limit only, in various degrees, these various men’s response to -it; and to realize so intensely that a generous yielding to this our -ineradicable deepest _attrait_ is our fullest joy, and the resisting it -is our one final misery, as to picture the soul, penitent for this its -mad resistance, plunging itself, now eagerly responsive to that intense -attraction, into God and a growing conformity with Him. - -(3) As to points concerning the Sacraments where Catherine is -influenced by John, we find that here again Baptismal conceptions are -passed over by her. She does not allude to the water in the discourse -to Nicodemus, iii, 5, although she is full of other ideas suggested -there; but she dwells upon the water in the address to the Woman at -the Well, iv, 10-15, that “living water,” which is, for her, the -spirit’s spiritual sustenance, Love, Christ, God, and insensibly glides -over into the images and experiences attaching, for her, to the Holy -Eucharist. - -But, as to this the greatest of the Sacraments and the all-absorbing -devotion of her life, her symbols and concepts are all suggested by -the Fourth Gospel, in contrast to the Synoptists and St. Paul. For the -Holy Eucharist is, with her, ever detached from any direct memory of -the Last Supper, Passion, and Death, the original, historical, unique -occasions which still form its setting in the pre-Joannine writings, -although those greatest proofs of a divinely boundless self-immolation -undoubtedly give to her devotion to the Blessed Sacrament its beautiful -enthusiasm and tenderness. The Holy Eucharist ever appears with her, -as with St. John, attached to the scene of the multiplication of the -breads,--a feast of joy and of life, with Christ at the zenith of His -earthly hope and power. For not “a shewing of the death” in “the -eating of this bread,” 1 Cor. xi, 26, is dwelt on by John; but we have: -“I am the Bread of Life; he that eateth this bread, shall live for -ever,” John vi, 51, 52. - -And Catherine follows John in thinking predominantly of the single -soul, when dwelling upon the Holy Eucharist. For if John presents -a great open-air Love-Feast in lieu of Paul’s Upper Chamber and -Supper with the twelve, he, as over against Paul’s profoundly social -standpoint, has, throughout this his Eucharistic chapter, but three -indications of the plural as against some fourteen singulars. - -And, finally, John’s change from the future tense, with its reference -to a coming historic institution, “the food which … the Son of Man -will give you,” vi, 27, to the present tense, with its declaration -of an eternal fact and relation, “I am” (now and always) “the living -bread which hath come down from heaven,” vi, 51, will have helped -Catherine towards the conception of the eternal Christ-God offering -Himself as their ceaseless spiritual food to His creatures, possessed -as they are by an indestructible spiritual hunger for Himself. For if -the Eucharistic food, Bread, Body, has already been declared by St. -Paul to be “spiritual,” 2 Cor. iii, 17, in St. John also it has to be -spiritual, for it is here “the true bread from heaven” and “the bread -of life”; and Christ declares here “it is the Spirit that giveth life, -the flesh (alone) profiteth nothing,” vi, 61, 69. Hence Catherine is, -again through the Holy Eucharist and St. John, brought back to her -favourite Pauline conception of the Lord as Himself “Spirit,” “the -Life-giving Spirit,” 2 Cor. iii, 17; 1 Cor. xv, 45. - -(4) And if we conclude with the Joannine Eschatology, we shall find -that Catherine has penetrated deep into the following conceptions, -which undoubtedly, even in their union, present us with a less rich -outlook than that furnished by the Synoptists, but which may be said to -constitute the central spirit of Our Lord’s teaching. - -Like John, who has but two mentions of “the Kingdom of God,” iii, 3, -5, and who elsewhere ever speaks of “Life,” Catherine has nowhere “the -Kingdom,” but everywhere “Life.” Like him she conceives the process of -Conversion as a “making alive” of the moribund, darkened, cold soul, by -the Light, Love, Christ, God, v, 21-29, when He, Who is Himself “the -Life,” xi, 25, and “the Spirit,” iv, 24, speaks to the soul “words” -that are “spirit and life,” vi, 63; for then the soul that gives ear -to His words “hath eternal life,” v, 24. - -Again Catherine, for the most part, appropriates and develops that one -out of the two Joannine currents of doctrine concerning the Judgment, -which treats the latter as already determined and forestalled by Man’s -present personal attitude towards the Light. The judgment is thus -simply a discrimination, according to the original meaning of the noun -κρίσις--like when God in the beginning “discriminated the light from -the darkness,” Gen. i, 5; a discrimination substantially effected -already here and now, “he that believeth in Him, is not judged; he -that believeth not, is already judged,” iii, 18. But the other current -of doctrine, so prominent in the Synoptists, is not absent from St. -John,--the teaching as to a later, external and visible, forensic -judgment. And Catherine has a similar intermixture of two currents, yet -with a strong predominance of the immanental, present conception of the -matter. - -And even for that one volitional act in the beyond, which, according -to her doctrine, has a certain constitutive importance for the whole -eternity of all still partially impure souls--for that voluntary -plunge--we can find an analogue in the Joannine writings, although here -there is no reference to the after life. For throughout the greater -part of his teaching--from iii, 15, 16, apparently up to the end of the -Gospel,--the possession of spiritual Life is consequent upon the soul’s -own acts of Faith, and not, as one would expect from his other, more -characteristic teaching, upon its Regeneration from above, iii, 3. And -the result of such acts of Faith is a “Metabasis,” a “passing over from -death to life,” v, 24; 1 John iii, 14. Catherine will have conceived -such an act of Faith as predominantly an act of Love, and the act as -itself already that Metabasis; and will, most characteristically, -have quickened the movement, and have altered its direction from the -horizontal to the vertical, so that the “passing, going over,” becomes -a “plunge down into” Life. For indeed the Fire she plunges into is, in -her doctrine, Life Itself; since it is Light, Love, Christ, and God. - -Catherine, once more, is John’s most faithful disciple, where he -declares that Life to stream out immediately from the life-giving -object of Faith into the life-seeking subject of that Faith, from the -believed God into the believing soul: “I am the Bread of Life; he who -cometh to Me, shall not hunger”; “he who abideth in Me, and I in him, -beareth much fruit”; vi, 35; xv, 5. - -And finally, she follows John closely where he insists upon -Simultaneity and Eternity as contrasted with Succession and -Immortality, so as even to abstract from the bodily resurrection. He -who “hath passed over from death to life” (already) “possesses eternal -life”; “every one who liveth and believeth in Me, shall not die for -ever (at any time)”; “this,” already and of itself, “is eternal life, -to know Thee, the one true God and Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent”; -and the soul’s abiding in such an experience is Christ’s own joy, -transplanted into it, and a joy which is full, v, 24; xi, 26; xvii, 3; -xv, 11. And there is here such an insistence upon an unbroken spiritual -life, in spite of and right through physical death, that, to Martha’s -declaration that her brother will arise at the last day, xi, 24, Jesus -answers, “I am the Resurrection and the Life: he who believeth in Me, -even if he die” the bodily death, “shall live” on in his soul; indeed -“every man who liveth” the life of the body, “and who believeth in Me, -shall not die for ever (at any time)” in his soul, xi, 25, 26. John’s -other line of thought, in which the bodily resurrection is prominent, -remains without any definite or systematic response in Catherine’s -teaching. - -(5) We can then summarize the influence exercised by John upon -Catherine by saying that he encouraged her to conceive religion as -an experience of eternity; as a true, living knowledge of things -spiritual; indeed as a direct touch of man’s soul by God Himself, -culminating in man’s certainty that God is Love. - - -III. THE AREOPAGITE WRITINGS. - -Catherine’s close relations to the Areopagite, the Pseudo-Dionysius, -are of peculiar interest, in their manifold agreement, difference, or -non-responsiveness; and this although the ideas thus assimilated are -mostly of lesser depth and importance than those derived from the New -Testament writings just considered. They can be grouped conveniently -under the subject-matters of God’s creative, providential, and -restorative, outgoing, His action upon souls and all things extant, -and of the reasons for the different results of this action; of -certain symbols used to characterize that essential action of God -upon His creatures; of the states and energizings of the soul, in so -far as it is responsive to that action; of certain terms concerning -these reactions of the soul; and of the final result of the whole -process. I shall try and get back, in most cases, to the Areopagite’s -Neo-Platonist sources, the dry, intensely scholastic Proclus, and that -great soul, the prince of the non-Christian Mystics, Plotinus.[70] - - -1. _God’s general action._ - -As to God’s action, we have in Dionysius the Circle with the -three stages of its movement,--a conception so dear to Catherine. -“Theologians call Him the Esteemed and the Loved, and again Love and -Loving-kindness, as being a Power at once propulsive and leading up” -and back “to Himself; a loving movement self-moved, which pre-exists in -the Good, and bubbles forth from the Good to things existing, and which -again returns to the Good--as it were a sort of everlasting circle -whirling round, because of the Good, from the Good, in the Good, and -to the Good,--ever advancing and remaining and returning in the same -and throughout the same.” This is “the power of the divine similitude” -present throughout creation, “which turns all created things to their -cause.”[71] The doctrine is derived from Proclus: “Everything caused -both abides in its cause and proceeds from it and returns to it”; -and “everything that proceeds from something returns, by a natural -instinct, to that from which it proceeds.”[72] And Plotinus had led -the way: “there” in the super-sensible world, experienced in moments -of ecstasy, “in touch and union with the One, the soul begets Beauty, -Justice, and Virtue: and that place and life is, for it, its principle -and end: principle, since it springs from thence; end, because the Good -is there, and because, once arrived there, the soul becomes what it was -at first.”[73] - -And Dionysius has the doctrine, so dear to Catherine, that “the Source -of Good is indeed present to all, but all are not,” by their intention, -“present to It; yet, by our aptitude for Divine union, we all,” in a -sense, “are present to It.” “It shines, on Its own part, equally upon -all things capable of participation in It.”[74] Already Plotinus had -finely said: “The One is not far away from any one, and yet is liable -to be far away from one and all, since, present though It be, It is” -efficaciously “present only to such as are capable of receiving It, and -are so disposed as to adapt themselves to It and, as it were, to seize -and touch It by their likeness to It, … when, in a word, the soul is in -the state in which it was when it came from It.”[75] - -We have again in Dionysius the combination, so characteristic of -Catherine, of a tender respect for the substance of human nature, as -good and ever respected by God, and of a keen sense of the pathetic -weakness of man’s sense-clogged spirit here below. “Providence, as -befits its goodness, provides for each being suitably: for to destroy -nature is not a function of Providence.” “All those who cavil at the -Divine Justice, unconsciously commit a manifest injustice. For they -say that immortality ought to be in mortals, and perfection in the -imperfect … and perfect power in the weak, and that the temporal should -be eternal … in a word, they assign the properties of one thing to -another.”[76] - - -2. _Symbols of God’s action._ - -(1) As to the symbols of God’s action, we have first the Chain or Rope, -Catherine’s “fune,” that “rope of His pure Love,” of which “an end was -thrown to her from heaven.”[77] This symbol was no doubt suggested by -Dionysius: “Let us then elevate our very selves by our prayers to the -higher ascent of the Divine … rays; as though a luminous chain (rope, -σειρά) were suspended from the celestial heights and reached down -hither, and we, by ever stretching out to it up and up … were thus -carried upwards.”[78] And this passage again goes back to Proclus, -who describes the “chain (rope) of love” as “having its entirely -simple and hidden highest point fixed amongst the very first ranks of -the Gods”; its middle effluence “amongst the Gods higher than the -(sensible) world”; and its third, lowest, part, as “divided multiformly -throughout the (sensible) world.” “The divine Love implants one common -bond (chain) and one indissoluble friendship in and between each soul -(that participates in its power), and between all and the Beautiful -Itself.”[79] And this simile of a chain from heaven, which in Dionysius -is luminous, and in Catherine and Proclus is loving, goes back, across -Plato (_Theaetetus_ 153_c_ and _Republic_, X, 61_b_, 99_c_) to Homer, -where it again is luminous (golden). For, in the _Iliad_, viii, 17-20, -Zeus says to the Gods in Olympus, “So as to see all things, do you, O -Gods and Goddesses all, hang a golden chain from heaven, and do you all -seize hold of it”--so as thus to descend to earth. - -(2) We have next the symbol of the Sun and its purifying, healing -Light, under which God and His action are rapturously proclaimed by -Dionysius. “Even as our sun, by its very being, enlightens all things -able to partake of its light in their various degrees, so also the -Good, by its very existence, sends unto all things that be, the rays -of its entire goodness, according to their capacity for them. By means -of these rays they are purified from all corruption and death … and -are separated from instability.” “The Divine Goodness, this our great -sun, enlightens … nourishes, perfects, renews.” Even the pure can -thus be made purer still. “He, the Good, is called spiritual light -… he cleanses the mental vision of the very angels: they taste, as -it were, the light.”[80] All this imagery goes back, in the first -instance, to Proclus. For Proclus puts in parallel “sun” and “God,” and -“to be enlightened” and “to be deified”; makes all purifying forces -to coalesce in the activity of the Sun-God, Apollo Katharsios, the -Purifier, who “everywhere unifies multiplicity … purifying the entire -heaven and all living things throughout the world”; and describes how -“from above, from his super-heavenly post, Apollo scatters the arrows -of Zeus,--his rays upon all the world.”[81] The Sun’s rays, here as -powerful as the bolts of Zeus, thus begin to play the part still -assigned to them in Catherine’s imagery of the “Saëtte” and “Radii” of -the divine Light and Love. And the substance of the whole symbol goes -back, through fine sayings of Plotinus and through Philo, to Plato, who -calls the Sun “the offspring of the Good and analogous to it,” and who -(doubtless rightly) takes Homer’s “golden chain” to be nothing but the -Sun-rays,--thus identifying the two symbols.[82] - -(3) Fire, as a symbol for God and His action, is thus praised by -Dionysius: “The sacred theologians often describe the super-essential -Essence in terms of Fire.… For sensible fire is, so to say, present -in all things, and pervades them all without mingling with them, and -is received by all things; … it is intolerable yet invisible; it -masters all things by its own might, and yet it but brings the things -in which it resides to (the development of) their own energy; it has -a transforming power; it communicates itself to all who approach it -in any degree; … it has the power of dividing (what it seizes); it -bears upwards; it is penetrating; … it increases its own self in a -hidden manner; it suddenly shines forth.”[83]--All these qualities, -and the delicate transitions from fire to light and from light back to -fire, and from heat immanent to heat applied from without, we can find -again, vividly assimilated and experienced, in Catherine’s teaching -and emotional life. But the Sun-light predominates in Dionysius, the -Fire-heat in Catherine; and whereas the former explicitly attaches -purification only to the Sun-light, the latter connects the cleansing -chiefly with Fire-heat, no doubt because the Greek man is busy chiefly -with the intellectually cognitive, and the Italian woman with the -morally ameliorative, activities and interests of the mind and soul. - - -3. _The soul’s reaction._ - -(1) As to the soul’s reaction under God’s action, and its return to -Him, we first get, in Dionysius, the insistence upon Mystical Quietude -and Silence, which, according to him, are strictly necessary, since -only like can know and become one with like, and God is “Peace and -Repose” and, “as compared with every known progression, Immobility,” -and “the one all-perfect source and cause of the Peace of all”; and -He is Silence, “the Angels are, as it were, the heralds of the Divine -Silence,”--teaching not unlike that of St. Ignatius of Antioch, -“Jesus Christ … the Word which proceeds from Silence.”[84] Hence “in -proportion as we ascend to the higher designations of God, do our -expressions become more and more circumscribed”; and at last “we shall -find, not a little speaking, but a complete absence of speech and -of conception.”[85] As Proclus has it: “Let this Fountain of Godhead -be honoured on our part by silence and by the union which is above -silence.”[86] And Plotinus says: “This,” the Divine, “Light comes not -from anywhere nor disappears any whither, but simply shines or shines -not: hence we must not pursue after it, but must abide in quietness -till it appears.” And when it does appear, “the contemplative, as one -rapt and divinely inspired, abides here with quietude in a motionless -condition, … being entirely stable, and becoming, as it were, stability -itself.”[87]--All this still finds its echo in Catherine.--But the -treble (cognitive) movement of the Angelic and human mind,--the -circular, the straight-line, and the spiral,--which Dionysius, in -direct imitation of Proclus, carefully develops throughout three -sections, is quite absent from Catherine’s mind.[88] - -(2) We next get, in Dionysius, the following teachings as to Mystical -Vision and Union. “The Unity-above-Mind is placed above the minds; -and the Good-above-word is unutterable by word.” “There is, further, -the most divine knowledge of Almighty God, which is known through -not knowing … when the mind, having stood apart from all existing -things, and having then also dismissed itself, has been made one with -the super-luminous rays.” “We must contemplate things divine by our -whole selves standing out of our whole selves, and becoming wholly -of God.” “By the resistless and absolute ecstasy, in all purity, -from out of thyself and all things, thou wilt be carried on high, to -the super-essential ray of the divine darkness.” “It is during the -cessation of every mental energizing, that such a union of the deified -minds and of the super-divine light takes place.”[89] And the original -cause and final effect of such a going forth from self, are indicated -in words which were worked out in a vivid fulness by Catherine’s whole -convert life: “Divine Love is ecstatic, not permitting any lovers to -belong to themselves, but only to those beloved by them. And this -love, the superior beings show by being full of forethought for their -inferiors; those equal in rank, by their mutual coherence; and the -inferior by a looking back and up to the superior ones.”[90] - -Dionysius here everywhere follows Proclus. Yet the noblest -Neo-Platonist sayings are again furnished by Plotinus: “We are not cut -off or severed from the Light, but we breathe and consist in It, since -It ever enlightens and bears us, as long as It is what It is.” In the -moments of Union, “we are able to see both Him and ourself,--ourself -in dazzling splendour, full of spiritual light, or rather one with the -pure Light Itself … our life’s flame is then enkindled.” “There the -soul rests, after it has fled up, away from evil, to the place which -is free from evils … and the true life is there.” “Arrived there, -the soul becomes that which she was at first.”[91] And if Plotinus -has thus already got the symbolism of place, he is as fully aware as -Catherine herself that, for purposes of vivid presentation, he is -spacializing spiritual, that is, unextended, qualitative states and -realities. “Things incorporeal do not get excluded by bodies; they are -severed only by otherness and difference: hence, when such otherness is -absent, they, not differing, are near each other.” And already, as with -Catherine, there is the apparent finality, and yet also the renewed -search for more. “The seer and the seen have become one, as though it -were a case not of vision but of union.” “When he shall have crossed -over as the image to its Archetype, then he will have reached his -journey’s end.” And yet this “ecstasy, simplification, and donation of -one’s self,” this “quiet,” is still also “a striving after contact,” “a -musing to achieve union.”[92] - - -4. _Terminology of the soul’s reaction._ - -(1) Certain terms and conceptions in connection with the soul’s return -to God, which are specially dear to Catherine, already appear, fully -developed, in Dionysius, Proclus, and Plotinus; in part, even in Plato. -Her “suddenly “ (_subito_) appears but rarely in Dionysius, _e.g._ in -_Heavenly Hierarchy_ xv, 2; but it is carefully explained by him in -his Third Epistle, specially devoted to the subject.[93] It is common -in Plotinus: “Suddenly the soul saw, without seeing how it saw”; -“suddenly thou shalt receive light,” “suddenly shining.”[94] And in -Plato we find: “He who has learnt to see the Beautiful in due order -and succession, when he comes towards the end, will suddenly perceive -a Nature of wondrous beauty--Beauty alone, absolute, separate, simple -and everlasting”: a passage which derives its imagery from the Epopteia -of the Eleusynian Mysteries,--the sudden appearance, the curtain being -withdrawn, upon the stage whereon the Heathen Mystery-play was being -performed, under a peculiar fairy-illumination, of the figures of -Demeter, Kore, and Iacchus, as the culmination of a long succession of -purifications and initiations.[95] - -Catherine’s “wound,” or “wounding stroke,” (_ferita_), is, in part, the -necessary consequence of the “arrow” conception already considered; -in part, the echo of that group of terms which, in Dionysius and -Proclus even more than in Plotinus, express the painfully sudden -and overwhelming, free-grace character of God’s action upon the -soul,--especially of ἐπιβολή, “immissio,” a “coming-upon,” a “hitting,” -a very common word in the Areopagite; μετοχή, “communication,” and -παραδοχή, “reception,” being the corresponding terms for God’s and the -soul’s share in this encounter respectively. Thus: “Unions, whether we -call them immissions or receptions from God.”[96] - -“Presence,” “presenza,” παρουσιά, is another favourite term, as with -Catherine so also with Dionysius and Proclus. Thus the Areopagite: -“The presence of the spiritual light causes recollection and unity in -those that are being enlightened with it,” “His wholly inconceivable -presence.”[97] And Proclus: “Every perfect spiritual contact and -communion is owing to the presence of God.”[98] And the conception of a -sudden presence goes back, among the Neo-Platonists, to Plato and the -Greek Mysteries, in which the God was held suddenly to arrive and to -take part in the sacred dance. Such rings of sacred dancers, “choirs,” -are still characteristic of Dionysius--_e.g._ _Heavenly Hierarchy_, -vii, 4--but they are quite wanting in Catherine.--But “contact,” -“touch,” ἐπαφή,--said of God’s direct action upon the soul,--a -conception so intensely active in Catherine’s mind and life, is again -a favourite term with Dionysius and Proclus. The former declares this -“touch” to be neither “sensible” nor “intelligible” and that “we are -brought into contact with things unutterable”; the latter talks of -“perfect spiritual contact.”[99] - -The symbols of “Nakedness” and “Garments,” as indicative respectively -of the soul’s purity and impurity or self-delusion, are, though most -prominent in Catherine, rare in Dionysius. But his declaration: -“The nakedness of the (Angels’) feet indicates purification from -the addition of all things external and assimilation to the divine -simplicity” exactly expresses her idea.[100] And Proclus has it more -fully: The soul, on descending into the body, forsakes unity, “and -around her, from all sides, there grow multiform kinds of existence -and manifold garments”; “love of honour is the last garment of souls”; -and “when,” in mounting up, “we lay aside our passions and garments -which, in coming down, we had put on, we must also strip off that -last garment, in order that, having become (entirely) naked, we may -establish ourselves before God, having made ourselves like to the -divine life.”[101] - -(2) Again, as to Triads, it is interesting to note that Catherine has -nothing about the three stages or ways of the inner life,--purgative, -illuminative, unitive,--of which Dionysius is full, and which are -already indicated in Proclus; for we can find but two in her life, the -purgative and unitive, and in her teaching these two alone appear, -mostly in close combination, sometimes in strong contrast. Nor has -she anything about the three degrees or kinds of prayer,--Meditation, -Contemplation, Union,--as indicated in Dionysius: “It behoves us, by -our prayers, to be lifted into proximity with the Divine Trinity; and -then, by still further approaching it, to be initiated…; and (lastly) -to make ourselves one with it”; and as taught by Proclus: “Knowledge -leads, then follows proximity, and then union.”[102] With her we -only get Contemplation and Union.--Nor do we get in her anything -about thrice three choirs of Angels, or three orders of Christian -Ministrants, or three classes of Christian people, or thrice three -groups of Sacraments and Sacramental acts. For she is too intensely -bent upon immediate intercourse with God, and too much absorbed in the -sense of profound unity and again of innumerable multiplicity, to be -attracted by Dionysius’s Neo-Platonist ladder of carefully graduated -intermediaries, or by his continuous interest in triads of every kind. -Catherine thus follows the current in Dionysius which insists upon -direct contact between the soul and the transcendent God, and ignores -the other, which bridges over the abyss between the two by carefully -graduated intermediaries: these intermediaries having become, with her, -successive stages of purification and of ever more penetrating union of -the one soul with the one God. - - -5. _Deification, especially through the Eucharist._ - -As to the end of the whole process, we find that Deification, so -frequently implied or suggested by Catherine, is formally taught by -Dionysius: “A union of the deified minds” (ἐκθεουμένων); the heavenly -and the earthly Hierarchy have the power and task “to communicate -to their subjects, according to the dignity of each, the sacred -deification” (ἐκθέωσις); “we are led up, by means of the multiform of -sensible symbols, to the uniform Deification.”[103] “The One is the -very God,” says Proclus, “but the Mind (the Noûs) is the divinest of -beings, and the soul is divine, and the body is godlike.… And every -body that is God-like is so through the soul having become divine; and -every soul that is divine, is so through the Mind being very divine; -and every Mind that is thus very divine, is so through participation -in the Divine One.”[104] There are preformations of this doctrine in -Plotinus and echoes of it throughout Catherine’s sayings. - -And the Areopagite’s teaching that the chief means and the culmination -of this deification are found and reached in the reception of the -Holy Eucharist will no doubt also have stimulated Catherine’s mind: -“The Communicant is led to the summit of deiformation, as far as this -is possible for him.”[105] And her soul responds completely to the -beautiful Dionysian-Proclian teaching concerning God’s presence in all -things, as the cause of the profound sympathy which binds them all -together. “They say,” declares Dionysius, “that He is in minds … and -in bodies, and in heaven and in earth; (indeed that He is) sun, fire, -water, spirit … all things existing, and yet again not one of all -things existing.” “The distribution of boundless power passes from -Almighty God all things, and no single being but has intellectual, -or rational, or sensible, or vital, or essential power.” “The gifts -of the unfailing Power pass on to men and (lesser) living creatures, -to plants, and to the entire nature of the Universe.”[106] This -latter passage was suggested by Proclus: “One would say that, through -participation in the One, all things are deified, each according to -its rank, inclusive of the very lowest of beings.” “The image of the -One and the inter-communion existing through it,--this it is that -produces the extant sympathy” which permeates all things.[107]--But -Catherine has nowhere the term “echo,” which is so dear to Dionysius: -“His all-surpassing power holds together and preserves even the -remotest of its echoes”; “the sun and plants are or hold most distant -echoes of the Good and of Life”; indeed even the licentious man still -possesses, in his very passion, “as it were a faint echo of Union and -of Friendship.”[108] - - -6. _Dionysius and Catherine; three agreements and differences._ - -I conclude with three important points of difference and similarity -between Catherine and Dionysius. - -(1) Catherine abstains from the use of those repulsive, impossibly -hyperbolic epithets such as “the Super-Good,” “the Above-Mind,” which -Dionysius is never weary of applying to God, and is content with ever -feeling and declaring how high above the very best conception which -she can form of mind and of goodness He undoubtedly is; thus wisely -moderated, I take it, by her constant experience and faith as to -God’s immediate presence within the human soul, which soul cannot, -consequently, be presented as entirely remote from the nature of God. - -(2) Catherine transforms over-intense and impoverishing insistence upon -the pure Oneness of God, such as we find it even in Dionysius and still -more in Proclus, into a, sometimes equally over-intense, conception as -to the oneness of our union with Him, leaving Him to be still conceived -as an overflowing richness of all kinds. - -(3) And Catherine keeps, in an interesting manner, Hellenic, and -specifically Platonic, formulation for the deepest of her experiences -and teachings, since her standing designation of God and of Our -Lord is never personal, “My Lover” or “My Friend”; but, as it were, -elemental, “Love” or “My Love.” Her keen self-purifying instinct -and reverence for God will have spontaneously inclined her thus to -consider Him first as an Ocean of Being in which to quench and drown -her small, clamorous individuality, and this as a necessary step -towards reconstituting that true personality, which, itself spirit, -would be penetrated and sustained by the Spirit, Christ, God. And then -the Pauline-Joannine picturings of God as a quasi-place and extended -substance (“from Him and in Him and to Him,” “in the Spirit,” “in -Christ,” “God is Charity and he that abideth in Charity, abideth in -Him”) will have strongly confirmed this trend. Yet Dionysius too must -have greatly helped on this movement of her mind. For in Dionysius -the standing appellations for God are, in true Neo-Platonist fashion, -derived from extended or diffusive material substances or conditions, -Light, Fire, Fountain, Ocean; and from that pervasive emotion, Love, -strictly speaking Desire, Eros. - -Now this, for our modern and Christian feeling, curiously impersonal, -general and abstract method goes back, through Proclus and Plotinus, -to Plato, who, above all in his _Symposium_, is dominated by the two -tendencies and requirements, of identifying the First and Perfect -with the most General and the most Abstract; and of making the very -prerequisites and instruments of the search for It,--even the earthly -Eros, still so far from the Heavenly Eros and from the Christian -Agapē,--into occasions, effects or instalments of and for the great -Reality sought by them. And since it is thus the love, the desire, the -eros, of things beautiful, and true, and good,--a love first sensible, -then intellectual, and at last spiritual, which makes us seek and find -It, the Beauty, Truth, and Goodness which is First Cause and Final End -of the whole series, this Cause and End will be considered not as a -Lover but as Love Itself. It is plain, I think, that it is specially -this second motive, this requirement of a pervading organization and -circle of and within the life of spirits and of the Spirit, which has -also determined Catherine to retain Plato’s terminology. - - -IV. JACOPONE DA TODI’S “LODE.” - -In the case of Jacopone, the suddenly wife-bereft and converted lawyer, -an ardent poet doubled by a soaring, daring mystic, with an astonishing -richness of simultaneous symbols and conceptions and rapidity of -successive complements and contrasts, it will really be simplest if -I take the chief touches which have characteristically stimulated -Catherine or have left her unaffected, in the order and grouping in -which they appear in his chief “Lode,” as these latter are given in the -first printed edition, probably the very one used by Catherine.[109] - - -1. _Lode XIII, XXIII, XXXV, XLV._ - -In Loda XIII “the vicious soul is likened unto Hell,” vv. 1-7; and “the -soul that yesterday was Hell, to-day has turned into Heaven,” v. 8. We -thus get here, precisely as in Catherine, the spaceless conditions of -the soul and their modifications treated under the symbols of places -and of the spacial change from one place to the other. - -In Loda XXIII we first have five successive purifications and purities -of Love, “carnal, counterfeit, self-seeking, natural, spiritual, -transformed,” vv. 1-6; and then the symbols of spacial location -and movement reappear, “if height does not abase itself, it cannot -participate with, nor communicate itself to, the lowest grade”; all -which is frequent with Catherine. But she nowhere echoes the teaching -reproduced here, v. 10, as to the Divine Trinity being figured in man’s -three faculties of soul. - -Loda XXXV gives us a sort of Christian Stoicism very dear dear to -Catherine: “Thou, my soul, hast been created in great elevation; thy -nature is grounded in great nobility (_gentilezza_),” v. 7; “thou hast -not thy life in created things; it is necessary for thee to breathe in -other countries, to mount up to God thine inheritance, Who (alone) can -satisfy thy poverty,” v. 10; “great is the honour which thou doest to -God, when thou abidest (stare) in Him, in thy (true) nobility,” v. 11. - -Loda XLV gives “the Five Modes in which God appears in the Soul”--“the -state of fear”; mercenary, “beggar-love”; “the way of love”; “the -paternal mode”; “the mode of espousals.” Catherine leaves the last two, -anthropomorphic and familial, conceptions quite unused, and passes in -her life, at one bound, from the first to the third mode. - - -2. _Lode LVIIIa, LVIIIb._ - -The fine Loda LVIII_a_, “Of Holy Poverty, Mistress of all Things,” has -evidently suggested much to Catherine. “Waters, rivers, lakes, and -ocean, fish within them and their swimming; airs, winds, birds, and all -their flying: all these turn to jewels for me,” v. 10. How readily the -sense of water, and of rapid movement within it, passes here into that -of air, and of swift locomotion within _it_! And both these movements, -are felt to represent, in vivid fashion, certain very different -experiences of the soul.--“Moon, Sun, Sky, and Stars,--even these are -_not_ amongst my treasures; above the very sky those things abide, -which are the object of my song,” v. 11. The positive, “analogic” -method has here turned suddenly into the negative, “apophatic” one; -and yet, even here, we still have the spacial symbolism, for the best -is the highest up,--indeed it is this very symbolism which is made to -add point to the negative declaration, a declaration which nevertheless -clearly implies the mere symbolism of that spacialization. All this is -fully absorbed by Catherine.--“Since God has my will, … my wings have -such feathers that from earth to heaven there is no distance for me,” -v. 12. Here we see how Plato filters through, complete, to Jacopone; -but only in his central idea to Catherine. For the _Phaedrus_, 246_b_, -_c_, teaches: “The perfect soul then, having become winged, soars -upwards, and is the ruler of the universe; whilst the imperfect soul -sheds her feathers and is borne downwards, till it settles on the solid -ground.” Catherine never mentions wings nor feathers, but often dwells -upon flying. - -The great Loda LVIII_b_, “Of Holy Poverty and its Treble Heaven,” -(one passage of which is formally quoted and carefully expounded -by Catherine), is a combination of Platonism, Paulinism, and -Franciscanism, and has specially influenced her through its Platonist -element. Verses 1-9 contain a fine apostrophe to Poverty. “O Love of -Poverty, Reign of tranquillity! Poverty, high Wisdom! to be subject -to nothing; through despising to possess all things created!” v. 1: -all this is echoed by Catherine. But the ex-lawyer’s declaration that -such a soul “has neither judge nor notary,” v. 3, did certainly not -determine her literally, for we have had before us some fifteen cases -in which she had recourse to lawyers. “God makes not His abode in a -narrow heart; thou art, oh man, precisely as great as thine affection -may be. The spirit of poverty possesses so ample a bosom, that Deity -Itself takes up its dwelling there,” v. 8. Catherine’s deepest self -seems to breathe from out of this profound saying. - -Verses 10 to 30 describe the three heavens of successive -self-despoilments. The firmamental heaven, which typifies the four-fold -renouncement,--of honour, riches, science, reputation of sanctity, -has left no echo in Catherine. The stellar heaven is “composed of -solidified clear waters (_aque solidate_)”; here “the four winds” -cease “that move the sea,--that perturb the mind: fear and hope, grief -and joy,” 11-14. Here Plato again touches Catherine through Jacopone. -For the _Symposium_, 197_a_, declares: “Love it is that produces -peace among men and calm on the sea, a cessation of the winds, and -repose and sleep even in trouble”; and Jacopone identifies the middle -“crystalline” heaven, (“the waters above” of Genesis, chap, i,) with -Plato’s “sea”; takes Plato’s (four) winds as the soul’s chief passions; -and considers Plato’s “peace” and “windlessness” as equivalent to the -“much silence,” which, says the Apocalypse, “arose in heaven,” viii, 1, -interpreted here as “in mid-heaven.” “Not to fear Hell, nor to hope for -Heaven, to rejoice in no good, to grieve over no adversity,” v. 16, is -a formulation unlike Catherine, although single sayings of hers stand -for sentiments analogous to the first and last.--“If the virtues are -naked, and the vices are not garmented,--mortal wounds get given to the -soul,” v. 19, has a symbolism exactly opposite to Catherine’s, who, we -know, loves to glorify “nakedness” as the soul’s purity.--“The highest -heaven” is “beyond even the imagings of the mortified fancy”; “of every -good it has despoiled thee, and has expropriated thee from all virtue: -lay up as a treasure this thy gain,--the sense of thine own vileness.” -“O purified Love! it alone lives in the truth!” These verses, 20-22, -have left a deep impress upon Catherine, although she wisely does -not press that “expropriation from virtue,” which goes back at least -to Plotinus, for whom the true Ecstatic is “beyond the choir of the -virtues.”[110] - -“That which appears to thee (as extant), is not truly, existent: -so high (above) is that which truly is. True elevation of soul -(_la superbia_) dwells in heaven above, and baseness of mind -(_humilitade_) leads to damnation,” v. 24, is a saying to which we -still have Catherine’s detailed commentary. In its markedly Platonic -distinction between an upper true and a lower seeming world, and in its -characteristically mystical love of paradox and a play upon words, it -is more curious than abidingly important; but in its deeply Christian -consciousness of “pride” and “humility,” in their ordinary ethical -sense, being respectively the subtlest vice and the noblest virtue, it -rises sheer above all Platonist and Neo-Platonist apprehension. - -“Love abides in prison, in that darksome light! All light there is -darkness, and all darkness there is as the day,” vv. 26, 27. Here -Catherine no doubt found aids towards her prison-conception,--of the -loving soul imprisoned in the earthly body, and of the imperfect, -yet loving, disembodied souls imprisoned in Purgatory; and towards -articulating her strong sense of the change in the meaning and value of -the same symbols, as the soul grows in depth and experience. But her -symbolization of God, and of our apprehension of Him as Light and Fire, -is too solidly established in her mind, to allow her to emphasize the -darkness-symbol with any reference to Him. - -“There where Christ is enclosed (in the soul), all the old is changed -by Him,--the one is transformed into the Other, in a marvellous union. -To live as I and yet not I; and my very being to be not mine: this is -so great a cross-purpose (_traversio_), that I know not how to define -it,” vv. 28-30. This vivid description, based of course upon St. Paul, -of the apparent shifting of the very centre of the soul’s personality, -has left clear echoes in Catherine’s sayings; but the explicit -reference to Christ is here as characteristically Franciscan as it is -unlike Catherine’s special habits.--And the great poem ends with a -_refrain_ of its opening apostrophe. - - -3. _Lode LXXIV, LXXIX, LXXXI, LXXXIII._ - -In the dramatically vivid Dialogue between the Old and the Young Friar -“Concerning the divers manners of contemplating the Cross,” Loda -LXXIV, the elder says to the younger man: “And I find the Cross full -of arrows, which issue from its side: they get fixed in my heart. The -Archer has aimed them at me; He causes me to be pierced,” v. 6. The -Cross is here a bow; and yet the arrows evidently issue not from it, -but, as so many rays, from the Sun, the Light-Christ, Who is laid upon -it,--from the heart of the Crucified. Catherine maintains the rays and -arrows, and the Sun and Fire from which they issue; but the Cross and -the Crucified, presupposed here throughout, appear not, even to this -extent, in her post-conversion picturings.--“You abide by the warmth, -but I abide within the fire; to you it is delight, but I am burning -through and through, I cannot find a place of refuge in this furnace,” -v. 13. All this has been echoed throughout by Catherine. - -Loda LXXIX, “Of the Divine Love and its Praises,” has evidently much -influenced her. “O joyous wound, delightful wound, gladsome wound, for -him who is wounded by Thee, O Love!” “O Love, divine Fire! Love full -of laughter and playfulness!” “O Love, sweet and suave; O Love, Thou -art the key of heaven! Ship that Thou art, bring me to port and calm -the tempest,” vv. 3, 6, 16. All this we have found reproduced in her -similes and experiences. “Love, bounteous in spending Thyself; Love -with widespread tables!” “Love, Thou art the One that loves, and the -Means wherewith the heart loves Thee!” vv. 24, 26. These verses give us -the wide, wide world outlook, the connection between Love and the Holy -Eucharist, and the identity of the Subject, Means, and Object of Love, -which are all so much dwelt upon by Catherine. - -Loda LXXXI is interesting by the way in which, although treating of -“the love of Christ upon the Cross,” it everywhere apostrophizes Love -and not the Lover, and treats the former, again like Catherine, as a -kind of boundless living substance; indeed v. 17 must have helped to -suggest one of her favourite conceptions: “O great Love, greater than -the great sea! Oh! the man who is drowned within it, under it, and with -it all around him, whilst he knows not where he is!” - -Loda LXXXIII has two touches dear to Catherine. “O Love, whose name is -‘I love’--the plural is never found,” v. 5,--a saying which evidently -is directed, not against a social conception of religion, but against -a denial of the Divine Love being Source as well as Object of our -love; and “I did not love Thee with any gain to myself, until I loved -Thee for Thine own sake,” v. 15,--a declaration of wondrous depth and -simplicity. - - -4. _Lode LXXXVIII, LXXXIX, LXXXX, LXXXXVIII, LXXXXIX._ - -The great Loda LXXXVIII, “How the soul complains to God concerning -the excessive ardours of the love infused into it,” contains numerous -touches which have been interestingly responded to or ignored by -Catherine. “All my will is on fire with Love, is united, transformed -(into It); who can bear such Love? Nor fire nor sword can part the -loving soul and her Love; a thing so united cannot be divided; neither -suffering nor death can henceforth mount up to that height where the -soul abides in ecstasy,” vv. 5, 6: a combination of St. Paul and -Plotinus, quite after Catherine’s heart. But “the light of the sun -appears to me obscure, now that I see that resplendent Countenance,” -v. 7, has an anthropomorphic touch to which she does not respond; -and “I have given all my heart, that it may possess that Lover who -renews me so,--O Beauty ancient and ever new!” v. 10, has the personal -designation “Lover,” which, again, is alien to her vocabulary. - -“Seeing such Beauty, I have been drawn out of myself … and the heart -now gets undone, melted as though it were wax, and finds itself again, -with the likeness of Christ upon it,” v. 11, must have stimulated, by -its first part, some of her own experiences, and will, by its second -part, taken literally, have helped on the fantastic expectations of -her attendants. “Love rises to such ardour, that the heart seems to -be transfixed as with a knife,” v. 14, no doubt both expressed an -experience of Jacopone and helped to constitute the form of a similar -experience on the part of Catherine. “As iron, which is all on fire, -as dawn, made resplendent by the sun, lose their own form (nature) and -exist in another, so is it with the pure mind, when clothed by Thee, O -Love,” v. 21, contains ideas, (all but the symbol of clothing,) very -dear to Catherine. But the astonishingly daring words: “Since my soul -has been transformed into Truth, into Thee, O Christ alone, into Thee -Who art tender Loving,--not to myself but to Thee can be imputed what I -do. Hence, if I please Thee not, Thou dost not please Thine Own Self, -O Love!” v. 22, remain unechoed by her, no doubt because her states -shift from one to another, and she wisely abstains from pushing the -articulation of any one of them to its own separate logical limit. - -“Thou wast born into the world by love and not by flesh, O Love -become Man (_humanato Amore_),” v. 27, is like her in its interesting -persistence in the “Love” (not “Lover”) designation, but is unlike her -in its definite reference to the historic Incarnation. “Love, O Love, -Jesus, I have reached the haven,” v. 32, is closely like her, all but -the explicit mention of the historic name; and “Love, O Love, Thou art -the full-orbed circle,” “Thou art both warp and woof,” beginning and -end, material and transforming agency, v. 33, is Catherine’s central -idea, expressed in a form much calculated to impress it upon her. - -The daring and profound Loda LXXXIX, “How the soul, by holy -self-annihilation and love, reaches an unknowable and indescribable -state,” contains again numerous touches which have been assimilated by -Catherine. So with: “Drawn forth, out of her natural state, into that -unmeasurable condition whither love goes to drown itself, the soul, -having plunged into the abyss of this ocean, henceforth cannot find, -on any side, any means of issuing forth from it,” vv. 12, 13. So also -with: “Since thou dost no longer love thyself, but alone that Goodness -… it has become necessary for thee again to love thyself, but with -His Love,--into so great an unity hast thou been drawn by Him,” vv. -52-54. So too with: “All Faith ceases for the soul to whom it has been -given to see; and all Hope, since it now actually holds what it used -to seek,” v. 70, although this is more absolute than are her similar -utterances.--But especially are the startling words interesting: “In -this transformation, thou drinkest Another, and that Other drinketh -thee (_tu bevi e sei bevuto, in transformazione_),” v. 98, which, in -their second part, are identical with R. Browning’s “My end, to slake -Thy thirst”:[111] for they will have helped to support or to encourage -Catherine’s corresponding inversion--the teaching of an eating, an -assimilation, not of God by man, but of man by God. Both sets of images -go back, of course, to the Eucharistic reception by the soul of the -God-man Christ, under the forms of Bread eaten and of Wine drunk. - -The striking Loda LXXXX, “How the soul arrives at a treble state of -annihilation,” has doubtless suggested much to Catherine. “He who -has become the very Cause of all things” (_chi è cosa d’ogni cosa_) -“can never more desire anything,” v. 4, is, it is true, more daring, -because more quietly explicit, than any saying of hers. But v. 13 has -been echoed by her throughout: “The heavens have grown stagnant; their -silence constrains me to cry aloud: ‘O profound Ocean, the very depth -of Thine Abyss has constrained me to attempt and drown myself within -it,’”--where note the interestingly antique presupposition of the music -of the spheres, which has now stopped, and of the watery constitution -of the crystalline heaven, which allows of stagnation; and the rapidity -of the change in the impressions,--from immobility to silence, and from -air to water. Indeed that Ocean is one as much of air as of water, and -as little the one as the other; and its attractive force is still that -innate affinity between the river-soul and its living Source and Home, -the Ocean God, which we have so constantly found in Plotinus, Proclus, -and Dionysius. “The land of promise is, for such a soul, no longer one -of promise only: for the perfect soul already reigns within that land. -Men can thus transform themselves, in any and every place,” v. 18, has, -in its touching and lofty Stoic-Christian teaching, found the noblest -response and re-utterance in and by Catherine’s words and life. - -Loda LXXXXVIII, “Of the Incarnation of the Divine Word,” full though -it is of beautiful Franciscanism, has left her uninfluenced. But the -fine Loda LXXXXIX, “How true Love is not idle,” contains touches which -have sunk deep into her mind. “Splendour that givest to all the world -its light, O Love Jesus … heaven and earth are by Thee; Thine action -resplends in all things and all things turn to Thee. Only the sinner -despises Thy Love and severs himself from Thee, his Creator,” v. 6, -is, in its substance, taken over by her. “O ye cold sinners!” v. 12, -is her favourite epithet. And vv. 13, 14, with their rapid ringing of -the changes on the different sense-perceptions, will, by their shifting -vividness, have helped on a similar iridescence in her own imagery: “O -Odour, that transcendest every sweetness! O living river of Delight … -that causest the very dead to return to their vigour! In heaven Thy -lovers possess Thine immense Sweetness, tasting there those savoury -morsels.” - -And finally Loda LXXXVII, “Of true and false discretion,” which, in vv. -12-20, consists of a dialogue between “the Flesh” and “the Reason,” -will have helped to suggest the slight beginnings of this form of -apprehension to Catherine which we have found amongst her authentic -sayings and experiences, and which were, later on, developed on so -large a scale, by Battista Vernazza, throughout her long _Dialogo della -Beata Caterina_. - -5. Jacopone it is, then, who furnished Catherine with much help towards -that rare combination of deep feeling with severely abstract thinking -which, if at times it somewhat strains and wearies us moderns who would -ever end with the concrete, gives a nobly virile, bracing note to even -the most effective of her sayings. - - -V. POINTS COMMON TO ALL FIVE MINDS; AND CATHERINE’S MAIN DIFFERENCE -FROM HER FOUR PREDECESSORS. - -If we now consider for a moment the general points common to the four -writers just considered and to Catherine, we readily note that all -five are profoundly reflective and interpretative in their attitude -towards the given contingencies of traditional religion; that they -all tend to find the Then and There of History still at work, in -various degrees, Here and Now, throughout Time and Space, and in the -last resort, above and behind both these categories, in a spaceless, -timeless Present. And if only three, Paul, Jacopone, and Catherine, -bear marks, throughout all they think and feel and do and are, of the -cataclysmic conversion-crisis through which they had passed,--the -temporally intermediate two, John and Dionysius, have also got, but in -a more indirect form, much of a similar Dualism. All five are, in these -and other respects, indefinitely closer to each other than any one of -them is to the still richer, more complete, and more entirely balanced -though less articulated, Synoptic teaching, which enfolds all that -is abiding in those other five, whilst they, even if united, do not -approximately exhaust the substance of that teaching. - -And if we would briefly define the main point on which Catherine holds -views additional to, or other than, those other four, we must point to -her Purgatorial teaching, which has received but little or no direct -suggestion from any one of them, and which, whatever may have been its -literary precursors and occasions, gives, perhaps more than anything -else, a peculiarly human and personal, original and yet still modern, -touch to what would otherwise be, to our feeling, too abstract and -antique a spiritual physiognomy. - - - - -CHAPTER XI - -CATHERINE’S LESS ULTIMATE THIS-WORLD DOCTRINES - - -INTRODUCTORY: CATHERINE’S LESS ULTIMATE POSITIONS, CONCERNING OUR LIFE -HERE, ARE FOUR. - -We have now attempted, (by means of a doubtless more or less artificial -distinction between things that, in real life, constitute parts of one -whole in a state of hardly separable inter-penetration,) a presentation -of Catherine’s special, mental and psycho-physical, character and -temperament, and of the principal literary stimulations and materials -which acted upon, and in return were refashioned by, that character; -and we have also given, in sufficient detail, the resultant doctrines -and world-view acquired and developed by that deep soul and noble mind. -The most important and difficult part of our task remains, however, -still to be accomplished,--the attempt to get an (at least approximate) -estimate of the abiding meaning, place, and worth of this whole, highly -synthesized position, for and within the religious life generally and -our present-day requirements in particular. For the general outline of -the Introduction, (intended there more as an instrument of research -and classification for the literature and history then about to be -examined, than as this history’s final religious appraisement,) cannot -dispense us from now attempting something more precise and ultimate.--I -propose, then, to give the next four chapters to an examination -of Catherine’s principal positions and practices, the first two, -respectively, to “the less ultimate This-World Doctrines”; and “the -Other-World Doctrines,” or “the Eschatology”; and the last two to “the -Ultimate Implications and Problems” underlying both. The last chapter -shall then sum up the whole book, and consider the abiding place and -function of Mysticism, in its contrast to, and supplementation of, -Asceticism, Institutionalism, and the Scientific Habit and Activity of -the Mind. - -Now I think the less ultimate spiritual positions, as far as they -concern our life here below, which are specially represented, or at -least forcibly suggested by, Catherine, can reasonably be accounted as -four: Interpretative Religion; a strongly Dualistic attitude towards -the body; Quietude and Passivity; and Pure Love. I shall devote a -section to each position. - - -I. INTERPRETATIVE RELIGION. - - -1. _Difficulties of the Subjective element of Religion._ - -Now, by Interpretative Religion, I do not mean to imply that there -is anywhere, in _rerum natura_, such a thing as a religion which is -not interpretative, which does not consist as truly of a reaction on -the part of the believing soul to certain stimulations of and within -it, as of these latter stimulations and actions. As every (even -but semi-conscious) act and state of the human mind, ever embraces -both such action of the object and such reaction of the subject,--a -relatively crude fact of sensation or of feeling born in upon it, and -an interpretation, an incorporation of this fact by, and into, the -living tissue and organism of this mind: so is it also, necessarily -and above all, with the deepest and most richly complex of all human -acts and states,--the specifically religious ones. But if this -interpretative activity of the mind was present from the very dawn of -human reason, and exists in each individual in the precise proportion -as mind can be predicated as operative within him at all: this mental -activity is yet the last element in the compound process and result -which is, or can be, perceived as such by the mind itself. The process -is too near to the observer, even when he is once awake to its -existence; he is too much occupied with the materials brought before -his mind and with moulding and sorting them out; and this moulding and -sorting activity is itself too rapid and too deeply independent of -those materials as to its form, and too closely dependent upon them as -to its content, for the observation by the mind of this same mind’s -contributions towards its own affirmations of reality and of the nature -of this reality, not ever to appear late in the history of the human -race or in the life of any human individual, or not to be, even when it -appears difficult, a fitful and an imperfect mental exercise. - -And when the discovery of this constant contribution of the mind to -its own affirmations of reality is first made, it can hardly fail, -for the time being, to occasion misgivings and anxieties of a more or -less sceptical kind. Is not the whole of what I have hitherto taken -to be a solid world of sense outside me, and the whole of the world -of necessary truth and of obligatory goodness within me,--is it not, -perhaps, all a merely individual creation of my single mind--a mind cut -off from all effective intercourse with reality,--my neighbour’s mind -included? For all having, so far, been held to be objective, the mind -readily flies to the other extreme, and suspects all to be subjective. -Or if all my apprehensions and certainties are the resultants from the -interaction between impressions received by my senses and mind and -reactions and elaborations on the part of this mind with regard to -those impressions, how can I be sure of apprehending rightly, unless -I can divide each constituent off from the other? And yet, how can I -effect such a continuous discounting of my mind’s action by means of my -own mind itself? - -And this objection is felt most keenly in religion, when the religious -soul first wakes up to the fact that itself, of necessity and -continuously, contributes, by its own action, to the constitution of -those affirmations and certainties, which, until then, seemed, without -a doubt, to be directly borne in upon a purely receptive, automatically -registering mind, from that extra-, super-human world which it thus -affirmed. Here also, all having for so long been assumed to be purely -objective, the temptation now arises to consider it all as purely -subjective. Or again, if we insist upon holding that, here too, there -are both objective and subjective elements, we readily experience keen -distress at our inability clearly to divide off the objective, which is -surely the reality, from the subjective, which can hardly fail to be -its travesty. - -And finally, this doubt and trouble would seem to find specially ready -material in the mystical element and form of religion. For here, as we -have already seen, psycho-physical and auto-suggestive phenomena and -mechanisms abound; here especially does the mind cling to an immediate -access to Reality; and here the ordinary checks and complements -afforded by the Historical and Institutional, the Analytically -Rational, and the Volitional, Practical elements of Religion are at -a minimum. Little but the Emotional and the Speculatively Rational -elements seems to remain; and these, more than any others, appear -incapable of admitting that they are anything other than the pure and -direct effects and expressions of spiritual Reality. - -What, then, shall we think of all this? - - -2. _Answers to the above difficulties._ - -We evidently must, in the first instance, guard against any attempt -at doing a doctrinaire violence to the undeniable facts of our -consciousness or of its docile analysis, by explaining all our -knowledge, or only even all our knowledge of any single thing, as -either of purely subjective or of purely objective provenance; for -everywhere and always these two elements co-exist in all human -apprehension, reason, feeling, will, and faith. We find, throughout, an -organization, an indissoluble organism, of subjective and objective, -hence a unity in diversity, which is indeed so great that (for our -own experience and with respect to our own minds at all events), the -Subjective does not and cannot exist without the Objective, nor the -Objective without the Subjective. - -In the next place, we must beware against exalting the Objective -against the Subjective, or the Subjective against the Objective, as -if Life, Reality, and Truth consisted in the one rather than the -other. Because the subjective element is, on the first showing, a work -of our own minds, it does not follow (as we shall see more clearly -when studying the ultimate problems) that its operations are bereft -of correspondence with reality, or, at least, that they are further -from reality than are our sense-perceptions. For just as the degree -of worth represented by these sense-perceptions can range from the -crudest delusion to a stimulation of primary importance and exquisite -precision, so also our mental and emotional reaction and penetration -represent almost any and every degree of accuracy and value. - -And, above all, as already implied, the true priority and superiority -lies, not with one of these constituents against the other, but with -the total subjective-objective interaction and resultant, which is -superior, and indeed gives their place and worth to, those ever -interdependent parts. - -Now, in the general human experience, the Objective element is -constituted, in the first instance and for clear and ready analysis, -by the sense-stimulations; and, after some mental response to and -elaboration of these, by the larger psychic moods; and later still, by -the examples of great spiritual attitudes and of great personalities -offered by other souls to the soul that keeps itself open to such -impressions. And though the sense of Reality (as contrasted with -Appearance), of the Abiding and Infinite (as different from the -Passing and the Finite), are doubtless awakened, however faintly and -inarticulately, in the human soul from the first, as the background and -presupposition of the foreground and the middle-distances of its total -world of perceptions and aspirations: yet all these middle-distances, -as well as that great background and groundwork, would remain -unawakened but for those humble little sense-perceptions on the one -hand, and intercourse with human fellow-creatures on the other. And in -such intercourse with the minds and souls, or with the literary remains -and other monuments of souls, either still living here or gone hence -some two thousand years or more, a mass of mental and moral impressions -and stimulations, which, in those souls, were largely their own -elaborations, offer themselves to any one human mind, or to the minds -of a whole generation or country, with the apparent homogeneity of a -purely objective, as it were a sense-impression. - -Especially in Religion the Historical and Institutional (as Religion’s -manifestation in space and time), come down to us thus from the past -and surround us in the present, and either press in upon us with a -painful weight, or support us with a comforting solidity, thus giving -them many of the qualities of things physically seen and touched, -say, a mystery play or a vast cathedral. And, on the other hand, -the Rational, (whether Analytic or Synthetic,) and the Emotional -and Volitional Elements, whenever they are at all preponderant or -relatively independent of the other, more objective ones, are liable, -in Religion, to look quite exceptionally subjective,--and this in -the unfavourable sense of the word, as though either superfluous and -fantastic, or as dangerous and destructive.--And yet both that look of -the objective elements being, in Religion, more self-sufficing than -they appear to be in the ordinary psychic, or the artistic, or social, -or scientific life; and that impression conveyed by the subjective -elements in Religion, as being there less necessary or more dangerous -than elsewhere, are doubtless deceptive. These impressions are simply -caused by two very certain facts. Religion is the deepest and most -inclusive of all the soul’s energizings and experiences, and hence -all its constituents reveal a difference, at least in amount and -degree, when compared with the corresponding constituents of the more -superficial and more partial activities of the soul; and Religion, -just because of this, requires the fullest action and co-operation, the -most perfect unity, in and through diversity, of all the soul’s powers, -and all mere non-use of any of these forces, even any restriction to -the use of but one or two, is here, more readily and extensively than -elsewhere, detrimental both to the non-exercised and to the exercised -forces, and, above all, is impoverishing to the soul itself and to its -religion. - -Hence, here as elsewhere, but more than anywhere, our ideal standard -will be the greatest possible development of, and inter-stimulation -between, each and all of the religious elements, with the greatest -possible unity in the resulting organism. And yet,--in view of the -very greatness of the result aimed at, and of the fact that its even -approximate attainment can, even for any one age of the world, be -reasonably expected only from the co-operation of the differently -endowed and attracted races and nations, social and moral grades, -sexes, ages and individuals that make up mankind,--we shall not -only be very tolerant of, we shall positively encourage, largely -one-sided developments, provided that each keeps some touch with the -elements which itself knows not how to develop in abundance, and that -it considers its own self, and works out its own special gift and -_attrait_, as but one out of many variously gifted and apportioned -fellow-servants in the Kingdom,--as only one of the countless, mutually -complementary, individually ever imperfect, part-expressions of the -manifold greatness, of the rich unity of spiritual humanity as willed -by God, and of God Himself. - - -3. _Partial developments of the full Gospel Ideal._ - -Now in the New Testament we have a most instructive, at first sight -puzzling phenomenon, illustrative of the positions just taken up. -For here it is clear that, with regard to the distinction between -richly many-sided but as yet unarticulated religion, and comparatively -one-sided and limited but profoundly developed religion, we have two -considerably contrasted types of spiritual tone and teaching. We get -the predominantly “Objective” strand of life and doctrine, in the -pre-Pauline parts and in their non-Pauline echoes, _i.e._ in the -substance of the Synoptic tradition, and in the Epistles of St. James -and of St. Peter; and we find the predominantly “Subjective” strain -in the “Pauline” parts, St. Paul’s Epistles and the Joannine Gospel -and Letters.--And it has become more and more clear that it is the -pre-Pauline parts which give us the most immediately and literally -faithful, and especially the most complete and many-sided, picture of -Our Lord’s precise words and actions; whereas the Pauline parts give -us rather what some of these great creative forces were and became for -the first generations of Christians and for the most penetrating of -Christ’s early disciples and lovers. And yet it is the latter documents -which, at first sight, appear to be the deeper, the wider, and the more -profoundly spiritual; whereas the former look more superficial, more -temporal and local, and more simply popular and material. - -And yet,--though this first impression has been held to be finally -true by large masses of Christians; although the Greek Fathers -predominantly, and, in the West, the great soul of an Augustine, and -the powerful but one-sided personalities of a Luther and a Calvin -have, in various degrees and ways, helped to articulate and all but -finally fix it for the general Christian consciousness: this view is -yielding, somewhat slowly but none the less surely, to the sense that -it is the Synoptic, the pre-Pauline tradition which contains the fuller -arsenal of the spiritual forces which have transfigured and which still -inspire the world of souls. This, of course, does not mean that the -Pauline-Joannine developments were not necessary, or are not abiding -elements towards the understanding of the Christian spirit. - -And, to come to the true answer to our objection, such a judgment -does not mean that the reflective penetration and reapplication of -the original more spontaneous message was, from the very nature of -the case, inferior to the first less articulated announcement of the -Good Tidings. But it merely signifies that this necessary process of -reflection could only be applied to parts of the original, immensely -rich and varied, because utterly living, divinely spiritual, whole; and -that, thus, the special balance and tension which characterized the -original, complete spirit and temper, could, however profoundly, be -reproduced only in part. For the time being this later penetration and -resetting of some elements from among the whole of Our Lord’s divinely -rich and simple life and teaching, necessarily and rightly, yet none -the less most really, ignored, or put for the time into some other -context, certain other sides and aspects of that primitive treasure -of inexhaustible experience. Only the full, equable, and simultaneous -unfolding of all the petals could have realized the promise and -content of the bud; whereas the bud, holding enfolded within itself -such various elements and combinations of truth, could not expand its -petals otherwise than successively, hence, at any one moment only -somewhat one-sidedly and partially. Each and all of these unfoldings -bring some further insight into, and articulation of, the original -spiritual organism; and that they are not more, but less, than the -totality of that primitive experience and revelation, does not prove -that such reflective work is wrong or even simply dispensable,--for, on -the contrary, in some degree or form it was and ever is necessary to -the soul’s apprehension of that life and truth,--but simply implies the -immensity of the spiritual light and impulsion given by Our Lord, and -the relative smallness of even the greatest of His followers. - -Thus only if it could be shown that those parts of the New Testament -which doubtless give us the nearest approach to the actual words and -deeds of Our Lord require us to conceive them as having been without -the reflective and emotional element; or again that, in the case of the -more derivative parts of the New Testament, it is their reflectiveness, -and not their relative incompleteness and one-sidedness, that cause -them to be more readily englobed in the former world, than that former -world in the latter: could the facts here found be used as an argument -against the importance and strict necessity for religion of the -reflective and emotional, the “Subjective” elements, alongside of the -“Objective,” the Historical and Institutional ones. - -It is a most legitimate ground for consolation to a Catholic when -he finds the necessities of life and those of learned research both -driving us more and more to this conclusion; for it is not deniable -that Catholicism has ever refused to do more than include the Pauline -and Joannine theologies amongst its earliest and most normative -stimulations and expressions; and that it has ever retained, far -more than Protestantism, the sense, which (upon the whole) is most -unbrokenly preserved by the Synoptists, of, if I may so phrase it, the -Christianity of certain true elements in the pre- and extra-Christian -religions. For it is in the Synoptists that we get the clear -presentation of Our Lord’s attitude towards the Jewish Church of His -time, as one, even at its keenest, analogous to that of Savonarola, and -not to that of a Luther, still less of a Calvin, towards the Christian -Church of their day.--Indeed in these documents all idea of limiting -Christianity to what He brought of new, appears as foreign to His mind -as it ever has been to that of the Catholic Church. Here we get the -most spontaneous and many-sided expression of that divinely human, -widely traditional and social, all-welcoming and all-transforming -spirit, which embraces both grace _and_ nature, eternity _and_ time, -soul _and_ body, attachment _and_ detachment. The Pauline strain stands -for the stress necessary to the full spiritualization of all those -occasions and materials, as against all, mere unregenerate or static, -retention of the simple rudiments or empty names of those things; -and predominantly insists upon grace, _not_ nature; eternity, _not_ -time; soul, _not_ body; the cross and death here, the Crown and Life -hereafter. No wonder it is this latter strain that gets repeated, -with varying truth and success, in times of acute transition, and by -characters more antithetic than synthetic, more great at developing a -part of the truth than the whole. - -Thinkers, of such wide historical outlook and unimpeachable detachment -from immediate controversial interest as Prof. Wilhelm Dilthey and -Dr. Edward Caird, have brought out, with admirable force, this -greater fulness of content offered by the Synoptists, and how the -Pauline-Joannine writings give us the first and most important of -those concentrations upon, and in part philosophic and mystical -reinterpretations of, certain constituents of the original happenings, -actions and message, as apprehended and transmitted by the first -eye-witnesses and believers.[112]--Here I would but try and drive -home the apparently vague, but in reality ever pressing and concrete, -lesson afforded by the clear and dominant fact of these two groups -within the New Testament itself:--of how no mere accumulation of -external happenings, or of external testimony as to their having -happened,--no amount of history or of institutionalism, taken as sheer, -purely positive givennesses,--can anywhere be found, or can anywhere -suffice for the human mind and conscience, in the apprehension and -embodiment of the truth. For although, in Our Lord’s most literally -transmitted sayings and doings, this continuous and inalienable element -of the apprehending, organizing, vitalizing mind and heart,--on -His part above all, but also on the part of His several hearers and -chroniclers,--can mostly still be traced and must everywhere be -assumed: yet it is in the Pauline-Joannine literature that the ever -important, the rightly and fruitfully “subjective,” the speculative and -emotional, the mystical and the volitional strain can best be studied, -both as to its necessity and as to its special character and dangers, -because here it is developed to the relative exclusion of the other -factors of complete religion. - - -4. _The exclusive emotionalism of Dionysius and Jacopone._ - -Now if even in St. Paul and St. John there is a strong predominance of -these reflective-emotional elements, in Dionysius and Jacopone they -threaten to become exclusive of everything else. Especially is this -the case with the Pseudo-Areopagite, steeped as he is in reflection -upon reflections and in emotion upon emotions, often of the most -subtle kind: a Christian echo, with curiously slight modifications, -of Neo-Platonism in its last stage,--hence, unfortunately, of the -over-systematic and largely artificial Proclus, instead of the -predominantly experimental and often truly sublime Plotinus. And even -Jacopone, although he has distinctly more of the historic element, is -still predominantly reflective-emotional, and presents us with many a -hardly modified Platonic or Stoic doctrine, derived no doubt from late -Graeco-Roman writers and their mediaeval Christian echoes. - - -5. _Catherine’s interpretation of the Gospel Ideal._ - -Catherine herself, although delightfully free from the long scale of -mediations between the soul and God which forms one of the predominant -doctrines of the Areopagite, continues and emphasizes most of what is -common, and much of what is special to, all and each of these four -writers; she is a reflective saint, if ever there was one. And of her -too we shall have to say that she is great by what she possesses, and -not by what she is without: great because of her noble embodiment of -the reflective and emotional, the mystical and volitional elements -of Christianity and Religion generally. Religion is here, at first -sight at least, all but entirely a thought and an emotion; yet all -this thought and emotion is directed to, and occasioned by, an -abiding Reality which originates, sustains, regulates, and fulfils -it. And although this Reality is in large part conceived, in Greek -and specially in Neo-Platonist fashion, rather under its timeless and -spaceless, or at least under its cosmic aspect, rather as Law and -Substance, than as Personality and Spirit: yet, already because of the -strong influence upon her of the noblest Platonic doctrine, it is loved -as overflowing Love and Goodness, as cause and end of all lesser love -and goodness; and the real, though but rarely articulated, acceptance -and influence of History and Institutions, above all the enthusiastic -devotion to the Holy Eucharist with all its great implications, gives -to the whole a profoundly Christian tone and temper. - -True, the Church at large, indeed the single soul (if we would take -such a soul as our standard of completeness) requires a larger -proportion of those crisp, definite outlines, of those factual, -historical, and institutional elements; a very little less than what -remains in Catherine of these elements, and her religion would be -a simple, even though deep religiosity, a general aspiration, not -a definite finding, an explicit religion. Yet it remains certain, -although ever readily forgotten by religious souls, especially by -theological apologists, that without some degree and kind of those -outgoing, apprehending, interpreting activities, no religion is -possible. Only the question as to what these activities should be, and -what is their true place and function within the whole religious life, -remains an open one. And this question we can study with profit in -connection with such a life and teaching as Catherine’s, which brings -out, with a spontaneous, childlike profundity and daring, the elemental -religious passion, the spiritual hunger and thirst of man when he is -once fully awake; the depths within him anticipating the heights above -him; the affinity to and contact with the Infinite implied and required -by that nobly incurable restlessness of his heart, which finds its rest -in Him alone Who made it. - - -II. DUALISTIC ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE BODY. - -And if Catherine is profoundly reflective, that reflection is, in its -general drift, deeply dualistic,--at least in the matter of body and -spirit. Their difference and incompatibility; the spirit’s fleeing of -the body; the spirit’s getting outside of it,--by ecstasy, for a little -while, even in this earthly life, and by this earthly body’s death, for -good and all; the body a prison-house, a true purgatory to the soul: -all this hangs well together, and is largely, in its very form, of -ultimately Neo-Platonist or Platonic origin. - - -1. _New Testament valuations of the body._ - -Now here is one of the promised instances of a double type--if not of -doctrine, yet at least of emotional valuation in the New Testament. - -(1) In the Synoptist documents, (with the but apparent, or at least -solitary, exceptions, of Jesus’ Fasting in the Desert and of His -commendation of those who have made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom -of Heaven),[113] we find no direct or acute antagonism to the body, -even to the average earthly human body, in the teaching and practice -of Our Lord. The Second Coming and its proximity do indeed, here -also, dwarf all earthly concerns, in so far as earthly.[114] This -background to the teaching and its tradition was, in course of time, -in part abstracted from, in part restated.--The entrance into life is -through the narrow gate and the steep way; only if a man turn, can he -enter into the Kingdom of God; only if he lose his soul, can he find -it:[115] this great teaching and example, as to life and joy being ever -reached through death to self and by the whole-hearted turning of the -soul from its false self to its true source, God: remains, in the very -form of its promulgation as given by the Synoptists, the fundamental -test and standard of all truly spiritual life and progress. But as to -the body in particular, Jesus here knows indeed that “the flesh is -weak,” and that we must pray for strength against its weakness:[116] -but He nowhere declares it evil--an inevitable prison-house or a -natural antagonist to the spirit. The beautiful balance of an unbroken, -unstrained nature, and a corresponding doctrine as full of sober -earnestness as it is free from all concentrated or systematic dualism, -are here everywhere apparent. - -(2) It is St. Paul, the man of the strongest bodily passions -and temptations, he who became suddenly free from them by the -all-transforming lightning-flash of his conversion, who, on and on, -remained vividly conscious of what he had been and, but for that -grace, still would be, and of what, through that grace, he had become. -The deepest shadows are thus ever kept in closest contrast to the -highest lights; and the line of demarcation between them runs here -along the division between body and soul. “Unhappy man that I am, who -can liberate me from this body of sin?” “In my flesh dwelleth no good -thing”:[117] are sayings which are both keener in their tone and more -limited in their range than are Our Lord’s. And we have seen how, in -one of his most depressed moods, he transiently adopts and carries -on a specifically Platonist attitude towards the body’s relation to -the soul, as he finds it in that beautiful, profoundly Hellenistic -treatise, the Book of Wisdom.[118] This attitude evidently represents, -in his strenuous and deeply Christian character, only a passing -feeling; for, if we pressed it home, we could hardly reconcile it with -his doctrine as to the reality and nature of the body’s resurrection. -It is indeed clear how the Platonist, and especially the Neo-Platonist, -mode of conceiving that relation excludes any and every kind of body -from the soul’s final stage of purification and happiness; and how -the Synoptic, and indeed the generally Christian conception of it, -necessarily eliminates that keen and abiding dualism characteristic of -the late Greek attitude. - - -2. _Platonic, Synoptic, and Pauline elements in Catherine’s view._ - -Now in Catherine we generally find an interesting combination of the -Platonic form with the Synoptic substance and spirit: and this can, of -course, be achieved only because that abiding form itself is made to -signify a changed set and connection of ideas. - -(1) We have seen how she dwells much, Plotinus-like, upon the soul’s -stripping itself of all its numerous garments, and exposing itself -naked to the rays of God’s healing light. Yet in the original Platonic -scheme these garments are put on by the soul in its descent from -spirit into matter, and are stripped off again in its ascent back out -of matter into spirit; in both cases, they stand for the body and its -effects. In Catherine, even more than in Plotinus, the garments stand -for various evil self-attachments and self-delusions of the soul; -and against these evils and dangers the Synoptists furnish endless -warnings. And yet she insists upon purity, clear separation, complete -abstraction of the soul, in such terms as still to show plainly enough -the originally Neo-Platonist provenance of much of her form; for -in the Neo-Platonists we get, even more markedly than here, a like -insistence upon the natural dissimilarity of the body and the soul, -and a cognate longing to get away from it in ecstasy and death. But -whilst in the Neo-Platonists there is, at the bottom of all this, a -predominant belief that the senses are the primary source and occasion -of all sin, so that sin is essentially the contamination of spirit -by matter: in Catherine, (although she shares to the full Plotinus’s -thirst for ecstasy, as the escape from division and trouble into unity -and peace), impurity stands primarily for self-complacency,--belief in, -and love of, our imaginary independence of even God Himself; and purity -means, in the first instance, the loving Him and His whole system of -souls and of life, and one’s own self only in and as part of that -system. - -It is very instructive to note, in this connection, how, after her four -years of directly penitential and ascetical practice, (an activity -which, even then, extended quite as much to matters of decentralization -of the self as of bodily mortification), her warfare is, in the first -instance, all but exclusively directed against the successive refuges -and ambushes of self-complacency and self-centredness. Thus there is -significance in the secondary place occupied, (even in the _Vita_, and -doubtless still more in her own mind), by the question of continence; -indeed her great declaration to the Friar indicates plainly her -profound concentration upon the continuous practice of, and growth in, -Love Divine, and her comparative indifference to the question of the -systematic renunciation of anything but sin and selfish attachments and -self-centrednesses of any kind. Her conception of sinners as “cold,” -even more than as dark or stained; of God as Fire, even more than -as Light; and of purity as indefinitely increasable, since Love can -grow on and on: all similarly point to this finely positive, flame-, -not snow-conception, in which purity has ceased to be primarily, as -with the Greeks, a simple absence of soiledness, even if it be moral -soiledness, and has become, as with the Synoptic teaching, something -primarily positive, love itself. - -In her occasionally intense insistence upon herself as being all evil, -a very Devil, and in some of her picturings of her interior combat, -we get, on the other hand, echoes, not of Plato, nor again of the -Synoptist teaching, but of St. Paul’s “in my flesh there dwelleth no -good thing,” and of his combat between flesh and spirit.--Yet the evil -which she is thus conscious of, is not sensual nor even sensible evil -and temptation, but consists in her unbounded natural claimfulness and -intense inclination to sensitive self-absorption.--And this gives, -indeed, to these feminine echoes of St. Paul a certain thin shrillness -which the original tones have not got, standing there for the massive -experiences of a man violently solicitated by both sense and spirit. -But it leaves her free to note, as regards the flesh, the whole bodily -organism, (and this in beautiful sympathy with Our Lord’s own genially -fervent, homely heroic spirit), not its wickedness, but its weakness, -its short-livedness, and its appeal for merciful allowance to God, -“Who knows that we are dust.” Instead of a direct and pointed dualism -of two distinct substances informed by all but incurably antagonistic -principles, we thus get a direct conflict between two dispositions of -the soul, and a but imperfect correspondence between the body and that -soul. - -(2) There is, indeed, no doubt that the very ancient association of the -ideas of Fire and of spiritual Purification goes back, in the first -instance, to the conception of the soul being necessarily stained by -the very fact of its connection with the body, and of those stains -being finally removed by the body’s death and cremation. We find -this severely self-consistent view scattered up and down Hellenic -religion and literature.[119] And even in Catherine the fire, a sense -of fever-heat, still seizes the body, and this body wastes away, -and leaves the soul more and more pure, during those last years of -illness.--Yet the striking identity, between that old cluster of ideas -and her own forms of thought, brings out, all the more clearly, the -immense road traversed by spirituality between the substance of those -ideas and the essence of this thought. For in her teaching, which -is but symbolized or at most occasioned by those physico-psychical -fever-heats, the Fire is, at bottom, so spiritual and so directly -busy with the soul alone, that it is ever identical with itself in -Heaven, Hell, Purgatory, and on earth, and stands for God Himself; and -that its effects are not the destruction of a foreign substance, but -the bringing back, wherever and as far as possible, of the fire-like -soul’s disposition and quality to full harmony with its Fire-source and -Parent, God Himself. - -(3) Only the Prison-house simile for the body, as essentially an -earthly purgatory for the soul, must be admitted, I think, to remain -a primarily Platonic, not fully Christianizable conception; just as -the absence of all reference by her to the resurrection of the body -will have been, in part, occasioned by the strong element of Platonism -in her general selection and combination of ideas. Yet it would -obviously be unfair to press these two points too much, since, as to -the resurrection, her long illness and evidently constant physical -discomfort must, even of themselves, have disinclined her to all -picturing of an abiding, even though highly spiritualized, bodily -organization; and as to the likeness of her body to a prison and -purgatory of the soul, we are expressly told that it began only with -the specially suffering last part of her life. - - -3. _Dualism pragmatic, not final. Its limits._ - -Now, for this whole matter of the right conception as to the relations -of body and soul, it is clear that any more than partial and -increasingly superable antagonism between body and spirit cannot be -accepted. - -(1) A final Dualism is unsound in Psychology, since all the first -materials, stimulations, and instruments for even our most abstract -thinking are supplied to us by our sense-perceptions, hence also -through the body. It is narrow in Cosmology, for we do not want to -isolate man in this great universe of visible things; and his link -with animal- and plant-life, and even with the mineral creation, is, -increasingly as we descend in the scale of beings, his body. It is -ruinous for Ethics, because purity, in such a physical-spiritual being -as is man, consists precisely in spiritual standards and laws extending -to and transforming his merely physical inclinations. It is directly -contradictory of the central truth and temper of Christianity, since -these require a full acceptance of the substantial goodness and the -thorough sanctifiableness of man’s body; of God’s condescension to -man’s whole physico-spiritual organism; and of the persistence or -reanimation of all that is essential to man’s true personality across -and after death. And it is, at bottom, profoundly un-Catholic; the -whole Sacramental system, the entire deep and noble conception of the -normal relations between the Invisible and the Visible being throughout -of the Incarnational type,--an action of the one in the other, which -develops the agent and subject at the same time that it spiritualizes -the patient, the object, is in direct conflict with it. Neo-Platonism -came more and more to treat the body and the entire visible creation -as an intrinsic obstacle to spirit, to be eliminated by the latter as -completely as possible; at least this very prominent strain within it -was undoubtedly pushed on to this extreme by the Gnostic sects. But -Christianity has ever to come back to its central presupposition--the -substantial goodness and spiritual utility and transfigurableness of -body and matter; and to its final end,--the actual transformation of -them by the spirit into ever more adequate instruments, materials, and -expressions of abiding ethical and religious values and realities. - -(2) The fact is that here, as practically at every chief turning-point -in ethical and religious philosophy, the movement of the specifically -Christian life and conviction is not a circle round a single -centre,--detachment; but an ellipse round two centres,--detachment and -attachment. And precisely in this difficult, but immensely fruitful, -oscillation and rhythm between, as it were, the two poles of the -spiritual life; in this fleeing and seeking, in the recollection back -and away from the visible (so as to allay the dust and fever of growing -distraction, and to reharmonize the soul and its new gains according -to the intrinsic requirements and ideals of the spirit), and in the -subsequent, renewed immersion in the visible, (in view both of gaining -fresh concrete stimulation and content for the spiritual life, and of -gradually shaping and permeating the visible according to and with -spiritual ends and forces): in this combination, and not in either -of these two movements taken alone, consists the completeness and -culmination of Christianity.[120] - -(3) It no doubt looks, at first sight, as though the Church, by her -canonization of the Monastic Ideal, gave us, for the ultimate pattern -and measure of all Christian perfection, as pure and simple a flight of -the soul from the body and the world, as (short of insanity or suicide) -can be made in this life. But here we have to remember three things. - -In the first place, the Church not only forbids all attacks upon -the legitimacy, indeed sanctity of marriage, or upon its necessity, -indeed duty, for mankind at large; but St. Augustine and St. Thomas -only articulate her ordinary, strenuously anti-Manichean teaching, -in declaring that man was originally created by God, in body and in -soul, not for celibacy but for marriage; and that only owing to the -accidental event of the Fall and of its effects,--the introduction of -disorder and excess into human nature, but not any corruption of its -substance and foundations,--does any inferiority,--the dispositions, -motives, and circumstances being equal,--attach to marriage as compared -with virginity.[121] Hence, still, the absolute ideal would be that man -could and did use marriage as all other legitimate functions and things -of sense, as a necessary, and ever more and more perfected, means and -expression of truly human spirituality, a spirituality which ever -requires some non-spiritual material in which to work, and by working -in which the soul itself, not only spiritualizes it, but increasingly -develops its own self. - -And secondly, detachment, unification, spiritual recollection is the -more difficult, and the less obviously necessary, of the two movements, -and yet is precisely the one which (by coming upon the extant or -inchoate attachments, and by suppressing or purifying them according -as they are bad or good) first stamps any and every life as definitely -religious at all. No wonder, then, that it is this sacred detachment -and love of the Cross that we notice, first of all, in the life and -doctrine of Our Lord and of all His followers, indeed in all truly -religious souls throughout the world; and that the Church should, by -her teaching and selection of striking examples, ever preach and uphold -this most necessary test and ingredient, this very salt of all virile -and fruitful spirituality. - -But, in the third place, a man need only directly attack the family, -society, the state; or art, literature, science,--as intrinsically -evil or even as, in practice, true hindrances to moral and religious -perfection,--and the Church,--both the learning and experimenting, -and the official and formulating Church,--will at once disavow him: -so strong is, at bottom, the instinct that attachment and variety -of interests,--variety both in kind and in degree--that materials, -occasions, and objects for spirituality to leaven and to raise, and to -work on in order to be itself deepened and developed,--are as truly -essential to the spiritual life as are detachment, and unity, and -transcendence of ultimate motive and aim; these latter furnishing to -the soul the power gradually to penetrate all that material, and, in -and through this labour, more and more to articulate its own spiritual -character. - -(4) No man can become, or is proclaimed to have become, a Christian -saint, who has not thus achieved a profound spiritualization and -unification of a more or less recalcitrant material and multiplicity. -In some cases, it is the unity and detachment that greatly predominate -over the multiplicity and attachment,--as, say, in the Fathers of the -Desert. In other cases, it is the variety and attachment that strikes -us first of all,--as, for instance, in Sir Thomas More and Edmund -Campion. And, in a third set of cases, it is the depth of the unity and -detachment, in the breath of the variety and attachment, which is the -dominant characteristic, so with St. Paul and St. Augustine. Catherine -herself belongs, for her great middle period, rather to the third -group than to either of the other two; only during her penitential -period and her last long illness does she clearly belong to the group -of intensely detached and unified saints.--It is evidently impossible -in such a matter to do more than insist upon the necessity of both -movements; upon the immensely fruitful friction and tension which -their well-ordered alternation introduces into the soul’s inner life; -and upon the full ideal and ultimate measure for the complete and -perfected man, humanity at large, being a maximum of multiplicity and -attachment permeated and purified by a maximum of unity and detachment. -The life which can englobe and organize both these movements, with -their manifold interaction, will have a multitude of warm attachments, -without fever or distraction, and a great unity of pure detachment, -without coldness or emptiness: it will have the, winning because rich, -simplicity and wondrous combination of apparent inevitableness and of -seeming paradox furnished by all true life, hence exhibited in its -greatest fulness by the religious life which, at its deepest, is deeper -any other kind of life. - - -III. QUIETUDE AND PASSIVITY. POINTS IN THIS TENDENCY TO BE CONSIDERED -HERE. - -We have inevitably somewhat anticipated another matter, in which -Catherine shows all the true Mystic’s affinities: the craving for -simplification and permanence of the soul’s states,--her practice -and teaching as to Quietude and Passivity. Pushed fully home, this -tendency involves four closely related, increasingly profound, -convictions and experiences. Utter unification of the soul’s functions, -indeed utter unity of its substance: _i.e._ the soul does one single -thing, and seems to do it by one single act; itself is simply one, and -expresses itself by one sole act. Passivity of the soul: _i.e._ the -soul does not apparently act at all, it simply _is_ and receives--it -is now nothing but one pure immense recipiency. Immediacy of contact -between the soul and God: _i.e._ there seems to be nothing separating, -or indeed in any way between, the soul and God. And, finally, an -apparent coalescence of the soul and God: _i.e._ the soul _is_ God, and -God _is_ the soul.--Only the first two points, and then the closely -related question of Pure Love, shall occupy us here; the last two -points must stand over for our penultimate chapter. - - -1. _Distinction between experiences, their expression, and their -analysis._ - -We have already studied the psycho-physical occasions, concomitants, -and embodiments of Catherine’s keen desire for, and profound experience -of, spiritual unification and passivity; and we can have no kind of -doubt as to the factual reality and the practical fruitfulness of the -state so vividly described by her. Here we have only to inquire into -the accuracy of the analysis and terminology effected and employed by -her, in so far as they seem to claim more than simply to describe the -soul’s own feeling and impression as to these states thus experienced -by itself. We have then to consider the nature and truth of what can -roughly be styled Quietism and Passivity. - -Now here especially will it be necessary for us carefully to -distinguish between the direct experiences, impressions, and -instinctive requirements of the soul,--here all souls, in precise -proportion to their depth and delicacy of holiness and of -self-knowledge are our masters, and furnish us with our only materials -and tests; and, on the other hand, the implications and analysis of -these states, as, in the first instance, psychological, and then as -requiring elucidation with regard to their ontological cause and -reality by means of a religious philosophy,--here, psychology, and -religious philosophy, especially also the discriminations and decisions -of theologians and Church authorities as expressive of these ultimate -questions, will be our guides.[122] - -(1) If we start from the history of the nomenclature which, (though -present only partially in Catherine’s sayings, for she nowhere uses the -term “passivity”), runs, with however varying a completeness, right -through the Christian Mystics more or less from the first, we shall -find that it consists, roughly, of three stages, and, throughout, -of two currents. There is the Pre-Pauline and Pre-Philonian stage; -the stage of Paul, Philo, and John, through Clement and Origen, -on to Gregory of Nyssa and St. Augustine; and the stage from the -Pseudo-Dionysius onward, down to Nicolas of Coes inclusive, and which, -to this hour, still largely influences us all.--And there are the two -currents. The one tends so to emphasize the sense and reality of the -soul’s simple receptivity, and of what the soul receives at such, -apparently, purely receptive times, as to ignore, or even practically -deny, the undeniable fact that this very receptivity is, inevitably, -an act of its own. Its decisive terms are Passivity, Fixedness, -Oneness. The other current realizes that Grace does not destroy, -violate, or supplant Nature, either entirely or in part, but that it -awakens, purifies, and completes it, so that every divine influx is -also ever a stimulation of all the good and true energy already, even -though latently, present in the soul. And its characteristic terms are -“Action” (as distinguished from “Activity”), Growth, Harmony. - -(2) And we should note with care that these two currents are not simply -Heathen and Christian respectively. For if that great, indeed all but -central, term and conception of “Action” has been wisely generalized -by most Christian Mystics, as the truly Christian substitute for the -strongly Neo-Platonist term “Passivity”: that term and conception of -“Action” was first fixed and elucidated by Aristotle, who, as Mr. -Schiller well puts it, “has packed into his technical term ‘Energeia,’ -and especially into the combination ‘Unmoving Energy,’ all that -was most distinctive, most original, most fundamental, and most -profound in his philosophy”;[123] whilst the second term, “Passivity,” -goes on figuring in Christian Mystics and Mystical Theologies--(in -spite of its demonstrably dangerous suggestions and frequently -scandalous history)--because the religious, especially the Christian, -consciousness requires a term for the expression of one element of all -its deepest experiences, that character of “giveness” and of grace, of -merciful anticipation by God, which marks all such states, in exact -proportion to their depth and to the soul’s awakeness. - -(3) Now Aristotle’s conception of God’s Unmoving Energy, is taken over -by St. Thomas in the form of God being One Actus Purus,--sheer Energy, -His very peace and stillness coming from the brimming fulness of His -infinite life. And even finite spirit, whilst fully retaining, indeed -deepening, its own character, can and does penetrate finite spirit -through and through,--the law of Physics, which does not admit more -than one body in any one place, having here no kind of application,--so -that the Infinite Spirit is at once conceived unspiritually, if He -is conceived as supplanting, and not as penetrating, stimulating, -and transforming the finite spirits whom He made into an increasing -likeness to Him, their Maker. And hence according to the unanimous -teaching of the most experienced and explicit of the specifically -Theistic and Christian Mystics, the appearance, the soul’s own -impression, of a cessation of life and energy of the soul in periods -of special union with God or of great advance in spirituality, is an -appearance only. Indeed this, at such times strong, impression of rest -springs most certainly from an unusually large amount of actualized -energy, an energy which is now penetrating, and finding expression -by, every pore and fibre of the soul. The whole moral and spiritual -creature expands and rests, yes; but this very rest is produced by -Action “unperceived because so fleet,” so near, so all fulfilling; or -rather by a tissue of single acts, mental, emotional, volitional, so -finely interwoven, so exceptionally stimulative and expressive of the -soul’s deepest aspirations, that these acts are not perceived as so -many single acts, indeed that their very collective presence is apt to -remain unnoticed by the soul itself. - -(4) Close parallels to such a state are abundant in all phases and -directions of the soul’s life. The happiest and most fruitful moments -for our aesthetic sense, those in which our mind expands most and -grows most, hence is most active in aesthetic “action” (though not -“activity”) are those in which we are unforcedly and massively absorbed -in drinking in, with a quiet intentness, the contrasts and harmonies, -the grand unity in variety, the very presence and spirit of an alpine -upland, or of a river’s flowing, or of the ocean’s outspread, or of -the Parthenon sculptures or of Rafael’s madonnas. At such moments -we altogether cease to be directly conscious of ourselves, of time -or of the body’s whereabouts; and when we return to our ordinary -psychical and mental condition, we do so with an undeniable sense -of added strength and youthfulness,--somewhat as though our face, -old and haggard, were, after gazing in utter self-oblivion upon some -resplendent youthfulness, to feel, beyond all doubt, all its many -wrinkles to have gone. And so too with the mind’s absorption in some -great poem or philosophy or character.--In all these cases, the mind or -soul energizes and develops, in precise proportion as it is so absorbed -in the contemplation of these various over-againstnesses, these -“countries” of the spirit, as to cease to notice its own overflowing -action. It is only when the mind but partially attends that a part of -it remains at leisure to note the attention of the other part; when -the mind is fully engrossed, and hence most keenly active, there is no -part of it sufficiently disengaged to note the fact of the engrossment -and action of, now, the whole mind. And, with the direct consciousness -of our mind’s action, we lose, for the time being, all clear -consciousness of the mind’s very existence. And let it be carefully -noted, this absence of the direct consciousness of the self is as -truly characteristic of the deepest, most creative, moments of full -external action: the degree of mind and will-force operating in Nelson -at Trafalgar and in Napoleon at Waterloo, or again in St. Ignatius -of Antioch in the Amphitheatre, and in Savonarola at the stake, was -evidently in the precisely contrary ratio to their direct consciousness -of it or of themselves at all. - - -(5) Now if such “Passivity,” or Action, is in reality the condition -in which the soul attains to its fullest energizing, we can argue -back, from this universal principle, to the nature of the various -stages and kinds of the Prayer and States of Quiet. In each case, that -is, we shall combat the still very common conception that,--though -orthodoxy, it is admitted, requires _some_ human action to remain -throughout,--such Prayer and States consist (not only as to the -immediate feeling of their subjects, but in reality and in their -ultimate analysis) in an ever-increasing preponderance of divine action -within the soul, and an ever-decreasing remnant of acts of the soul -itself. For such a view assumes that God supplants man, and that, so -to speak, His Hand appears unclothed alongside of the tissue woven by -man’s own mind; whereas God everywhere but stimulates and supports man -whom He has made, and His Hand moves ever underneath and behind the -tissue,--a tissue which, at best, can become as it were a glove, and -suggest the latent hand. The Divine Action will thus stimulate and -inform the human action somewhat like the force that drives the blood -within the stag’s young antlers, or like the energy that pushes the -tender sap-full fern-buds up through the hard, heavy ground. - -Thus a special intensity of divine help and presence, and an unusual -degree of holiness and of union, have nothing to do with the fewness -of the soul’s own acts at such times, but with their quality,--with -the preponderance amongst them of divinely informed acts as against -merely natural, or wrongly self-seeking, or downrightly sinful acts. -And since it is certain that living simplicity is but the harmony and -unification, the synthesis, of an organism, and hence is great in -precise proportion to the greater perfection of that synthesis, it -follows that the living, utterly one-seeming Action or State will, -at such times, contain a maximum number of interpenetrating acts and -energies, all worked up into this harmonious whole. - - -2. _Four causes of inadequate analysis._ - -It is plain, I think, that one thoroughly normal, one accidental, and -two mischievous, causes have all conspired to arrest or to deflect the -analysis of most of the Mystics themselves concerning Simplicity. - -For one thing, the soul, as has just been shown, at such moments of -harmonious concentration and of willing and thinking in union with -God’s Light and Will, necessarily ceases, more or less, to be conscious -of its own operations, and, in looking back, braced and rested as it -now is, it cannot but think that it either did not act at all, or that -its action was reduced to a minimum. For how otherwise could it now -feel so rested, when, after its ordinary activity, it feels so tired -and dissatisfied? and how otherwise could it be so unable to give -any clear account of what happened in those minutes of union? Yet it -is, on the contrary, the very fulness of the action which has rested, -by expanding, the soul; and which has made the soul, returned to its -ordinary distractedness, incapable of clearly explaining that, now -past, concentration. - -The accidental cause has been the fairly frequent, though not -necessary, connection of the more pronounced instances of such habits -of mind with more or less of the psycho-physical phenomena of ecstasy, -in the technical sense of the word. For, in such trances, the breathing -and circulation are retarded, and the operation of the senses is in -part suspended. And it was easy to reason, from such visible, literal -simplification of the physical life, to a similar modification of -the soul’s action at such times; and, from the assumed desirableness -of that psycho-physical condition, to the advantage of the supposed -corresponding state of the soul itself. Any tendency to an extreme -dualism, as to the relations between body and soul, would thus -directly help on an inclination to downright Quietism.--Here it is, -on the contrary, certain that only in so far as those psycho-physical -simplifications are the results of, or conditions for, a deepening -multiplicity in unity, a fuller synthetic action of the soul, or, -at least, of a fuller penetration by the soul of even one limited -experience or idea--an operation which entails not less, but more, -energizing of the soul,--are such psycho-physical simplifications of -any spiritual advantage or significance. And in such cases they could -not be indications of the cessation or diminution of the deepest and -most docile energizing of the soul. - -And the mischievous causes were a mistake in Psychology and a mistake -in Theology. For, as to Psychology, not only was simplicity assumed, -(through a mistaken acceptance of the soul’s own feeling, as furnishing -the ultimate analysis of its state), to consist, at any one moment, -of an act materially and literally one, instead of a great organism -of various simultaneous energizings; but this one act was often -held to require no kind of repetition. Since the act was one as -against any simultaneous multiplicity, so was it one as against any -successive multiplicity, even if this latter were taken as a repetition -differentiated by number alone. And yet here again energizing _is_ -energizing; and though the soul’s acts overlap and interpenetrate -each other, and though when, by their number and harmony, they -completely fill and pacify the soul, many of them are simultaneously -or successively present to the soul in their effects alone: it is -nevertheless the renewal, however peaceful and unperceived, of these -acts, which keeps the state of soul in existence. For these acts are -not simply unowned acts that happen to be present within the soul; they -are the soul’s own acts, whether, in addition, the soul is directly -conscious of them or not. - -And, theologically, the idea was often at work that it was more -worthy of God to operate alone and, as it were, _in vacuo_; and more -creaturely of man to make, or try to make, such a void for Him. Yet -this is in direct conflict with the fundamental Christian doctrine, -of the Condescension, the Incarnation of God to and in human nature, -and of the persistence, and elevation of this humanity, even in the -case of Christ Himself. God’s action does not keep outside of, nor -does it replace, man’s action; but it is,--Our Lord Himself has told -us,--that of yeast working in meal, which manifests its hidden power in -proportion to the mass of meal which it penetrates and transforms. - - -3. _Four Quietistic aberrations._ - -Now it is certain that the error of Quietism has, in no doubt many -cases, not remained confined to such mistakes in psychological analysis -and theological doctrine, but that these have joined hands with, and -have furnished a defence to, sloth and love of dreamy ease, or to some -impatience of the necessary details of life, or to fanatical attachment -to some one mood and form of experience; and that they have, thus -reinforced, ravaged not a few wills and souls. - -Four chief Quietistic aberrations can be studied in history. - -(1) The neglect or even contempt of vocal prayer, and of the historical -and institutional elements of religion, at least in the case of -more advanced souls, is one of these abuses.--Now it is true, and -Catherine has been a striking instance, that the proportion of all -these different elements towards one another vary, and should vary, -considerably between soul and soul, according to the _attrait_ and -degree of advance of each; that the soul’s most solid advance is in the -direction of an ever-deepened spiritual devotedness, and not in that of -a multiplication of particular devotions; that the use of even the more -central of those elements and means may, for souls called to the prayer -of Quiet, become remarkably elastic and largely unmethodized; and that, -for such souls (and, in various degrees and ways, sooner or latter, for -perhaps most other souls), a prayer of peacefully humble expectation -and of all but inarticulate, practically indescribable, brooding of -love, and of dim, expansive trust and conformity is possible, sometimes -alone possible, and is proved right and useful, if it leaves them -strengthened to act and to suffer, to help and to devote themselves to -their fellows, to Christ, and to God. - -But it remains equally true, even for these as for all other souls, -that the historical and institutional elements must ever remain -represented, and sufficiently represented; indeed the persistence in -these elements of religion will be one of the chief means for avoiding -delusion. We have St. Teresa’s experience and teaching here, as a truly -classical instance. And if the prayer of Quiet will give a special -colour, depth, and unity to those more contingent-seeming practices, -these practices will, in return, give a particular definiteness, -content, and creaturely quality to that prayer. And thus too the -universally and profoundly important union and interchange with souls -of other, equally legitimate, kinds and degrees of spirituality will -be kept up. Only the sum-total of all these souls, only the complete -invisible Church, is the full Bride of Christ; and though the souls -composing her may and should each contribute a varying predominance of -different elements, no soul should be entirely without a certain amount -of each of these constituents. - -(2) Another abuse is the neglect, contempt, or misapplied fear -of not directly religious occupations and labours which, however -otherwise appropriate or even necessary to this soul’s growth and -destination, tend to disturb its quiet and to absorb a part of its -time and attention. Here it is doubtless true that the other elements -of religion are also all more or less apprehensive and jealous with -regard to actual, or even only possible, non-religious rival interests. -And it is certain that they are all right in so far as that a certain -interior leisureliness and recollection, a certain ultimate preference -for the spiritualizing religious force of the soul as against the -materials, non-religious and other, which that force is to penetrate, -are necessary to the soul that would advance. - -But the fear that characterizes the Historical and Institutional -elements is rather a fear, respectively, of error and of disobedience -and singularity, whereas on the part of the Mystical element it is a -fear of distraction and absorption away from the _Unum Necessarium_ of -the soul. Perhaps even among the Canonized Mystics there is none that -has more impressively warned us, both by word and example, against -this insidious danger, than the distinguished Platonist scholar and -deep spiritual writer, Père Jean Nicolas Grou, who, right through the -long mystical period of his life, alternated his prayer of Quiet with -extensive and vigorous critical work on the Graeco-Latin classics, -and whose practice only wants further expansion and application, -(according to the largely increased or changed conditions of such not -directly religious work), in order to bear much fruit, not only for -criticism and science, but, (by the return-effect of such occupations -upon the soul’s general temper and particular devotional habits), for -spirituality itself. But we must return to this point more fully in our -last chapter. - -(3) The third abuse is the neglect or contempt of morality, especially -on its social, visible, and physical sides. Particular Mystics, and -even whole Mystical schools and movements, have undoubtedly in some -instances, and have, possibly, in many more cases, been maligned on -this point, since even such a spotless life as Fénelon’s, and that of -such a profoundly well-intentioned woman as Madame Guyon, did not, -for a time, escape the most unjust suspicions. It is also true that, -as a man advances in spirituality, he lays increasing stress upon the -intention and general attitude of the agent, and increasingly requires -to be judged by the same interior standard, if he is to be rightly -understood at all. God may and does, to humble and purify him, allow -painful temptations and trials from within to combine, apparently, -against him, with persecutions and much isolation from without. And -the difference, rather than the similarity, between Religion and -Morality,--the sense of pure grace, of free pardon, of the strange -profound “givenness” of even our fullest willings and of our most -emphatically personal achievements,--can and should grow in him more -and more. - -And yet it is clear that there must have been some fire to account -for all that smoke of accusation; that the material and the effect -outwards, the _body_ of an action, do matter, as well as does that -action’s _spirit_; that this body does not only act thus outwards, -but also inwards, back upon the spirit of the act and of the agent; -and that temptations and trials are purifying, not by their simple -presence but in proportion as they are resisted, or, if they have been -yielded to, in proportion as such defeats are sincerely deplored and -renounced. Thus everywhere the full development of any one part of -life, and the true unity of the whole, have to be achieved through the -gradual assimilation of at first largely recalcitrant other elements, -and within an ever-abiding multiplicity--a maximum number of parts and -functions interacting within one great organism. And hence not the -outrage, neglect, or supersession of morality, but, on the contrary, -its deeper development, by more precise differentiation from, and more -organic integration into, religion proper, must, here again and here -above all, be the final aim. Once more again it is the Incarnational -type which is the only fully true, the only genuinely Christian one. - -(4) And, finally, there are certain hardly classifiable fanaticisms, -which are nevertheless a strictly logical consequence from a wrongly -understood Quiet and Passivity,--from Quietism in its unfavourable, -condemned sense. I am thinking of such a case as that of Margarethe -Peters, a young Quietist, who caused herself to be crucified by her -girl-companions, at Wildenspuch, near Schaffhausen, in 1823,--in order -to carry out, in full literalness and separateness, the utmost and -most painful passivity and dependence and resistless self-donation, in -direct imitation of the culminating act of Christ’s life on earth and -of His truest followers.[124] Here, in the deliberate suicide of this -undoubtedly noble Lutheran girl, we get an act which but brings out -the strength and weakness of Quietism wherever found. For the greatest -constituents of the Christian spirit are undoubtedly there: free -self-sacrifice, impelled by love of God, of Christ, and of all men, -and by hatred of self.--Yet, because they here suppress other, equally -necessary, constituents, and are out of their proper context and bereft -of their proper checks, they but render possible and actual a deed of -piteous self-delusion. How terrible is false simplification, the short -cut taken by pure logic, operating without a sufficient induction from -facts, and within an ardent, self-immolating temperament! - - -4. _Rome’s condemnation of Quietism._ - -All this is abundantly sufficient to explain and justify Rome’s -condemnation of Quietism. The term “Quietists” appears, I think, for -the first time,--at least in an invidious sense,--in the Letter which -Cardinal Caraccioli, Archbishop of Naples, addressed to Pope Innocent -XI (Odescalchi) on June 30, 1682, and in which he graphically describes -the abuses which, (under pretext or through the misapplication of -spiritual Quiet and Passivity), had now appeared in his Diocese: souls -apparently incapable of using their beads or making the sign of the -Cross; or which will neither say a vocal prayer nor go to Confession; -or which, when in this prayer of Quiet, even when at Holy Communion, -will strive to drive away any image, even of Our Lord Himself, that may -present itself to their imagination; or which tear down a Crucifix, as -a hindrance to union with God; or which look upon all the thoughts that -come to them in the quietude of prayer, as so many rays and effluences -from God Himself, exempting them henceforth from every law.[125] - -Yet it is important to bear well in mind, the special circumstances, -the admitted limits, and the probable signification of Rome’s -condemnations. - -(1) As to the circumstances of the time, it appears certain that it was -the ready circulation of the doctrines of the Spanish priest, Miguel de -Molinos in the _Guida Spirituale_, 1675, and the abuses of the kind we -have just now detailed, and that sprang from this circulation, which -formed the primary reason and motive for the otherwise excessively -severe treatment of a man and a book, which had both received the very -highest and the most deliberate ecclesiastical approbations. That these -two circumstances were the determining causes of at least the severity -of his condemnation is well brought out by the circumstance that, -during his two years’ trial (1685-1687), not only the short _Guida_ but -his whole obtainable correspondence (some twenty thousand letters) were -examined, and that it is at least as much on such occasional manuscript -material, and on Molinos’s own oral admissions,--in prison and -doubtless, in part at least, under torture,--that the condemnation was -based, containing, as it does, certain revoltingly immoral propositions -and confessions, admittedly absent from his published writings. - -But if at least some shadow of doubt rests upon the moral character -of Molinos, not a shadow of such suspicion or of doubt concerning his -perfectly Catholic intentions can, in justice, be allowed to rest -upon his chief follower and the most distinguished apologist for his -doctrine, the saintly Oratorian and Bishop, the much-tried Cardinal -Petrucci; any more than Fénelon’s moral and spiritual character, or -deeply Catholic spirit and intentions, can, (in spite of the painfully -fierce and unjust attack upon both by Bossuet in his formally classic -invective, _Relation sur le Quiétisme_), for one moment be called -in question.[126] Other admittedly deeply spiritual and entirely -well-intentioned Catholics, whose writings were also condemned during -this time when devotional expressions having an at all quietistic tinge -or drift were very severely judged, are Mère Marie de l’Incarnation -(Marie Guyard), a French Ursuline Religious, who died in Canada in -1672, and the process of whose Beatification has been introduced; the -saintly French layman, Jean de Bernières-Louvigny, much admired by -Fénelon, who died in 1659; the very interior, though at times somewhat -fantastic, Secular Priest, Henri Marie Boudon, who died in 1702; and -the very austere but highly experienced ascetical writer, the Jesuit -Père Joseph Surin, whom Bossuet had formally approved, and who died in -1668.[127] But Madame Guyon herself, that much-tried and vehemently -opposed woman, was held, by many an undoubtedly Catholic-minded, -experienced and close observer, to be (in spite of the largely -misleading and indeed incorrect character of many of her analyses and -expressions) a truly saintly, entirely filial Catholic.[128] - -(2) As to the limits of these condemnations, we must remember that only -two of them,--those of Molinos and of Fénelon,--claim to be directly -doctrinal at all; and that Fénelon was never really compromised in -the question of Quietism proper, but was condemned on questions of -Pure Love alone. Bossuet himself was far less sound as against the -central Quietist doctrine of the One Act, which, unless formally -revoked, lasts on throughout life, and hence need never be repeated; -Fénelon’s early criticism of the Molinos propositions remains one of -the clearest extant refutations of that error. Again in the matter of -the Passivity of advanced souls, Bossuet was distinctly less normal and -sober than Fénelon: for whilst Fénelon taught that in no state does -the soul lose all capacity, although the facility may greatly vary, -to produce distinct acts of the virtues or vocal prayers and other -partially external exercises, Bossuet taught that, in some cases, all -capacity of this kind is abolished.[129] “I take,” says Fénelon, “the -terms ‘Passive’ and ‘Passivity’ as they actually appear everywhere -in the language of the (sound) Mystics, as something opposed to the -terms ‘active’ and ‘activity’: ‘Passivity,’ taken in the sense of an -entire inaction of the will, would be a heresy.” And he then opposes -“Passivity,” not to “Action,” but to that “Activity,” which is a merely -natural, restless, and hurried excitation.[130] - -(3) And as to the abiding significance of the whole anti-quietist -decisions and measures, we shall do well to consider the following -large facts. From St. Paul and St. John to Clement of Alexandria and -Origen; from these to Dionysius the Areopagite; from the Areopagite to -St. Bernard of Clairvaux and then the Franciscan and Dominican Mystics; -from these, again, on to the great Renaissance and Counter-Reformation -saints and writers of this type,--the German Cardinal Nicolas of Coes -and the Italian St. Catherine of Genoa, the Spaniards St. Teresa and -St. John of the Cross, and the French Saint Francis de Sales and -Saint Jane Frances de Chantal, we get a particular type of religious -experience and doctrine, which but unfolds and concentrates, with an -unusual articulation, breadth, and depth, what is to be found, on -some sides of their spiritual character and teaching, among Saints -and religious souls of the more mixed type, such as St. Augustine, -St. Anselm, St. Thomas of Aquin, and St. Ignatius Loyola. And this -mixed type, bearing within it a considerable amount of that mystical -quiet and emotional-speculative element, is again but a deepening, a -purification and a realization of one of the profoundest affinities and -constituents of every human heart and will. - -Hence, even in the thickest of the quietist controversy, when that -mystical element must have seemed, to many, to be discredited once for -all, those best acquainted with the rich history of the Church, and -with the manifold requirements of the abiding religious consciousness, -could not and did not doubt that all that was good, deep, and true -in that element would continue to be upheld by, and represented in, -the Church.--And it is not difficult to point to the more or less -Mystical souls furnished by the Monks, the Friars; the Clerks-Regular, -specially the Jesuits; the Secular Clergy; and the Laity, down to -the present day. Such writers and Saints as Père de Caussade (_d._ -about 1770) on the one hand, and Père Jean N. Grou (_d._ 1803) and -the Curé d’Ars (_d._ 1859) on the other hand, carry on the two -streams of the predominantly mystical and of the mixed type,--streams -so clearly observable before 1687 and 1699. Quietism, the doctrine -of the One Act; Passivity in a literal sense, as the absence or -imperfection of the power and use of initiative on the soul’s part in -any and every state: these doctrines were finally condemned, and most -rightly and necessarily condemned; the Prayer of Quiet, and various -states and degrees of an ever-increasing predominance of Action over -Activity,--an Action which is all the more the soul’s very own, -because the more occasioned, directed, and informed by God’s action -and stimulation,--these, and the other chief lines of the ancient -experience and practice, remain as true, correct, and necessary as ever. - - -5. _Rome’s alleged change of front._ - -And yet it is undeniable that the Roman events between 1675 and 1688 do -seem, at first sight, to justify the strongly Protestant Dr. Heppe’s -contention that those twelve years,--not to speak of the later troubles -of Madame Guyon and of Fénelon--witnessed a complete _volte face_, a -formal self-stultification, of the Roman teaching and authority, on -these difficult but immediately important matters. - -(1) Let us put aside the many passages in Molinos’s _Guida_ which -were but (more or less) literal reproductions of the teachings -of such solemnly approved authorities as Saints Teresa, Peter of -Alcantara, John of the Cross, Francis de Sales and Jane Frances de -Chantal,--passages which, of course, remained uncondemned even in -Molinos’s pages, but which it would often be difficult to distinguish -from the parts of his book that were censured. Yet there still remain -such facts as the following. - -Juan Falconi’s _Alfabeto_ and _Lettera_ were at their Fifth Italian -edition, 1680, and all five editions had been approved by the Master -of the Apostolic Palace; but only in 1688 were these writings -forbidden. Yet the _Lettera_ contains, with unsurpassed directness and -clearness, the central doctrine of Quietism: an exhortation to the -production of one single lively Act of Faith, which will then continue -uninterruptedly through the whole earthly life into eternity, and -which, consequently, is not to be repeated.[131] - -Molinos’s _Guida_ and _Breve Trattato_ appeared in Rome, respectively -in 1675 and 1681, with the approbations of five theologians, four of -whom were Consultors of the Holy Office,--the Archbishop of Reggio; -the Minister-General of the Franciscans; the late General of the -Carmelites; Father Martin Esparza, the same Jesuit Theologian-Professor -of the Roman College who, some years before, had been one of those who -had examined and approved St. Catherine’s _Vita ed Opere_; and the -actual General of the Carmelites.[132] - -Even after these two writings of Molinos had been criticised by the -Jesuits Bell Huomo and Segneri and the Clerk Regular Regio, (Segneri -enjoying a deservedly immense reputation, and showing in this affair -much moderation and a strong sense of the legitimate claims of -Mysticism), the Inquisition examined these criticisms, and forbade, not -the incriminated writings of Molinos and Petrucci, but the critique of -Bell Huomo _donec corrigatur_, and those of Regio and of Segneri (in -his _Lettera_ of 1681) absolutely. Segneri’s subsequent _Concordia_ -almost cost him his life, so strong was the popular veneration of -Molinos. - -Molinos indeed was the guest of Pope Innocent XI himself, and the -friend and confidant, amongst countless other spiritually-minded souls, -of various Cardinals, especially of the deeply devout Petrucci, Bishop -of Jesi, who was raised to the Cardinalate eighteen months after the -beginning of Molinos’s trial. The imprisonment of Molinos began in May -1685, but the trial did not end till August 1687, when (after nineteen -“Principal Errors of the New Contemplation” had been censured by the -Holy Office in February 1687) sixty-eight propositions, out of the -two hundred and sixty-three which had been urged against him, were -solemnly condemned: of these the clearly and directly immoral ones -being admittedly not derived from any printed book, or indeed any ever -published letter of his Molinos.[133] - -(2) To estimate Rome’s attitude (as far as it concerns the ultimate -truth and completeness of these doctrines, taken in their most -characteristic and explicit forms) fairly, we shall have to put aside -all questions as to the motives that impelled, and the methods that -were employed, by either side against the other. Molinos may have been -even worse than the condemned propositions represent, and yet Petrucci -would remain a saintly soul; and we certainly are driven to ask with -Leibniz: “Si Molinos a caché du venin sous ce miel, est-il juste que -Petrucci et autres personnes de mérite en soient responsables?”[134] -But neither the wickedness of the one nor the sanctity of the other -would make the doctrines propounded by them, objectively, any less -solid or more spiritual than they are in themselves. The acutely -anti-Roman Anglican Bishop Burnet may not have invented or exaggerated -when he wrote from Rome, during those critical years, that one of the -chief motives which actuated the opponents of the Quietists was the -fact that, though the latter “were observed to become more strict in -their lives, more retired and serious in their mental devotions, yet … -they were not so assiduous at Mass, nor so earnest to procure Masses to -be said for their friends: nor … so frequently either at Confession or -in processions”: and so “the trade of those that live by these things -was sensibly sunk.”[135] And the cruel injustice of many details and -processes of the movement against the Quietists,--a movement which soon -had much of the character of a popular scare and panic, in reaction -against a previous, in part, heedless enthusiasm,--are beyond dispute -or justification. Yet mercenary and ruthless as part of the motives and -much of the action of the anti-quietists doubtlessly were, the question -as to the worth and wisdom of Quietism, (taken objectively, and not as -an excusable counter-excess but as a true synthesis of the spiritual -life), remains precisely where it was before. - -(3) Now I think that two peculiarities, most difficult to notice at -the time, seriously differentiate the Molinist movement from the great -current of fully Catholic Mysticism, even in those points and elements -where the two are materially alike or even identical; and yet that -these peculiarities are but the caricature (through further emphasis -and systematization) of certain elements present, in a more latent -and sporadic manner, in the formulae and philosophic assumptions -or explanations of the older Mysticism,--elements which had been -borrowed too largely from a, at bottom, profoundly anti-incarnational -philosophy, not to be of far less value and of much greater danger than -the profoundly true experiences, nobly spiritual maxims, and exquisite -psychological descriptions which that predominantly Neo-Platonist -framework handed on. - -The first peculiarity is that the older Mystics, especially those of -the type of St. Catherine of Genoa and St. John of the Cross, but -even also those of the more “mixed” type of Mysticism, such as St. -Teresa, had indeed quite freely used terms which are vividly true -as descriptions of the prima facie aspect and emotional impression -of certain states and experiences of the soul: “empty,” “fixed,” -“motionless,” “the reason and the will have ceased to act,” “doing -nothing,” “incapable of doing anything,” “moved by irresistible grace,” -“but one act,” “one single desire”: these and equivalent expressions -occur again and again. But these sayings do not here lead up to such a -deliberate and exclusive rule as is that given by Falconi, and repeated -by Molinos in his _Guida_, Nos. 103-106.[136] - -This doctrine of the One Act, in this its negative form,--for it -is not to be repeated,--and in its application to the whole waking -and sleeping life, is first an exclusive concentration upon, and -then a wholesale extension of, one out of the several trends of the -older teaching, a doctrine which, compared with that teaching in its -completeness, is thin and doctrinaire, and as untrue to the full -psychological explanation and working requirements of the soul as it -is readily abusable in practice and contrary to the Incarnational type -of religion. It is impossible not to feel that the manifold great -ocean-waters of life, that the diversely blowing winds of God’s Spirit -are here, somehow, expected to flow and breathe in a little shortcut, -single channel, through a tiny pipe; one more infallible recipe or -prescription is here offered to us, hardly more adequate than the many -similar “sure” roads to salvation, declared by this or that body of -devout religionists to attach to the practice or possession of this or -that particular prayer or particular religious object. - -And the second difference is that the older Catholic Mystics leave -less the impression that the external side of religion, its _body_, -is of little or no importance, and indeed very readily an obstacle to -its interior side, its _soul_. And this, again, for the simple reason -that their teaching is, in general, less systematic and pointed, more -incidental, and careless of much self-consistency. - -(4) Yet these two differences have largely sprung from the simple -pressing and further extension of precisely the least satisfactory, the -explanatory and systematic side,--the form as against the content,--of -the older Mystics. For once the more specifically Neo-Platonist -constituent, in those Mystics’ explanation and systematization, was -isolated from the elements of other provenance which there had kept it -in check, and now became, as it were, hypostasized and self-sufficient, -this constituent could not but reveal, more clearly than before, its -inadequacy as a form for the intensely organic and “incarnational” -spiritual realities and processes which it attempted to show forth. -That Neo-Platonist constituent, always present in those ancient -Mystics, had ever tended to conceive the soul’s unity, at any one -moment, as a something outside of all multiplicity whatsoever. Hence -this character of the simultaneous unity had only to be extended to -the successive unity,--and the literally One Act, as in the present so -throughout the future, became a necessary postulate. - -And that same constituent had, even in those great teachers of -profound maxims, exquisite religious psychology, and noblest living, -tended, (however efficaciously checked by all this their Christian -experience and by certain specifically Platonist and Aristotelian -elements of their philosophy), towards depreciating the necessity, -importance, indeed even the preponderant utility, of the External, -Contingent, Historical and Institutional, and of the interchange, the -inter-stimulation between these sides and expressions of religion and -its internal centre and spirit. - -Perhaps, amongst all the great ecclesiastically authorized Mystics of -that past, the then most recent of them all, St. John of the Cross, -comes, by his (theoretically continuous though in his practice by no -means exclusive) insistence upon the abstractive and universal, the -obscure and invisible, the self-despoiling and simplifying element and -movement, nearest to an exclusion of the other element and movement. -Indeed the Quietists’ generally strong insistence upon the necessity -of a Director and upon Frequent Communion gives their teaching, when -taken in its completeness, a prima facie greater Institutionalism than -is offered by the spiritual theory of the great Spaniard. Yet if, even -in him, one misses, in his theoretical system, a sufficiently organic -necessity for the outgoing movement, a movement begun by God Himself, -and which cannot but be of fundamental importance and influence for -believers in the Incarnation, there is as complete an absence of the -doctrinaire One-Act recipe for perfection as in the most Historical and -Institutional of Christian teachers. But more about this hereafter. - - -6. _Four needs recognised by Quietism._ - -Quietism, then, has undoubtedly isolated and further exaggerated -certain explanatory elements of the older Mysticism which, even there, -were largely a weakness and not a strength; has thus underrated and -starved the Particular, Visible, Historical, Institutional constituents -of Religion; and has, indeed, misunderstood the nature of true Unity -everywhere. Yet the very eagerness with which it was welcomed at -the time,--in France and Italy especially,--and this, not only as a -fashion by the _Quidnuncs_, but as so much spiritual food and life by -many a deeply religious soul; and the difficulty, and not infrequent -ruthlessness of its suppression, indicate plainly enough that, with -all its faults and dangers, it was divining and attempting to supply -certain profound and abiding needs of the soul. I take these needs to -be the following four. - -(1) Man has an ineradicable, and, when rightly assuaged, profoundly -fruitful thirst for Unity,--for Unification, Synthesis, Harmonization; -for a living System, an Organization both within and without himself, -in which each constituent gains its full expansion and significance -through being, and more and more becoming, just _that_ part and -function of a great, dynamic whole; a sense of the essential and -ultimate organic connection of all things, in so far as, in any degree -or form, they are fair and true and good. And this sense and inevitable -requirement alone explain the surprise and pain caused, at first, to -us all, by the actual condition of mutual aloofness and hostility, -characteristic of most of the constituents of the world within us, as -of the world around us, towards their fellow-constituents. A truly -atomistic world,--even an atomistic conception of the world,--of life, -as a collection of things one alongside of another, on and on, is -utterly repulsive to any deeply religious spirit whose self-knowledge -is at all equal to its aspirations.--No wonder, then, if the Quietists, -haunted by the false alternative of one such impenetrable atom-act or -of an indefinite number of them, chose the One Act, and not a multitude -of them. - -(2) Man has a deep-seated necessity to purify himself by detachment, -not only from things that are illicit but even from those that are -essential and towards which he is bound to practise a deep and warm -attachment. There is no shadow of theoretical or ultimate contradiction -here: to love one’s country deeply, yet not to be a _Chauvinist_; to -love one’s wife tenderly, yet not to be uxorious; to care profoundly -for one’s children, yet to train, rebuke, and ever brace them, when -necessary, up to suffering and even death itself: these things so -little exclude each the other, that each attachment can only rightly -grow in and through the corresponding detachment. The imperfection -in all these cases, and in all the analogous, specifically religious -ones, lies not in the objects to be loved, nor in these objects being -many and of various degrees and kinds of lovableness, nor in the right -(both effective and affective, appropriately varied) love of them: -but simply in our actual manner of loving them.--No wonder then that -Quietism, face to face with the false alternative of either Attachment -or Detachment, chose Detachment, (the salt and the leaven of life) and -not attachment (life’s meat and meal). - -(3) Man has a profound, though ever largely latent, capacity and need -for admiration, trust, faith; and does not by any means improve solely -by direct efforts at self-improvement, and by explicit examinations -of his efforts and failures; but, (a little from the first, and very -soon as much, and later on far more), he progresses by means of a -happy absorption in anything clean and fruitful that can and does -lift him out of and above his smaller self altogether.--And such an -absorption will necessarily be unaccompanied, at the time, by any -direct consciousness on the part of the mind as to this its absorption. -And, religiously, such quiet concentrations will, in so far as they are -at all analyzable after the event, consist in a quite inarticulate, -and yet profound and spiritually renovating, sense of God; and they -will have to be tested, not by their describable content, but by their -ethical and religious effects. “Psychology and religion,” says that -great psychological authority, Prof. William James, “both admit that -there are forces, seemingly outside of the conscious individual, that -bring redemption to his life.” “A man’s conscious wit and will, so far -as they strain after the ideal, are aiming at something only dimly and -inaccurately imagined, whilst the deeper forces of organic ripening -within him tend towards a rearrangement that is pretty surely definite, -and definitely different from what he consciously conceives and -determines. It may consequently be actually interfered with by efforts -of too direct and energetic a kind on our part.”[137]--No wonder -then that Quietism, finding this element of quiet incubation much -ignored and starved in the lives of most religious souls, flew to the -other extreme, of making this inarticulateness and wise indirectness -of striving into the one test and measure of the perfection of all -the constituents of the religious life, instead of insisting upon -various degrees and combination of full and direct consciousness and -articulation, and of much dimness and indirect alertness, as each -requiring the other, and as both required by the complete and normal -life of the soul. - -(4) And Man has a deep-seated sense of shame, in precise proportion -as he becomes spiritually awake, about appropriating to himself his -virtues and spiritual insight, even in so much as he perceives and -admits his possession of them. Not all his consciousness and conviction -of the reality of his own efforts and initiative, can or does prevent -a growing sense that this very giving of his is (in a true sense) -God’s gift,--that his very seeking of God ever implies that he had, in -some degree, already found God,--that God had already sought him out, -in order that he might seek and find God.--No wonder then that, once -more shrinking from a Unity constituted in a Multiplicity, Quietism -should, (with the apparently sole choice before it, of God Himself -operating literally all, or of man subtracting something from that -exclusive action and honour of God), have chosen God alone and entire, -rather than, as it were, a fragmentary, limited, baffled influence -and efficiency of the Almighty within His Own creature. Yet here -again the greater does not supplant, but informs, the lesser; and the -Incarnational action of God is, in this supreme question also, the -central truth and secret of Christianity. - - -7. _Multiplicity and unity, in different proportions, needful for all -spiritual life._ - -We find, then, that it is essential for even the most advanced souls, -that they should keep and increase the sense and the practice of a -right multiplicity, as ever a constituent and essential condition -of every concrete, living unity; of a right attachment, as ever the -necessary material and content for a fruitful and enriching detachment; -of a right consciousness and articulation of images, thoughts, -feelings, volitions, and external acts, as ever stimulations, restful -alternations, and food for a wise and strengthening prayer or states -of Quiet and inarticulation; and of a right personal initiative -and responsibility, as the most precious means and element for the -operations of God. - -We find, too, that it is equally important, for even the most imperfect -souls, to be helped towards some, (though but ever semi-conscious and -intermittent), sense of the unity which alone can give much worth -or meaning to their multiplicity; of the detachment which alone can -purify and spiritualize their attachments; of the self-oblivion, in -rapt and peaceful admiration, which alone can save even their right -self-watchings and self-improvements from still further centring them -in themselves; and of the true self-abandonment to pure grace and the -breathing of God’s Spirit, which alone can give a touch of winning -freedom and of joyful spaciousness to all the prudence and right fear -and conscious responsibility which, left alone, will hip, darken and -weigh down the religious soul. - -And thus we shall find that there is no degree of perfection for any -one set of souls which is not, in some form and amount, prefigured and -required by all other souls of good-will; and again, that there is -no one constituent, to which any one soul is specially drawn, which -does not require the supplementation and corrective of some other -constituents, more fully represented in other souls of possibly lower -sanctity. - -Thus each soul and grade requires all the others; and thus the measure -of a soul’s greatness is not its possessing things which cannot, in -any degree or way, be found in, or expected of, all human souls, in -proportion as they are fully and characteristically human, but, on the -contrary, its being full of a spirit and a force which, in different -degrees and forms, are the very salt and yeast, the very light and -life, of all men in every place and time. - -The following weighty declaration, long ascribed to St. Thomas Aquinas, -fully covers, I think, the doctrine and ideal aimed at throughout this -section: “Already in this life we ought continuously to enjoy God, as -a thing most fully our own, in all our works.… Great is the blindness -and exceeding the folly of many souls that are ever seeking God, -continuously sighing after God, and frequently desiring God: whilst, -all the time, they are themselves the tabernacles of the living God … -since their soul is the seat of God, in which He continuously reposes. -Now who but a fool deliberately seeks a tool which he possesses under -lock and key? or who can use and profit by an instrument which he is -seeking? or who can draw comfort from food for which he hungers, but -which he does not relish at leisure? Like unto all this is the life -of many a just soul, which ever seeks God and never tarries to enjoy -Him; and all the works of such an one are, on this account, less -perfect.”[138] - - -IV. PURE LOVE, OR DISINTERESTED RELIGION: ITS DISTINCTION FROM QUIETISM. - -The problem of Pure Love, of Disinterested Religion, can hardly, in -practice, be distinguished from that of Quiet and Passivity, if only -because Quietists, (those who have considered perfection to diminish -more and more the number of the soul’s acts, or at least to eliminate -more and more the need of distinctness or difference between them), -have, quite inevitably, ever given a special prominence to the question -as to what should be the character of those few acts, of that one -unbroken act. For once allow this their main question we should all -have to answer in the Quietist’s way,--viz. that this single act must, -for a perfect soul, to be the most perfect of the acts possible to -man, and hence must be an act of Pure Love.--Yet it is well to realize -clearly that, if Quietism necessitates an even excessive and unreal -doctrine of Pure Love, a moderate and solid Pure-Love teaching has -no kind of necessary connection with Quietism. For even though my -interior life be necessarily one continuous stream and tissue of acts, -countless in their number, variety, and degrees of inter-penetration, -it in nowise follows that acts of Pure Love are not the best, or are -impossible; nor that, in proportion as Pure Love informs the soul’s -multiform acts, such acts must lose in depth and delicacy of variety -and articulation. Indeed here, with regard to the very culmination -of the interior life, we shall again find and must again test the two -conceptions: the finally abstractive and materially simplifying one, -which must ever have any one real thing outside of another; and the -incarnational and synthetic one, which finds spiritual realities and -forces working the one inside and through the other. And the latter -view will appear the true one. - - -1. _New Testament teaching as to Pure Love._ - -Now we must first try and get some clear ideas as to how this difficult -matter stands in the New Testament,--in the Synoptic tradition and in -the Pauline-Joannine teaching respectively. Here again it is the former -which, (though on its surface it appears as the more ordinary and the -more locally coloured teaching), is the richer, in its grandly elastic -and manifold simplicity; and it is the latter which has most profoundly -penetrated and articulated the ultimate meaning and genius of a part -of Our Lord’s doctrine, yet at the cost of a certain narrowing of the -variety and breadth of that outlook. In both cases I shall move, from -the easier and more popular teaching, to the deepest and most original -enunciations and explanations.[139] - -(1) The Synoptic teaching starts throughout from the ordinary -post-exilic Jewish feeling and teaching, which indeed recognizes the -ceremonial obligations and the more tangible amongst the ethical -demands as standing under the categorical imperative of the Legal -“Thou Shalt,” but places the large territory of the finer moral -precepts outside of the Law. So with the “Zedakah,” the “Justice” of -almsdeeds, and with the “Gemiluth Chasadim,” the “works of mercy,” -such as visiting the sick, burying the dead, and rejoicing with the -joyful and sorrowing with the sorrowful. Thus Rabbi Simon the Just -tells us: “The world rests on three things: on the Law (_Thorah_), -on Worship (_Abodah_), and on Works of Mercy (_Gemiluth Chasadim_)”; -and Rabbi Eleazar declared the “Gemiluth Chasadim” to be above the -“Zedakah.”[140] And it is especially in view of these works of -supererogation that rewards, and indeed a strict scale of rewards, -are conceived. Thus already in the Book of Tobit, (written somewhere -between 175 and 25 B.C.), we have Tobit instructing his son Tobias that -“Prayer is good with Fasting and Alms, more than to buy up treasures -of gold. For Alms delivereth from death … they that practise Mercy and -Justice shall live long.”[141] And one of the sayings of the Jewish -Fathers declares: “So much trouble, so much reward.”[142] - -Now this whole scheme and its spirit seems, at first to be taken over -quite unchanged by Our Lord. The very Beatitudes end with: “Rejoice -… because your reward is great in heaven.” And, in the following -Sermon, his hearers are bidden to beware of doing their “Zedakah,”--the -“Justice” of Prayer, Fasting, Almsdeeds in order to be seen by men; -since, in that case, “ye shall not have reward from your Father Who is -in heaven.” And this is driven home in detail: these three kinds of -Justice are to be done “in secret,” and “thy Father will repay thee.” -Even Prayer itself thus appears as a meritorious good work, one of the -means to “treasure up treasures in heaven.” Similarly, the rich man -is bid “Go sell all that thou hast and give it to the poor; and thou -shalt have a treasure in heaven.” Even “he that shall give you a cup of -cold water in My name, shall not lose his reward.” Indeed we have the -general principle, “the labourer is worthy of his hire.”[143] - -And yet we can follow the delicate indications of the presence, and the -transitions to the expression, of the deeper apprehension and truth. -For, on the part of God, the reward appears, in the first instance, as -in intrinsic relation to the deed. The reward is the deed’s congenital -equivalent: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy”; -“if ye forgive men their trespasses, your Father … will likewise -forgive you your trespasses”; and “everyone who shall confess Me before -men, him will I also confess before My Father Who is in heaven.”[144] -Or the reward appears as a just inversion of the ordinary results of -the action thus rewarded: “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit -the land”; take the highest seat at a banquet, and you will be forced -down to the lowest, take the lowest, and you will be moved up to the -highest; and, generally, “he who findeth his soul, shall lose it; -and that loseth his soul, for My sake, shall find it.”[145] Or the -reward appears as an effect organically connected with the deed, as its -cause or condition: “Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall see -God.”[146] And then the reward comes to vary, although the deed remains -quantitatively identical, solely because of that deed’s qualitative -difference,--_i.e._ according to the variation in its motive: “He that -receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive the reward -of a prophet; and he who receiveth a just man in the name of a just -man, shall receive the reward of a just man.”[147] And then the reward -moves up and up and becomes a grace, through being so far in excess -of the work done: “Every one who hath forsaken house … or father or -children or fields for My name, shall receive manifold,” indeed “an -hundredfold”--“a full … and overflowing measure shall they pour into -your lap”; and “whosoever shall humble himself, shall be exalted,”--not -simply back to his original level, but into the Kingdom of Heaven. So, -too, “Thou wast faithful over a few things, I shall place thee over -many things”; indeed this faithful servant’s master “shall place him -over all his possessions;” or rather, “blessed are those servants whom -the Lord, when He cometh, shall find watching. Amen, I say unto you, -that he shall approach … and shall minister unto them.”[148] - -This immense disproportion between the work and its reward, and the -consequent grace-character of the latter, is driven home with a -purposely paradoxical, provocative pointedness, in the two Parables of -the Wedding Garment and of the Equal Payment of the Unequal Labourers, -both of which are in St. Matthew alone. The former concerns the soul’s -call to the kingdom, and that soul’s response. The King here, after -having formally invited a certain select number of previously warned -relatives and nobles, who all, as such, had a _claim_ upon him, Matt, -xxii, 3, sends out invitations with absolute indiscrimination,--to men -with no claims or with less than none; to “bad” as well as “good.” And -it is the King, again, who gratuitously supplies them each with the -appropriate white wedding-feast garment. He has thus a double right to -expect all his guests to be thus clothed, and to punish instantly, -not the mere negligence, but the active rejection implied on the part -of the man clothed in his ordinary clothing (vv. 11, 12). Both call -and investiture have been here throughout pure graces, which rendered -possible, and which invited but did not force, an acceptance.[149] - -The second Parable describes the “Householder” who hired labourers -for his vineyard at the first, third, sixth, ninth, and even eleventh -hour,--each and all of them for a penny a day; who actually pays out -to them, at the end of the day, this one identical pay; and who, -to the labourer of the first shift who complains, “These last have -wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us who have -borne the burden and heat of the day,” declares, “Friend, I do thee -no wrong: didst thou not agree with me for a penny? Take thine own -and go thy way: I will give to this last even as unto thee. Is it not -lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil (art -thou envious) because I am good” (because I choose to be bountiful)? -Matt. xx, 1-15. Here again the overflowing generosity of God’s grace -is brought home to us, as operating according to other standards -than those of ordinary daily life: nor is this operation unjust, for -the Householder paid their due to the first set of workers, whilst -rewarding, far above their worth, those poor labourers of the last -hour. But, as Jülicher well points out, “we should not pedantically -insist upon finding here a doctrine of the strict equality of souls in -the Beyond--a doctrine contradicted by other declarations of Jesus. -Only the _claim_ of single groups of souls to preferential treatment is -combated here …: a certain fundamental religious disposition is to be -awakened.” And, as Bugge rightly notes, “the great supreme conception -which lies at the bottom of the parable has, parablewise, remained here -unnamed: Paul has found the expressive term for it,--‘Grace.’”[150] - -And we get corresponding, increasingly spiritual interpretations with -regard to man’s action and man’s merit. First, all ostentation in the -doing of the deed cancels all reward in the Beyond; so, in the case -of each of the three branches of “Justice.”[151] And then the worker -is to be satisfied, day by day, with that day’s pay and sustenance: -“Give us this day our daily bread,” every soul is to pray; the divine -Householder will say, “Didst thou not agree with me for a penny a day? -Take thine own and go thy way.” And even “when ye have done all that -has been commanded you, say ‘we are unprofitable servants, we have but -done what we were bound to do.’” They are invited to look away from -self, to “seek first the Kingdom and His Justice,” and then “all these -things,” their very necessaries for earthly life, “shall be added unto -you.” Indeed it is the boundlessly generous self-communicativeness of -God Himself which is to be His disciples’ deliberate ideal, “be ye -perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect”; and the production of -this likeness within themselves is to be the ultimate end and crown -of their most heroic, most costly acts: “love your enemies, and pray -for those that persecute you: that you may become the sons of your -Father who is in Heaven, who maketh His sun to rise upon the evil and -the good, and who raineth upon the just and the unjust.” And the more -there is of such self-oblivious love, the more will even the gravest -sins be entirely blotted out, and the more rapid will be the full -sanctification of the soul, as Our Lord solemnly declares concerning -the sinful woman in St. Luke, “her many sins are forgiven her, because -she hath loved much.”[152] - -In all this matter it is St. Luke’s Gospel which is specially -interesting as showing, so to speak, side by side, an increased -Rabbinical-like preciseness of balance between work and reward, and -yet the adoption, doubtlessly under Pauline influence, of St. Paul’s -central term in lieu of the old Jewish terminology. For, in one of its -curious so-called “Ebjonite” passages, this Gospel works up the Parable -of the Talents, with its only approximate relation between the deeds -and their rewards (Matt. xxv, 14-30), into the Parable of the Pounds -(Luke xix, 12-27), with its mathematically symmetrical interdependence -between the quantities of the merit and those of this merit’s reward: -the man who makes ten pounds is placed over ten cities, and he who -makes five, over five. And, on the other hand, in a Lukan equivalent -for part of the Sermon on the Mount, St. Matthew’s “reward” is replaced -by “grace”: “If ye love them that love you, what grace (χάρις) have -you? and if ye do good to those that do you good, what grace have -you?”[153] - -(2) St. Paul indeed it is who, in the specially characteristic portions -of his teaching, unfolds, by means of a partly original terminology, -the deepest motives and implications of Our Lord’s own divinely -deep sayings and doings, and never wearies of insisting upon the -Grace-character of the soul’s call and salvation,--the Free Mercy, the -Pure Love which God shows to us, and the sheer dependence and complete -self-donation, the pure love which we owe to Him, and which, at the -soul’s best, it can and does give Him. - -It is true that in the contrasting, the traditional layer of his -teaching, we find the old Jewish terminology still intact: “God will -render unto every man according to his works”; “it behoves us to -appear before the Judgment-seat of Christ, that everyone … may receive -according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad.”[154] -Indeed it is precisely in St. Paul’s pages that we find the two most -difficult and, at first sight, least spiritual sayings concerning this -matter to be discovered in the whole New Testament: “If in this life -only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most miserable.” -And: “If the dead do not rise … let us eat and drink, for to-morrow -we die.”[155] But these two passages must doubtless be taken partly -as arguments adapted to the dispositions of his hearers,--the “Let us -eat and drink” conclusion is given in the words of a current Heathen -Greek proverb,--and, still more, as expressions not so much of a -formal doctrine as of a mood, of one out of the many intense, mutually -supplementary and corrective moods of that rich nature. - -According to his own deepest, most deliberate, and most systematic -teaching, it is the life of Christ, the living Christ, energizing even -now within the faithful soul, that constitutes both the primary source -and the ultimate motive of Christian sanctity. “I am crucified with -Christ; nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” And -through this divine-human life within us “we faint not; but though our -outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.” Indeed -the Lord Himself said to him: “My grace is sufficient for thee; for -power is made perfect in infirmity”; and hence he, Paul, could declare: -“Gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the power of -Christ may dwell in me.” And thus, with Christ living within him, he -can exclaim: “If God be for us, who shall be against us?… Who shall -separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or peril, or -the sword?… In all these things we are more than conquerors, through -him that loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, -nor things present nor things to come … shall be able to separate us -from the love of God.” “Whether we live, or whether we die, we are -the Lord’s.”[156] We thus get here a reinsistence upon, and a further -deepening of, perhaps the profoundest utterance of the whole Old -Testament: “What have I in Heaven besides Thee? and besides Thee I seek -nothing upon earth. Even though my flesh and my heart faint, Thou art -my rock and my portion for ever.”[157] - -And then that deathless hymn to Pure Love, the thirteenth chapter of -the First Epistle to the Corinthians, not only culminates with the -proclamation that, of all man can hope and wish and will and do, of -all his doings and his graces, “there remain these three, Faith, Hope, -Love, (Charity): but the greatest of these is Love (Charity).” But -the Love that has this primacy is Pure Love, for “it seeketh not its -own.” And though of this Love alone it is said that “it never passeth -away,” ever persists in the Beyond: yet even here already it can and -does get exercised,--and this, not only without any suppression of -parallel acts of the other virtues, but with these other virtues and -their specific motives now taken over and deepened, each in its special -characteristic, by the supreme virtue and motive of Pure Love: “Love -believeth all things, hopeth all things, beareth all things.”[158] Thus -Faith, Hope, Patience, and all the other virtues, they all remain, -but it is Love that is now the ultimate motive of all their specific -motives. These, his culminating teachings, indicate clearly enough that -virtue’s rewards are regarded by him, ultimately and substantially, as -“the wages of going on and not to die”; or rather that they are, in -their essence, manifestations of that Eternal Life which is already -energizing, within souls that earnestly seek God, even here and now. -This Life, then, however great may be its further expansion and the -soul’s consciousness of possessing it, already holds within itself -sufficient, indeed abundant motives, (in the fulfilment of its own -deepest nature and of its now awakened requirements of harmony, -strength, and peace through self-donation), for giving itself ever more -and more to God. - -(3) And with regard to the Joannine teaching, it will be enough for -us to refer back to the texts discussed in the preceding chapter, and -to note how large and specially characteristic is here the current -which insists upon the reward being already, at least inchoatively, -enclosed in the deed itself, and upon this deed being the result and -expression of Eternal Life operating within the faithful soul, even -already, Here and Now. Only the declaration that “perfect love casteth -out fear,” that it does not tolerate fear alongside of itself, 1 John -iv, 18, appears to be contrary to the Pauline doctrine that Perfect -Love, “Love” itself “beareth all things, believeth, hopeth, endureth -all things,” 1 Cor. xiii, 7. Love then can animate other virtues: why -not then a holy fear? But this Joannine saying seems in fact modelled -upon St. Paul’s quotation and use of a passage from the Septuagint: -“Cast out the bondwoman (the slave-servant) and her son, for the son -of the bondwoman shall not be heir together with the son of the free,” -Gal. iv, 30; and hence this saying will not exclude “children of the -free-woman,”--a holy fear as well as faith, hope, patience,--but -only “children of the slave-woman,” superstition, presumption, -weakmindedness, and slavish fear. - - -2. _The “Pure Love” controversy._ - -In turning now to the controversy as to, Pure Love (1694-1699) and its -assured results, we shall have again to distinguish carefully between -the lives and intentions of the writers who were censured, and the -doctrines, analytic or systematic, taught or implied by them, which -were condemned. This distinction is easier in this case than in that of -Quietism, for the chief writer concerned here is Fénelon, as to whose -pure and spiritual character and deeply Catholic intentions there never -has been any serious doubt. - -But in this instance we have to make a further distinction--viz. -between the objective drift of at least part of his _Explication des -Maximes des Saints sur la Vie Interieure_, published in 1697, and -especially the twenty-three propositions extracted from it which -were condemned by Pope Innocent XII in 1699; and the teaching which -he increasingly clarified and improved in his numerous apologetic -writings against Bossuet and other opponents in this memorable -controversy--especially in his Latin writings, intended for -transmission to the Pope, and written as late as 1710 and 1712.[159] -It is certain that Bishops and theologians who opposed his _Maximes_ -were found warmly endorsing such pieces as his wonderfully clear and -sober _Première Réponse aux Difficultés de M. l’Evêque de Chartres_. -It is these pieces, comprising also his remarkably rich _Instruction -Pastorale_, his admirably penetrating _Lettre sur l’Oraison Passive_ -and _Lettre sur la Charité_, and his extraordinarily compact and -balanced Second Epistle to Pope Clement XI, 1712 (where all the -censured ambiguities and expressions are carefully avoided), and which -alone among Fénelon’s writings shall be accepted in what follows.[160] -Indeed even the earlier of these writings fail in but one thing--in -justifying the actual text of the condemned book, as distinguished -from the intentions of its writer. Bishop Hedley sums up the real -position with the treble authority of a spiritually trained Monk, -of a practised theological writer, and of a Catholic Bishop of long -experience: “The doctrine intended by Fénelon, in his _Maximes des -Saints_, and as explained by him during his controversy with Bossuet, -has never been censured, although the opposite party laboured hard for -its condemnation. Fifteen years after the condemnation of his book, we -find him re-stating to Pope Clement XI (who, as Cardinal, had drawn up -the Brief of his condemnations), in careful scholastic language the -doctrine intended by himself, but which he himself had misstated in his -popular treatise. As there were errors, the other side, whatever the -crudity or novelty of some of its contentions, whatever its motives or -methods--and some of them were far from creditable--was sure in the end -to succeed. And it is well that it should have succeeded as far as it -did succeed.”[161] - -In any case, we shall have to beware of considering Bossuet’s -contentions as to the specific character of Charity, Love, and as to -the possibility, for man here below, of single acts of pure love, to -be representative of the ordinary Catholic teaching either before or -since the condemnation. On both these fundamental points Fénelon’s -positions are demonstrably, and indeed have been generally admitted to -be, a mere restatement of that teaching, as is shown, for instance, in -the Jesuit Father Deharbe’s solid and sober, thoroughly traditional and -highly authorized essay: _Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes … dargestellt -nach der Lehre des h. Thomas von Aquin_, Regensburg, 1856. It is -this most useful treatise and the admirable _Analyse Raisonnée de la -Controverse du Quiétisme_ of the Abbé Gosselin,[162] (which has already -much helped me in the preceding section), that have been my chief aids -in my careful study, back through Bossuet and Fénelon, to St. Thomas -and his chief commentators, Sylvius, who died in 1649, and Cardinal -Cajetan, who died in 1534, and to the other chief authorities beyond -them.--I group the main points, which alone need concern us here, under -three heads: the specific Nature of Pure Love; single Acts of Pure -Love; a State of Pure Love. - -(1) Now as to the specific Nature of Charity, or Pure, Perfect Love, -St. Thomas tells us: “One Kind of Love is perfect, the other kind is -imperfect. Perfect Love is that wherewith a man is loved for his own -sake: as, for instance, when some one wishes well to another person, -for that other person’s sake, in the manner in which a man loves his -friend. Imperfect love is the love wherewith a man loves something, -not for its own sake, but in order that this good thing may accrue to -himself,--in the manner in which a man loves a thing that he covets. -Now the former kind of love pertains to Charity, which clings to God -for His own sake, whereas it is Hope that pertains to the second -kind of love, since he who hopes aims at obtaining something for -himself.”[163] And Cardinal Cajetan explains that this wishing well to -God, “this good that we can will God to have, is double. The good that -is in Him, that (strictly speaking) is God Himself,--we can, by Love, -will Him to have it, when we find our delight in God being what He is. -And the good that is but referred to God,--His honour and Kingdom and -the Obedience we owe him,--this we can will, not only by finding our -pleasure in it, but by labouring at its maintenance and increase with -all our might.”[164] - -And, says St. Thomas, such Perfect Love alone is Love in its strict -sense and “the most excellent of all the virtues”: for “ever that which -exists for its own sake is greater than that which exists in view of -something else. Now Faith and Hope attain indeed to God, yet as the -source from which there accrue to us the knowledge of the Truth and -the acquisition of the Good; whilst Love attains to God Himself, with -a view to abide in Him, and not that some advantage may accrue to us -from Him.” And perhaps still more clearly: “ When a man loves something -so as to covet it, he apprehends it as something pertaining to his -own well-being. The lover here stands towards the object beloved, as -towards something which is his property.”[165] And note how, although -he teaches that whereas “the beatitude of man, as regards its cause -and its object, is something increate,” _i.e._ God Himself, “the -essence of the beatitude itself is something created,” for “men are -rendered blessed by participation, and this participation in beatitude -is something created”: yet he is careful to explain some of his more -incidental passages, in which he speaks of this essence of beatitude -as itself man’s end, by the _ex professo_ declaration: “God” alone “is -man’s ultimate end, and beatitude is only as it were an end before the -very end, an end in immediate proximity to the ultimate end.”[166] - -(2) And next, as to the possibility, actual occurrence and -desirableness of single Acts of such Pure Love, even here below: -all this is assumed as a matter of course throughout St. Thomas’s -_ex professo_ teaching on the matter. For throughout the passages -concerning the Nature of Pure Love he is not exclusively, indeed not -even primarily, busy with man’s acts in the future life, but with the -respective characteristics of man’s various acts as executed and as -analyzable, more or less perfectly, already here below. And nowhere -does he warn us against concluding, from his reiterated insistence upon -the essential characteristics of Pure Love, that such love cannot, as -a matter of fact, be practised, at least in single acts, here below at -all. Hence it is clear that, according to him, the soul as it advances -in perfection will--alongside of acts of supernatural Faith, Hope, -Fear, etc. (and the production of such acts will never cease), produce -more and more acts of Pure Love: not necessarily more, as compared -with the other kinds of contemporary acts, but certainly more as -compared with its former acts of the same character. - -But there is a further, profoundly and delicately experienced -doctrine. Not only can Pure Love be exercised in single and simple -acts, alongside of single and simple acts of other kinds of virtues, -supernatural or otherwise: but Pure Love can itself come to command -or to inform acts which in themselves bear, and will now bear in -increased degree, the characteristics of the other kinds of acts. St. -Thomas tells us, with admirable clearness: “An act can be derived from -Charity in one of two ways. In the first way, the act is elicited -by Charity itself, and such a virtuous act requires no other virtue -beside Charity,--as in the case of loving the Good, rejoicing in it, -and mourning over its opposite. In the second way, an act proceeds -from Charity in the sense of being commanded by it: and in this -manner,--since Charity” has the full range of and “commands all the -virtues, as ordering them (each and all) to their (ultimate) end,--an -act can proceed from Charity whilst nevertheless belonging to any other -special virtue.” And he assures us that: “The merit of eternal life,” -“the fountain-head of meriting,” “pertains primarily to, consists in -Charity, and pertains to and consists in other kinds of supernatural -acts in only a secondary manner,--that is, only in so far as these acts -are commanded or informed by Charity” or Pure Love.[167] - -Let us take some instances of such two-fold manifestations of identical -motives and virtues, according as these motives and virtues operate -in simple co-ordination, or within a compound and organic system. In -the scholar’s life, Greek and Latin and Hebrew may be acquired, each -simply for its own sake and each alongside of the other; or they can be -acquired, from the immediate motive indeed of knowing each in its own -specific nature as thoroughly as possible, yet with the ultimate, ever -more and more conscious and all-penetrating, motive of thus acquiring -means and materials for the science of language, or for the study of -philosophy, or for research into early phases of the Jewish-Christian -religion. In the family life, a man, woman, or child can live for -himself or herself, and then for his or her other immediate relatives, -each taken as separate alongside of the other, or he or she may get -more and more dominated by the conception and claims of the family as -an organic whole, and may end by working largely, even with respect -to himself, as but for so many constituents of that larger organism -in which alone each part can attain its fullest significance. And -especially a young mother can live for her own health and joys, and -then, alongside of these, for those of her child, or she can get to the -point of sustaining her own physical health and her mental hopes and -will to live as so many means and conditions for feeding and fostering -the claimful body and soul of her child. - -So again, in the creatively artistic life, we can have a Dante writing -prose and poetry and painting a picture, and a Rafael painting -pictures and writing sonnets; or we can have Wagner bringing all his -activities of scholar, poet, painter, musician, stage-manager,--each -retaining, and indeed indefinitely increasing, its specific character -and capabilities,--to contribute, by endless mutual stimulation and -interaction, to something other and greater than any one of them -individually or even than the simple addition of them all,--to a great -Music-Drama and multiform yet intensely unified image of life itself. -And an organist can draw out, as he plays, the _Vox Humana_ stop, and -then another and another limitedly efficacious organ-stop, whilst each -new-comer takes the place of its predecessor or a place beside it; or -he can draw out the _Grand Jeu_ stop, which sets all the other stops -to work in endless interaction, with itself permeating and organizing -the whole. We thus, in these and countless other cases, and in every -variety of degree within each case, get two kinds of variety, what we -may call the simple and the compound diversification. And everywhere -we can find that the richest variety not only can co-exist with, but -that it requires and is required by, indeed that it is a necessary -constituent and occasion of, the deepest and most delicate unity.[168] - -(3) And finally, as to a State of Pure Love. Only here do we reach the -class of questions to which the condemnations of Fénelon really apply. - -We shall do well to begin by bearing in mind the very ancient, -practically unbroken, very orthodox Christian discrimination of -faithful souls,--sometimes into the two classes of Mercenaries (or -Slaves) and Friends or Children, the latter of whom the great Clement -of Alexandria, who died about A.D. 215, called “Gnostics,” “Gnosis” -being his term for perfection (this scheme is the one to which -Catherine’s life and teaching conform); or into the three classes -of Servants (Slaves); Mercenaries; and Friends (or Children), as is -already worked out with full explicitness by Saints Basil, Gregory -of Nazianzum, and Gregory of Nyssa, who died in the years 379, 389, -and 395 (?) respectively. Now Clement places the Mercenary on the -left of the Sanctuary, but the “Gnostic” on the right; and, whilst -declaring that the former “are those who, by means of renouncing things -perishable, hope to receive the goods of incorruption in exchange,” -he demands of the “Gnostic” that “he approach the saving word neither -from the fear of punishment, nor from the motive of reward, but simply -because He is good.”[169] And St. Basil, echoed in this by his two -contemporaries, teaches that, “We obey God and avoid vices, from the -fear of punishment, and in that case we take on the resemblance of -Slaves. Or we keep the precepts, because of the utility that we derive -from the recompense, thus resembling Mercenaries. Or finally, from -love of Him who has given us the law, we obey with joy at having been -judged worthy of serving so great and good a God, and thus we imitate -the affection of Children towards their parents.”[170] And, in the case -of all these Fathers, it is clear that, not only single acts, but whole -states of soul and life are meant. - -But the increased fineness in the analysis of interior experiences -and dispositions has since then required, and the Church formulations -have most wisely demanded, that these three classes be not so sharply -distinguished as to make any one soul seem exclusively and unchangeably -to pertain to any one of them; and, still more, that these three -divisions be taken to represent, even where and whilst they are most -completely realized, only the predominant character of the majority of -the acts constituting the respective state of soul. For it is clear -that not only is there, and can there be, no such thing, on earth at -least, as a state composed of one unrepeated act; but there is no such -thing as a condition of soul made up solely of acts of “simple” Pure -Love, or even of supernatural acts of all sorts commanded throughout -by Charity, or indeed solely of supernatural acts, both simple and -commanded. The “One-act” state is a chimera; the state of “simple” -acts of Pure Love alone would, if possible, involve the neglect of -numberless other virtues and duties; and the last two states indeed -highly desirable, but it would be fanaticism to think we could -completely attain to them here below. - -Yet there is nothing in any Church-censure to prevent, and there is -much in the teaching and life of countless saints to invite, our -holding the possibility, hence the working ideal and standard, for even -here below, of a state in which two kinds of acts, which are still -good in their degree, would be in a considerable minority: acts of -merely natural, unspiritualized hope, fear, desire, etc.; and acts of -supernatural hope, fear, desire, etc., in so far as not commanded by -Charity. For even in this state not fully deliberate venial sins would -occasionally be committed, far more would a certain number of acts -of an unspiritualized, unsupernatural kind occur. And the necessary -variety among the supernatural acts would in nowise be impaired,--it -would indeed be greatly stimulated, by Pure Love being now, for the -most part, the ultimate motive of their exercise. - -Sylvius, in his highly authoritative commentary on St. Thomas, puts the -matter admirably: “We may not love God in view of reward in suchwise -as to make eternal life the true and ultimate end of our love, or to -love God because of it, so that without the reward we would not love -Him … We must love God with reference to the eternal reward in suchwise -that we put forth indeed both love and good works in view of such -beatitude,--in so far as the latter is the end proposed to these works -by God Himself; yet that we subordinate this our beatitude to the love -of God as the true and ultimate end,” so that “if we had no beatitude -to expect at all, we should nevertheless still love Him and execute -good works for His own sake alone. In this manner we shall first love -God above all things and for His own sake; and we shall next keep the -eternal reward before us, for the sake of God and of His honour.”[171] -A man in these dispositions would still hope, and desire, and fear, -and regret, and strive for, and aspire to conditions, things, persons -both of earth and of the beyond, both for himself and for others, -both for time and for eternity: but all this, for the most part, from -the ultimate motive, penetrating, deepening, unifying all the other -motives,--of the love of Love, Christ, Spirit, God. - -Any hesitation to accept the reality or possibility of such a state -cannot, then, be based upon such acceptance involving any kind of -Quietism, but simply on the admittedly great elevation of such a -condition. Yet this latter objection seems to be sufficiently met if -we continuously insist that even such a state neither exempts souls -from the commission of (more or less deliberate) venial sin; nor is -ever entirely equable; nor is incapable of being completely lost; nor, -as we have just contended, is ever without more or less numerous acts -of an unsupernaturalized kind, and still less without acts of the -supernatural virtues other than Love and unprompted by Love. - -And all fear of fanaticism will be finally removed by a further most -necessary and grandly enlarging insistence upon the Mercenaries and -even the Servants having passing moments, and producing varyingly -numerous single acts of, Pure Love and of the other supernatural -virtues prompted by Pure Love. All souls in a state of Grace throughout -God’s wide wide world,--every constituent, however slight and recent, -of the great soul of the Church throughout every sex, age, race, clime, -and external organization, would thus have some touches, some at least -incidental beginnings of Pure Love, and of the other supernatural -virtues prompted by Pure Love. All souls would thus, in proportion to -their degree of grace and of fidelity, have some of those touches; and -the progress of all would consist in the degree to which that variety -of acts would become informed and commanded by the supreme motive of -all motives, Pure and Perfect Love.[172] - -And with such an Ideal, required by fundamental Catholic positions, -ever increasingly actuating the soul and binding it to all souls -beneath, around, above it, what there is of truth in the savage -attacks of Spinoza and of Kant and of such recent writers as A. -E. Taylor,[173] upon the supposed hypocritical self-seeking in the -practice and temper of average Christians, would lose all its force. - - -3. _Cognate Problems._ - -Three much-discussed cognate matters require some elucidation here. -They answer to the questions: Does reference to the self, as for -instance in acts of gratitude and thanksgiving, prevent an act from -being one of Pure Love? Is the pleasurableness, normally ever attached -and subsequent to all virtuous acts, to be regarded as part of the -reward from which Pure Love abstracts? And finally are, I will not say -any technically ecstatic or other in part psycho-physical peculiarities -and manifestations, but even active Contemplation or the simple Prayer -of Quiet, necessary conditions or expressions of a state of Pure -Love,--understood in the sense explained above? - -(1) As to reference to the self, it is highly important to distinguish -between acts of Pure Love, and attempts, by means of the maximum -possible degree of abstraction, to apprehend the absolute character -and being of God. For these two things have no necessary connection, -and yet they have been frequently confounded. St. Teresa’s noble -confession of past error, and consequent doubly valuable, amended -teaching is perhaps the most classical pronouncement extant upon this -profoundly important point.[174] The contingent, spacial and temporal, -manifestations and communications of God, above all as we have them in -the life of Our Lord and in those who have come nearest to Him, but -also, in their several degrees and forms, in the lives of each one of -us: all these, in their sacred, awakening and healing, particularity -and closeness of contact, can and should be occasions and materials for -the most perfect, for the purest Love. - -Indeed it is well never to forget that nothing, and least of all God, -the deepest of all the realities, is known to us at all, except in and -by means of its relation to our own self or to our fellow-creatures. -Hence if Love were Pure only in proportion as it could be based upon -our apprehension of God as independent of all relation to ourselves, -Pure Love would be simply impossible for us.--But, in truth, such a -conception would, in addition, be false in itself: it would imply that -the whole great Incarnation-fact and -doctrine,--the whole of that -great root of all religion, the certainty that it is because God has -first loved us that we can love Him, that He is a self-revealing God, -and One whom we can know and reach because “in Him we live and move -and have our being”--was taking us, not towards, but away from, our -true goal. There are, surely, few sadder and, at bottom, more deeply -uncreaturely, unchristian attitudes, than that which would seek or -measure perfection in and by the greatest possible abstraction from all -those touching contingencies which God Himself has vouchsafed to our -nature,--a nature formed by Himself to require such plentiful contact -with the historical and visible.--And if God’s pure love for us can -and does manifest itself in such contingent acts, then our love can -and should become and manifest itself purer and purer by means, not -only of the prayer of formless abstraction and expectation, but also -by the contemplation of these contingencies and by the production of -analogously contingent acts. And if so, then certainly gratitude, in so -far as it truly deserves the name, can and does belong to Pure Love, -for the very characteristic of such gratitude consists in a desire to -give and not to receive.[175] - -Not, then, the degree of disoccupation with the Contingent, even -of the contingent of our own life, but the degree of freedom from -self-seeking, and of the harmonization and subordination of all these -contingencies in and under the supreme motive of the Pure Love and -service of God in man and of man in God, is the standard and test of -Christian perfection. - -(2) As to the pleasurableness which, in normal psychic conditions, more -or less immediately accompanies or follows the virtuous acts of the -soul, the realizations of its own deeper and deepest ideals, we should -note that, in its earthly degree and form, it is not included in what -theologians mean by the “rewards” of virtuous action. And in this they -are thoroughly self-consistent, for they adhere, I think with practical -unanimity, to Catherine’s doctrine that these immediate consequences -of virtuous acts are not to be considered a matter of positive and, -as it were, separate divine institution,--as something which, given -the fundamental character of man’s spiritual nature, might have been -otherwise; but as what,--given the immutable nature of God and of the -image at nature in His creature, man,--follows from an intrinsic, -quite spontaneous necessity.--Hence, at this point especially, would -it be foolish and fanatical, because contrary to the immanental nature -of things, and to the right interplay of the elemental forces of all -life, to attempt the suppression even of the several actual irruptions -of such pleasure, and still more of the source and recurrence of this -delectation. Fortunately success is here as impossible as it would be -undesirable,--as much so as, on a lower plane, would be the suppression -of the pleasure concomitant with the necessary kinds and degrees of -eating. Indeed, it is clear, upon reflection that unless a man (at -least implicitly) accepts and (indirectly) wills that spiritual or -physical pleasure, he cannot profitably eat his food or love his God. - -But from this in nowise follows what Bossuet tried so hard to -prove,--that what is thus necessarily present in man, as a psychical or -physical prompting and satisfaction, must also of necessity be willed -by him, directly and as his determining reason and justification. In -turning to eat, man cannot help feeling a psychic pleasure of an all -but purely physical kind; and, if he is wise, he will make no attempt -to meddle with this feeling. But he can either deliberately will, as -his action’s object, that pleasure which is thus inevitably incident -to the act, and the more he does so, the more simply greedy and -sensual he will become; or he can directly will, as his determining -end, that sustenance of life and strength for his work and spiritual -growth, which is the justification and ultimate reason of eating (the -_rationale_ of that very pleasure so wisely attached by nature, as a -stimulus, to a process so necessary to the very highest objects), and -the more he does so, the more manly and spiritual he will grow. - -And so with every one of man’s wondrously manifold and different -physical, psychical, spiritual requirements and actions, within -the wide range of his right nature and ideals. There is not one of -them,--not the most purely physical-seeming of these acts,--which he -cannot ennoble and spiritualize by, as it were, meeting it,--by willing -it, more and more, because of its rational end and justification. -And there is not one of them,--not an act which, judged simply by -its direct subject-matter and by the soul’s faculties immediately -engaged, would be the most purely mental and religious of acts,--which -man cannot degrade and de-spiritualize, by, as it were, following -it, by willing it more and more because of its psychical attraction -and pleasurable concomitance alone. For, in the former case, the -act, however gross may seem its material, is made the occasion and -instrument of spiritual character-building and of the constitution -of liberty; in the latter case, the act, however ethereal its body, -is but the occasion and means of the soul’s dispersion in the mere -phenomenal flux of the surface of existence, and of its subjection to -the determinism which obtains here.[176] - -Catherine’s whole convert life is one long series of the most striking -examples of an heroic delicacy in self-knowledge and self-fighting in -this matter: a delicacy which, as to the degree of its possibility and -desirableness in any particular soul, is, however, peculiarly dependent -upon that soul’s special circumstances, temperament, _attrait_, and -degree of perfection reached and to be reached. - -(3) And, finally, as to the relations between the Contemplative forms -of Prayer, and Acts and variously complete States of Pure Love; and, -again, of such Prayer and Love, and Abnormal or Miraculous conditions: -it is clear that, if there is no true Contemplation without much Pure -Love, there can be much Pure Love without Contemplation. - -Abbé Gosselin well sums up the ordinary Catholic teaching. “Meditation -consists of discursive acts which are easily distinguished from each -other, both because of the kind of strain and shock with which they -are produced, and because of the diversity of their objects. It is -the ordinary foundation of the interior life and the ordinary prayer -of beginners, whose imperfect love requires to be thus excited and -sustained by distinct and reflective acts. Contemplation consists, -strictly speaking, in direct ‘non-reflex’ acts,--acts so simple and -peaceful as to have nothing salient by which the soul could distinguish -one from the other. It is called by the Mystical Saints ‘a simple and -loving look,’ as discriminating it from meditation and the latter’s -many methodic and discursive acts, and as limiting it to a simple and -loving consideration and view of God and of divine things, certified -and rendered present to the soul by faith. It is the ordinary prayer -of perfect souls, or at least of those that have already made much -progress in the divine love. For the more purely a soul loves -God, the less it requires to be sustained by distinct, reflective -acts; reasoning becomes a fatigue and an embarrassment to it in its -prayer--it longs but to love and to contemplate the object of its love.” - -Or as Fénelon puts it: “‘Passivity,’ ‘Action,’ is not precisely itself -Pure Love, but is the mode in which Pure Love operates.… ‘Passivity,’ -‘Action,’ is not precisely the purity of Love, but is the effect of -that purity.”[177] Yet, as M. Gosselin adds, “It must be admitted that -without Contemplation the soul can arrive at a very high perfection; -and that the most discursive meditation, and hence still more all -prayer as it becomes effective, often includes certain direct acts -which form an admixture and beginning of contemplation.”[178] - -And as to any supposed necessary relations between the very highest -contemplation and the most complete state of Pure Love on the one hand, -and anything abnormal or miraculous on the other hand, Fénelon, in -this point remarkably more sober than Bossuet, well sums up the most -authoritative and classical Church-teaching on the matter: “‘Passive’ -Contemplation is but Pure Contemplation: ‘Active’ Contemplation -being one which is still mixed with hurried and discursive acts. -When Contemplation has ceased to have any remnant of this hurry, of -this ‘activity,’ it is entirely ‘Passive,’ that is, peaceful, in -its acts.” “This free and loving look of the soul means acts of the -understanding,--for it is a look; and acts of the will, for the look -is a loving one; and acts produced by free-will, without any strict -necessity, for the look is a free look.” “We should not compare -Passive Contemplation,” as did Bossuet, “to prophecy, or to the gift -of tongues or of miracles; nor may we say that this mystical state -consists principally in something wrought by God within us without -our co-operation, and where, consequently, there neither is nor can -be any merit. We must, on the contrary, to speak correctly, say that -the substance of such Passive Prayer, taken in its specific acts, -is free, meritorious, and operated within us by a grace that acts -together with us.” “It is the attraction to the acts which the soul -now produces which, as by a secondary and counter-effect, occasions -a quasi-incapacity for those acts which it does not produce. Now -this attraction is not of a kind to deprive the soul of the use of -its free-will: we see this from the nature of the acts which this -attraction causes the soul to produce. Whence I conclude that this -same attraction does not, again, deprive it of its liberty with regard -to the acts which it prevents. The attraction but prevents the latter -in the way it produces the other,--by an efficacious influence that -involves no sheer necessity.” “‘Passivity,’ if it comes from God, ever -leaves the soul fully free for the exercise of the distinct virtues -demanded by God in the Gospel; the _attrait_ is truly divine only -in so far as it draws the soul on to the perfect fulfilment of the -evangelical counsels and promises concerning all the virtues.” “The -inspiration of the Passive state is but an habitual inspiration for -the interior acts of evangelical piety. It renders the Passive soul -neither infallible nor impeccable, nor independent of the Church even -for its interior direction, nor exempt from the obligation of meriting -and growing in virtue.… The inspiration of the passive soul differs -from that of actively just souls only in being purer; that is, more -exempt from all natural self-seeking, more full, more simple, more -continuous, and more developed at each moment. We have, throughout, -ever one and the same inspiration, which but grows in perfection and -purity in proportion as the soul renounces itself more, and becomes -more sensitive to the divine impressions.”[179] - -Thus we get an impressive, simple and yet varied, conception of -spirituality, in which a real continuity, and a power and obligation of -mutual understanding and aid underlies all the changes of degree and -form, from first to last. For from first to last there are different -degrees, but of the same supernatural grace acting in and upon the same -human nature responsive in different degrees and ways. From first to -last there is, necessarily and at every step, the Supernatural: at no -point is there any necessary presence of, or essential connection with, -the Miraculous or the Abnormal. - - -4. _Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant._ - -Theology and Philosophy have not ceased to occupy themselves, at least -indirectly, with the substance of these great questions, since they -furnished the subject-matter to Bossuet and Fénelon in their memorable -controversy; somewhat over-subtle although some of it was in its -earlier phases, owing to Fénelon’s chivalrous anxiety to defend, as far -as possible, the very expressions, often so nebulous and shifting, of -his cousin, Madame Guyon. - -(1) Indeed about twenty years before that controversy, Spinoza had, -in his _Theologico-Political Treatise_, and then, more impressively -still, in his _Ethics_, made a brilliant assault upon all, especially -all religious, self-seeking. Also on this point these writings showed -that strange, pathetic combination of grandly religious intuitions -and instincts with a Naturalistic system which, logically, leaves no -room for those deepest requirements of that great soul; and here they -revealed, in addition, considerable injustice towards the, doubtless -very mixed and imperfect, motives of average humanity. - -True intuition speaks in his _Treatise_ (published in 1670) in the -words: “Since the love of God is man’s supreme beatitude and the final -end and scope of all human actions: it follows that only that man -conforms to the divine law, who strives to love God, not from fear of -punishment, nor from the love of some other thing, such as delights, -fame, and so forth, but from this motive alone, that he knows God, or -that he knows the knowledge and love of God, to be his supreme end.” -But a little further back we learn that “the more we know the things -of Nature, the greater and the more perfect knowledge of God do we -acquire”; a frank application of the pure Pantheism of his reasoned -system. - -In his _Ethics_, again, a noble intuition finds voice where he says: -“Even if we did not know our Mind,” our individual soul, “to be -eternal, we should still put Piety and Religion and, in a word, all -those virtues that are to be referred to magnanimity and generosity, -first in our esteem.” But he is doubtless excessive in his picturing of -the downright, systematic immorality of attitude of ordinary men--the -“slaves” and “mercenaries.” “Unless this hope of laying aside the -burdens of Piety and Religion after death and of receiving the price -of their service, and this fear of being punished by dire punishments -after death were in men, and if they, contrariwise, believed that -their minds would perish with their bodies: they would let themselves -go to their natural inclination and would decide to rule all their -actions according to their lust.” And he is doubtlessly, though nobly, -excessive in his contrary ideal: “He who loves God cannot strive that -God shall love him in return,”--an ideal which is, however, certainly -in part determined by his philosophy, which knows no ultimate abiding -personality or consciousness either in God or man. - -Yet, once again, we have him at his inspiring best when, -Catherine-like, he tells us: “The supreme Good of those who pursue -virtue is common to them all, and all are equally able to rejoice in -it”; and “this love towards God is incapable of being stained by the -passions of envy and bitterness, but is increased in proportion as we -figure to ourselves a larger number of men joined to God by the same -bonds of love”; when he declares: “we do not enjoy beatitude because we -master our passions; rather, contrariwise, do we master our passions -because we enjoy beatitude”; and when he insists, with no doubt too -indiscriminating, too Jacopone-like, a simplification, upon what, -in its substance, is a profound truth: “the intellectual,” the pure -“love of the soul for God is the very love of God, wherewith God loves -Himself.”[180] - -(2) It was, however, the astonishingly circumspect and many-sided -Leibniz who, indefinitely smaller soul though he was, succeeded, -perhaps better than any other modern philosopher, in successfully -combining the divers constitutive elements of the act and state of -Pure Love, when he wrote in 1714: “Since true Pure Love consists in a -state of soul which makes me find pleasure in the perfections and the -felicity of the object loved by me, this love cannot but give us the -greatest pleasure of which we are capable, when God is that object. -And, though this love be disinterested, it already constitutes, even -thus simply by itself, our greatest-good and deepest interest.” - -Or, as he wrote in 1698: “Our love of others cannot be separated -from our true good, nor our love of God from our felicity. But it is -equally certain that the consideration of our own particular good, as -distinguished from the pleasure which we taste in seeing the felicity -of another, does not enter into Pure Love.” And earlier still he -had defined the act of loving as “the finding one’s pleasure in the -felicity of another”; and had concluded thence that Love is for man -essentially an enjoyment, although the specific motive of love is not -the pleasure or the particular good of him who loves, but the good or -the felicity of the beloved object.[181] - -(3) Yet it is especially Kant who, with his predominant hostility to -all Eudaemonism in Morality and Religion, has, more than all others, -renewed the controversy as to the relations between virtue and piety -on the one hand, and self-seeking motives on the other, and who is -popularly credited with an entirely self-consistent antagonism to even -such a wise and necessary attitude as are the amended positions of -Fénelon and those of Leibniz. And yet I sincerely doubt whether (if -we put aside the question as to the strictly logical consequences of -his Critical Idealism, such as that Idealism appears in its greatest -purity in the _Critique of Pure Reason_, 1781; and if we neglect the -numerous, often grossly unjust, Spinoza-like sallies against the -supposed undiluted mercenariness of ordinary piety, which abound in his -_Religion within the Limits of Pure Reason_, 1793), we could readily -find any explicit pronouncement hopelessly antagonistic to the Catholic -Pure-Love doctrine. - -Certainly the position taken up towards this point in that very -pregnant and curious, largely-overlooked little treatise, _The Canon -of Pure Reason_, which (evidently an earlier and complete sketch), has -been inserted by him into his later, larger, but materially altered -scheme of the _Critique_ of 1781, (where it now forms the _Zweite -Hauptstück_ of the _Transcendentale Methodenlehre_, ed. Kehrbach, -Reclam, pp. 603-628), appears to be substantially acceptable.[182] -“Happiness consists in the satisfaction of all our inclinations, -according to their various character, intensity, and duration. The -law of practical action, in so far as it is derived from the motive -of happiness, I call Pragmatic, a Rule of Good Sense; the same law, -in so far as it has for its motive only the becoming worthy of such -happiness, I call Moral, the Moral Law. Now Morality already by itself -constitutes a system, but Happiness does not do so, except in so far as -Happiness is distributed in exact accordance with Morality. But such a -distribution is only possible in the intelligible world,”--the world -beyond phenomena which can be reached by our reason alone--“and under -a wise Originator and Ruler. Such an One, together with life in such a -world--a world which we are obliged to consider as a future one--reason -finds itself forced to assume, or else to look upon the moral laws as -empty phantoms, since the necessary result of these laws,--a result -which that same reason connects with their very idea,--would have to -fall away, if that assumption were to go. Hence every one looks upon -the moral laws as _commandments_, a thing which they could not be, -if they did not conjoin with their rule consequences of _a priori_ -appropriateness, and hence if they did not carry with them _promises_ -and _threats_. But this too they can do only if they lie within the -compass of a Single Necessary Being, Itself the Supreme Good, Which -alone can render possible such a unity embracing both means and -end.--Happiness alone is, for our reason, far from being the Complete -Good, for reason does not approve of Happiness unless it be united with -the being worthy of Happiness, _i.e._ Moral Rectitude. But Morality -alone, and with it the simple being worthy of happiness, is also far -from the Complete Good. Even if reason, free from any consideration of -any interest of its own, were to put itself in the position of a being -that had to distribute all happiness to others alone, it could not -judge otherwise: for, in the complete idea of practical action, both -points are in essential conjunction, yet in suchwise that it is the -moral disposition which, as condition, first renders possible a sharing -in happiness, and not the prospect of happiness which first gives -an opening to the moral disposition. For, in this latter case, the -disposition would not be moral, and, consequently, would not deserve -that complete happiness to which reason can assign no other limitation -than such as springs from our own immoral attitude of will.”[183] - -In his _Foundation of the Metaphysic of Morals_, 1785, the noble -apostrophe to the Good Will no doubt appears formally to proclaim -as possible and desirable a complete human disposition, in which no -considerations of Happiness play any part: “The good will is good, -not through what it effects or produces, not through its utility for -the attainment of any intention or end, but it is good through the -quality of the volition alone; that is, it is good in itself.…” “If, -with its greatest efforts, nothing were to be effected by it, and only -the good will itself were to remain, this bare will would yet shine in -lonely splendour as a jewel,--as something which has its full value in -itself.” But further on he shows us how, after all, “this good will -cannot, then, be the only and the whole good, but still it is the -highest good and the condition for all the rest, even for our desire of -happiness.”[184] Certain exaggerations, which are next developed by -him here, shall be considered in a later chapter. - - -5. _Four important points._ - -Here I will but put together, in conclusion, four positions which I -have rejoiced to find in two such utterly, indeed at times recklessly, -independent writers as Professor Georg Simmel of Berlin and Professor -A. E. Taylor. - -(1) Dr. Simmel declares, with admirable cogency: “The concept of -religion completely loses in Kant, owing to his rationalistic manner -of discovering in it a mere compound of the moral interest and the -striving after happiness, its most specific and deepest character. -No doubt these two apprehensions are also essential to religion, but -precisely the direction in which Kant conjoins them,--that duty issues -in happiness, is the least characteristic of religion, and is only -determined by his Moralism, which refuses to recognize the striving -after happiness as a valuable motive. The opposite direction appears to -me as far more decisively a part of religion and of its incomparable -force: for we thus find in religion precisely that ideal power, which -makes it the duty of man to win his own salvation. According to the -Kantian Moralism, it is every man’s private affair how he shall meet -his requirement of happiness; and to turn such a private aspiration -into an objective, ideal claim, would be for Kant a contradiction and -abomination. In reality, however, religion itself _requires_ that man -should have a care for his own welfare and beatitude, and in this -consists its incomparable force of attraction.”[185] Let the reader -note how entirely this agrees with, whilst properly safeguarding, the -doctrine of Pure Love: it is the precise position of the best critics -of the unamended Fénelon. - -(2) Professor Taylor insists that “it is possible to desire directly -and immediately pleasant experiences which are not my own.… Because -it is _I_ who in every case have the pleasure of the anticipation, it -is assumed that it must be I who am to experience the realization of -the anticipation.” Yet “it is really no more paradoxical that I should -anticipate with pleasure some event which is not to form part of my own -direct sensible experience, than it is that I should find pleasure in -the anticipation at twenty of myself at eighty.” “The austerest saints -will and can mortify themselves as a thing well-pleasing to God.”[186] -In this way the joy of each constituent of the Kingdom of God in the -joys of all the rest, and in the all-pervading joy of God, is seen to -be as possible as it is undoubtedly actual: the problem of the relation -between pleasure and egoism is solved. - -(3) And Professor Taylor again insists upon how pleasant experiences, -which do not owe their pleasantness to their relation to a previous -anticipation, are not, properly speaking, good or worthy. It is by -“satisfactions” and not by mere “pleasures” that “even the most -confirmed Hedonist must compute the goodness of a life.… Only when -the pleasant experience includes in itself the realization of an idea -is it truly good.”[187] But, if so, then the experience will be good, -not in proportion as it is unpleasant, as Kant was so prone to imply; -nor directly in proportion as it is pleasant, although pleasantness -will accompany or succeed it, of a finer quality if not of a greater -intensity, according as the idea which it embodies is good: but -directly in proportion to the goodness of that idea. Thus all things -licit, from sense to spirit, will find their place and function in such -acts, and in a life composed of such acts, spirit expressing itself -in terms of sense. And the purification, continuously necessary for -the ever more adequate expression of the one in and by the other, will -be something different from any attempt at suppressing this means of -expression. Thus here again the great Christian Incarnation-Doctrine -appears as the deepest truth, and as the solution of the problem as to -the relations of pleasure and duty.[188] - -(4) And finally, as to the ever-present need and importance of a theory -concerning these matters, Professor Taylor points out, not only that -some such theory is necessary to the full human life, but that it must -place an infinite ideal before us: paradox though it may sound, nothing -less is truly practical, for “any end that is to be permanently felt -as worth striving for, must be infinite,” and therefore “in a sense -infinitely remote”; and hence “if indifference to the demand for a -practicable ideal be the mark of a dreamer or a fanatic, contentment -with a finite and practicable ideal is no less undeniably the mark of -an _esprit borné_.”[189] - -Here Fénelon has adequately interpreted the permanent and complete -requirements of the religious life and spirit. “You tell me,” he -says to his adversaries, “that ‘Christianity is not a school of -Metaphysicians.’ All Christians cannot, it is true, be Metaphysicians; -but the principal Theologians have great need to be such. It was by a -sublime Metaphysic that St. Augustine soared above the majority of the -other Fathers, who were, for the rest, as fully versed in Scripture -and Tradition. It was by his lofty Metaphysic that St. Gregory of -Nazianzum has merited the distinguishing title of _Theologian_. -It is by Metaphysic that St. Anselm and St. Thomas have been such -great luminaries of the Church. True, the Church is not ‘a school of -Metaphysicians,’ who dispute without docility, as did the ancient sects -of philosophers. Yet she is a school in which St. Paul teaches that -Charity is more perfect than Hope, and in which the holiest Doctors -declare, in accordance with the principles of the Fathers, that Love -is more perfect, precisely because it ‘abides in God, not in view of -any benefit that may accrue to us from so doing.’” “I know well,” he -writes to a friend, “that men misuse the doctrines of Pure Love and -Resignation; I know that there are hypocrites who, under cover of -such noble terms, overthrow the Gospel. Yet it is the worst of all -procedures to attempt the destruction of perfect things, from a fear -that men will make a wrong use of them.” Notwithstanding all misuse of -the doctrine--“the very perfection of Christianity is Pure Love.”[190] - - - - -CHAPTER XII - -THE AFTER-LIFE PROBLEMS AND DOCTRINES - - -Moving on now to the questions concerning the After-Life, it -will be convenient to consider them under five heads: the chief -present-day positions and perplexities with regard to belief in -the After-Life in General; the main implications and convictions -inherent to an Eschatology such as Catherine’s; and then the principal -characteristics, difficulties, and helps of her tendencies and -teachings concerning Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven. And throughout the -Chapter we shall busy ourselves directly only with the After-Life in -the sense of a heightened, or at least an equal, consciousness after -death, as compared to that which existed before death: the belief in -a shrunken state of survival, in non-annihilation, appearing to be as -certainly the universal minimum of belief as such a minimum is not -Immortality. - - -I. THE CHIEF PRESENT-DAY PROBLEMS, PERPLEXITIES, AND REQUIREMENTS WITH -REGARD TO THE AFTER-LIFE IN GENERAL. - -Now I take our chief present-day problems, perplexities, and resultant -requirements with regard to the After-Life in general, to fall into -three groups, according as those problems are predominantly Historical, -or Philosophical, or directly Practical and Ethical. - - -1. _Three Historical Difficulties._ - -The Historical group now brings very clearly and certainly before -us the striking non-universality, the startling lateness, and -the generally strange fitfulness and apparent unreasonableness -characterizing the earliest stage of belief in the soul’s heightened, -or at least equivalent, consciousness after death. - -(1) Now with respect to the Non-Universality of the doctrine, it -is true that, in China, Confucianism is full of care for the dead. -“Throughout the Empire, the authorities are obliged to hold three -annual sacrifices for the refreshment and rest of the souls of the dead -in general.” “It is hardly doubtful that the cultus of Ancestors formed -the chief institution in classical Confucianism, and constituted the -very centre of religion for the people. Even now ancestor-worship is -the only form of religion for which rules, applicable to the various -classes among the Emperor’s subjects, are laid down in the Dynastic -Statutes.” And Professor De Groot, from whom I am quoting, gives an -interesting conspectus of the numberless ways in which the religious -service of the dead penetrates Chinese life.[191]--Yet we hear of -Kong-Tse (Confucius) himself (551-478 B.C.), that, though he insisted -upon the most scrupulous execution of the three hundred rules of the -then extant temple-ceremonial, which were no doubt largely busy with -the dead, and though he said that one should sacrifice to the spirits -as if they were present, he designated, in several of his sayings, -occupation with theological problems as useless: “as long as we do not -know men, how shall we know spirits? As long as we do not understand -life, how should we fathom death?” And to questions relative to the -spirits and the dead, he would give evasive answers.[192] Thus the -founder of the most characteristic of the Chinese religions was without -any clear and consistent conviction on the point in question. - -In India we find, for Brahmanic religion, certain unmistakable -Immortality-Doctrines (in the sense of the survival of the soul’s -self-consciousness), expressed in the hymns of the _Rig-Veda_.--But -already, in the philosophizings of the _Upanishads_, we get a -world-soul, and this soul’s exclusive permanence: “to attain to true -unity, the very duality of subject and object is to disappear. The -terms Atman and Brahman here express the true Being which vivifies all -beings and appearances, and with which cognizing man reunites himself -whilst losing his individual existence.”[193] - -And if we move on to Buddhism, with its hundreds of millions of -adherents in Burmah, Tibet, China, and Japan, we can learn, from the -classical work of Oldenberg, how interestingly deep down lies the -reason for the long conflict between scholars as to whether Nirvana -is or is not to be taken for the complete extinction of the individual -soul. “Everything, in the Buddhist dogmatic system, is part and parcel -of a circle of Becoming and of Dissolution: all things are but a -Dhamma, a Sankhara; and all Dhamma, all Sankhara are but temporary.… -The Mutable, Conditioned is here thinkable only as conditioned by -another Mutable and Conditioned. If we follow the dialectic consequence -alone, there is no seeing how, according to this system, there can -remain over, when a succession and mutual destruction of things -conditioning and of things conditioned has run its course, anything -but a pure vacuum.” And we have also such a saying of the Buddha as -the following. “Now if, O disciples, the Ego (_atta_) and anything -appertaining to the Ego (_attaniya_) cannot be comprehended with -accuracy and certainty, is not then the faith which declares: ‘This is -the world, and this is the Ego; this shall I become at death,--firm, -constant, eternal, unchangeable,--thus shall I be there, throughout -eternity,’--is not this sheer empty folly?” “How should it not, O -Lord, be sheer empty folly?” answer the disciples. “One who spoke -thus,” is Oldenberg’s weighty comment, “cannot have been far from the -conviction that Nirvana is annihilation. Yet it is understandable how -the very thinkers, who were capable of bearing this consequence, should -have hesitated to raise it to the rank of an official dogma of the -community.… Hence the official doctrine of the Buddhist Church attained -the form, that, on the question of the real existence of the Ego, of -whether or not the perfected saint lives on after death, the exalted -Buddha has taught nothing. Indeed the legally obligatory doctrine of -the old community required of its votaries an explicit renunciation of -all knowledge concerning the existence or non-existence of completely -redeemed souls.” - -“Buddhism,” so Oldenberg sums up the matter, with, I think, the -substantial adhesion of all present-day competent authorities, “teaches -that there is a way out of the world of created things, out into the -dark Infinite. Does this way lead to new being? or does it lead to -nothingness? Buddhist belief maintains itself on the knife’s edge -of these alternatives. The desire of the heart, as it longs for the -Eternal, is not left without something, and yet the thinking mind is -not given a something that it could grasp and retain. The thought -of the Infinite, the Eternal, could not be present at all, and yet -vanish further away than here, where, a mere breath and on the -point of sinking into sheer nothingness, it threatens to disappear -altogether.”[194] This vast Buddhist community, numbering, perhaps, a -third of the human race, should not, then, be forgotten, when we urge -the contrary instances of the religions of Assyria and Babylonia; of -Egypt; of Greece and Rome; and, above all, of the Jews and Christianity. - -Yet it is well to remember that such non-universality of belief is at -least as real, to this very hour, for such a fundamental religious -truth and practice as Monotheism and Monolatry; such purely Ethical -convictions as Monogamy and the Illicitness of Slavery; such a plain -dictate of the universal humanitarian ideal as the illegitimacy -of the application of physical compulsion in matters of religious -conviction; and such directly demonstrable psychical and natural facts -as subconsciousness in the human soul, the sexual character of plants, -and the earth’s rotundity and rotation around the sun. In none of these -cases can we claim more than that the higher, truer doctrine,--that is, -the one which explains and transcends the element of truth contained in -its predecessor and opposite,--is explicitly reached by a part only of -humanity, and is but implied and required by other men, at their best. -Yet this is clearly enough for leaving us free to decide,--reasonably -conclusive evidence for their truth being forthcoming,--in favour of -the views of the minority: since the assumption of an equality of -spiritual and moral insight and advance throughout mankind is as little -based upon fact, as would be the supposition of men’s equal physical -strength or height, or of any other quality or circumstance of their -nature and environment. - -(2) The lateness of the doctrine’s appearance, precisely in the cases -where there can be no doubt of its standing for a conviction of an -endless persistence of a heightened consciousness after death,--that -is, amongst the Greeks (and Romans) and the Jews (and Christians),--has -now been well established by critical historical research. - -With regard to the Greeks,[195] the matter is particularly plain, -since we can still trace even in Plato, (427 to 347 B.C.), who, next -to Our Lord Himself and to St. Paul, is doubtless the greatest and -most influential teacher of full individual Immortality that the world -has seen, two periods of thought in this matter, and can show that -the first was without any such certain conviction. In his _Apology of -Socrates_, written soon after the execution in 399 B.C., he makes his -great master, close to his end, declare that death would bring to man -either a complete unconsciousness, like to a dreamless sleep, or a -transition into another life,--a life here pictured like to the Homeric -Hades. Both possibilities Socrates made to accept resignedly, in full -reliance on the justice of the Gods, and to look no further; how should -he know what is known to no man?--And this is Plato’s own earlier -teaching. For in the very _Republic_ which, in its chronologically -later constituents, (especially in Book V, 471_c_, to the end of -Book VIII, Book IX, 560_d_ to 588_a_, and Book X up to 608_b_), so -insists upon and develops the truth and importance of Immortality in -the strictest, indeed the sublimest sense: we get, in its earlier -portions, (especially in Book II, 10_c_, to Book V, 460_c_), no trace -of any such conviction. For, in these earlier passages, the Guardians -in the Ideal State are not to consider what may come after death: the -central theme is the manner in which Justice carries with it its own -recompense; and the rewards, that are popularly wont to be placed -before the soul, are referred to ironically,--Socrates is determined to -do without such hopes. In those later portions, on the contrary, there -is the greatest insistence upon the importance of caring, not for this -short life alone, but for the soul’s “whole time” and for what awaits -it after death. And in the still later parts, (as in Books VI and VII), -the sublimest form of Immortality is presupposed as true and actual -throughout. Thus in Greece it is not till about 390-380 B.C., and in -Plato himself not till his middle life, that we get a quite definite -and final doctrine of the Immortality of all souls, and of a blessed -after-existence for every just and holy life here below. - -For the survival after the body’s death, indubitably attributed to -the Psyche in the Homeric Poems, is conceived there, throughout, -as a miserably shrunken consciousness, and one which is dependent -for its continuance upon the good offices bestowed by the survivors -upon the corpse and grave. And the translation of the still living -Menelaus to Elysium (Od. IV, 560-568) is probably a later insertion; -belongs to a small class of exceptional cases; implies the writer’s -inability to conceive a heightened consciousness for the soul, after -the soul’s separation from the body; and is based, not upon any virtue -or reward, but upon Menelaus’s family-relationship to Zeus. Ganymede -gets similarly translated because of his physical beauty (II. XX, 232 -_seq._). - -Hesiod, though later than Homer as a writer, gives us, in his account -of the Five Ages of the World (_Works and Days_, ll. 109-201), some -traces of an Animistic conception of a heightened life of the bodiless -soul beyond the grave,--a conception which had been neglected or -suppressed by Homer, but which had evidently been preserved alive in -the popular religion of, at least, Central Greece. Yet Hesiod knows of -such a life only for the Golden and for the Silver Ages, and for some -miraculous, exceptional cases of the fourth, the Heroic Age: already -in the third, the Bronze Age, and still more emphatically in his own -fifth, the Iron Age, there are no such consolations: nothing but the -shrunken consciousness of the Homeric after-death Psyche is, quite -evidently, felt by him to be the lot of all souls in the hard, iron -present. - -The Cultus of the Heroes is already registered in Draco’s Athenian -Laws, in about 620 B.C., as a traditional custom. And these Heroes have -certainly lived at one time as men upon earth, and have become heroes -only after death; their souls, though severed from the body, live a -heightened imperishable life, indeed one that can mightily help men -here below and now,--so at Delphi and at Salamis against the Persians. -Yet here again each case of such an elevation was felt to be a miracle, -an exception incapable of becoming a universal law: not even the germ -of a belief in the Immortality of the soul as such seems to be here. - -The Cultus of the Nether-World Deities, of the Departed generally, and, -as the culmination of all this movement, the Eleusinian Mysteries, -must not be conceived as involving or as leading to, any belief in the -ecstatic elevation of the soul, or consciousness of its God-likeness; -and such unending bliss as is secured, is gained by men, not because -they are virtuous and devout, but through their initiation into the -Mysteries. Rhode assures us, rightly I think, that “it remains unproved -that, during the classical period of Greek culture, the belief in -Judges and a Judgment to be held in Hades over the deeds done by men on -earth, had struck root among the people”; Professor Percy Gardner adds -his great authority to the same conclusion.[196] Here again it is Plato -who is the first to take up a clearly and consistently spiritual and -universalistic position. - -Indeed it is only in the predominantly neuropathic, indeed largely -immoral and repulsive, forms of the Dionysiac sect and movement, (at -work, perhaps, already in the eighth century B.C. and which leads -on to the formation of the more aristocratic and priestly Orphic -communities) that a demonstrable and direct belief arose in the soul’s -intrinsic God-likeness, or even divinity, and in its immortality, -or even eternity; and that stimulations, materials, and conceptions -were furnished to Greek thought, which are traceable wheresoever it -henceforth inclines to belief in the soul’s intrinsic Immortality. - -Yet the leaven spread but slowly into philosophy. For the Ionian -philosophers, and among them Heraclitus, the impressive teacher of -the flux of all things, flourish from about 600 to 430 B.C.; but, -_naïve_ Materialists and Pantheists as they are, they frankly exclude -all survival of individual consciousness after death. The Eleatic -philosophers live between 550 and 450 B.C., and are all busy with _a -priori_ logical constructions of the physical world, conceived as sole -and self-explanatory; and amongst them is Parmenides, the powerful -propounder of the complete identity and immutability of all reality. -Those transcendent spiritual beliefs appear first as part, indeed as -the very foundation, although still rather of a mode of life than of -a formal philosophy, in the teaching and community of Pythagoras, who -seems to have lived about 580 to 490 B.C., and who certainly emigrated -from Asia Minor to Croton in Southern Italy. The soul appears here -as intrinsically immortal, indeed without beginning and without end. -And then Immortality forms one (the mystical) of the two thoroughly -heterogeneous elements of the, otherwise predominantly Ionic and -Materialistic, philosophy of Empedocles of Agrigentum in Sicily, about -490 to 435 B.C. In both these cases the Dionysiac-Orphic provenance of -the “Immortality”-doctrines is clearly apparent. - -And then, among the poets who bridge over the period up to Plato, we -find Pindar, who, alongside of reproductions of the ordinary, popular -conceptions, gives us at times lofty, Orphic-like teachings as to -the eternity, the migration, and the eventual persistent rest and -happiness of the just Soul, and as to the suffering of the unjust one; -Aeschylus, who primarily dwells upon the Gods’ judgment in this life, -and who makes occasional allusions to the after-life which are partly -still of the Homeric type; Sophocles, who indeed refers to the special -privileges which, in the after-life, attend upon the souls that have -here been initiated into the Eleusinian Mysteries, and who causes -Oedipus to be translated, whilst still alive, to Other-World happiness, -but who knows nothing of an unceasing heightened consciousness -for all men after death; and Euripides, who, showing plainly the -influence of the Sophists, gives expression, alongside of Pantheistic -identifications of the soul and of the aether, to every kind of -misgiving and doubt as to any survival after death. - -And as to the appearance of the doctrine among the Jews, we again find -a surprising lateness. I follow here, with but minor contributions -and modifications from other writers and myself, the main conclusions -of Dr. Charles’s standard _Critical History of the Doctrine of a -Future Life_, London, 1899, whose close knowledge of the subject is -unsurpassed, and who finds as many and as early attestations as are -well-nigh findable by serious workers.[197] - -“The primitive beliefs of the individual Israelite regarding the future -life, being derived from Ancestor-worship, were implicitly antagonistic -to Yahwism, from its first proclamation by Moses.… This antagonism -becomes explicit and results in the final triumph of Yahwism.” And -to the early Israelite, even under Yahwism, “the religious unit was” -not the individual but “the family or tribe.” Thus, even fully six -centuries after Moses, “the message of the prophets of the eighth -century,” Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, “is still directed to the -nation, and the judgments they proclaim are collective punishment for -collective guilt. It is not till late in the seventh century B.C. that -the problem of individual retribution really emerged, and received -its first solution in the teaching of Jeremiah.” And “the further -development of these ideas,” by the teaching of Ezekiel and of some -of the Psalms and Proverbs, as regards individual responsibility -and retribution in this life, and by the deep misgivings and keen -questionings of Job and Ecclesiastes, as to the adequacy of this -teaching, “led inevitably to the conception of a blessed life beyond -the grave.” - -Yet throughout the Hebrew Old Testament the Eschatology of the Nation -greatly predominates over that of the Individual. Indeed in pre-Exilic -times “the day of Yahwe,” with its national judgments, constitutes -the all but exclusive subject of the prophetic teaching as to the -future. Only from the Exile, (597 to 538 B.C.), onwards, does the -eschatological development begin to grow in complexity, for now the -individualism first preached by Jeremiah begins to maintain its claim -also. But not till the close of the fourth century, or the beginning of -the third century B.C., do the separate eschatologies of the individual -and of the nation issue finally in their synthesis: the righteous -individual will participate in the Messianic Kingdom, the righteous -dead of Israel will arise to share therein,--thus in Isaiah xxvi, 1-19, -a passage which it is difficult to place earlier than about 334 B.C. -The resurrection is here limited to the just. In Daniel xii, 2, which -is probably not earlier than 165 B.C., the resurrection is extended, -not indeed to all members of Israel, but, with respective good and evil -effects, to its martyrs and apostates. - -And the slowness and incompleteness of the development throughout the -Hebrew Old Testament is strikingly illustrated by the great paucity -of texts which yield, without the application of undue pressure, any -clear conviction or hope of a heightened, or even a sheer, maintenance -of the soul’s this-life consciousness and force after death. Besides -the passages just indicated, Dr. Charles can only find Psalms xlix and -lxxiii, and Job xix, 25-27, all three, according to him, later than -Ezekiel, who died in 571 B.C.[198] The textually uncertain and obscure -Job-passage (xix, 25, 26) must be discounted, since it evidently -demands interpretation according to the plain presupposition and point -of the great poem as a whole.--And the same result is reached by the -numerous, entirely unambiguous, passages which maintain the negative -persuasion. In the hymn put into the mouth of the sick king Hezekiah, -for about 713 B.C., (a composition which seems to be very late, -perhaps only of the second century B.C.), we hear: “The grave cannot -praise Thee … they that go down into the pit cannot hope for truth. -The living, the living, he shall praise Thee, as I do this day.” And -the Psalter contains numerous similar declarations. Thus vi, 5: “In -death there is no remembrance of Thee: in the grave who shall give Thee -thanks?” and cxv, 17: “The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that -go down into silence; but _we_ praise the Lord.” See also Psalms xxx, -19; lxxxviii, 11. - -Indeed the name for the Departed is Rephaim, “the limp, the powerless -ones.” Stade well says: “According to the ancient Israelitish -conception the entire human being, body and soul, outlasts death, -whilst losing all that makes life worth living. That which persists -in Sheol for all eternity is the form of man, emptied of all content. -Antique thought ignores as yet that there exists no such thing as a -form without substance. The conception has as little in common with -the conviction of the Immortality of the Soul, which found its chief -support in Greek ideas, as with the expectation of the Resurrection, -which grew out of the Jewish Messianic hope, or with the Christian -anticipation of Eternal Life, which is also based upon religious -motives.”[199] - -Yet, with respect to this objection from the lateness of the doctrine, -we must not forget that fully consistent Monotheism and Monogamy are -also late, but not, on that account, less true or less precious; and -indeed that, as a universal rule, the human mind has acquired at all -adequate convictions as to most certain and precious truths but slowly -and haltingly. This process is manifest even in Astronomy, Geology, -Botany, Human Anatomy. It could not fail to be, not less but more -the case in a matter like this which, if it concerns us most deeply, -is yet both too close to us to be readily appreciated in its true -proportions, and too little a matter of mathematical demonstration -or of direct experience not to take much time to develop, and not to -demand an ever-renewed acquisition and purification, being, as it is, -the postulate and completion of man’s ethical and spiritual faiths, at -their deepest and fullest. - -(3) And with regard to the unsatisfactory character of some of the -earliest manifestations of the belief, this point is brought home to -us, with startling vividness, in the beginnings of the doctrine in -ancient Greece. For Rhode’s very careful and competent examination of -precisely this side of the whole question shows conclusively (even -though I think, with Crusius, that he has overlooked certain rudiments -of analogous but healthy experiences and beliefs in pre-Dionysiac -Greece) how new and permanently effective a contribution to the full -doctrine was made, for the Hellenic world and hence indirectly for -all Western humanity, by the self-knowledge gained in that wildly -orgiastic upheaval, those dervish-like dances and ecstatic fits during -the Dionysian night-celebrations on the Thracian mountain-sides. -Indeed Rhode traces how from these experiences, partly from the -continuation of them, partly from the reaction against them, on the -part of the intensely dualistic and ascetic teaching and training of -the Orphic sect, there arose, and filtered through to Pythagoras, to -Plato, and to the whole Neo-Platonist school, the clear conception -and precise terminology concerning ecstatic, enthusiastic states, -the divinity and eternity of the human soul, its punitive lapse -into and imprisonment within the body, and its need of purification -throughout the earthly life and of liberation through death from this -its incurably accidental and impeding companion.--Thus we get here, -concerning one of the chief sources of at least the formulation of our -belief in Immortality, what looks a very nest of suspicious, repulsive -circumstances:--psycho-physical phenomena, which, quite explicable to, -and indeed explained by, us now as in nowise supernatural, could not -fail to appear portentous to those men who first experienced them; -unmoral or immoral attitudes and activities of mind and will; and -demonstrable excesses of feeling and conception as regards both the -static goodness, the downright divinity, eternity, and increateness -of the soul, and the unmixed evil of the body with its entirely -disconnected alongsideness to the soul. Does not all this spell a mass -of wild hallucination, impurity, fanaticism, and superstition? - -Yet here again it behoves us, if not to accept, yet also not to reject, -in wholesale fashion and in haste. For the profoundly experienced -Professor Pierre Janet shows[200] us, what is now assumed as an axiom, -and as the ultimate justification of the present widespread interest -in the study of Hysteria, that “we must admit for the moral world the -great principle universally admitted for the physical world since -Claude Bernard,--viz. that the laws of illness are, at bottom, the -same as those of health, and that, in the former, there is but the -exaggeration or the diminution of phenomena which existed already in -the latter.” - -And if thus our recent studies of morbid mentalities have been able -to throw a flood of light upon the mechanism and character of the -healthy mind, a mind more difficult to analyze precisely because -of the harmonious interaction of its forces, there is nothing very -surprising if man, in the past, learnt to know his own fundamental -nature better in and through periods of abnormal excitation than in -those of normal balance. And the resultant doctrines in the case in -question only required, and demand again and again, a careful pruning -and harmonizing to show forth an extraordinary volume of abiding -truth. The insuppressible difference between mind and matter, and the -distinction between the fully recollected soul (intuitive reason), and -explicit reasoning; the immeasurable superiority of mind over matter, -and the superiority of that full reason over this “thin” reasoning; -the certainty, involved in all our inevitable mental categories and -assumptions and in all our motives for action, of this mind and -intuition being more like the cause of all things than are those -other inferior realities and activities; the indestructibleness of -the postulates and standards of objective and infinite Beauty, Truth, -Goodness, of our consciousness of being intrinsically bound to them, -and of our inmost humanity and its relative greatness being measurable -by just this our consciousness of this our obligation, and hence -by the keenness of our sense of failure, and by our striving after -purification and the realization of our immanental possibilities: all -this remains deeply fruitful and true. - -And those crude early experiences and analyses certainly point to -what, even now, are our most solid reasons for belief in Immortality: -for if man’s mind and soul can thus keenly suffer from the sense -of the contingency and mutability of all things directly observed -by it without and within, it must itself be, at least in part or -potentially, outside of this flux which it so vividly apprehends -as _not_ Permanence, _not_ Rest, _not_ true Life. Let us overlook, -then, and forgive the first tumultuous, childishly rude and clumsy, -mentally and emotionally hyper-aesthetic forms of apprehension of -these great spiritual facts and laws, forms which are not, after all, -more misleading than is the ordinary anaesthetic condition of our -apprehending faculties towards these fundamental forces and testimonies -of our lot and nature. Not the wholesale rejection, then, of even those -crude Dionysian witnessings, still less of the already more clarified -Orphic teaching, and least of all of Plato’s great utilizations and -spiritualizations can be required of us, but only a reinterpretation -of those first impressions and of mankind’s analogous experiences, and -a sifting and testing of the latter by the light of all that has been -deeply lived through, and seriously thought out, by spiritually awake -humanity ever since.--And we should remember that the history of the -doctrine among the Jews is, as has already been intimated, grandly free -from any such suspicious occasions and concomitances. - - -2. _Two Philosophical Difficulties._ - -Yet it is precisely this latter, social, body-and-soul-survival -doctrine which brings the second group of objections, the philosophical -difficulties, to clear articulation. For thus we are unavoidably driven -to one or other of the equally difficult alternatives, of a bodiless -life of the soul, and of a survival or resurrection of the body. - -(1) Christianity, by its explicit teachings, and even more by its whole -drift and interior affinities, requires the survival of all that is -essential to the whole man, and conceives this whole as constituted, -not by thought alone but also by feeling and will and the power of -effectuation; so that the body, or some unpicturable equivalent to -it, seems necessary to this physico-spiritual, ultimately organic -conception of what man is and must continue to be, if he is to remain -man at all.--And Psychology, on its part, is showing us, more and more, -how astonishingly wide and deep is the dependence, at least for their -actuation, of the various functions and expressions of man’s character -and spirit upon his bodily frame. For not only is the reasoning -faculty seen, ever since Aristotle, to depend, for its material and -stimulation, upon the impressions of the senses, nor can we represent -it to ourselves otherwise than as seated in the brain or in some -such physical organism, but the interesting Lange-James observations -and theory make it likely that also the emotions,--the feelings as -distinct from sensations,--ever result, as a matter of fact, from -certain foregoing, physico-neural impressions and modifications, which -latter follow upon this or that perception of the mind, a perception -which would otherwise, as is the case in certain neural lesions and -anaesthesias, remain entirely dry and unemotional.[201]--And the -sense of the Infinite, which we have had such reason to take as the -very centre of religion, arises ever, within man’s life here below, -in contrast to, and as a concomitant and supplementation of, his -perception of the Finite and Contingent, and hence not without his -senses being alive and active. - -Now all this fits in admirably with the whole Jewish-Christian respect -for, high claims upon, and constant training of the body, the senses, -the emotions, and with the importance attached to the Visible and -Audible,--History, Institutions, Society.--Yet our difficulties are -clear. For however spiritually we may conceive a bodily survival or -resurrection; however completely we may place the identity of the -various stages of the body in this life, and the sameness between -the body before death and after the resurrection, in the identity of -its quasi-creator, the body-weaving soul, we can in nowise picture -to ourselves such a new, indefinitely more spiritual, incorporation, -and we bring upon ourselves acute difficulties, for both before and -after this unpicturable event. Before the resurrection there would -have to be unconsciousness between death and that event; but thus -the future life is broken up, and for no spiritual reason. Or there -would be consciousness; but then the substitute for the body, that -occasions this consciousness, would, apparently, render all further -revivification of the body unnecessary. And if we take the resurrection -as effected, we promptly feel how mixed and clumsy, how inadequate, -how less, and not more, than the best and noblest elements of our -experience and aspirations even here and now, is such a, still -essentially temporal and spacial, mode of existence. - -I take it that, against all this, we can but continue to maintain -two points. The soul’s life after bodily death is not a matter of -experience or of logical demonstration, but a postulate of faith and a -consequence from our realization of the human spirit’s worth; and hence -is as little capable of being satisfactorily pictured, as are all the -other great spiritual realities which can nevertheless be shown to be -presupposed and implicitly affirmed by every act of faith in the final -truth and abiding importance of anything whatsoever.--And again, it is -not worth while to attempt to rescue, Aristotle-wise, just that single, -and doubtless not the highest, function of man’s spirit and character, -his dialectic faculty, or even his intellectual intuitive power, for -the purpose of thus escaping, or at least minimizing, the difficulties -attendant upon the belief in Immortality. If we postulate, as we do, -man’s survival, we must postulate, without being able to fill in or to -justify any details of the scheme, the survival of all that may and -does constitute man’s true and ultimate personality. How much or how -little this may precisely mean, we evidently know but very imperfectly: -but we know enough to be confident that it means more than the -abstractive, increasingly dualistic school of Plato, Philo, Plotinus, -Proclus would allow. - -(2) But speculative reason seems also to raise a quite general -objection, based upon man’s littleness within the immense Universe, and -upon the arbitrariness of excepting those tiny points, those centres of -human consciousness, men’s souls, from the flux, the ceaseless becoming -and undoing, of all the other parts of that mighty whole, immortal, -surely, only _as_ a whole. - -Here we can safely say that, at least in this precise form, the -difficulty springs predominantly not from reason or experience, but -from an untutored imagination. For all our knowledge of that great -external world, which this objection supposes to englobe our small -internal world, as a part inferior, or at most but equal, to the other -parts of that whole, is dependent upon this interior world of ours; and -however truly inherent in that external world we may hold that world’s -laws to be, those laws can, after all, be shown to be as truly the -result of our own mind’s spontaneous work,--an architectonic building -up by this mind of the sense-impressions conveyed to it from without. -And that whole Universe, in so far as it is material, cannot be -compared, either in kind or in dignity, to Mind: only the indications -there, parallel in this to our experiences within our own mind, of a -Mind and Spirit infinitely greater and nobler than, yet with a certain -affinity to, our own,--only these constitute that outer world as great -as this our inner world. Indeed it is plain that Materialism is so -far from constituting the solution to the problem of existence, that -even Psycho-Physical Parallelism, even the attribution of any ultimate -reality to Matter, are on their trial. It is anyhow already clear that, -of the two, it is easier and nearer to the truth to maintain that -Matter and its categories are simply modes in the manifestation of Mind -to minds and in the apprehension of Mind by minds, than to declare Mind -to be but a function or resultant of Matter.[202] - -But if all this is so, then no simply sensible predominance of the -sensible Universe, nor even any ascertainment of the mere flux and -interchange of and between all things material and their elements, -can reasonably affect the question as to the superiority and -permanence of Mind. But we shall return, in the next chapter, to the -difficulties special to the Immortality of individual human spirits or -personalities,--for this is, I think, the point at which the problem is -still acute. - - -3. _Three Ethico-Practical Difficulties._ - -The last group of objections is directly practical and ethical, and -raises three points: the small space and influence occupied and -exercised, apparently, by such a belief, in the spiritual life of even -serious persons; the seemingly selfish, ungenerous type of religion and -of moral tone fostered by definite belief in, or at least occupation -with, the thought of an individual future life, as contrasted with the -nobility of tone engendered by such denials or abstractions from all -such beliefs as we find in Spinoza and Schleiermacher; and, finally, -the plausibility of the teaching, on the part of some distinguished -thinkers and poets, that a positive conviction of this our short -earthly life being the sole span of our individual consciousness -is directly productive of a certain deep tenderness, an heroic -concentration of attention, and a virile truthfulness, which are -unattainable, which indeed are weakened or rendered impossible by, -the necessarily vague anticipation of an unending future life; a hope -which, where operative at all, can but dwarf and deaden all earthly -aspiration and endeavour. - -(1) As to the first point, which has perhaps never been more -brilliantly affirmed than by Mr. Schiller,[203] I altogether doubt -whether the numerous appearances, which admittedly seem to point that -way, are rightly interpreted by such a conclusion. For it is, for one -thing, most certainly possible to be deeply convinced of the reality -and importance of the soul’s heightened after-life, and to have no -kind of belief or interest in Psychical Research, at least in such -Research as an intrinsically valuable aid to any specifically religious -convictions. No aloofness from such attempts to find spiritual -realities at the phenomenal level can, (unless it is clear that the -majority of educated Western Europeans share the naïve assumptions of -this position), indicate negation of, or indifference to, the belief in -Immortality.--And next, it is equally certain that precisely the most -fruitful form of the belief is that which conceives the After-life as -already involved in this one, and which, therefore, dwells specially, -not upon the posteriority in time, but upon the difference in kind -of that spiritual life of the soul which, even _hic et nunc_, can be -sought after and experienced, in ever imperfect degrees no doubt, yet -really and more and more. Here we ever get an approach to Simultaneity -and Eternity, instead of sheer succession and clock-time: and here -the fundamental attitude of the believer would appear only if pressed -to deny or exclude the deathlessness of the spirit and its life,--the -usual latency and simple implication of the positive conviction, in -nowise diminishing this conviction’s reality.--And, finally, it would -have to be seen whether those who are indifferent or sceptical as to -Immortal or Eternal Life, are appreciably fewer and largely other -than those who are careless as to the other deep implications and -requirements of spiritual experience. We may well doubt whether they -would turn out to be so. - -(2) As to the second point, we have already found how utterly -insuppressible is the pleasure, normally concomitant upon every act of -noble self-conquest; and how, though we can and should perform such -and all other acts, as far as possible, from the ultimate, determining -motive of thereby furthering the realization of the Kingdom of God, -there can be no solid truthfulness or sane nobility in insisting upon -attempts at thinking away and denying the fact and utility of that -concomitant pleasure. But if so, then a further, other-world extension -of that realization and of this concomitant happiness, and a belief -here below in such an eventual extension, cannot of themselves be -ignoble or debasing. Occasions for every degree and kind of purely -selfish and faultily natural acts, of acts inchoatively supernatural -but still predominantly slavish, reappear here, in close parallel to -the variety of disposition displayed by men towards every kind of -reality and ideal, towards the Family, Science, the State, Humanity, -where the same concomitances and the same high uses and mean abuses are -ever possible and actual. Neither here nor there should we attempt to -impoverish truth and life, in order to exclude the possibility of their -abuse.--And it would, of course, be profoundly unfair to contrast such -a rarely noble spirit as Spinoza among the deniers with the average -mind from among the affirmers. The average or the majority of the -deniers would not, I think, appear as more generous and devoted than -the corresponding average or majority on the other side. - -(3) And as to the supposed directly beneficial effects of a positive -denial of Immortality, such as have been sung for us by George -Eliot and Giovanni Pascoli, we can safely affirm that the special -tendernesses and quiet heroisms, deduced by them from such a negation, -are too obviously dependent upon spiritual implications and instincts, -for us to be able to put them directly to the credit of that denial. -Only in so far as Immortality were not a postulate intrinsically -connected with belief in objective and obligatory Beauty, Truth, and -Goodness,--in God as our origin and end,--could its persistent and -deliberate denial not be injurious to these fundamental convictions -and to the ultimate health of the soul’s life: and of this intrinsic -non-connection there is no sufficient evidence.--Certainly, in such -a case as Spinoza’s, the same strain of reasoning which makes him -abandon individual Immortality Ought, in logic, to prevent him, a -mere hopelessly determined link in the _Natura Naturata_, from ever -attaining to the free self-dedication of himself, as now a fully -responsible member of the _Natura Naturans_. And if not all the grand -depth of his spiritual instinct and moral nobility, and its persistence -in spite of its having no logical room in the fixedly naturalistic -element of his teaching, can be urged as an argument in favour of the -ultimate truth and ethical helpfulness of that whole element, neither -can it be urged with respect to what is presumably one part of that -element, his denial of personal Immortality. - - -II. CATHERINE’S GENERAL AFTER-LIFE CONCEPTIONS. - -Now Catherine’s general After-Life Conceptions in part bring into -interesting prominence, in part really meet and overcome, the -perplexities and mutually destructive alternatives which we have just -considered. I shall here again leave over to the next chapter the -simply ultimate questions, such as that of the pure Eternity _versus_ -the Unendingness of the soul; but shall allow myself, as to one set -of her general ideas, a little digression as to the probability of -their ultimate literary suggestion by Plato.--These Platonic passages -probably reached her too indirectly, and by means and in forms which I -have too entirely failed to discover, for me to be able to discuss them -in my chapter devoted to her assured and demonstrably direct literary -sources. But these sayings of Plato greatly help to illustrate the -meaning of her doctrine.--I shall group these, her general, positions -and implications under four heads, and shall consider three of these -as, in substance, profoundly satisfactory, but one of them, the second, -as acceptable only with many limitations, although this second has -obviously much influenced the form given by her to several of those -other conceptions. - - -1. _Forecasts of the Hereafter, based upon present experience._ - -First, then, we get, as the fundamental presupposition of the -whole Eschatology, a grandly sane, simple, and profound doctrine -formulated over and over again and applied throughout, with a splendid -consistency, as the key and limit to all her anticipations and -picturings. Only because of the fact, and of our conviction of the -fact, of the unbroken continuity and identity of God with Himself, -of the human soul with itself, and of the deepest of the relations -subsisting between that God and the soul, across the chasm formed by -our body’s death, and only in proportion as we can and do experience -and achieve, during this our earthly life, certain spiritual laws and -realities of a sufficiently elemental, universal, and fruitful, more or -less time- and space-less character, can we (whilst ever remembering -the analogical nature of such picturings even as to the soul’s life -here) safely and profitably forecast certain general features of the -future which is thus already so largely a present. But, given these -conditions in the present, we can and should forecast the future, -to the extent implied. And as Plato’s great imaginative projection, -his life-work, the _Republic_, achieves its original end, (of making -more readily understandable, by objectivizing on a large scale, the -life of the inner city of our own soul), in so far as he has rightly -understood the human soul and has found appropriate representations -of its powers, laws, and ideals in his future commonwealth, even -if we cannot accept this picture for political purposes and in all -its details: so is it also with Catherine’s projection, which, if -bolder in its subject-matter, is, most rightly, indefinitely more -general in its indications than is Plato’s great diagram of the soul. -Man’s spiritual personality, being held by her to survive death,--to -retain its identity and an at least equivalent consciousness, of that -identity,--the deepest experiences of that personality before the -body’s death are conceived as re-experienced by it, in a heightened -degree and form, after death itself. Hence these great pictures, of -what the soul will experience then, would remain profoundly true of -what the soul seeks and requires now, even if there were no _then_ at -all. - -And note particularly how only with regard to one stage and condition -of the spirit’s future life,--that of the purification of the imperfect -soul,--does she indulge in any at all direct doctrine or detailed -picturing; and this, doubtless, not only because she has experienced -much concerning this matter in her own life here, but also because -the projection of these experiences would still give us, not the -ultimate state, but more or less only a prolongation of our mixed, -joy-in-suffering life upon earth. As to the two ultimate states, we get -only quite incidental glimpses, although even these are strongly marked -by her general position and method. - - -2. _Catherine’s forecasts and present experience correspondingly -limited._ - -And next, coming to the projection itself, we naturally find it -to present all the strength and limitations of her own spiritual -experiences which are thus projected: her attitude towards the body -and towards human fellowship, (two subjects which are shown to be -closely inter-related by the continuous manner in which they stand -and fall together throughout the history of philosophy and religion,) -thus constitute the second general peculiarity of her Eschatology. We -have already noted, in her life, her strongly ecstatic, body-ignoring, -body-escaping type of religion; and how, even in her case, it tended to -starve the corporate, institutional conceptions and affections. Here, -in the projection, we find both the cause and the effect again, and on -a larger scale. Her continuous psycho-physical discomforts and keen -thirst for a unity and simplicity as rapid and complete as possible, -the joy and strength derived from ecstatic habits and affinities, would -all make her, without even herself being aware of it, drop all further -thought as to the future fate of that oppressive “prison-house” from -which her spirit had at last got free. - -Now such non-occupation with the fate of the body and of her -fellow-souls may appear quite appropriate in her Purgatorial -Eschatology, yet we cannot but find that, even here, it already -possesses grave disadvantages, and that it persists throughout all her -After-life conceptions. For in all the states and stages of the soul we -get a markedly unsocial, a _sola cum solo_ picture. And yet there is, -perhaps, no more striking difference, amongst their many affinities, -between Platonism and Christianity than the intense Individualism -which marks the great Greek’s doctrine, and the profoundly social -conception which pervades Our Lord’s own teaching,--in each case as -regards the next life as well as this one. Plotinus’s great culminating -commendation of “the flight of the alone to the Alone” continues -Plato’s tradition; whereas, if even St. Paul and the Joannine writings -speak at times as though the individual soul attained to its full -personality in and by direct intercourse with God alone, the Synoptic -Gospels, and at bottom also those two great lovers of Our Lord’s -spirit, never cease to emphasize the social constituent of the soul’s -life both here and hereafter. The Kingdom of Heaven, the Soul of -the Church, as truly constitutes the different personalities, their -spirituality and their joy, as they constitute it,--that great Organism -which, as such, is both first and last in the Divine thought and love. - -Here, in the at least partial ignoring of these great social facts, -we touch the main defect of most mystical outlooks; yet this defect -does not arise from what they possess, but from what they lack. For -solitude, and the abstractive, unifying, intuitive, emotional, mystical -element is also wanted, and this element and movement Catherine -exemplifies in rare perfection. Indeed, in the great classical, -central period of her life she had, as we know, combined all this -with much of the outward movement, society, detailed observation, -attachment, the morally _en-static_, the immanental type. Unfortunately -the same ill-health and ever-increasing predominance of the former -element, which turned her, quite naturally, to these eschatological -contemplations, and which indeed helped to give them their touching -tone of first-hand experience, also tended, of necessity, to make her -drop even such slight and lingering social elements as had formerly -coloured her thought. It is, then, only towards the understanding and -deepening of the former of these two necessary movements of religion, -that these, her latter-day enlargements of some of her deepest -experiences and convictions will be found true helps. - -Yet if the usual _ad extra_ disadvantages of such an abstractive -position towards the body are thus exemplified by her, in this her -unsocial, individualistic attitude, it is most interesting to note -how entirely she avoids the usual _ad intra_ drawbacks of this same -position. For if her whole attention, and, increasingly, even her -consciousness are, in true ecstatic guise, absorbed away from her -fellows and concentrated exclusively upon God in herself and herself -in God, yet this consciousness consists not only of _Noûs_, that dry -theoretic reason which, already by Plato, but still more by Aristotle, -is alone conceived as surviving the body, but contains also the upper -range of _Thumos_,--all those passions of the noblest kind,--love, -admiration, gratitude, utter self-donation, joy in purifying suffering -and in an ever-growing self-realization as part of the great plan of -God,--all the highest notes in that wondrous scale of deep feeling and -of emotionally coloured willing which Plato made dependent, not for its -character but for the possibility of its operation, upon the body’s -union with the soul.--And thus we see how, in her conception of the -soul’s own self within itself and of its relation to God, the Christian -idea of Personality, as of a many-sided organism in which Love and -Will are the very flower of the whole, has triumphed over the Platonic -presentation of the Spirit, in so far as this is taken to require and -achieve an ultimate sublimation free from all emotive elements. Thus -in her doctrine the whole Personality survives death, although this -Personality energizes only, as it were upwards, to God alone, and -not also sideways and downwards, towards its fellows and the lesser -children of God. - - -3. _Catherine’s forecast influenced by Plato._ - -Catherine’s third peculiarity consists in a rich and profound -organization of two doctrines, the one libertarian, the other -determinist; and requires considerable quotation from Plato, whose -teachings, bereft of all transmigration-fancies, seem clearly to -reappear here, (however complex may have been the mediation,) in -Catherine’s great conception. - -The determinist doctrine maintains that virtue and vice, in proportion -as they are allowed their full development, spontaneously and -necessarily attain to their own congenital consummation, a consummation -which consists, respectively, in the bliss inseparable from the final -and complete identity between the inevitable results upon itself of -the soul’s deliberate endeavours, and the indestructible requirements -of this same soul’s fundamental nature; and in the misery of the, now -fully felt but only gradually superable, or even, in other cases, -insuperable, antagonism between the inevitable consequences within its -own self of the soul’s more or less deliberate choosings, and those -same, here also ineradicable, demands of its own truest nature. - -As Marsilio Ficino says, in his _Theologia Platonica_, published in -Florence in 1482: “Virtue is reward in its first budding, reward is -virtue full-grown. Vice is punishment at the moment of its birth; -punishment is vice at its consummation. For, in each of these cases, -one and the same thing is first the simple seed and then the full ear -of corn; and one and the same thing is the full ear of corn and then -the food of man. Precisely the very things then that we sow in this our -(earthly) autumn, shall we reap in that (other-world) summer-day.”[204] -It is true that forensic terms and images are also not wanting in -Catherine’s sayings; but these, in part, run simply parallel to the -immanental conception without modifying it; in part, they are in -its service; and, in part, they are the work of the theologians’ -arrangements and glosses discussed in my Appendix. - -And the libertarian doctrine declares that it is the soul itself which, -in the beyond and immediately after death, chooses the least painful, -because the most expressive of her then actual desires, from among the -states which the natural effects upon her own self of her own earthly -choosings have left her interiorly free to choose. - -Now it is in this second doctrine especially that we find so detailed -an anticipation by Plato of a whole number of highly original and -characteristic points and combinations of points, as to render a -fortuitous concurrence between Catherine and Plato practically -impossible. Yet I have sought in vain, among Catherine’s authentic -sayings, actions, possessions, or friends, for any trace of direct -acquaintance with any of Plato’s writings. But Ficino’s Latin -translation of Plato, published, with immense applause, in Florence in -1483, 1484, must have been known, in those intensely Platonizing times, -to even non-professed Humanists in Genoa, long before Catherine’s death -in 1510, so that one or other of her intimates may have communicated -the substance of these Platonic doctrines to her.[205] Plotinus, of -whom Ficino published a Latin translation in 1492, contains but a -feeble echo of Plato on this point. Proclus, directly known only very -little till much after Catherine’s time, is in even worse case. The -Areopagite, who has so continuously taken over whole passages from -all three writers, although directly almost exclusively from Proclus, -contains nothing more immediately to the purpose than his impressive -sayings concerning Providence’s continuous non-forcing of the human -personality in its fundamental constitution and its free elections with -their inevitable consequences; hence Catherine cannot have derived her -ideas, in the crisp definiteness which they retain in her sayings, from -her cousin the Dominican nun and the Areopagite. And it is certain, as -we have seen, how scattered and inchoate are the hints which she may -have found in St. Paul, the Joannine writings, and Jacopone da Todi. -St. Augustine contains nothing that would be directly available,--an -otherwise likely source considering Catherine’s close connection with -the Augustinian Canonesses of S. Maria delle Grazie. - -In Plato, then, we get five conceptions and symbolic pictures that are -practically identical with those of Catherine. - -(1) First we get the conception of souls having each, in exact -accordance with the respective differences of their moral and spiritual -disposition and character, as these have been constituted by them here -below, a “place” or environment, expressive of that character, ready -for their occupation after the body’s death. “The soul that is pure -departs at death, herself invisible, to the invisible world,--to the -divine, immortal and rational: thither arriving, she lives in bliss. -But the soul that is impure at the time of her departure and is … -engrossed by the corporeal …, is weighed down and drawn back again into -the visible place (world).” - -And this scheme, of like disposition seeking a like place, is then -carried out, by the help of the theory of transmigration, as a -re-incarnation of these various characters into environments, bodies, -exactly corresponding to them: gluttonous souls are assigned to asses’ -bodies, tyrannous souls to those of wolves, and so on: in a word, -“there is no difficulty in assigning to all ‘a whither’ (a place) -answering to their general natures and propensities.”[206] For this -corresponds to a law which runs throughout all things,--a determinism -of consequences which does not prevent the liberty of causes. “The King -of the universe contrived a general plan, by which a thing of a certain -nature found a seat and place of a certain kind. But the formation of -this nature, he left to the wills of individuals.” - -Or, with the further spacial imagery of movements up, level, or down, -we get: “All things that have a soul change … and, in changing, move -according to law and the order of destiny. Lesser changes of nature -move on level ground, but great crimes sink … into the so-called lower -places …; and, when the soul becomes greatly different and divine, she -also greatly changes her place, which is now altogether holy.”[207] The -original, divinely intended “places” of souls are all high and good, -and similar to each other though not identical, each soul having its -own special “place”; and for this congenital “place” each soul has a -resistible yet ineradicable home-sickness. “The first incarnation” of -human souls which “distributes each soul to a star,” is ordained to -be similar for all.… “And when they have been of necessity implanted -in bodily forms, should they master their passions … they live in -righteousness; if otherwise, in unrighteousness. And he who lived well -through his allotted time shall be conveyed once more to a habitation -in his kindred star, and there shall enjoy a blissful and congenial -life; but failing this he shall pass into … such a form of (further) -incarnation as fits his disposition … until he shall overcome, by -reason, all that burthen that afterwards clung around him.”[208] - -If from all this we exclude the soul’s existence before any -beginning of its body, its transmigration into other bodies, and the -self-sufficiency of reason; and if we make it all to be penetrated -by God’s presence, grace, and love, and by our corresponding or -conflicting emotional and volitional as well as intellectual attitude: -we shall get Catherine’s position exactly. - -(2) But again, in at least one phase of his thinking, Plato pictures -the purification of the imperfect soul as effected, of at least as -begun, not in a succession of “places” of an extensionally small but -organic kind, bodies, but in a “place” of an extensionally larger but -inorganic sort,--the shore of a lake, where the soul has to wait. -“The Acherusian lake is the lake to the shores of which the many go -when they are dead; and, after waiting an appointed time, which to -some is longer and to others shorter, they are sent back to be born -as animals.” Here we evidently get a survival of the conception, -predominant in Homer, of a pain-and-joyless Hades, but limited here to -the middle, the imperfect class of souls, and followed, in their case, -by transmigration, to which alone, apparently, purification is directly -attached. - -In the same Dialogue we read later on: “Those who appear to have lived -neither well nor ill … go to the river Acheron, and are carried to the -lake; and there they dwell and are purified of their evil deeds … and -are absolved and receive the rewards of their good deeds according to -their deserts.” Here we have, evidently, still the same “many” and the -same place, the shores of the Acherusian lake, but also an explicit -affirmation of purification effected there, for this purification is -now followed directly, not by re-incarnation, but by the ultimate -happiness in the soul’s original and fundamentally congenial “place.” -And this scheme is far more conformable to Plato’s fundamental -position: for how can bodies, even lower than the human, help to purify -the soul which has become impure precisely on occasion of its human -body?--We can see how the Christian Purgatorial doctrine derives some -of its pictures from the second of these parallel passages; yet that -the “longer or shorter waiting” of the first passage also enters into -that teaching,--especially in its more ordinary modern form, according -to which there is, in this state, no intrinsic purification. - -And lower down we find: “Those who have committed crimes which, -although great, are not unpardonable,--for these it is necessary to -plunge (ἐμπεσεῖν) into Tartarus, the pains of which they are compelled -to undergo for a year; but at the end of the year they are borne to -the Acherusian lake. But those who appear incurable by reason of the -greatness of their crimes … such their appropriate destiny hurls -(ῤίπτει) into Tartarus, whence they never come forth.” Here we get a -Purgatory, pictured as a watery substance in which the more gravely -impure of the curable souls are immersed before arriving at the easier -purification, the waiting on the dry land alongside the lake; this -Purgatory is, as a “place” and, in intensity, identical with Hell; and -into this place the curable souls “plunge” and the incurable ones are -“hurled.”--Of this third passage Catherine retains the identification -of the pains of Purgatory and those of Hell; the “plunge,” or -“hurling,” of two distinct classes of souls into these pains; and -the mitigation, after a time, previous to complete cessation, of the -suffering in the case of the curable class. But the “plunge,” with her, -is common to all degrees of imperfectly pure souls; there is, for all -these souls, no change of “place” during their purgation, but only a -mitigation of suffering; and this mitigation is at work gradually and -from the first. And the ordinary modern Purgatorial teaching is like -this passage, in that it keeps the curable souls in Tartarus, say, for -one year, and lets them suffer there, apparently without mitigation, -throughout that time: and that, in the case of both classes of souls, -it conceives the punishment as extrinsic, vindictive, and inoperative. - -And a fourth _Phaedo_ passage tells us: “Those who are remarkable for -having led holy lives are released from this earthly prison, and go -to their pure home, which is above, and dwell in the purer earth,” -the Isles of the Just, in Oceanus. “And those, again, amongst these -who have duly purified themselves with philosophy, live henceforth -altogether without the body, in mansions fairer far than these.” Here -we get, alongside of the two Purgatories and the one Hell, two Heavens, -of which the first is but taken over from Homer and Pindar, but of -which the second is Plato’s own conception. Catherine, in entire accord -with the ordinary teaching, has got but one “place” of each kind; and -her Heaven corresponds, apart from his formal and final exclusion of -every sort of body, to the second of these Platonic Heavens; whilst, -here again, the all-encompassing presence of God’s love for souls as -of the soul’s love for God, which, in her teaching, is the beginning, -means, and end of the whole movement, effects an indefinite difference -between the two positions.[209] - -(3) Yet Plato, in his most characteristic moods, explicitly anticipates -Catherine as to the intrinsic, ameliorative nature and work of -Purgatory: “The proper office of punishment is two-fold: he who -is rightly punished ought either to become better … by it, or he -ought to be made an example to his fellows, that they may see what -he suffers and … become better. Those who are punished by Gods and -men and improved, are those whose sins are curable … by pain and -suffering:--for there is no other way in which they can be delivered -from evil, as in this world so also in the other. But the others are -incurable--the time has passed at which they can receive any benefit -themselves.… Rhadamanthus,” the chief of the three nether-world judges, -“looks with admiration on the soul of some just one, who has lived in -holiness and truth … and sends him” without any intervening suffering -“to the Isles of the Blessed.… I consider how I shall present my soul -whole and undefiled before the Judge, in that day.”[210] Here the last -sentence is strikingly like in form as well as in spirit to many a -saying of St. Paul and Catherine. - -(4) But the following most original passages give us a sentiment and an -image which, in their special drift, are as opposed to St. Paul, and -indeed to the ordinary Christian consciousness, as they are dear to -Catherine, in this matter so strongly, although probably unconsciously, -Platonist, indeed Neo-Platonist, in her affinities. “In the time of -Kronos, indeed down to that of Zeus, the Judgment was given on the day -on which men were to die,” _i.e._ immediately _before_ their death; -“and the consequence was, that the judgments were not well given,--the -souls found their way to the wrong places. Zeus said: ‘The reason is, -that the judged have their clothes on, for they are alive.… There are -many, having evil souls, who are apparelled in fair bodies or wrapt -round in wealth and rank.… The Judges are awed by them; and they -themselves too have their clothes on when judging: their eyes and -ears and their whole bodies are interposed, as a veil, before their -own souls. What is to be done? … Men shall be entirely stript before -they are judged, for they shall be judged when dead; the Judge too -shall be naked, that is, dead: he, with his naked soul, shall pierce -into the other naked soul immediately _after_ each man dies … and is -bereft of all his kith and kin, and has left behind him all his brave -attire upon earth, and thus the Judgment will be just.’”[211]--If we -compare this with St. Paul’s precisely contrary instinct and desire to -be “clothed upon” at death, “lest we be found naked,” i.e. without the -protection of any kind of body; and then realize Catherine’s intense -longing for “nudità,”--to strip herself here, as far as possible, from -all imperfection and self-delusion before the final stripping off of -the body in death, and to appear, utterly naked, before the utterly -naked eye of God, so that no “clothes” should remain requiring to -be burnt away by the purifying fires,[212] the profound affinity of -sentiment and imagery between Catherine and Plato--and this on a point -essentially Platonic,--is very striking. - -(5) But, above all, in his deep doctrine as to the soul’s spontaneous -choice after death of that condition, “place,” which, owing to the -natural effects within her of her earthly willings and self-formation, -she cannot but now find the most congenial to herself, Plato appears as -the ultimate source of a literary kind for Catherine’s most original -view, which otherwise is, I think, without predecessors. “The souls,” -he tells us in the _Republic_, “immediately on their arrival in the -other world, were required to go to Lachesis,” one of the three Fates. -And “an interpreter, having taken from her lap a number of lots and -plans of life, spoke as follows: ‘Thus saith Lachesis, the daughter of -Necessity.… “Your destiny shall not be allotted to you, but you shall -choose it for yourselves. Let him who draws the first lot, be the first -to choose a life which shall be his irrevocably.… The responsibility -lies with the chooser, Heaven is guiltless.”’” “No settled character -of soul was included in the plans of life, because, with the change -of life, the soul inevitably became changed itself.” “It was a truly -wonderful sight, to watch how each soul selected its life.… When all -the souls had chosen their lives, Lachesis dispatched with each of -them the Destiny he had selected, to guard his life and satisfy his -choice.”[213] And in the _Phaedrus_ Plato tells us that “at the end of -the first thousand years” (of the first incarnation) “the good souls -and also the evil souls both come to cast lots and to choose their -second life; and they may take any that they like.”[214] - -In both the dialogues the lots are evidently taken over from popular -mythology, but are here made merely to introduce a certain orderly -succession among the spontaneous choosings of the souls themselves, -whilst the lap of the daughter of Necessity, spread out before all -the choosers previous to their choice, and the separate, specially -appropriate Destiny that accompanies each soul after its choice, -indicate plainly that, although the choice itself is the free act -and pure self-expression of each soul’s then present disposition, -yet that this disposition is the necessary result of its earthly -volitions and self-development or self-deformation, and that the -choice now made becomes, in its turn, the cause of certain inevitable -consequences,--of a special environment which itself is then productive -of special effects upon, and of special occasions for, the final -working out of this soul’s character.--Plotinus retains the doctrine: -“the soul chooses there” in the Other world,--“its Daemon and its kind -of life.”[215] But neither Proclus nor Dionysius has the doctrine, -whilst Catherine, on the contrary, reproduces it with a penetrating -completeness. - - -4. _Simplifications characteristic of Catherine’s Eschatology._ - -And under our last, fourth head, we can group the simplifications -characteristic of Catherine’s Eschatology. - -(1) One simplification has, of course, for now some fifteen hundred -years, been the ordinary Christian conception: I mean the elimination -of the time-element between the moment of death and the beginning of -the three states. Yet it is interesting to note how by far the greatest -of the Latin Fathers, St. Augustine, who died in A.D. 430, still clings -predominantly to the older Christian and Jewish conception of the soul -abiding in a state of shrunken, joy-and-painless consciousness from -the moment of the body’s death up to that of the general resurrection -and judgment. “After this short life, thou wilt not yet be where the -saints will be,” _i.e._ in Heaven. “Thou wilt not yet be there: who -is ignorant of this? But thou canst straightway be where the rich -man descried the ulcerous beggar to be a-resting, far away,” _i.e._ -in Limbo. “Placed in that rest, thou canst await the day of judgment -with security, when thou shalt receive thy body also, when thou shalt -be changed so as to be equal to an Angel.”[216] Only with regard to -Purgatory, a state held by him, in writings of his last years, 410-430 -A.D., to be possible, indeed probable, does he make an exception to -his general rule: for such purification would have to take place” in -the interval of time between the death of the body and the last day of -condemnation and reward.”[217] - -It is doubtless the still further fading away of the expectation, so -vivid and universal in early Christian times, of the proximity of Our -Lord’s Second Advent, and the tacit prevalence of Greek affinities and -conceptions concerning the bodiless soul, that helped to eliminate, -at last universally, this interval of waiting, in the case of souls -too good or too bad for purgation, from the general consciousness -of at least Western Christendom. The gain in this was the great -simplification and concentration of the immediate outlook and interest; -the loss was the diminished apprehension of the essentially complex, -concrete, synthetic character of man’s nature, and of the necessity for -our assuming that this characteristic will be somehow preserved in this -nature’s ultimate perfection. - -(2) There is a second simplification in Catherine which, though here -St. Augustine leads the way, is less common among Christians: her three -other-world “places” are not, according to her ultimate thought, three -distinct spacial extensions and localities, filled, respectively, with -ceaselessly suffering, temporarily suffering, and ceaselessly blessed -souls; but they are, (notwithstanding all the terms necessitated by -such spacial picturings as “entering,” “coming out,” “plunging into”), -so many distinct states and conditions of the soul, of a painful, -mixed, or joyful character. We shall have these her ultimate ideas very -fully before us presently. But here I would only remark that this her -union of a picturing faculty, as vivid as the keenest sense-perception, -and of a complete non-enslavement to, a vigorous utilization of, -these life-like spacial projections, by a religious instinct and -experience which never forgets that God and souls are spirits, to whom -our ordinary categories of space and extension, time and motion, do -not and cannot in strictness apply, is as rare as it is admirable; -and that, though her intensely anti-corporeal and non-social attitude -made such a position more immediately easy for her than it can be for -those who remain keenly aware of the great truths involved in the -doctrines of the Resurrection of the Body and the Communion of Saints, -this her trend of thought brings into full articulation precisely the -deepest of our spiritual apprehensions and requirements, whilst it is -not her fault if it but further accentuates some of our intellectual -perplexities. - -We get much in St. Augustine, which he himself declares to have -derived, in the first instance, from “the writings of the Platonists,” -which doubtless means above all Plotinus, (that keen spiritual thinker -who can so readily be traced throughout this part of the great -Convert’s teaching), as to this profound incommensurableness between -spiritual presence, energizing, and affectedness on the one hand, and -spacial position, extension, and movement on the other. “What place is -there within me, to which my God can come? … I would not exist at all, -unless Thou already wert within me.” “Thou wast never a place, and yet -we have receded from Thee; and we have drawn near to Thee, yet Thou -art never a place.” “ Are we submerged and do we emerge? Yet it is not -places into which we are plunged and out of which we rise. What can be -more like to places and yet more unlike? For here the affections are in -case,--the impurity of our spirit, which flows downwards, oppressed by -the love of earthly cares; and the holiness of Thy Spirit, which lifts -us upwards with the love of security.”[218] For, as he teaches “the -spiritual creature can only be changed by times,”--a succession within -a duration: “by remembering what it had forgotten, or by learning -what it did not know, or by willing what it did not will. The bodily -creature can be changed by times and places,” by spacial motion, “from -earth to heaven, from heaven to earth, from east to west.” “That thing -is not moved through space which is not extended in space … the soul is -not considered to move in space, unless it be held to be a body.”[219] - -In applying the doctrine just expressed to eschatological matters, St. -Augustine concludes: “If it be asked whether the soul, when it goes -forth from the body, is borne to some corporeal places, or to such as, -though incorporeal, are like to bodies, or to what is more excellent -than either: I readily answer that, unless it have some kind of body, -it is not borne to bodily places at all, or, at least, that it is not -borne to them by bodily motion.… But I myself do not think that it -possesses any body, when it goes forth from this earthly body.… It gets -borne, according to its deserts, to spiritual conditions, or to penal -places having a similitude to bodies.”[220] - -The reader will readily note a curiously uncertain frame of mind -in this last utterance. I take it that Plotinian influences are -here being checked by the Jewish conception of certain, definitely -located, provision-chambers (_promptuaria_), in which all souls are -placed for safe keeping, between the time of the body’s death and its -resurrection. So in the Fourth Book of Esra (of about 90 A.D.), “the -souls of the just in their chambers said: ‘How long are we to remain -here?’”; and in the Apocalypse of Baruch (of about 150-250 A.D.), “at -the coming of the Messiah, the provision-chambers will open, in which -the” whole, precise “number of the souls of the just have been kept, -and they will come forth.”[221] - -But it is St. Thomas Aquinas who, by the explicit and consistent -adoption and classification of these _promptuaria receptacula_, reveals -to us more clearly the perplexities and fancifulnesses involved in -the strictly spacial conception. “Although bodies are not assigned -to souls (immediately) after death, yet certain bodily places are -congruously assigned to these souls in accordance with the degree of -their dignity, in which places they are, as it were, locally, in the -manner in which bodiless things can be in space: each soul having a -higher place assigned to it, according as it approaches more or less -to the first substance, God, whose seat, according to Scripture, is -Heaven.” “In the Scriptures God is called the Sun, since He is the -principle of spiritual life, as the physical sun is of bodily life; -and, according to this convention, … souls spiritually illuminated have -a greater fitness for luminous bodies, and sin-darkened souls for dark -places.” “It is probable that, as to local position, Hell and the Limbo -of the Fathers constitute one and the same place, or are more or less -continuous.” “The place of Purgatory adjoins (that of) Hell.” “There -are altogether five places ready to receive (_receptanda_) souls bereft -of their bodies: Paradise, the Limbo of the Fathers, Purgatory, Hell, -and the Limbo of Infants.”[222] - -No doubt all these positions became the common scholastic teaching. But -then, as Cardinal Bellarmine cogently points out: “no ancient, as far -as I know, has written that the Earthly Paradise was destroyed … and I -have read a large number who affirm its existence. This is the doctrine -of all the Scholastics, beginning with St. Thomas, and of the Fathers. -… St. Augustine indeed appears to rank this truth amongst the dogmas -of faith.”[223] We shall do well, then, not to press these literal -localization-schemes, especially since, according to St. Augustine’s -penetrating analysis, our spiritual experiences, already in this our -earthly existence, have a distinctly non-spacial character. Catherine’s -position, if applied to the central life of man here, and hence -presumptively hereafter, remains as true and fresh and unassailable as -ever. - -(3) And her last simplification consists in taking the Fire of Hell, -the Fire of Purgatory, and the Fire and Light of Heaven as profoundly -appropriate symbols or descriptions of the variously painful or joyous -impressions produced, through the differing volitional attitudes of -souls towards Him, by the one God’s intrinsically identical presence -in each and all. In all three cases, throughout their several grades, -there are ever but two realities, the Spirit-God and the spirit-soul, -in various states of inter-relation. - -Here again it is Catherine’s complete abstraction from the body which -renders such a view easy and, in a manner, necessary for her mind. But -here I would only emphasize the impressive simplicity and spirituality -of view which thus, as in the material world it finds the one sun-light -and the one fire-heat, which, in themselves everywhere the same, vary -indefinitely in their effects, owing to the varying condition of the -different bodies which meet the rays and flames; so, in the Spiritual -World it discovers One supreme spiritual Energy and Influence which, -whilst ever self-identical, is assimilated, deflected, or resisted by -the lesser spirits, with inevitably joyous, mixed, or painful states -of soul, since they can each and all resist, but cannot eradicate that -Energy’s impression within their deepest selves. And though, even with -her, the Sun-light image remains quasi-Hellenic and Intellectual, and -the Fire-heat picture is more immediately Christian and Moral: yet -she also frequently takes the sunlight as the symbol of the achieved -Harmony and Peace, and the Fire-heat as that of more or less persisting -Conflict and Pain. She is doubtless right in keeping both symbols, and -in ever thinking of each as ultimately implying the other, for God is -Beauty and Truth, as well as Goodness and Love, and man is made with -the indestructible aspiration after Him in His living completeness. - -And here again Catherine has a complicated doctrinal history behind her. - -We have already considered the numerous Scriptural passages where -God and His effects upon the soul are symbolized as light and fire; -and those again where joy or, contrariwise, trial and suffering are -respectively pictured by the same physical properties. And Catherine -takes the latter passages as directly explanatory of the first, in -so far as these joys and sufferings are spiritual in their causes or -effects. - -Among the Greek Fathers, Clement of Alexandria tells us that “the Fire” -of Purgatory,--for he has no Eternal Damnation,--“is a rational,” -spiritual, “fire that penetrates the soul”; and Origen teaches that -“each sinner himself lights the flame of his own fire, and is not -thrown into a fire that has been lit before that moment and that exists -in front of him.… His conscience is agitated and pierced by its own -pricks.” Saints Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzum are more or -less influenced by Origen on this point. And St. John Damascene, who -died in about 750 A.D., says explicitly that the fire of Hell is not a -material fire, that it is very different from our ordinary fire, and -that men hardly know what it is.[224] - -Among the Latins, St. Ambrose declares: “neither is the gnashing, a -gnashing of bodily teeth; nor is the everlasting fire, a fire of bodily -flames; nor is the worm, a bodily one.”--St. Jerome, in one passage, -counts the theory of the non-physical fire as one of Origen’s errors; -but elsewhere he mentions it without any unfavourable note, and even -enumerates several Scripture-texts which favour it, and admits that -“‘the worm which dieth not and the fire which is not quenched,’ is -understood, by the majority of interpreters (_a plerisque_), of the -conscience of sinners which tortures them.”[225]--St. Augustine, in -413 A.D., declares: “In the matter of the pains of the wicked, both -the unquenchable fire and the intensely living worm are interpreted -differently by different commentators. Some interpreters refer both -to the body, others refer both to the soul; and some take the fire -literally, in application to the body, and the worm figuratively, -in application to the soul, which latter opinion appears the more -credible.” Yet when, during the last years of his life, he came, -somewhat tentatively, to hold an other-world Purgatory as well, he -throughout assimilated this Purgatory’s fire to the fire of this-world -sufferings. Thus in 422 A.D.: “Souls which renounce the wood, hay, -straw, built upon that foundation (I Cor. iii, 11-15), not without pain -indeed (since they loved these things with a carnal affection), but -with faith in the foundation, a faith operative through love … arrive -at salvation, through a certain fire of pain.… Whether men suffer these -things in this life only, or such-like judgments follow even after -this life--in either case, this interpretation of that text is not -discordant with the truth.” “‘He shall be saved yet so as by fire,’ -because the pain, over the loss of the things he loved, burns him. It -is not incredible that some such thing takes place even after this life -… that some of the faithful are saved by a certain purgatorial fire, -more quickly or more slowly, according as they have less or more loved -perishable things.”[226] - -St. Thomas, voicing and leading Scholastic opinion, teaches that the -fire of Purgatory is the same as that of Hell; and Cardinal Bellarmine, -who died in 1621, tells us: “The common opinion of theologians is that -the fire of Purgatory is a real and true fire, of the same kind as an -earthly fire. This opinion, it is true, is not of faith, but it is very -probable,”--because of the “consent of the scholastics, who cannot be -despised without temerity,” and also because of “the eruptions of Mount -Etna.”[227] Yet the Council of Florence had, in 1439, restricted itself -to the quite general proposition that “if men die truly penitent, -in the love of God, before they have satisfied … for their sins … -their souls are purified by purgatorial pains after death”; thus -very deliberately avoiding all commitment as to the nature of these -pains.[228] Cardinal Gousset, who died in 1866, tells us: “The more -common opinion amongst theologians makes the sufferings of Purgatory -to consist in the pain of fire, or at least in a pain analogous to -that of fire.”[229] This latter position is practically identical with -Catherine’s. - -As to the fire of Hell, although here especially the Scholastics, old -and new, are unanimous, it is certain that there is no definition or -solemn judgment of the Church declaring it to be material. On this -point again we find St. Thomas and those who follow him involved in -practically endless difficulties and in, for us now, increasingly -intolerable subtleties, where they try to show how a material fire -can affect an immaterial spirit. Bossuet, so severely orthodox in all -such matters, preaching, before the Court, about sin becoming in Hell -the chastisement of the sinner, does not hesitate to finish thus: “We -bear within our hearts the instrument of our punishment. ‘I shall -produce fire from thy midst, which shall devour thee’ (Ezek. xxviii, -18). I shall not send it against thee from afar, it will ignite in -thy conscience, its flames will arise from thy midst, and it will be -thy sins which will produce it.”[230]--And the Abbé F. Dubois, in a -careful article in the Ecclesiastical _Revue du Clergé Français_ of -Paris, has recently expressed the conviction that “the best minds of -our time, which are above being suspected of yielding to mere passing -fashions, feel the necessity of abandoning the literal interpretation, -judged to be insufficient, of the ancient symbols; and of returning -to a freer exegesis, of which some of the Ancients have given us the -example.”[231] Among these helpful “Ancients” we cannot but count -Catherine, with her One God Who is the Fire of Pain and the Light of -Joy to souls, according as they resist Him or will Him, either here or -hereafter. - - -III. CATHERINE AND ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. - - -_Introductory: four doctrines and difficulties to be considered._ - -Taking now the three great after-life conditions separately, in the -order of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven, I would first of all note that -some readers may be disappointed that Catherine did not, like our -own English Mystic, the entirely orthodox optimist, Mother Juliana -of Norwich--her _Revelations_ belong to the year 1373 A.D.--simply -proclaim that, whilst the teaching and meaning of Christ and His -Church would come true, all, in ways known to God alone, would yet -be well.[232] In this manner, without any weakening of traditional -teaching, the whole dread secret as to the future of evil-doers is -left in the hands of God, and a beautifully boundless trust and hope -glows throughout those contemplations. - -Yet, as I hope to show as we go along, certain assumptions and -conceptions, involved in the doctrine of Eternal Punishment, cannot -be systematically excluded, or even simply ignored, without a grave -weakening of the specifically Christian earnestness; and that, -grand as is, in certain respects, the idea of the Apocatastasis, -the Final Restitution of all Things and Souls--as taught by Clement -and Origen--it is not, at bottom, compatible with the whole drift, -philosophy, and tone, (even apart from specific sayings) of Our Lord. -And this latter teaching--of the simply abiding significance and effect -of our deliberate elections during this our one testing-time,--and -not that of an indefinite series of chances and purifications with -an ultimate disappearance of all difference between the results of -the worst life and the best, answers to the deepest postulates and -aspirations of the most complete and delicate ethical and spiritual -sense. For minds that can discriminate between shifting fashions and -solid growth in abiding truth, that will patiently seek out the deepest -instinct and simplest implications underlying the popular presentations -of the Doctrine of Abiding Consequences, and that take these -implications as but part of a larger whole: this doctrine still, and -now again, presents itself as a permanent element of the full religious -consciousness. - -It would certainly be unfair to press Catherine’s rare and incidental -sayings on Hell into a formal system. Yet those remarks are deep and -suggestive, and help too much to interpret, supplement, and balance -her central, Purgatorial teaching, and indeed to elucidate her general -religious principles, for us to be able to pass them over. We have -already sufficiently considered the question as to the nature of the -Fire; and that as to Evil Spirits is reserved for the next Chapter. -Here I shall consider four doctrines and difficulties, together with -Catherine’s attitude towards them: the soul’s final fate, dependent -upon the character of the will’s act or active disposition at the -moment of the body’s death; the total moral perversion of the lost; the -mitigation of their pains; and the eternity of their punishment. - - -1. _Eternity dependent on the earthly life’s last moment._ - -Now as to the soul’s final fate being made dependent upon the -character of that soul’s particular act or disposition at the last -moment previous to death, this teaching, prominent in parts of the -_Trattato and Vita_, goes back ultimately to Ezekiel, who, as Prof. -Charles interestingly shows, introduces a double individualism into -the older, Social and Organic, Eschatology of the Hebrew Prophets. -For Man is seen, by him, as responsible for his own acts alone, and -as himself working out separately his own salvation or his own doom; -and this individual man again is looked at, not in his organic unity, -but as repeating himself in a succession of separate religious acts. -The individual act is taken to be a true expression of the whole man -at the moment of its occurrence: and hence, if this act is wicked at -the moment of the advent of the Kingdom, the agent will rightfully be -destroyed; but if it be righteous, he will be preserved.[233]--Now -the profound truth and genuine advance thus proclaimed, who can doubt -them? And yet it is clear that the doctrine here is solidly true, only -if taken as the explicitation and supplement, and even in part as the -corrective, of the previously predominant teaching. Take the Ezekielian -doctrine as complete, even for its own time, or as final over against -the later, the Gospel depth of teaching, (with its union of the social -body and of individual souls, and of the soul’s single acts and of the -general disposition produced by and reacting upon these acts), and you -get an all but solipsistic Individualism and an atomistic Psychology, -and you offend Christianity and Science equally. - -It is evident that Catherine, if she can fairly be taxed with what, -if pressed, would, in her doctrine rather than in her life, be an -excessive Individualism, is, in her general teaching and practice, -admirably free from Psychological Atomism; indeed did any soul ever -understand better the profound reality of habits, general dispositions, -tones of mind and feeling and will, as distinct from the single acts -that gradually build them up and that, in return, are encircled and -coloured by them all? Her whole Purgatorial doctrine stands and falls -by this distinction, and this although, with a profound self-knowledge, -she does not hesitate to make the soul express, in one particular act -after death,--that of the Plunge,--an even deeper level of its true -attitude of will and of its moral character than is constituted by -those imperfect habits of the will, habits which it will take so much -suffering and acceptance of suffering gradually to rectify. - -Thus the passages in which Catherine seems to teach that God can and -does, as it were, catch souls unawares, calling them away, and finally -deciding their fate on occasion of any and every _de facto_ volitional -condition at the instant of death, however little expressive of the -radical determination of that soul such an act or surface-state may be, -will have, (even if they be genuine, and most of them have doubtlessly -grown, perhaps have completely sprung up, under the pen of sermonizing -scribes), to be taken as hortatory, hence as partly hyperbolical. -And such an admission will in nowise deny the possibility for the -soul to express its deliberate and full disposition and determination -in a single act or combination of acts; nor that the other-world -effects will follow according to such deep, deliberate orientations -of the character: it will only deny that, at any and every moment, -any and every act of the soul sufficiently expresses its deliberate -disposition. Certainly it is comparatively rarely that the soul exerts -its full liberty, in an act of true, spiritual self-realization; and -an analogous rarity cannot but be postulated by religious philosophy -for contrary acts, of an approximately equal fulness of deliberation -and accuracy of representation, with regard to the soul’s volitional -state. And yet the operative influence towards such rare, fully -self-expressive acts of the right kind, and the aid towards similar, -massive, and truly representative volitions of the wrong kind, afforded -by even quite ordinary half-awake acts and habits of respectively good -or evil quality are so undeniable, and it is so impossible to draw -a general line as to where such wishes pass into full willings and -deliberate states: that the prevalence of a hortatory attitude towards -the whole subject is right and indeed inevitable. - - -2. _The reprobate will of the lost._ - -As to Moral Perversion, the reprobate will of the lost, we find that -Catherine approaches the question from two different, and at bottom, -on this point, incompatible, systems; but some incidental and short -sayings of hers give us suggestive hints towards a consistent position -in this difficult matter. - -Catherine has a double approach. For, consistently with the strong -Neo-Platonist, Dionysian strain in her mind, she frequently teaches and -implies that Evil is the absence of Good, of Love, and nothing positive -at all. In this case Evil would not only be less strong than good--only -Manichaeans would maintain that they were equal--but, as against the -constructive force of good, it would have no kind even of destructive -strength. Varying amounts, degrees, and kinds of good, but good and -only good, everywhere, would render all, even transitory, pollution of -the soul, and all, even passing, purification of it, so much actual -impossibility and theoretical superstition. All that survived at all, -could but be good; and at most some good might be added, but no evil -could be removed, since none would exist.--Yet all this is, of course, -strongly denied and supplanted by the, at first sight, less beautiful, -but far deeper and alone fully Christian, position of her specifically -Purgatorial teaching. Here Evil is something positive, an active -disposition, orientation, and attachment of the will; it is not without -destructive force; and its cure is a positive change in that will and -its habits, and not a mere addition of good. Yet it is plain that, even -exclusively within the implications of this deeper conviction, there -is no necessity to postulate unmixed evil in the disposition of any -soul. In some the evil would be triumphing over the good; in others -good would be triumphing over evil,--each over the other, in every -degree of good or of evil, up to the all but complete extinction of all -inclinations to evil or to good respectively. - -And Catherine has suggestive sayings. For one or two of them go, at -least in their implications, beyond a declaration as to the presence -of God’s extrinsic mercy in Hell, a presence indicated by a mitigation -of the souls’ sufferings to below what these souls deserve; and even -beyond the Areopagite’s insistence upon the presence of some real good -in these souls, since he hardly gets beyond their continuous possession -of those non-moral goods, existence, intelligence, and will-power.[234] -For when she says, “The ray of God’s mercy shines even in Hell,” she -need not, indeed, mean more than that extrinsic mercy, and its effect, -that mitigation. But when she declares: “if a creature could be found -that did not participate in the divine Goodness,--that creature would, -as it were, be as malignant as God is good,” we cannot, I think, avoid -applying this to the moral dispositions of such souls.[235] - -Now I know that St. Thomas had already taught, in at first sight -identical terms: “Evil cannot exist (quite) pure without the admixture -of good, as the Supreme Good exists free from all admixture of evil.… -Those who are detained in Hell, are not bereft of all good”;[236] and -yet he undoubtedly maintained the complete depravation of the will’s -dispositions in these souls. And, again, after Catherine’s first -declaration there follow, (at least in the text handed down in the -_Vita_), words which explain that extrinsic mercy, not as mitigating -the finite amount of suffering due to the sinner, but as turning the -infinite suffering due to the sinner’s infinite malice, into a finite, -though indefinite amount; and hence, in the second declaration, a -corresponding interior mercy may be signified--God’s grace preventing -the sinner from being infinitely wicked. - -But Catherine, unlike St. Thomas, expressly speaks not only of Good and -Evil, but of Good and Malignancy; and Malignancy undoubtedly refers -to dispositions of the will. And even if the words, now found as the -sequel to the first saying, be authentic, they belong to a different -occasion, and cannot be allowed to force the meaning of words spoken -at another time. In this latter saying the words “as it were” show -plainly that she is not thinking of a possible infiniteness of human -wickedness which has been changed, through God’s mercy, to an actual -finitude of evil; but is simply asking herself whether a man could be, -not infinitely but wholly, malignant. For she answers that, were this -possible, a man would “as it were” be as malignant as God is good, and -thus shows that the malignancy, which she denies, would only in a sense -form a counterpart to God’s benevolence: since, though the man would be -as entirely malignant as God is entirely good, God would still remain -infinite in His goodness as against the finitude of Man’s wickedness. - -The difficulties of such a combination of convictions are, of course, -numerous and great. Psychologically it seems hard to understand why -this remnant of good disposition should be unable to germinate further -and further good, so that, at last, good would leaven the whole -soul. From the point of view of any Theodicy, it appears difficult -to justify the unending exclusion of such a soul from growth in, and -the acquirement of, a predominantly good will and the happiness that -accompanies such a will. And the testimony of Our Lord Himself and of -the general doctrine of the Church appear definitely opposed: for does -not His solemn declaration: “Hell, where their worm dieth not” (Mark -ix, 48), find its authoritative interpretation in the common Church -teaching as to the utterly reprobate will of the lost? And indeed -Catherine herself, in her great saying that if but one little drop of -Love could fall into Hell (that is, surely, if but the least beginning -of a right disposition towards God could enter those souls) Hell would -be turned into Heaven, seems clearly to endorse this position. - -And yet, we have full experience in this life of genuinely good -dispositions being present, and yet not triumphing or even spreading -within the soul; of such conditions being, in various degrees, our own -fault; and of such defeat bringing necessarily with it more or less of -keen suffering.--There would be no injustice if, after a full, good -chance and sufficient aid had been given to the soul to actualize its -capabilities of spiritual self-constitution, such a soul’s deliberately -sporadic, culpably non-predominant, good did not, even eventually, lead -to the full satisfaction of that soul’s essential cravings.--The saying -attributed to Our Lord, which appears in St. Mark alone, is a pure -quotation from Isaiah lxvi, 24 and Ecclesiasticus vii, 17, and does not -seem to require more than an abiding distress of conscience, an eternal -keenness of remorse. - -Again, the common Church-teaching is undoubtedly voiced by St. Thomas -in the words, “Since these souls are completely averse to the final end -of right reason, they must be declared to be without any good will.” -Yet St. Thomas himself (partly in explanation of the Areopagite’s -words, “the evil spirits desire the good and the best, namely, to -be, to live, and to understand”), is obliged to distinguish between -such souls’ deliberate will and their “natural will and inclination,” -and to proclaim that this latter, “which is not from themselves but -from the Author of nature, who put this inclination into nature … can -indeed be good.”[237] And, if we would not construct a scheme flatly -contradictory of all earthly experience, we can hardly restrict the -soul, even in the beyond, to entirely indeliberate, good inclinations, -and to fully deliberate, bad volitions, but cannot help interposing -an indefinite variety of inchoative energizings, half-wishes, and -the like, and thinking of these as mixed with good and evil. Indeed -this conclusion seems also required by the common teaching that the -suffering there differs from soul to soul, and this because of the -different degrees of the guilt: for such degrees depend undoubtedly -even more upon the degree of deliberation and massiveness of the will -than upon the degree of objective badness in the deed, and hence can -hardly fail to leave variously small or large fragments of more or less -good and imperfectly deliberate wishings and energizings present in the -soul. - -And finally Catherine’s “little drop of Love” would, she says, “at -once” turn Hell into Heaven, and hence cannot mean some ordinary good -moral disposition or even such supernatural virtues as theological -Faith and Hope, but Pure Love alone, which latter queen of all the -virtues she is explicitly discussing there. Thus she in nowise requires -the absence from these souls of a certain remnant of semi-deliberate -virtue of a less exalted, and not necessarily regenerative kind. - - -3. _Mitigation of the sufferings of the lost._ - -As to the Mitigation of the Suffering, it is remarkable that Catherine, -who has been so bold concerning the source of the pains, and the -dispositions, of the lost souls, does not more explicitly teach such -an alleviation. I say “remarkable,” because important Fathers and -Churches, that were quite uninfected by Origenism, have held and have -acted upon such a doctrine. St. Augustine, in his _Enchiridion_ (A.D. -423 (?)) tells us that “in so far as” the Offering of the Sacrifice of -the Altar and Alms “profit” souls in the beyond, “they profit them by -procuring a full remission (of the punishment), or at least that their -damnation may become more tolerable.” And after warning men against -believing in an end to the sufferings of the lost, he adds: “But let -them consider, if they like, that the sufferings of the damned are -somewhat mitigated during certain intervals of time.”[238]--Saints -John Chrysostom and John Damascene, thoroughly orthodox Greek Fathers, -and the deeply devout hymn-writer Prudentius among the Latins, teach -similar doctrine; and in many ancient Latin missals, ranging from the -eleventh to the fourteenth century, prayers for the Mitigation of the -Sufferings of the Damned are to be found.[239] - -Hence the great Jesuit Theologian Petau, though not himself -sharing this view, can declare: “Concerning such a breathing-time -(_respiratio_) of lost souls, nothing certain has as yet been decreed -by the Catholic Church, so that this opinion of most holy Fathers -should not temerariously be rejected as absurd, even though it be -foreign to the common opinion of Catholics in our time.”[240] And the -Abbé Emery, that great Catholic Christian, the second founder of St. -Sulpice, who died in 1811, showed, in a treatise _On the Mitigation -of the Pains of the Damned_, that this view had also been held by -certain Scholastic Theologians, and had been defended, without any -opposition, by Mark of Ephesus, in the Sessions of the Council of -Florence (A.D. 1439); and concluded that this doctrine was not contrary -to the Catholic Faith and did not deserve any censure. The most learned -Theologians in Rome found nothing reprehensible in this treatise, and -Pope Pius VII caused his Theologian, the Barnabite General, Padre -Fontana, to thank M. Emery for the copy sent by him to the Holy -Father.[241] - -Catherine herself cannot well have been thinking of anything but some -such Mitigation when she so emphatically teaches that God’s mercy -extends even into Hell. Indeed, even the continuation of this great -saying in the present _Vita_-text formally teaches such Mitigation, yet -practically withdraws it, by making it consist in a rebate and change, -from an infinitude in degree and duration into a finitude in degree -though not in duration.[242] But, as we have already found, this highly -schematic statement is doubtless one of the later glosses, in which -case her true meaning must have been substantially that of the Fathers -referred to, viz. that the suffering, taken as anyhow finite in its -degree, gets mercifully mitigated for these souls.--And, if she was -here also faithful to her general principles, she will have conceived -the mitigation, not as simply sporadic and arbitrary, but as more or -less progressive, and connected with the presence in these souls of -those various degrees of semi-voluntary good inclinations and wishes, -required by her other saying. Even if these wishings could slowly and -slightly increase, and the sufferings could similarly decrease, this -would in nowise imply or require a final full rectification of the -deliberate will itself, and hence not a complete extinction of the -resultant suffering. Hell would still remain essentially distinct -from Purgatory; for in Purgatory the deliberate, active will is good -from the first, and only the various semi-volitions and old habits are -imperfect, but are being gradually brought into full harmony with that -will, by the now complete willing of the soul; and hence this state -has an end; whereas in Hell the deliberate, active will is bad from -the first, and only various partially deliberate wishes and tendencies -are good, but cannot be brought to fruition in a full virtuous -determination of the dominant character of the soul, and hence _this_ -state has no end. - - -4. _The Endlessness of Hell._ - -And lastly, as to the Endlessness of this condition of the Lost, it is, -of course, plain that Catherine held this defined doctrine; and again, -that “the chief weight, in the Church-teaching as to Hell, rests upon -Hell’s Eternity.”[243] - -Here I would suggest five groups of considerations: - -(1) Precisely this Eternity appears to be the feature of all others -which is ever increasingly decried by contemporary philosophy and -liberal theology as impossible and revolting. Thus it is frequently -argued as though, not the indiscriminateness nor the materiality nor -the forensic externality nor the complete fixity of the sufferings, nor -again the complete malignity of the lost were incredible, and hence -the unendingness of such conditions were impossible of acceptance; -but, on the contrary, as though,--be the degree and nature of those -sufferings conceived as ever so discriminated, spiritual, interior, and -relatively mobile, and as occasioned and accompanied by a disposition -in which semi-voluntary good is present,--the simple assumption of -anything unending or final about them, at once renders the whole -doctrine impossible to believe. It is true that Tennyson and Browning -take the doctrine simply in its popular Calvinistic form, and then -reject it; and even John Stuart Mill and Frederick Denison Maurice -hardly consider the eternity separately. But certainly that thoughtful -and religious-minded writer, Mr. W. R. Greg, brings forward the -eternity-doctrine as, already in itself, “a _curiosa infelicitas_ which -is almost stupidity on the part of the Church.”[244] - -(2) Yet it is plain how strongly, even in Mr. Greg’s case, the supposed -(local, physical, indiscriminate, etc.) nature of the state affects -the writer’s judgment as to the possibility of its unendingness,--as -indeed is inevitable. And it is even clearer, I think, that precisely -this eternity-doctrine stands for a truth which is but an ever-present -mysterious corollary to every deeply ethical or spiritual, and, -above all, every specifically Christian view of life. For every such -view comes, surely, into hopeless collision with its own inalienable -requirements if it _will_ hold that the deepest ethical and spiritual -acts and conditions are,--avowedly performed though they be in time -and space--simply temporary in their inmost nature and effects; -whereas every vigorously ethical religion, in so far as it has reached -a definite personal-immortality doctrine at all, cannot admit that -the soul’s deliberate character remains without any strictly final -and permanent results. The fact is that we get here to a profound -ethical and spiritual postulate, which cannot be adequately set aside -on the ground that it is the product of barbarous ages and vindictive -minds, since this objection applies only to the physical picturings, -the indiscriminateness, non-mitigation, and utter reprobation; or on -the ground that a long, keen purification, hence a temporally finite -suffering, would do as well, since, when all this has completely -passed away, there would be an entire obliteration of all difference -in the consequences of right and wrong; or that acts and dispositions -built up in time cannot have other than finite consequences, since -this is to naturalize radically the deepest things of life; or finally -that “Evil,” as the Areopagite would have it, “is not,”[245] since -thus the very existence of the conviction as to free-will and sin -becomes more inexplicable than the theoretical difficulties against -Libertarianism are insoluble.--Against this deep requirement of the -most alert and complete ethical and spiritual life the wave of any -Apocatastasis-doctrine or -emotion will, in the long run, ever break -itself in vain. - -(3) The doctrine of Conditional Immortality has, I think, many -undeniable advantages over every kind of Origenism. This view does not, -as is often imputed to it, believe in the annihilation by Omnipotence -of the naturally immortal souls of impenitent grave sinners; but simply -holds that human souls begin with the capacity of acquiring, with the -help of God’s Spirit, a spiritual personality, built up out of the mere -possibilities and partial tendencies of their highly mixed natures, -which, if left uncultivated and untranscended, become definitely fixed -at the first, phenomenal, merely individual level,--so that spiritual -personality alone deserves to live on and does so, whilst this animal -individuality does not deserve and does not do so. The soul is thus -not simply born as, but can become more and more, that “inner man” who -alone persists, indeed who “is renewed day by day, even though our -outward man perish.”[246] - -This conception thus fully retains, indeed increases, the profound -ultimate difference between the results of spiritual and personal, and -of animal and simply individual life respectively,--standing, as it -does, at the antipodes to Origenism; it eliminates all unmoralized, -unspiritualized elements from the ultimate world, without keeping souls -in an apparently fruitless suffering; and it gives full emphasis to a -supremely important, though continually forgotten fact,--the profoundly -expensive, creative, positive process and nature of spiritual -character. No wonder, then, that great thinkers and scholars, such -as Goethe, Richard Rothe, Heinrich Holtzmann, and some Frenchmen and -Englishmen have held this view.[247] - -Yet the objections against this view, taken in its strictness, are -surely conclusive. For how can an originally simply mortal substance, -force, or entity become immortal, and a phenomenal nature be leavened -by a spiritual principle which, _ex hypothesi_, is not present within -it? And how misleadingly hyperbolical, according to this, would be -the greatest spiritual exhortations, beginning with those of Our Lord -Himself! - -(4) And yet the conception of Conditional Immortality cannot be -far from the truth, since everything, surely, points to a lowered -consciousness in the souls in question, or at least to one lower -than that in the ultimate state of the saved. This conception of the -shrunken condition of these souls was certainly held by Catherine, -even if the other, the view of a heightened, consciousness, appears -in hortatory passages which just _may_ be authentic; and indeed only -that conception is conformable with her fundamental position that -love alone is fully positive and alone gives vital strength, and that -all fully deliberate love is absent from the lost souls. And if we -consider how predominantly hortatory in tone and object the ordinary -teaching on this point cannot fail to be; and, on the other hand, how -close to Manichaeism, any serious equating of the force and intensity -of life and consciousness between the Saved and the Lost would be, we -can hardly fail to find ourselves free, indeed compelled, to hold a -lesser consciousness for the Lost than for the Saved. Whilst the joyful -life of the Saved would range, in harmonious intensity, beyond all that -we can experience here, the painful consciousness of the Lost would -be, in various degrees, indefinitely less. The Saved would thus not be -only _other_ than the Lost, they would actually be _more_: for God is -Life supreme, and, where there is more affinity with God, there is more -life, and more consciousness. - -(5) But, if the view just stated is the more likely one, then we -cannot soften the sufferings of those souls, by giving them a sense of -Eternity, of one unending momentary Now, instead of our earthly sense -of Succession, as Cardinal Newman and Father Tyrrell have attempted to -do, in a very instructive and obviously orthodox manner.[248] I shall -presently argue strongly in favour of some consciousness of Eternity -being traceable in our best moments here, and of this consciousness -being doubtless more extended in the future blessed life. But here I -have only to consider whether for one who, like Catherine, follows the -analogy of earthly experience, the Lost should be considered nearer to, -or farther from, such a _Totum-Simul_ consciousness than we possess -now, here below, at our best? And to this the answer must, surely, be -that they are further away from it. Yet God in His mercy may allow -this greater successiveness, if unaccompanied by any keen memory or -prevision, to help in effecting that mitigation of the suffering which -we have already allowed. - - -IV. CATHERINE AND PURGATORY. - - -1. _Introductory._ - - -(1) _Changed feeling concerning Purgatory._ - -In the matter of a Purgatory, a very striking return of religious -feeling towards its normal equilibrium has been occurring in the most -unexpected, entirely unprejudiced quarters, within the last century -and a half. In Germany we have Lessing, who, in the wake of Leibniz, -encourages the acceptance of “that middle state which the greater part -of our fellow-Christians have adopted”: Schleiermacher, who calls the -overpassing of a middle state by a violent leap at death “a magical -proceeding”; David F. Strauss, who entirely agrees; Carl von Hase, who, -in his very Manual of Anti-Roman Polemics admits that “most men when -they die are probably too good for Hell, but they are certainly too bad -for Heaven”; the delicately thoughtful philosopher Fechner who, in the -most sober-minded of his religious works, insists upon our “conceiving -the life beyond according to the analogy of this-life conditions,” and -refers wistfully to “the belief which is found amongst all peoples -and is quite shrunken only among Protestants--that the living can -still do something to aid the dead”; and Prof. Anrich, probably the -greatest contemporary authority on the Hellenic elements incorporated -in Christian doctrine, declares, all definite Protestant though he -is, that “legitimate religious postulates underlie the doctrine of -Purgatory.”[249] And in England that sensitively religious Unitarian, -W. R. Greg, tells us “Purgatory, ranging from a single day to a century -of ages, offers that borderland of discriminating retribution for which -justice and humanity cry out”; and the Positivist, John Stuart Mill, -declares at the end of his life: “All the probabilities in case of a -future life are that such as we have been made or have made ourselves -before the change, such we shall enter into the life hereafter.… To -imagine that a miracle will be wrought at death … making perfect every -one whom it is His will to include among His elect … is utterly opposed -to every presumption that can be adduced from the light of nature.”[250] - - -(2) _Causes of the previous prejudice._ - -Indeed the general principle of ameliorative suffering is so obviously -true and inexhaustibly profound that only many, long-lived abuses -in the practice, and a frequent obscuration in the teaching, of the -doctrine, can explain and excuse the sad neglect, indeed discredit, -into which the very principle and root-doctrine has fallen among -well-nigh one-half of Western Christendom. As to the deplorably -widespread existence, at the time of the Protestant Reformation, of -both these causes, which largely occasioned or strengthened each other, -we have the unimpeachable authority of the Council of Trent itself: for -it orders the Bishops “not to permit that uncertain doctrines, or such -as labour under the presumption of falsity, be propagated and taught,” -and “to prohibit, as so many scandals and stones of stumbling for the -faithful, whatever belongs to a certain curiosity or superstition or -savours of filthy lucre.”[251] The cautious admissions of the strictly -Catholic scholar-theologian, Dr. N. Paulus, and the precise documentary -additions and corrections to Paulus furnished, directly from the -contemporary documents, by the fair-minded Protestant worker at -Reformation History, Prof. T. Brieger, now furnish us, conjointly, with -the most vivid and detailed picture of the sad subtleties and abuses -which gave occasion to that Decree.[252] - - -(3) _Catherine’s purgatorial conceptions avoid those causes. Her -conceptions harbour two currents of thought._ - -It is surely not a small recommendation of Catherine’s mode of -conceiving Purgatory, that it cuts, as we shall see, at the very root -of those abuses. Yet we must first face certain opposite dangers and -ambiguities which are closely intertwined with the group of terms -and images taken over, for the purpose of describing an immanental -Purgation, by her and her great Alexandrian Christian predecessors, -from the Greek Heathen world. And only after the delimitation of the -defect in the suggestions which still so readily operate from out of -these originally Hellenic ideas, can we consider the difficulties and -imperfections peculiar to the other, in modern times the predominant, -element in the complete teaching as to the Middle State, an element -mostly of Jewish and Roman provenance, and aiming at an extrinsically -punitive conception. Both currents can be properly elucidated only if -we first take them historically. - - -1. _Jewish prayers for the dead._ - -It is admitted on all hands that, in the practical form of Prayers for -the Dead, the general doctrine of a Middle State can be traced back, in -Judaism, up to the important passage in the Second Book of Maccabees, -c. ii, vv. 43-45, where Judas Maccabaeus sends about two thousand -drachms of silver to Jerusalem, in order that a Sin-Offering may be -offered up for the Jews fallen in battle against Gorgias, upon whose -bodies heathen amulets had been found. “He did excellently in this … -it is a holy and devout thought. Hence he instituted the Sin-Offering -for the dead, that they might be loosed from their sins.” That battle -occurred in B.C. 166, and this book appears to have been written in -B.C. 124, in Egypt, by a Jew of the school of the Pharisees. - -Now it is difficult not to recognize, in the doctrinal comment upon the -facts here given, rather as yet the opinions of a Judaeo-Alexandrian -circle, which was small even at the time of the composition of the -comment, than the general opinion of Judaism at the date of Judas’s -act. For if this act had been prompted by a clear and generally -accepted conviction as to the resurrection, and the efficacy of prayers -for the dead, the writer would have had no occasion or inclination to -make an induction of his own as to the meaning and worth of that act; -and we should find some indications of such a doctrine and practice in -the voluminous works of Philo and Josephus, some century and a half -later on. But all such indications are wanting in these writers. - -And in the New Testament there is, with regard to helping the dead, -only that curious passage: “If the dead do not arise, what shall they -do who are baptized for the dead?”[253] where St. Paul refers, without -either acceptance or blame, to a contemporary custom among Christian -Proselytes from Paganism, who offered up that bath of initiation for -the benefit of the souls of deceased relatives who had died without any -such purification. Perhaps not till Rabbi Akiba’s time, about 130 A.D., -had prayers for the dead become part of the regular Synagogue ritual. -By 200 A.D. Tertullian speaks of the practice as of an established -usage among the Christian communities: “we make oblations for the Dead, -on their anniversary, every year”; although “if you ask where is the -law concerning this custom in Scripture, you cannot read of any such -there. Tradition will appear before you as its initiator, custom as its -confirmer, and faith as its observer.”[254] - -It is interesting to note how considerably subsequent to the practice -is, in this instance also, its clear doctrinal justification. Indeed -the Jews are, to this hour, extraordinarily deficient in explicit, -harmonious conceptions on the matter. Certainly throughout Prof. W. -Bacher’s five volumes of Sayings of the Jewish Rabbis from 30 B.C. -to 400 A.D., I can only find the following saying, by Jochanan the -Amoraean, who died 279 A.D.: “There are three books before God, in -which men are inscribed according to their merit and their guilt: that -of the perfectly devout, that of the perfect evil-doers, and that of -the middle, the uncertain souls. The devout and the evil-doers receive -their sentence on New Year’s day … the first, unto life; the second, -unto death. As to middle souls, their sentence remains in suspense -till the day of Atonement: if by then they have done penance, they get -written down alongside of the devout; if not, they are written down -alongside of the evil-doers.”[255] - - -2. _Alexandrine Fathers on Purgatory._ - -Yet it is the Platonizing Alexandrian Fathers Clement and Origen, -(they died, respectively, in about 215 and in 254 A.D.), who are the -first, and to this hour the most important, Christian spokesmen for -a state of true intrinsic purgation. We have already deliberately -rejected their Universalism; but this error in no way weakens the -profound truth of their teaching as to the immanental, necessary -inter-connection between suffering and morally imperfect habits, and -as to the ameliorative effects of suffering where, as in Purgatory, it -is willed by a right moral determination. Thus Clement: “As children -at the hands of their teacher or father, so also are we punished by -Providence. God does not avenge Himself, for vengeance is to repay -evil by evil, but His punishment aims at our good.” “Although a -punishment, it is an emendation of the soul.” “The training which -men call punishments.”[256] And Origen: “The fury of God’s vengeance -profits unto the purification of souls; the punishment is unto -purgation.” “These souls receive, in the prison, not the retribution -of their folly, but a benefaction in the purification from the evils -contracted in that folly,--a purification effected by means of salutary -troubles.”[257] - -Now Clement is fully aware of the chief source for his formulation of -these deeply spiritual and Christian instincts and convictions. “Plato -speaks well when he teaches that ‘men who are punished, experience in -truth a benefit: for those who get justly punished, profit through -their souls becoming better.’”[258] But Plato, in contradistinction -from Clement, holds that this applies only to such imperfect souls as -“have sinned curable sins”; he has a Hell as well as a Purgatory: yet -his Purgatory, as Clement’s, truly purges: the souls are there because -they are partially impure, and they cease to be there when they are -completely purified. - -And Plato, in his turn, makes no secret as to whence he got his -suggestions and raw materials, _viz._ the Orphic priesthood and -its literature, which, ever since the sixth century B.C., had been -succeeding to and supplanting the previous Orgiastic Dionysianism.[259] -Plato gives us vivid pictures of their doings in Athens, at the time -of his writing, in about 380 B.C. “Mendicant prophets go to rich men’s -doors, and persuade these men that they have a power committed to them -of making an atonement for their sins, or for those of their fathers, -by sacrifices and incantations … and they persuade whole cities that -expiations and purifications of sin may be made by sacrifices and -amusements which fill a vacant hour, and are equally at the service of -the living and the dead.”[260]--Yet from these men, thus scorned as -well-nigh sheer impostors, Plato takes over certain conceptions and -formulations which contribute one of the profoundest, still unexhausted -elements to his teaching,--although this element is, at bottom, in -conflict with that beautiful but inadequate, quite anti-Orphic, -conception of his--the purely negative character of Evil. For the -Orphic literary remains, fragmentary and late though they be, plainly -teach that moral or ritual transgressions are a defilement of the soul, -an infliction of positive stains upon it; that these single offences -and “spots” produce a generally sinful and “spotted” condition; -and that this condition is amenable to and requires purification by -suffering,--water, or more frequently fire, which wash or burn out -these stains of sin. So Plutarch (who died about 120 A.D.) still -declares that the souls in Hades have stains of different colours -according to the different passions; and the object of the purificatory -punishment is “that, these stains having been worn away, the soul may -become altogether resplendent.” And Virgil, when he declares “the -guilt which infects the soul is washed out or burnt out … until a -long time-span has effaced the clotted stain, and leaves the heavenly -conscience pure”: is utilizing an Orphic-Pythagorean Hades-book.[261] - -This conception of positive stains is carefully taken over by the -Alexandrian Fathers: Clement speaks of “removing, by continuous prayer, -the stains (κηλίδας) contracted through former sins,” and declares -that “the Gnostic,” the perfect Christian, “fears not death, having -purified himself from all the spots (σπίλους) on his soul.” And Origen -describes “the pure soul that is not weighed down by leaden weights of -wickedness,” where the spots have turned to leaden pellets such as were -fastened to fishing-nets. Hence, says Clement, “post-baptismal sins -have to be purified out” of the soul; and, says Origen, “these rivers -of fire are declared to be of God, who causes the evil that is mixed up -with the whole soul to disappear from out of it.”[262] - -In Pseudo-Dionysius the non-Orphic, purely negative, view prevails: -“Evil is neither in demons nor in us as an existent evil, but as a -failure and dearth in the perfection of our own proper goods.” And St. -Thomas similarly declares that “different souls have correspondingly -different stains, like shadows differ in accordance with the difference -of the bodies which interpose themselves between the light.”[263] - -But Catherine, in this inconsistent with her own general -Privation-doctrine, again conceives the stain, the “macchia del -peccato,” as Cardinal Manning has acutely observed, not simply as a -deprivation of the light of glory, but “as the cause, not the effect, -of God’s not shining into the soul”: it includes in it the idea of -an imperfection, weakness with regard to virtue, bad (secondary) -dispositions, and unheavenly tastes.[264] - - -3. _The true and the false in the Orphic conception._ - -Now precisely in this profoundly true conception of Positive Stain -there lurk certain dangers, which all proceed from the original Orphic -diagnosis concerning the source of these stains, and these dangers will -have to be carefully guarded against. - -(1) The conviction as to the purificatory power of fire was no doubt, -originally, the direct consequence from the Orphic belief as to the -intrinsically staining and imprisoning effect of the body upon the -soul. “The soul, as the Orphics say, is enclosed in the body, in -punishment for the punishable acts”; “liberations” from the body, -and “purifications” of the living and the dead, ever, with them, -proceed together. And hence to burn the dead body was considered -to purify the soul that had been stained by that prison-house: the -slain Clytemnestra, says Euripides, “is purified, as to her body, by -fire,” for, as the Scholiast explains, “fire purifies all things, -and burnt bodies are considered holy.”[265] And such an intensely -anti-body attitude we find, not only fully developed later on into a -deliberate anti-Incarnational doctrine, among the Gnostics, but, as we -have already seen, slighter traces of this same tone may be found in -the (doubtless Alexandrian) Book of Wisdom, and in one, not formally -doctrinal passage, a momentary echo of it, in St. Paul himself. -And Catherine’s attitude is generally, and often strongly, in this -direction. - -(2) A careful distinction is evidently necessary here. The doctrine -that sin defiles,--affects the quality of the soul’s moral and -spiritual dispositions, and that this defilement and perversion, ever -occasioned by the search after facile pleasure or the flight from -fruitful pain, can normally be removed and corrected only by a long -discipline of fully accepted, gradually restorative pain, either here, -or hereafter, or both: are profound anticipations, and have been most -rightly made integral parts, of the Christian life and conception. The -doctrine that the body is essentially a mere accident or superaddition -or necessary defilement to the soul, is profoundly untrue, in its -exaggeration and one-sidedness: for if the body is the occasion of -the least spiritual of our sins, it can and should become the chief -servant of the spirit; the slow and difficult training of this servant -is one of the most important means of development for the soul itself; -and many faults and vices are not occasioned by the body at all, whilst -none are directly and necessarily caused by it. Without the body, we -should not have impurity, but neither should we have specifically -human purity of soul; and without it, given the persistence and -activity of the soul, there could be as great, perhaps greater, pride -and _solipsism_, the most anti-Christian of all the vices. Hence if, -in Our Lord’s teaching, we find no trace of a Gnostic desire for -purification from all things bodily as essentially soul-staining, we do -find a profound insistence upon purity of heart, and upon the soul’s -real, active “turning,” conversion, (an interior change from an un- or -anti-moral attitude to an ethical and spiritual dependence upon God), -as a _sine qua non_ condition for entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven. -And the Joannine teachings re-affirm this great truth for us as a -_Metabasis_, a moving from Death over to Life. - - -4. _Catherine’s conceptions as to the character of the stains and of -their purgation._ - -And this idea, as to an intrinsic purgation through suffering of -impurities contracted by the soul, can be kept thoroughly Christian, -if we ever insist, with Catherine in her most emphatic and deepest -teachings, that Purgation can and should be effected in this life, -hence in the body,--in and through all the right uses of the body, -as well as in and through all the legitimate and will-strengthening -abstentions from such uses; that the subject-matter of such purgation -are the habits and inclinations contrary to our best spiritual lights, -and which we have largely ourselves built up by our variously perverse -or slothful acts, but which in no case are directly caused by the body, -and in many cases are not even occasioned by it; and, finally, that -holiness consists primarily, not in the absence of faults, but in the -presence of spiritual force, in Love creative, Love triumphant,--the -soul becoming flame rather than snow, and dwelling upon what to do, -give and be, rather than upon what to shun.--Catherine’s predominant, -ultimate tone possesses this profound positiveness, and corrects all -but entirely whatever, if taken alone, would appear to render the -soul’s substantial purity impossible in this life; to constitute the -body a direct and necessary cause of impurity to the soul; and to find -the ideal of perfection in the negative condition of being free from -stain. In her greatest sayings, and in her actual life, Purity is -found to be Love, and this Love is exercised, not only in the inward, -home-coming, recollective movement,--in the purifying of the soul’s -dispositions, but also in the outgoing, world-visiting, dispersive -movement,--in action towards fellow-souls. - - -5. _Judaeo-Roman conception of Purgatory._ - -And this social side and movement brings us to the second element and -current in the complete doctrine of a Middle State,--a constituent -which possesses affinities and advantages, and produces excesses -and abuses, directly contrary to those proper to the element of an -intrinsic purgation. - -(1) Here we get early Christian utilizations, for purposes of a -doctrine concerning the Intermediate State, of sayings and images which -dwell directly only upon certain extrinsic consequences of evil-doing, -or which, again, describe a future historical and social event,--the -Last Day. For already Origen interprets, in his beautiful _Treatise on -Prayer_, XXIX, 16, Our Lord’s words as to the debtor: “Thou shalt be -cast into prison, thou shalt not come forth from thence, until thou -hast paid the uttermost farthing,” Matt, v, 25, 26, as applying to -Purgatory. And in his _Contra Celsum_, VII, 13, he already takes, as -the Biblical _locus classicus_ for a Purgatory, St. Paul’s words as to -how men build, upon the one foundation Christ, either gold, silver, -gems, or wood, hay, stubble; and how fire will test each man’s work; -and, if the work remain, he shall receive a reward, but if it be burnt, -he shall suffer loss and yet he himself shall be saved yet so as by -fire, 1 Cor. iii, 10-15. It appears certain, however, that St. Paul -is, in this passage, thinking directly of the Last Day, the End of the -World, with its accompaniment of physical fire, and as to how far the -various human beings, then on earth, will be able to endure the dread -stress and testing of that crisis; and he holds that some will be fit -to bear it and some will not. - -Such a destruction of the world by fire appears elsewhere in -Palestinian Jewish literature,--in the Book of Enoch and the Testament -of Levi; and in the New Testament, in 2 Peter iii, 12: “The heavens -being on fire shall be dissolved, the elements shall melt with fervent -heat.” Josephus, _Antiquities_, XI, ii, 3, teaches a destruction by -fire and another by water. And the Stoics, to whom also Clement and -Origen appeal, had gradually modified their first doctrine of a simply -cosmological Ekpyrōsis, a renovation of the physical universe by fire, -into a moral purification of the earth, occasioned by, and applied -to, the sinfulness of man. Thus Seneca has the double, water-and-fire, -instrument: “At that time the tide” of the sea “will be borne along -free from all measure, for the same reason which will cause the future -conflagration. Both occur when it seems fit to God to initiate a better -order of things and to have done with the old.… The judgment of mankind -being concluded, the primitive order of things will be recalled, and to -the earth will be re-given man innocent of crimes.”[266] - -(2) It is interesting to note how--largely under the influence of the -forensic temper and growth of the Canonical Penitential system, and -of its successive relaxations in the form of substituted lighter good -works, Indulgences,--the Latin half of Christendom, ever more social -and immediately practical than the Greek portion, came, in general, -more and more to dwell upon two ideas suggested to their minds by -those two, Gospel and Pauline, passages. The one idea was that souls -which, whilst fundamentally well-disposed, are not fit for Heaven at -the body’s death, can receive instant purification by the momentary -fire of the Particular Judgment; and the other held that, thus already -entirely purified and interiorly fit for Heaven, they are but detained -(in what we ought, properly, to term a _Satisfactorium_), to suffer -the now completely non-ameliorative, simply vindictive, infliction of -punishment,--a punishment still, in strict justice, due to them for -past sins, of which the guilt and the deteriorating effects upon their -own souls have been fully remitted and cured. - -In this way it was felt that the complete unchangeableness of the -condition of every kind of soul after death, or at least after the -Particular Judgment (a Judgment held practically to synchronize with -death), was assured. And indeed how could there be any interior growth -in Purgatory, seeing that there is no meriting there? Again it was -thought that thus the vision of God at the moment of Judgment was given -an operative value for the spiritual amelioration of souls which, -already in substantially good dispositions, could hardly be held to -pass through so profound an experience without intrinsic improvement, -as the other view seemed to hold.--And, above all, this form of the -doctrine was found greatly to favour the multiplication among the -people of prayers, Masses and good-works for the dead; since the _modus -operandi_ of such acts seemed thus to become entirely clear, simple, -immediate, and, as it were, measurable and mechanical. For these souls -in their “Satisfactorium,” being, from its very beginning, already -completely purged and fit for Heaven,--God is, as it were, free to -relax at any instant, in favour of sufficiently fervent or numerous -intercessions, the exigencies of his entirely extrinsic justice. - -(3) The position of a purely extrinsic punishment is emphasized, with -even unusual vehemence, in the theological glosses inserted, in about -1512 to 1529, in Catherine’s _Dicchiarazione_. Yet it is probably -the very influential Jesuit theologian Francesco Suarez, who died -in 1617, who has done most towards formulating and theologically -popularizing this view. All the guilt of sin, he teaches, is remitted -(in these Middle souls) at the first moment of the soul’s separation -from the body, by means of a single act of contrition, whereby the -will is wholly converted to God, and turned away from every venial -sin. “And in this way sin may be remitted, as to its guilt, in -Purgatory, because the soul’s purification dates from this moment”;--in -strictness, from before the first moment of what should be here termed -the “Satisfactorium.” As to bad habits and vicious inclinations, -“we ought not to imagine that the soul is detained for these”: but -“they are either taken away at the moment of death, or expelled by an -infusion of the contrary virtues when the soul enters into glory.”[267] -This highly artificial, inorganic view is adopted, amongst other -of our contemporary theologians, by Atzberger, the continuator of -Scheeben.[268] - - -6. _The Judaeo-Roman conception must be taken in synthesis with the -Alexandrine._ - -Now it is plain that the long-enduring Penitential system of the Latin -Church, and the doctrine and practice of Indulgences stand for certain -important truths liable to being insufficiently emphasized by the Greek -teachings concerning an intrinsically ameliorative _Purgatorium_, and -that there can be no question of simply eliminating these truths. -But neither are they capable of simple co-ordination with, still -less of super-ordination to, those most profound and spiritually -central immanental positions. As between the primarily forensic and -governmental, and the directly ethical and spiritual, it will be the -former that will have to be conceived and practised as, somehow, an -expression and amplification of, and a practical corrective and means -to, the latter.[269] - -(1) The ordinary, indeed the strictly obligatory, Church teaching -clearly marks the suggested relation as the right one, at three, simply -cardinal points. We are bound, by the Confession of Faith of Michael -Palaeologus, 1267 A.D., and by the Decree of the Council of Florence, -1429 A.D., to hold that these Middle souls “are purged after death by -purgatorial or cathartic pains”; and by that of Trent “that there is -a Purgatory.”[270] Yet we have here a true _lucus a non lucendo_, if -this place or state does not involve purgation: for no theologian dares -explicitly to transfer and restrict the name “Purgatory” to the instant -of the soul’s Particular Judgment; even Suarez, as we have seen, has to -extend the name somehow. - -Next we are bound, by the same three great Decrees, to hold indeed that -“the Masses, Prayers, Alms, and other pious offices of the Faithful -Living are profitable towards the relief of these pains,” yet this by -mode of “suffrage,” since, as the severely orthodox Jesuit, Father H. -Hurter, explains in his standard _Theologiae Dogmaticae Compendium_, -“the fruit of this impetration and satisfaction is not infallible, for -it depends upon the merciful acceptance of God.”[271] Hence in no case -can we, short of superstition, conceive such good works as operating -automatically: so that the _a priori_ simplest view concerning the -mode of operation of these prayers is declared to be mistaken. We can -and ought, then, to choose among the conceptions, not in proportion to -their mechanical simplicity, but according to their spiritual richness -and to their analogy with our deepest this-life experiences. - -And we are all bound, by the Decree of Trent and the Condemnation of -Baius, 1567 A.D., to hold that Contrition springing from Perfect Love -reconciles man with God, even before Confession, and this also outside -of cases of necessity or of martyrdom.[272] Indeed, it is the common -doctrine that one single act of Pure Love abolishes, not only Hell, -but Purgatory, so that, if the soul were to die whilst that act was -in operation, it would forthwith be in Heaven. If then, in case of -perfect purity, the soul is at once in heaven, the soul cannot be quite -pure and yet continue in Purgatory. - -(2) It is thus plain that, as regards Sin in its relation to the -Sinner, there are, in strictness, ever three points to consider: the -guilty act, the reflex effect of the act upon the disposition the -agent, and the punishment; for all theologians admit that the more or -less bad disposition, contracted through the sinful act, remains in -the soul, except in the case of Perfect Contrition, after the guilt -of the act has been remitted. But whilst the holders of an Extrinsic, -Vindictive Purgatory, work for a punishment as independent as possible -of these moral effects of sin still present in the pardoned soul, the -advocates of an Intrinsic, Ameliorative Purgatory find the punishment -centre in the pain and difficulty attendant upon “getting slowly -back to fully virtuous dispositions, through retracing the steps we -have taken in departing from it.”[273] And the system of Indulgences -appears, in this latter view, to find its chief justification in that -it keeps up a link with the past Penitential system of the Church; that -it vividly recalls and applies the profound truth of the interaction, -for good even more than for evil, between all human souls, alive and -dead; and that it insists upon the readily forgotten truth of even the -forgiven sinner, the man with the good determination, having ordinarily -still much to do and to suffer before he is quit of the effects of his -sin. - -(3) And the difficulties and motives special to those who supplant -the Intrinsic, Ameliorating Purgatory by an Extrinsic, Vindicative -_Satisfactorium_, can indeed be met by those who would preserve that -beautifully dynamic, ethical, and spiritual conception. For we can -hold that the fundamental condition,--the particular determination -of the active will,--remains quite unchanged, from Death to Heaven, -in these souls; that this determination of the active will requires -more or less of time and suffering fully to permeate and assimilate to -itself all the semi-voluntary wishes and habits of the soul; and that -this permeation takes place among conditions in which the soul’s acts -are too little resisted and too certain of success to be constituted -meritorious. We can take Catherine’s beautiful Plunge-conception as -indicating the kind of operation effected in and by the soul, at and -through the momentary vision of God. And we can feel convinced that -it is ever, in the long run, profoundly dangerous to try to clarify -and simplify doctrines beyond or against the scope and direction of -the analogies of Nature and of Grace, which are ever so dynamic and -organic in type: for the poor and simple, as truly as the rich and -learned, ever require, not to be merely taken and left as they are, but -to be raised and trained to the most adequate conceptions possible to -each.--It is, in any case, very certain that the marked and widespread -movement of return to belief in a Middle State is distinctly towards a -truly Purgative Purgatory, although few of these sincere truth-seekers -are aware, as is Dr. Anrich, that they are groping after a doctrine -all but quite explained away by a large body of late Scholastic and -Neo-Scholastic theologians.[274] - -(4) Yet it is very satisfactory to note how numerous, and especially -how important are, after all is said, the theologians who have -continued to walk, in this matter, in the footsteps of the great -Alexandrines. St. Gregory of Nyssa teaches a healing of the soul in the -beyond and a purification by fire.[275] St. Augustine says that “fire -burns up the work of him who thinketh of the things of this world, -since possessions, that are loved, do not perish without pain on the -part of their possessor. It is not incredible that something of this -sort takes place after this life.”[276] - -St. Thomas declares most plainly: “Venial guilt, in a soul which -dies in a state of grace, is remitted after this life by the purging -fire, because that pain, which is in some manner accepted by the -will, has, in virtue of grace, the power of expiating all such guilt -as can co-exist with a state of grace.” “After this life … there can -be merit with respect to some accidental reward, so long as a man -remains in some manner in a state of probation: and hence there can be -meritorious acts in Purgatory, with respect to the remission of venial -sin.”[277]--Dante (_d._ 1321) also appears, as Father Faber finely -notes, to hold such a voluntary, immanental Purgatory, where the poet -sees an Angel impelling, across the sea at dawn, a bark filled with -souls bent for Purgatory: for the boat is described as driving towards -the shore so lightly as to draw no wake upon the water.[278] - -Cardinal Bellarmine, perhaps the greatest of all anti-Protestant -theologians (_d._ 1621) teaches that “venial sin is remitted in -Purgatory _quoad culpam_,” and that “this guilt, as St. Thomas rightly -insists, is remitted in Purgatory by an act of love and patient -endurance.”[279] St. Francis of Sales, that high ascetical authority -(_d._ 1622), declares: “By Purgatory we understand a place where souls -undergo purgation, for a while, from the stains and imperfections which -they have carried away with them from this mortal life.”[280] - -And recently and in England we have had Father Faber, Cardinal Manning, -and Cardinal Newman, although differing from each other on many other -points, fully united in holding and propagating this finely life-like, -purgative conception of purgatory.[281] - - -7. _A final difficulty._ - -One final point concerning a Middle State. In the Synoptic tradition -there is a recurrent insistence upon the forgiveness of particular -sins, at particular moments, by particular human and divine acts of -contrition and pardon. In the Purgatorial teaching the stress lies -upon entire states and habits, stains and perversities of soul, and -upon God’s general grace working, in and through immanently necessary, -freely accepted sufferings, on to a slow purification of the complete -personality. As Origen says: “The soul’s single acts, good or bad, go -by; but, according to their quality, they give form and figure to to -the mind of the agent, and leave it either good or bad, and destined -for pains or for rewards.”[282] - -The antagonism here is but apparent. For the fact that a certain -condition of soul precedes, and that another condition succeed, each -act of the same soul, in proportion as this act is full and deliberate, -does not prevent the corresponding, complimentary fact that such acts -take the preceding condition as their occasion, and make the succeeding -condition into a further expression of themselves. Single acts which -fully express the character, whether good or bad, are doubtless rarer -than is mostly thought. Yet Catherine, in union with the Gospels and -the Church, is deeply convinced of the power of one single act of Pure -Love to abolish, not of course the effects outward, but the reflex -spiritual consequences upon the soul itself, of sinful acts or states. - -Catherine’s picture again, of the deliberate Plunge into Purgatory, -gives us a similar heroic act which, summing up the whole soul’s active -volitions, initiates and encloses the whole subsequent purification, -but which itself involves a prevenient act of Divine Love and mercy, to -which this act of human love is but the return and response. Indeed, -as we know, this plunge-conception was but the direct projection, -on to the other-world-picture, of her own personal experience at -her conversion, when a short span of clock-time held acts of love -received and acts of love returned, which transformed all her previous -condition, and initiated a whole series of states ever more expressive -of her truest self.--Act and state and state and act, each presupposes -and requires the other: and both are present in the Synoptic pictures, -and both are operative in the Purgatorial teaching; although in the -former the accounts are so brief as to make states and acts alike look -as though one single act; and, in the latter, the descriptions are so -large as to make the single acts almost disappear behind the states. - - -V. CATHERINE AND HEAVEN--THREE PERPLEXITIES TO BE CONSIDERED. - -We have found a truly Purgational Middle state, with its sense of -succession, its mixture of joy and suffering, and its growth and -fruitfulness, to be profoundly consonant with all our deepest spiritual -experiences and requirements. But what about Heaven, which we must, -apparently, hold to consist of a sense of simultaneity, a condition -of mere reproductiveness and utterly uneventful finality, and a state -of unmixed, unchanging joy?--Here again, even if in a lesser degree, -certain experiences of the human soul can help us to a few general -positions of great spiritual fruitfulness, which can reasonably -claim an analogical applicability to the Beyond, and which, thus -taken as our ultimate ideals, cannot fail to stimulate the growth of -our personality, and, with it, of further insight into these great -realities. I shall here consider three main questions, which will -roughly correspond to the three perplexities just indicated. - - -1. _Time and Heaven._ - -Our first question, then, is as to the probable character of man’s -happiest ultimate consciousness,--whether it is one of succession or -of simultaneity: in other words, whether, besides the disappearance of -the category of space (a point already discussed), there is likely to -be the lapse of the category of time also.--And let it be noted that -the retention of the latter sense for Hell, and even for Purgatory, -does not prejudge the question as to its presence or absence in Heaven, -since those two states are admittedly non-normative, whereas the latter -represents the very ideal and measure of man’s full destination and -perfection. - -(1) Now it is still usual, amongst those who abandon the ultimacy -of the space-category, simultaneously to drop, as necessarily -concomitant, the time-category also. Tennyson, among the poets, does -so, in his beautiful “Crossing the Bar”: “From out our bourne of Time -and Place, the flood may bear me far”; and Prof. H. J. Holtzmann, -among speculative theologians, in criticising Rothe’s conception of -man as a quite ultimately spacial-temporal being, treats these two -questions as standing and falling together.[283]--Yet a careful study -of Kant’s critique of the two categories of Space and Time suffices -to convince us of the indefinitely richer content, and more ultimate -reality, of the latter. Indeed, I shall attempt to show more fully in -the next Chapter, with the aid of M. Henri Bergson, that mathematical, -uniform clock-time is indeed an artificial compound, which is made up -of our profound experience of a duration in which the constituents -(sensations, imaginations, thoughts, feelings, willings) of the -succession ever, in varying degrees, overlap, interpenetrate, and -modify each other, and the quite automatic and necessary simplification -and misrepresentation of this experience by its imaginary projection on -to space,--its restatement, by our picturing faculty, as a perfectly -equable succession of mutually exclusive moments. It is in that -interpenetrative duration, not in this atomistic clock-time, that our -deeper human experiences take place. - -(2) But that sense of duration, is it indeed our deepest apprehension? -Dr. Holtzmann points out finely how that we are well aware, in our -profoundest experiences, of “that permanently incomprehensible -fact,--the existence of, as it were, a prism, through which the -unitary ray of light, which fills our consciousness with a real -content, is spread out into a colour-spectrum, so that what, in itself, -exists in pure unitedness” and simultaneity, “becomes intelligible to -us only as a juxtaposition in space and a succession in time. Beyond -the prism, there are no such two things.” And he shows how keenly -conscious we are, at times, of that deepest mode of apprehension and -of being which is a Simultaneity, an eternal Here and Now; and how -ruinous to our spiritual life would be a full triumph of the category -of time.[284] - -But it is St. Augustine who has, so far, found the noblest expression -for the deepest human experiences in this whole matter of Duration and -Simultaneity, as against mere Clock-Time, although, here as with regard -to Space, he is deeply indebted to Plotinus. “In thee, O my soul, I -measure time,--I measure the impression which passing events make -upon thee, who remainest when those events have passed: this present -impression then, and not those events which had to pass in order to -produce it, do I measure, when I measure time.” “The three times,” -tenses, “past, present, and future … are certain three affections in -the soul, I find them there and nowhere else. There is the present -memory of past events, the present perception of present ones, and the -present expectation of future ones.” God possesses “the splendour of -ever-tarrying Eternity,” which is “incomparable with never-tarrying -times,” since in it “nothing passes, but the content of everything -abides simply present.” And in the next life “perhaps our own thoughts -also will not be flowing, going from one thing to another, but we shall -see all we know simultaneously, in one intuition.” St. Thomas indeed is -more positive: “All things will,” in Heaven, “be seen simultaneously -and not successively.”[285] - -(3) If then, even here below, we can so clearly demonstrate the -conventionality of mere Clock-Time, and can even conceive a perfect -Simultaneity as the sole form of the consciousness of God, we cannot -well avoid holding that, in the other life, the clock-time convention -will completely cease, and that, though the sense of Duration is -not likely completely to disappear, (since, in this life at least, -this sense is certainly not merely phenomenal for man, and its -entire absence would apparently make man into God), the category of -Simultaneity will, as a sort of strong background-consciousness, -englobe and profoundly unify the sense of Duration. And, the more -God-like the soul, the more would this sense of Simultaneity -predominate over the sense of Duration. - - -2. _The Ultimate Good, concrete, not abstract._ - -Our second question concerns the kind and degree of variety in unity -which we should conceive to characterize the life of God, and of the -soul in its God-likeness. Is this type and measure of all life to be -conceived as a maximum of abstraction or as a maximum of concretion; -as pure thought alone, or as also emotion and will; as solitary and -self-centred, or as social and outgoing; and as simply reproductive, or -also as operative? - -(1) Now it is certain that nothing is easier, and nothing has been -more common, than to take the limitations of our earthly conditions, -and especially those attendant upon the strictly contemplative, and, -still more, those connected with the technically ecstatic states, as so -many advantages, or even as furnishing a complete scheme of the soul’s -ultimate life. - -As we have already repeatedly seen in less final matters, so here once -more, at the end, we can trace the sad impoverishment to the spiritual -outlook produced by the esteem in which the antique world generally -held the psycho-physical peculiarities of trances, as directly -valuable or even as prophetic of the soul’s ultimate condition; the -contraposition and exaltation, already on the part of Plato and -Aristotle, of a supposed non-actively contemplative, above a supposed -non-contemplatively active life; the largely excessive, not fully -Christianizable, doctrines of the Neo-Platonists as to the Negative, -Abstractive way, when taken as self-sufficient, and as to Quiet, -Passivity, and Emptiness of Soul, when understood literally; and the -conception, rarely far away from the ancient thinkers, of the soul as a -substance which, full-grown, fixed and stainless at the first, requires -but to be kept free from stain up to the end. - -And yet the diminution of vitality in the trance, and even the -inattention to more than one thing at a time in Contemplation, are, -in themselves, defects, at best the price paid for certain gains; the -active and the contemplative life are, ultimately, but two mutually -complementary sides of life, so that no life ever quite succeeds in -eliminating either element, and life, _caeteris paribus_, is complete -and perfect, in proportion as it embraces both elements, each at -its fullest, and the two in a perfect interaction; the Negative, -Abstractive way peremptorily requires also the other, the Affirmative, -Concrete way; the Quiet, Passivity, Emptiness are really, when -wholesome, an incubation for, or a rest from, Action, indeed they are -themselves a profound action and peace, and the soul is primarily a -Force and an Energy, and Holiness is a growth of that Energy in Love, -in full Being, and in creative, spiritual Personality. - -(2) Now on this whole matter the European Christian Mystics, strongly -influenced by, yet also largely developing, certain doctrines of the -Greeks, have, I think, made two most profound contributions to the -truths of the spirit, and have seriously fallen short of reality in -three respects. - -The first contribution can, indeed, be credited to Aristotle, whose -luminous formulations concerning Energeia, Action, (as excluding -Motion, or Activity), we have already referred to. Here to _be_ is -to _act_, and Energeia, a being’s perfect functioning and fullest -self-expression in action, is not some kind of movement or process; -but, on the contrary, all movement and process is only an imperfect -kind of Energeia. Man, in his life here, only catches brief glimpses of -such an Action; but God is not so hampered,--He is ever completely all -that He can be, His Action is kept up inexhaustibly and ever generates -supreme bliss; it is an unchanging, unmoving Energeia.[286]--And St. -Thomas echoes this great doctrine, for all the Christian schoolmen: “A -thing is declared to be perfect, in proportion as it is in act,”--as -all its potentialities are expressed in action; and hence “the First -Principle must be supremely in act,” “God’s Actuality is identical with -His Potentiality,” “God is Pure Action (_Actus Purus_).”[287]--Yet it -is doubtless the Christian Mystics who have most fully experienced, and -emotionally vivified, this great truth, and who cease not, in all their -more characteristic teachings, from insisting upon the ever-increasing -acquisition of “Action,” the fully fruitful, peaceful functioning of -the whole soul, at the expense of “activity,” the restless, sterile -distraction and internecine conflict of its powers. And Heaven, for -them, ever consists in an unbroken Action, devoid of all “activity,” -rendering the soul, in its degree, like to that Purest Action, God, -who, Himself “Life,” is, as our Lord declared, “not the God of the dead -but of the living.”[288] - -And the second contribution can, in part, be traced back to Plato, -who does not weary, in the great middle period of his writings, from -insisting upon the greatness of the nobler passions, and who already -apprehends a Heavenly Eros which in part conflicts with, in part -transcends, the Earthly one. But here especially it is Christianity, -and in particular Christian Mysticism, which have fully experienced -and proclaimed that “God” is “Love,” and that the greatest of all the -soul’s acts and virtues is Charity, Pure Love. And hence the Pure -Act of God, and the Action of the God-like soul, are conceived not, -Aristotle-like, as acts of pure intelligence alone, but as tinged -through and through with a noble emotion. - -(3) But in three matters the Mystics, as such and as a whole, have, -here especially under the predominant influence of Greek thought, -remained inadequate to the great spiritual realities, as most fully -revealed to us by Christianity. The three points are so closely -interconnected that it will be best first to illustrate, and then to -criticise them, together. - -(i) Aristotle here introduces the mischief. For it is he who in his -great, simply immeasurably influential, theological tractate, Chapters -VI to X of the Twelfth Book of his _Metaphysic_, has presented to us -God as “the one first unmoved Mover” of the Universe, but Who moves it -as desired by it, not as desiring it, as outside of it, not as also -inside it. God here is sheer Pure Thought, Noēsis, for “contemplation -is the most joyful and the best” of actions. And “Thought” here -“thinks the divinest and worthiest, without change,” hence “It thinks -Itself, and the Thinking is a Thinking of Thought.”[289] We have here, -as Dr. Caird strikingly puts it, a God necessarily shut up within -Himself, “of purer eyes than to behold, not only iniquity but even -contingency and finitude, and His whole activity is one act of pure -self-contemplation.” “The ideal activity which connects God with the -world, appears thus as in the world and not in God.”[290] - -(ii) Now we have already allowed that the Mystics avoid Aristotle’s -elimination of emotion from man’s deepest action, and of emotion’s -equivalent from the life of God. But they are, for the most part, much -influenced in their speculations by this intensely Greek, aristocratic, -intellectualist conception, in the three points of a disdain of the -Contingent and Historical; of a superiority to volitional, productive -energizing; and of a presentation of God as unsocial, and as occupied -directly with Himself alone. We have already studied numerous examples -of the first two, deeply un-Christian, errors as they have more or -less influenced Christian Mysticism; the third mistake, of a purely -Transcendental, Deistic God, is indeed never consistently maintained -by any Christian, and Catherine, in particular, is ever dominated by -the contrary great doctrine, adumbrated by Plato and fully revealed by -Our Lord, of the impulse to give Itself intrinsic to Goodness, so that -God, as Supreme Goodness, becomes the Supreme Self-giver, and thus the -direct example and motive for our own self-donation to Him. Yet even -so deeply religious a non-Christian as Plotinus, and such speculative -thinkers as Eriugena and Eckhart (who certainly intended to remain -Christians) continue all three mistakes, and especially insist upon a -Supreme Being, Whose true centre, His Godhead, is out of all relation -to anything but Himself. And even the orthodox Scholastics, and St. -Thomas himself, attempt at times to combine, with the noblest Platonic -and the deepest Christian teachings, certain elements, which, in -strictness, have no place in an Incarnational Religion. - -(iii) For, at times, the fullest, deepest Action is still not -conceived, even by St. Thomas, as a Harmony, an Organization of all -Man’s essential powers, the more the better. “In the active life, -which is occupied with many things, there is less of beatitude than -in the contemplative life, which is busy with one thing alone,--the -contemplation of Truth”; “beatitude must consist essentially in the -action of the intellect; and only accidentally in the action of the -will.”[291] God is still primarily intelligence: “God’s intelligence -is His substance”; whereas “volition must be in God, since there is -intelligence in Him,” and “Love must of necessity be declared to be -in God, since there is volition in Him.”[292] God is still, in a -certain sense, shut up in Himself: “As He understands things other -than Himself, by understanding His own essence, so He wills things -other than Himself, by willing His own goodness.” “God enjoys not -anything beside Himself, but enjoys Himself alone.”[293]--And we get, -in correspondence to this absorption of God in Himself, an absorption -of man in God, of so direct and exclusive a kind, as, if pressed, to -eliminate all serious, permanent value, for our soul, in God’s actual -creation of our fellow-creatures. “He who knoweth Thee and creatures, -is not, on this account, happier than if he knows them not; but he is -happy because of Thee alone.” And “the perfection of Love is essential -to beatitude, with respect to the Love of God, not with respect to -the Love of one’s neighbour. If there were but one soul alone to -enjoy God, it would be blessèd, even though it were without a single -fellow-creature whom it could love.”[294] - -(iv) And yet St. Thomas’s own deeply Christian sense, explicit sayings -of Our Lord or of St. Paul, and even, in part, certain of the fuller -apprehensions of the Greeks, can make the great Dominican again -uncertain, or can bring him to entirely satisfactory declarations, -on each of these points. For we get the declaration that direct -knowledge of individual things, and quasi-creative operativeness are -essential to all true perfection. “To understand something merely -in general and not in particular, is to know it imperfectly”; Our -Lord Himself has taught us that “the very hairs of your head are all -numbered”; hence God must “know all other individual things with -a distinct and proper knowledge.”--And “a thing is most perfect, -when it can make another like unto itself. But by tending to its -own perfection, each thing tends to become more and more like God. -Hence everything tends to be like God, in so far as it tends to be -the cause of other things.”[295]--We get a full insistence, with St. -Paul, (in I Cor. xiii), upon our love of God, an act of the will, -as nobler than our cognition of Him; and with Plato and St. John, -upon God’s forthgoing Love for His creatures, as the very crown and -measure of His perfection. “Everything in nature has, as regards its -own good, a certain inclination to diffuse itself amongst others, as -far as possible. And this applies, in a supreme degree, to the Divine -Goodness, from which all perfection is derived.” “Love, Joy, Delight -can be predicated of God”; Love which, of its very essence “causes -the lover to bear himself to the beloved as to his own self”: so that -we must say with Dionysius that “He, the very Cause of all things, -becomes ecstatic, moves out of Himself, by the abundance of His loving -goodness, in the providence exercised by Him towards all things -extant.”[296] - -(v) And we get in St. Thomas, when he is too much dominated by the -abstractive trend, a most interesting, because logically necessitated -and quite unconscious, collision with certain sayings of Our Lord. For -he then explains Matt. xviii, 10, “their,” the children’s, “Angels -see without ceasing the face of their Father who is in Heaven” as -teaching that “the action (_operatio_), by which Angels are conjoined -to the increate Good, is, in them, unique and sempiternal”; whereas his -commentators are driven to admit that the text, contrariwise, implies -that these Angels have two simultaneous “operations,” and that their -succouring action in nowise disturbs their intellectual contemplation. -Hence, even if we press Matt. xxii, 30, that we “shall be as the Angels -of God,” we still have an organism of peaceful Action, composed of -intellectual, affective, volitional, productive acts operating between -the soul and God, and the soul and other souls, each constituent and -object working and attained in and through all the others. - -(vi) Indeed all Our Lord’s Synoptic teachings, as to man’s ultimate -standard and destiny, belong to this God-in-man and man-in-God type -of doctrine: for there the two great commandments are strictly -inseparable; God’s interest in the world is direct and detailed,--it -is part of His supreme greatness that He cares for every sparrow that -falls to the ground; and man, in the Kingdom of God, will sit down -at a banquet, the unmistakable type of social joys.--And even the -Apocalypse, which has, upon the whole, helped on so much the conception -of an exclusive, unproductive entrancement of each soul singly in -God alone, shows the deepest emotion when picturing all the souls, -from countless tribes and nations, standing before the throne,--an -emotion which can, surely, not be taken as foreign to those souls -themselves.[297] But, indeed, Our Lord’s whole life and message become -unintelligible, and the Church loses its deepest roots, unless the -Kingdom of God is, for us human souls, as truly a part of our ultimate -destiny as is God Himself, that God who fully reveals to us His own -deepest nature as the Good Shepherd, the lover of each single sheep and -of the flock as a whole.[298] - -(4) We shall, then, do well to hold that the soul’s ultimate beatitude -will consist in its own greatest possible self-realization in its -God-likeness,--an Action free from all Activity, but full of a knowing, -feeling, willing, receiving, giving, effectuating, all which will -energize between God and the soul, and the soul and other souls,--each -force and element functioning in its proper place, but each stimulated -to its fullest expansion, and hence to its deepest delight, by the -corresponding vitalization of the other powers and ends, and of other -similar centres of rich action. - - -3. _The pain-element of Bliss._ - -And our third, last question is whether our deepest this-life -apprehensions and experiences give us any reason for holding that a -certain equivalent for what is noblest in devoted suffering, heroic -self-oblivion, patient persistence in lonely willing, will be present -in the life of the Blessed. It would certainly be a gain could we -discover such an equivalent, for a pure glut of happiness, an unbroken -state of sheer enjoyment, can as little be made attractive to our most -spiritual requirements, as the ideal of an action containing an element -of, or equivalent for, devoted and fruitful effort and renunciation can -lose its perennial fascination for what is most Christian within us. - -(1) It is not difficult, I take it, to find such an element, which we -cannot think away from any future condition of the soul without making -that soul into God Himself. The ultimate cause of this element shall -be considered, as Personality, in our next Chapter: here I can but -indicate this element at work in our relations to our fellow-men and -to God.--Already St. Thomas, throughout one current of his teaching, -is full of the dignity of right individuality. “The Multitude and -Diversity of natures in the Universe proceed directly from the -intention of God, who brought them into being, in order to communicate -His goodness to them, and to have It represented by them. And since -It could not be sufficiently represented by one creature alone, He -produced many and diverse ones, so that what is wanting to the one -towards this office, should be supplied by the other.”[299] Hence the -multiplication of the Angels, who differ specifically each from all -the rest, adds more of nobility and perfection to the Universe, than -does the multiplication of men, who differ only individually.[300] And -Cardinal Nicolas of Coes writes, in 1457 A.D., “Every man is, as it -were, a separate species, because of his perfectibility.”[301] As Prof. -Josiah Royce tells us in 1901, “What is real, is not only a content of -experience and the embodiment of a type; but an individual content of -experience, and the unique embodiment of a type.”[302] - -(2) Now in the future beatitude, where the full development of this -uniqueness in personality cannot, as so often here, be stunted or -misapplied, all this will evidently reach its zenith. But, if so, -then it follows that, although one of the two greatest of the joys of -those souls will be their love and understanding of each other,--this -love and trust, given as it will be to the other souls, in their full, -unique personality, will, of necessity, exceed the comprehension of -the giving personalities. Hence there will still be an equivalent for -that trust and venture, that creative faith in the love and devotion -given by us to our fellows, and found by us in them, which are, here -below, the noblest concomitants and conditions of the pain and the -cost and the joy in every virile love and self-dedication.--There -is then an element of truth in Lessing’s words of 1773: “The human -soul is incapable of even one unmixed emotion,--one that, down to its -minutest constituent, would be nothing but pleasurable or nothing but -painful: let alone of a condition in which it would experience nothing -but such unmixed emotions.”--For, as Prof. Troeltsch says finely in -1903, “Everything historical retains, in spite of all its relation to -absolute values, something of irrationality,”--of impenetrableness to -finite minds, “and of individuality. Indeed just this mixture is the -special characteristic of the lot and dignity of man; nor is a Beyond -for him conceivable in which it would altogether cease. Doubt and -unrest can indeed give way to clear sight and certitude: yet this very -clarity and assurance will, in each human soul, still bear a certain -individual character,” fully comprehensible to the other souls by love -land trust alone.[303] - -(3) And this same element we find, of course, in a still greater -degree,--although, as I shall argue later on, our experimental -knowledge of God is greater than is our knowledge of our -fellow-creatures,--in the relations between our love of God and our -knowledge of Him. St. Thomas tells us most solidly: “Individual -Being applies to God, in so far as it implies Incommunicableness.” -Indeed, “_Person_ signifies the most perfect thing in nature,”--“the -subsistence of an individual in a rational nature.” “And since the -dignity of the divine nature exceeds every other dignity, this name -of Person is applicable, in a supreme degree, to God.” And again: -“God, as infinite, cannot be held infinitely by anything finite “; -and hence “only in the sense in which comprehension is opposed to -a seeking after Him, is God comprehended, _i.e._ possessed, by the -Blessed.” And hence the texts: “I follow, if that I may apprehend, -seeing that I also am apprehended” (Phil. iii, 12); “then shall I -know even as I am known” (1 Cor. xiii, 12); and “we shall see Him as -He is” (1 John iii, 2): all refer to such a possession of God. In the -last text “the adverb ‘as’ only signifies ‘we shall see His essence’ -and not ‘we shall have as perfect a mode of vision as God has a mode -of being.’”[304]--Here again, then, we find that souls loving God in -His Infinite Individuality, will necessarily love Him beyond their -intellectual comprehension of Him; the element of devoted trust, of -free self-donation to One fully known only through and in such an act, -will thus remain to man for ever. St. John of the Cross proclaimed this -great truth: “One of the greatest favours of God, bestowed transiently -upon the soul in this life, is its ability to see so distinctly, and -to feel so profoundly, that … it cannot comprehend Him at all. These -souls are herein, in some degree, like to the souls in heaven, where -they who know Him most perfectly perceive most clearly that He is -infinitely incomprehensible; for those that have the less clear vision, -do not perceive so distinctly as the others how greatly He transcends -their vision.”[305] With this teaching, so consonant with Catherine’s -experimental method, and her continuous trust in the persistence of the -deepest relations of the soul to God, of the self-identical soul to the -unchanging God, we can conclude this study of her Eschatology. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII - -THE FIRST THREE ULTIMATE QUESTIONS. THE RELATIONS BETWEEN MORALITY, -MYSTICISM, PHILOSOPHY, AND RELIGION. MYSTICISM AND THE LIMITS OF HUMAN -EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE. MYSTICISM AND THE NATURE OF EVIL - - -I take the ultimate questions involved in the religious positions -which are taken up by Catherine, and indeed by the Christian Mystics -generally, and which we have studied in the preceding two chapters, -to be four. In the order of their increasing difficulty they are: the -question as to the relations between Morality, Mysticism, Philosophy, -and Religion; that as to the Limits of Human Knowledge, and as to the -special character and worth of the Mystics’ claim to Trans-subjective -Cognition; that as to the Nature of Evil and the Goodness or Badness -of Human Nature; and that as to Personality,--the character of, and -the relations between, the human spirit and the Divine Spirit. The -consideration of these deepest matters in the next two chapters will, I -hope, in spite of its inevitable element of dimness and of repetition, -do much towards binding together and clarifying the convictions which -we have been slowly acquiring,--ever, in part, with a reference to -these coming ultimate alternatives and choices. - - -I. THE RELATIONS BETWEEN MORALITY AND MYSTICISM PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION. - -Now the first of these questions has not, for most of the more -strenuous of our educated contemporaries, become, so far again, a -living question at all. A morally good and pure, a socially useful and -active life,--all this in the sense and with the range attributed to -these terms by ordinary parlance: this and this alone is, for doubtless -the predominant public present-day consciousness, the true object, -end, and measure of all healthy religion; whatever is alongside of, -or beyond, or other than, or anything but a direct and exclusive -incentive to this, is so much superstition and fanaticism. According to -this view, at least one half of Catherine’s activity at all times, and -well-nigh the whole of it during her last period, would be practically -worthless. Thus only certain elements of such a life would be retained -even for and in religion, and even these would be bereft of all that -has hitherto been held to be their specifically religious sense and -setting. - - -1. _Kant’s non-mystical religion._ - -It is doubtless Kant who, among the philosophers, has been the most -consistent and influential in inculcating such non-Mystical Religion. -“Religion,” he says in 1793, “is, on its subjective side, the cognition -of all our duties as so many Divine Commandments.” “The delusion that -we can effect something, in view of our justification before God, by -means of acts of religious worship, is religious superstition; and -the delusion that we can effect something by attempts at a supposed -intercourse with God, is religious fanaticism.… Such a feeling of the -immediate presence of the Supreme Being, and such a discrimination -between this feeling and every other, even moral, feeling, would -imply a capacity for an intuition, which is without any corresponding -organ in human nature.… If then a Church doctrine is to abolish or -to prevent all religious delusion, it must,--over and above its -statutory teachings, with which it cannot, for the present, entirely -dispense,--contain within itself a principle which shall enable it to -bring about the religion of a pure life, as the true end of the whole -movement, and then to dispense with those temporary doctrines.”[306] - -It is deeply instructive to note how thoroughly this, at first sight, -solid and triumphant view, has not only continued to be refuted by the -actual practice and experience of specifically religious souls, but how -explicitly it is being discredited by precisely the more delicately -perceptive, the more truly detached and comprehensive, students and -philosophers of religion of the present day,--heirs, let us not forget -in justice to Kant, of the intervening profound development of the -historical sense, and of the history and psychology of religion.--Thus -that most vigorous, independent thinker, Prof. Simmel of Berlin, -writes in 1904: “Kant has, I think, simply passed by the essentials -of religion,--that is to say, of that reality which historically bears -the name of religion. Only the reflection, that the harmony of complete -happiness with complete morality is producible by a Divine Being -alone, is here supposed to lead us to believe in such a Being. There -is here a complete absence of that direct laying hold of the Divine -by our souls, because of our intrinsic needs, which characterizes -all genuine piety. And the religious sense is not recognized as an -organism with a unity of its own, as a growth springing from its own -root. The entirely specific character of religion, which is resolvable -neither into morality nor into a thirst after happiness: the direct -self-surrender of the soul to a higher reality, the giving and taking, -the unification and differentiation,--that quite organic unity of the -religious experience, which we can but most imperfectly indicate by -a multiplicity of some such, simultaneously valid, antitheses: this, -there is no evidence to show, was ever really known to Kant. What -was religion for Augustine and Francis of Assisi, he was unable to -reproduce in himself; indeed religion, of this type, he readily rejects -as fanaticism. Here lay the limit both of his own nature and of his own -times.”[307] - -The rich mind of Prof. Troeltsch is, perhaps, more entirely just: “As -Kant’s theory of knowledge is throughout dependent upon the state of -contemporary psychology, so also is his theory of religious knowledge -dependent upon the psychology of religion predominant in his day. -Locke, Leibniz, Pascal had already recognized the essentially practical -character of all religion; and since their psychology was unable to -conceive the ‘practical’ otherwise than as the moral, it had looked -upon Religion as Morality furnished forth with its metaphysical -concomitants. And as soon as this psychology had become the very -backbone of his conception of Religion, Morality gained an entirely -one-sided predominance over Kant’s mind,--considerably, indeed, beyond -his own personal feelings and perceptions.” For he remains deeply -penetrated by “the conceptions of Regeneration and Redemption; the idea -of divine Grace and Wisdom, which accepts the totality of a soul’s -good disposition in lieu of that soul’s ever defective single good -works; the belief in a Providence which strengthens the Good throughout -the world against Evil; adoring awe in face of the majesty of the -Supersensible”: and “all these” conceptions “are no more simply moral, -they are specifically religious thoughts.”[308] - -Such a fuller conception of religion is admirably insisted on by that -penetrating philosopher and historian of philosophy, Prof. Windelband: -“Actual Religion, in its complete reality, belongs to all the spheres -of life, and yet transcends them all, as something new and _sui -generis_. It is first an interior life--an apprehending, cognizing, -feeling, willing, accomplishing. But this accomplishing leads it on to -being also an exterior life: an acting out, according to their various -standards, of such feeling and willing; and an outward expression of -that inner life in general, in ritual acts and divine worship. Yet -this worship takes it beyond the little circle of the individual, and -constitutes the corporate acts of a community, a social, external -organization with visible institutions. And yet Religion ever claims to -be more than the whole series of such empirical facts and doings, it -ever transcends mere earthly experience, and is an intercourse with the -inmost nature and foundation of all reality; it is a life in and with -God, a metaphysical life. All these elements belong to the complete -concept of actual religion.”[309] I would add, that they each stimulate -the other, the external, _e.g._ being not only the expression of the -awakened internal, but also the occasion of that awakening. - -And the great Dutch scholar, Prof. C. P. Tiele, unexcelled in the -knowledge of the actual course taken by the great religions of the -world, declares: “All progress, not only in Morality, but also in -Science, Philosophy, Art, necessarily exerts an influence upon that -of Religion. But … Religion is not, on that account, identical with -Ethics any more than with Philosophy or Art. All these manifestations -of the human spirit respond to certain needs of man; but none of them, -not even Morality, is capable of supplying the want which Religion -alone can satisfy.… Religion differs from the other manifestations -of the human mind” in this, that whereas “in the domain of Art, the -feelings and the imagination predominate; in that of Philosophy, -abstract thought is paramount”; and “the main object of Science is to -know accurately, whilst Ethics are chiefly concerned with the emotions -and with the fruit they yield: in Religion all these factors operate -alike, and if their equilibrium be disturbed, a morbid religious -condition is the result.”[310] - - -2. _Ritschlian modification of Kant’s view._ - -It is deeply interesting to note the particular manner in which Kant’s -impoverishment of the concept of religion has been in part retained, in -part modified, by the Ritschlian school,--I am thinking especially of -that vigorous writer, Prof. Wilhelm Hermann. - -(1) If in Kant we get the belief in God derived from reflection -upon Goodness and Happiness, and as the only possible means of -their ultimate coalescence: in Hermann we still get the Categorical -Imperative, but the thirst for Happiness has been replaced by the -historic figure of Jesus Christ. “Two forces of different kinds,” -he says, “ever produce the certainty of Faith: the impression of an -Historic Figure which approaches us in Time; and the Moral Law which, -when we have heard it, we can understand in its Eternal Truth. Faith -arises, when a man recognizes, in the appearance of Jesus, that symbol -of his own existence which gives him the courage to recognize in the -Eternal, which claims him in the Moral Imperative, the source of true -life for his own self.”[311]--And these two sole co-efficients of -all entirely living religion are made to exclude, as we have already -seen, especially all Mysticism from the life of Faith. “True, outside -of Christianity, Mysticism will everywhere arise, as the very flower -of the religious development. But a Christian is bound to declare the -mystical experience of God to be a delusion. Once he has experienced -his elevation, by Christ alone, above his own previous nature, he -cannot believe that another man can attain the same result, simply by -means of recollection within his own self.… We are Christians precisely -because we have struck, in the person of Jesus, upon a fact which is -incomparably richer in content than the feelings that arise within -ourselves.” “Only because Christ is present for us can we possess -God with complete clearness and certainty.” And, with Luther,--who -remained, however, thoroughly faithful to the Primitive and Mediaeval -high esteem for the Mystical element of religion;--“right prayer is -a work of faith, and only a Christian can perform it.” And, more -moderately: “We have no desire to penetrate through Christ on to -God: for we consider that in God Himself we still find nothing but -Christ.”[312] - -(2) Now it is surely plain that we have here a most understandable, -indeed respectable, reaction against all empty, sentimental -Subjectivism, and a virile affirmation of the essential importance -of the Concrete and Historical. And, in particular, the insistence -upon the supreme value and irreplaceable character and function of -Christ is profoundly true.--Yet three counter-considerations have -ever to be borne in mind. - -(i) It remains certain that we do not know, or experience anything, -to which we can attribute any fuller reality, which is either purely -objective or purely subjective; and that there exists no process of -knowing or experiencing such a reality which would exclude either the -objective or the subjective factor. “Whatever claims to be fully real,” -either as apprehending subject or as apprehended object, “must be an -individual … an organic whole, which has its principle of unity in -itself.” The truly real, then, is a thing that has an inside; and the -sharp antithesis drawn, although in contrary directions, by Aristotle -and by Kant, between the Phenomenal and the Intelligible worlds, does -not exist in the reality either of our apprehending selves, or of our -apprehended fellow-men, or God.[313]--But Hermann is so haunted by the -bogey-fear of the subjective resonance within us being necessarily -useless towards, indeed obstructive of, the right apprehension -of the object thus responded to, that he is driven to follow the -will-o’-the-wisp ideal of a pure, entirely exclusive objectivity. - -(ii) Bent on this will-o’-the-wisp quest of an exclusive objectivity, -he has to define all Mysticism in terms of Exclusive Mysticism, and -then to reject such an aberration. “Wherever the influence of God upon -the soul is sought and found solely in an interior experience of the -individual soul, in an excitation of the feelings which is supposed -directly to reveal the true nature of this experience, _viz._ in a -state of possession by God, and this without anything exterior being -apprehended and held fast with a clear consciousness, without the -positive content of some mental contemplation setting thoughts in -motion and raising the spiritual level of the soul’s life; _there_ is -Mystical Piety.”[314] - -Now it is, of course, true that false Mysticism does attempt such an -impossible feat as the thing at which Hermann is thus aiming. But, even -here, the facts and problems are again misstated. Just now the object -presented was everything, and the apprehending subject was nothing. -Here, on the contrary, the apprehension by the subject is pressed to -the degree of requiring the soul to remain throughout reflexly aware of -its own processes. - -Already in 1798 Kant had, in full acceptance of the great distinction -worked out by Leibniz in the years 1701-1709, but not published till -1765, declared: “We can be mediately conscious of an apprehension as to -which we have no direct consciousness”; and “the field of our obscure -apprehensions,--that is, apprehensions and impressions of which we are -not directly conscious, although we can conclude without doubt that we -have them,--is immeasurable, whereas clear apprehensions constitute but -a very few points within the complete extent of our mental life.”[315] -This great fact psychologists can now describe with greater knowledge -and precision: yet the observations and analyses of Pierre Janet, -William James, James Ward and others, concerning Subconsciousness, -have but confirmed and deepened the Leibnizian-Kantian apprehensions. -Without much dim apprehension, no clear perception; nothing is more -certain than this. - -And it is certain, also, that this absence of reflex consciousness, of -perceiving that we are apprehending, applies not only to impressions -of sensible objects, or to apprehensions of realities inferior -in richness, in interiority, to our own nature, but also, indeed -especially, to apprehensions of realities superior, in dignity and -profundity of organization, to our own constitution. When engrossed -in a great landscape of Turner, the Parthenon sculptures, a sonata of -Beethoven, Dante’s _Paradiso_; or when lost in the contemplation of the -seemingly endless spaces of the heavens, or of the apparently boundless -times of geology; or when absorbed in the mysterious greatness of -Mind, so incommensurable with matter, and of Personality, so truly -presupposed in all these appreciations yet so transcendent of even -their collectivity--we are as little occupied with the facts of our -engrossment, our self-oblivion, our absorption, or with the aim and -use of such immensely beneficial self-oblivion, as we are, in our -ordinary, loosely-knit states, occupied with the impression which, -nevertheless, is being produced upon our senses and mind by some small -insect or slight ray of light to which we are not giving our attention, -or which may be incapable of impressing us sufficiently to be thus -attended to and clearly perceived.[316] And, as in the case of these -under-impressions, so in that of those over-impressions, we can often -judge, as to their actual occurrence and fruitfulness, only from their -after-effects, although this indirect proof will, in each case, be of -quite peculiar cogency.--All this leaves ample room for that prayer -of simple quiet, so largely practised by the Saints, and indeed for -all such states of recollection which, though the soul, on coming -from them, cannot discover definite ideas or picturings to have been -contained in them, leave the soul braced to love, work, and suffer -for God and man, beyond its previous level. Prof. William James is -too deeply versed a Psychologist not fully to understand the complete -normality of such conditions, and the entire satisfactoriness of such -tests.[317] - -(iii) And finally, it is indeed true that God reveals Himself to us, -at all fully, in Human History alone, and within this history, more -fully still, in the lives and experiences of the Saints of all the -stages of religion, and, in a supreme and normative manner, in the life -and teaching of Jesus Christ; that we have thus a true immanence of -the Divine in the Human; and that it is folly to attempt the finding -or the making of any shorter way to God than that of the closest -contact with His own condescensions. Yet such a wisely Historical and -fully Christian attitude would be imperilled, not secured, by such an -excessive Christocentrism, indeed such _Panchristism_, as that of Prof. -Hermann. - -We shall indeed beware of all indifferentist levelling-down of the -various religions of the world. For, as Prof. Robertson Smith, who -knew so well the chief great religions, most wisely said, “To say -that God speaks to all men alike, and gives the same communication -directly to all without the use of a revealing agency, reduces religion -to Pure Mysticism. In point of fact it is not true of any man that -what he believes and knows of God, has come to him directly through -the voice of nature and conscience.” And he adds: “History has not -taught us anything in true religion to add to the New Testament. Jesus -Christ still stands as high above us as He did above His disciples, -the perfect Master, the supreme head of the fellowship of all true -religion.”[318] - -Yet we must equally guard against making even Our Lord into so -exclusive a centre and home of all that is divine, as to cause Him -to come into an entirely God-forsaken, completely God-forgetting -world, a world which did not and could not, in any degree or manner -whatsoever, rightly know, love, or serve God at all; and against so -conceiving the religion, taught and practised by Him, as to deprive it -of all affinity with, or room for, such admittedly universal forces -and resultants of the human soul and the religious sense as are dim -apprehension, formless recollection, pictureless emotion, and the -sense of the Hiddenness and Transcendence of the very God, Who is also -Immanent and Self-Revealing, in various degrees and ways, in every -place and time. Indeed, these two forces: the diffused Religiosity and -more or less inchoate religion, readily discoverable, by a generous -docility, more or less throughout the world of human souls, and the -concentrated spirituality and concrete, thoroughly characteristic -Religion, which has its culmination, after its ample preludings in the -Hebrew Prophets, in the Divine-Human figure and spirit of Jesus Christ: -are interdependent, in somewhat the way in which vague, widely spread -Subconsciousness requires, and is required by, definite, narrowly -localized Consciousness in each human mind. Precisely because there -have been and are previous and simultaneous lesser communications -of, and correspondences with, the one “Light that enlighteneth every -man that cometh into the world”; because men can and do believe -according to various, relatively preliminary, degrees and ways, in God -and a Providence, in Sin and Contrition, without a knowledge of the -Historic Christ (although never without the stimulation of some, often -world-forgotten, historic personality, and ever with some real, though -unconscious approximation to His type of life and teaching), therefore -can Christ be the very centre, and sole supreme manifestation and -measure of all this light. Not only can Christ remain supreme, even -though Moses and Elijah, Amos and Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel; and -indeed, in their own other degrees and ways, Plato and Plotinus, -Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, Gautama Buddha and Rabbi Akiba be all -revered as God-loved and God-loving, as, in various amounts, truly, -spiritually great: but only thus can His central importance be fully -realized. - -There is certainly much in Our Lord’s own attitude, as we have already -found, to demand such a view; and Clement of Alexandria, Origen and St. -Justin Martyr have emphasized it continually. And there is no necessary -Naturalism here--for the position is entirely compatible with the -profoundest belief in the great truth that it is Grace which everywhere -produces the various degrees of God-pleasing religion to be found -scattered throughout the world. Father Tyrrell has admirably said: -“God’s salutary workings in man’s heart have always been directed, -however remotely, to the life of Grace and Glory; of ‘the Order of mere -nature,’ and its exigencies, we have no experimental knowledge … In the -present order, Theism is but embryonic Christianity, and Christianity -is but developed Theism: ‘purely natural’ religion is what might have -been, but never was.”[319] - -(3) Now this must suffice as a sketch of the relations between -(Historical) Religion and Mysticism, and will have shown why I cannot -but regret that so accomplished a scholar as Prof. Morice Jastrow -should class all and every Mysticism, whether Pure or Mixed, as -so far forth a religious malady; why I rejoice that so admirably -circumspect an investigator as Prof. C. P. Tiele should, (in the -form of a strenuous insistence upon the apprehension, indeed the -ontological action of, the Infinite, by and within the human spirit, -as the very soul and mainspring of Religion), so admirably reinforce -the fundamental importance of the Mystical apprehensions; why I most -warmly endorse Prof. Rauwenhoff’s presentment of Mysticism as, with -Intellectualism and Moralism, one of the three psychological forms -of religion, which are each legitimate and necessary, and which each -require the check of the other two, if they are not to degenerate each -into some corruption special to the exclusive development of that -particular form; and why I cordially applaud the unequalled analysis -and description by Prof. Eucken of the manner in which “Universal -Religion” is at work, as an often obscure yet (in the long run) most -powerful leaven, throughout all specifically human life,--Sciences, -Art, Philosophy, and Ethics, calling for, and alone satisfied with, the -answering force and articulation of “Characteristic Religion,” each -requiring and required by the other, each already containing the other -in embryo, and both ever operating together, in proportion as Man and -Religion attain to their fulness.[320] - - -3. _Hermann’s impossible simplification concerning philosophy._ - -But what shall we say as to the relations between Religion and -Philosophy? Here again Hermann is the vigorous champion of a very -prevalent and plausible simplification. “There exists no Theory of -Knowledge for such things as we hold to be real in the strength of -faith. In such religious affirmations, the believer demolishes every -bridge between his conviction and that which Science can recognize as -real.” Indeed Hermann’s attitude is here throughout identical with that -of his master, Albrecht Ritschl: Metaphysics of any and every kind -appear everywhere, to both writers, as essentially unnecessary, unreal, -misleading, as so much inflation and delusion of soul.--Yet this again -is quite demonstrably excessive, and can indeed be explained only as an -all but inevitable recoil from the contrary metaphysical excesses of -the Hegelian school. - -(1) Since the culmination of that reaction, “it has,” as Prof. H. -J. Holtzmann, himself so profoundly historical and so free from -all extreme metaphysical bent, tells us, “become quite impossible -any further to deny the metaphysical factors which had a share in -constituting such types of New Testament doctrine as the Pauline and -Joannine. Indeed, not even if we were to reduce the New Testament to -the Synoptic Gospels and the Acts on the one hand, and to the Pastoral -Epistles, the Epistle of James and the Apocalypse on the other hand, -would the elements which spring from speculative sources be entirely -eliminated. And since, again, the Old Testament religion, in its last -stage, assimilated similarly metaphysical materials from the East -and from the West; since Mohammedanism, in its Persian and Indian -branches, did the same with regard to the older civilized religions of -Middle and Eastern Asia; since also these latter religions received -a speculative articulation in even the most ancient times, so that -they are both Philosophy and Religion simultaneously: we are forced -to ask ourselves, whether so frequent a concomitant of religion is -satisfactorily explicable as a mere symptom of falsification or decay.” -And whilst answering that the primary organ for religion is Feeling -and Conscience, he points out how large an amount of Speculation was, -nevertheless, required and exercised by a St. Augustine, even after his -unforgettable experiences of the sufferings attendant upon Sin, and of -their cure by Grace alone.[321] - -(2) The fact is that, if man cannot apprehend the objects,--the -historic and other facts,--of Religion, without certain subjective -organs, dispositions, and effects, any more than can all these -subjective capacities, without those objects, produce religious -convictions and acts, or be waked up into becoming efficient forces: -neither can man thus experience and effect the deepest foundations and -developments of his own true personality in and through contact with -the divine Spirit, without being more or less stimulated into some -kind of, at least rudimentary, Philosophy as to these his profoundest -experiences of reality, and as to their rights and duties towards the -rest of what he is and knows. - -(3) Indeed his very Religion is already, in itself, the profoundest -Metaphysical Affirmation. As the deeply historical-minded Prof. Tiele -admits: “Every man in his sound senses, who does not lead the life of -a half-dormant animal, philosophizes in his own way”; and “religious -doctrine rests on a metaphysical foundation; unless convinced of the -reality of a supersensual world, it builds upon sand.”[322] Or as Prof. -Eucken, the most eloquent champion of this central characteristic -of all vital religion, exclaims: “If we never, as a matter of fact, -get beyond merely subjective psychological processes, and we can -nowhere trace within us the action of cosmic forces; if we in no case -experience through them an enlargement, elevation, and transformation -of our nature: then not all the endeavours of its well-meaning friends -can preserve religion from sinking to the level of a mere illusion. -Without a universal and real principle, without hyper-empirical -processes, there can be no permanence for religion.”[323] - -(4) Some kind of philosophy, then, will inevitably accompany, follow, -and stimulate religion, were it only as the, necessarily ever -inadequate, attempt at giving a fitting expression to the essentially -metaphysical character of belief in a super-sensible world, in God, in -man’s spiritual capacities and in God’s redemption of man. Not because -the patient analysis of the completer human personalities, (as these -are to be found throughout the length and breadth of history), requires -the elimination of a wholesome Mysticism and a sober Metaphysic from -among the elements and effects of the fullest Manhood and Religion; but -because of the ever serious difficulties and the liability to grave -abuses attendant upon both these forces, the inevitably excessive -reactions against these abuses, and the recurrent necessity of -remodelling much of the theory and practice of both, in accordance with -the growth of our knowledge of the human mind, (a necessity which, at -first sight, seems to stultify all the hyper-empirical claims of both -these forces): only because of this have many men of sense and goodness -come to speak as though religion, even at its fullest, could and should -get on without either, contenting itself to be a somewhat sentimental, -Immanental Ethics. - -(5) Yet, against such misgivings, perhaps the most immediately -impressive counter-argument is the procession, so largely made up -of men and of movements not usually reckoned as exclusively or -directly religious, whose very greatness,--one which humanity will -not let die,--is closely interwoven with Mystical and Metaphysical -affirmations. There are, among philosophers, a Spinoza and a Leibniz, -a Fichte, Hegel, Schopenhauer, a Trendelenburg and a Lotze, with the -later stages of a John Mill, a Littré, and a Herbert Spencer; among -poets, a Pindar and Aeschylus, a Lucretius and Vergil, a Lessing and a -Goethe, a Wordsworth and a Browning; among historians, a Thucydides and -a Tacitus, a St. Simon and de Tocqueville, a Carlyle, a Jacob Grimm, -a Droysen and a Ranke; among scientists, a Copernicus and a Kepler, a -Newton, a Lyell, indeed, largely still, also a Darwin; and among men of -action, a Moltke and a Gordon, a Burke and a von Stein. Shear any of -these men of their Mystical and Metaphysical elements, and you will -have shorn Samson of his locks. - -And if we can frame a contrary list of men of force and distinction, -who have represented an un- or even an anti-Mystical and -anti-Metaphysical type: Caesar and Hannibal, Napoleon and Bismarck, -Voltaire and Laplace, Hume and Bentham, Huxley and Mommsen, we must -ever remember the complex truth as to the Polarity of Life,--the strict -necessity of the movement towards an intensely close contact with -empirical reality, as well as of the movement back to recollection; -the frequent sickliness of the recollective movement, as found in the -average practice of life, which cannot but produce a reaction and -contrary excess; and hence the legitimacy of what this second type -has got of positiveness and of corrective criticism. Yet here too the -greatness will consist directly in what these men are and have, not -in what they are not; and wherever this their brutal-seeming sense of -the apparent brutalities of life is combined with an apprehension of a -higher world and of a deeper reality, _there_ something fuller and more -true has been attained than is reached by such strong but incomplete -humanity alone. - - -4. _Religion and Morality, their kinship and difference._ - -And, finally, as to Religion and Morality, we should note how that the -men, who deny all essential connection between Religion and Mysticism -and Religion and Philosophy, ever, when they do retain Religion at -all, tend to identify it with Morality, if not as to the motives, yet -as to the contents of the two forces. And yet it is not difficult to -show that, if the relation between Religion and Morality is closer than -that between Religion and Philosophy, though not as intimate as is that -between Historical-Institutional Religion and Mysticism: Religion and -Morality are nevertheless not identical. - -(1) This non-identity is indicated by the broad historical fact that, -though the development of Religion tells upon that of Morality, and -_vice versa_: yet that the rate of development of these two forces is -practically never the same, even in one and the same soul, still less -in any one country or race. In each case we get various inequalities -between the two developments, which would be impossible, were the two -forces different only in name. - -We reach again the same conclusion, if we note, what Dr. Edward Caird -has so well pointed out, “the imperfection of the subjective religion -of the prophets and psalmists of Israel,”--who nevertheless already -possessed a very advanced type of profoundly ethical religion,--“shown -by its inability to overcome the legal and ceremonial system of -worship to which it was opposed”; as, “in like manner, Protestantism -… has never been able decisively to conquer the system of Rome.”[324] -For this, as indeed the failure of Buddhism to absorb and supersede -Hindooism, evidently implies that Religion cannot find its full -development and equilibrium in an exclusive concentration upon Morality -Proper, as alone essential; and hence that complete Religion embraces -other things besides Morality. - -Once more we find non-identity between the very Ethics directly -postulated by Religion at its deepest, and the Ethics immediately -required by the Family, Society, the State, Art, Science, and -Philosophy. As Prof. Troeltsch admirably puts it, “the special -characteristic of our modern consciousness resides in the insistence -both upon the Religious, the That-world Ends, _and_ upon the Cultural, -This-World Ends, which latter are taken as Ends-in-themselves: it -is precisely in this combination that this consciousness finds its -richness, power, and freedom, but also its painful interior tension -and its difficult problems.” “As in Christian Ethics we must recognize -the predominance of an Objective Religious End,--for here certain -relations of the soul to God are the chief commandments and the supreme -good,--so in the Cultural Ends we should frankly recognize objective -Moral Ends of an Immanental kind.” And in seeking after the right -relations between the two, we shall have to conclude that “Ethics, for -us, are not, at first, a unity but a multiplicity: man grows up amongst -a number of moral ends, the unification of which is his life’s task and -problem, and not its starting-point.” And this multiplicity “is” more -precisely “a polarity in human nature, for it contains two poles--that -of Religious and that of Humane Ethics, neither of which can be ignored -without moral damage, but which, nevertheless, cannot be brought under -a common formula.” “We can but keep a sufficient space open for the -action of both forms, so that from their interaction there may ever -result, with the least possible difficulty, the deepening of the Humane -Ends by the Christian Ethics, and the humanizing of the Christian End -by the Humane Ethics, so that life may become a service of God within -the Cultural Ends, and that the service of God may transfigure the -world.”[325] - -We can perceive the difference between the two forces most clearly -in Our Lord’s life and teaching--say, the Sermon on the Mount; in -the intolerableness of every exegesis which attempts to reduce the -ultimate meaning and worth of this world-renewing religious document to -what it has of literal applicability in the field of morality proper. -Schopenhauer expressed a profound intuition in the words: “It would be -a most unworthy manner of speech to declare the sublime Founder of the -Christian Religion, whose life is proposed to us as the model of all -virtue, to have been the most reasonable of men, and that his maxims -contained but the best instruction towards an entirely reasonable -life.”[326] - -(2) The fact is that Religion ever insists, even where it but seems -to be teaching certain moral rules and motives as appropriate to this -visible world of ours, upon presenting them in the setting of a fuller, -deeper world than that immediately required as the field of action and -as the justification of ordinary morality. Thus whilst, in Morality -Proper, the concepts of Responsibility, Prudence, Merit, Reward, -Irretrievableness, are necessarily primary; in Religious Ethics the -ideas of Trust, Grace, Heroism, Love, Free Pardon, Spiritual Renovation -are, as necessarily, supreme. And hence it is not accidental, although -of course not necessary, that we often find men with a keen religious -sense but with a defective moral practice or even conception, and men -with a strong moral sense and a want of religious perception; that -Mystics, with their keen sense for one element of religion, so often -seem, and sometimes are, careless of morality proper; and that, in such -recent cases (deeply instructive in their very aberrations) as that of -Nietzsche, we get a fierce anti-Moralism combined with a thirst for -a higher and deeper world than this visible one, which not all its -fantastic form, nor even all Nietzsche’s later rant against concrete -religion, can prevent from being essentially religious.[327] - -(3) We have then, here, the deepest instance of the law and -necessity which we have, so often, found at the shallower levels of -the spirit’s life. For here, once more, there is one apprehension, -force, life,--This-world Morality,--which requires penetration and -development, in nowise destruction, by another, a deeper power, -That-world Ethics and Religion. Let the one weaken or blunt the edge -and impact of the other, and it has, at the same time, weakened itself. -For here again we have, not a Thing which simply exists, by persistence -in its dull unpenetratingness and dead impenetrability, but a Life, -growing by the incorporation and organization, within its ampler range, -of lesser lives, each with its own legitimate autonomy. - - -II. MYSTICISM AND THE LIMITS OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE. - -But have not even the most sober-minded of the Partial Mystics greatly -exceeded the limits of human knowledge, more or less continuously, -throughout their conclusions? Is Kant completely in the wrong? And are -not the Positivists right in restricting all certain cognition to the -experiences of the senses and to the Mathematico-Physical Sciences -built upon those experiences? And, again, is there such a thing at all -as specifically Mystical Experience or Knowledge? And, if so, what is -its worth?--I must keep the elaboration of the (ultimately connected) -question, as to the nature of the realities experienced or known--as -to the human spirit and the Divine Spirit, and their inter-relations, -hence as to Pantheism and Personality--for the next chapter, and can -here but prepare the ground for it, by the elucidation of certain -important points in general Epistemology, and of the more obvious -characteristics of Mystical apprehension. - - -1. _Positivist Epistemology an error._ - -As regards general Epistemology, we may well take up the following -positions. - -(1) We cannot but reject, with Prof. Volkelt, as a mere vulgar error, -the Positivist limitation of trans-subjectively valid knowledge to -direct sense-perception and to the laws of the so-called Empirical -Sciences. For, as he shows conclusively, the only fact which is -absolutely indubitable, is that of the bare occurrence of our (possibly -utterly misleading) sensations and impressions. Some of these are, it -is true, accompanied by a certain pressure upon our minds to credit -them with trans-subjective validity; and the fact of this (possibly -quite misleading) pressure is itself part of our undeniable experience. -Yet we can, if we will, treat this pressure also as no more than a -meaningless occurrence, and not as evidencing the trans-subjective -reality which it seems to indicate. No man, it is true, has ever -succeeded in consistently carrying out such a refusal of assent,--since -no scepticism is so thorough but that it derives its very power, -against the trans-subjective validity of some of the impressions -furnished with trans-subjective pressure, from an utterly inconsistent -acceptance, as trans-subjectively valid, of other impressions furnished -with a precisely similar trans-subjective intimation. Yet the fact -remains that, in all such cases of trans-subjective pressure, the -mind has “an immediate experience of which the content is precisely -this, that we are justified in proceeding with these concepts into -what is absolutely beyond the possibility of being experienced by -us.” “Positivistic Cognition,” to which no man, Positivist included, -can systematically restrict himself, “abides absolutely within the -immediately experienced. Logical Cognition,” which every man practises -surreptitiously if not avowedly, “exceeds experience at every step, -and conceptually determines what is absolutely incapable of being -experienced, yet the justification for this kind of cognition is, here -also, an immediately experienced certitude.”[328] - -We have, “then, immediately experienced presentations which of -themselves already constitute a knowledge,--our first knowledge, -and the only one possessed of absolute indubitableness.” And some -of these presentations “are accompanied by a kind of immediate -certainty or revelation that, in some way, they reach right into the -Thing-in-Itself, that they directly express something objectively -valid, present in that Thing-in-Itself”; and “this pressure ever -involves, should the contradictory of what it enunciates be admitted as -objectively existent, the self-destruction of objective reality.”--“And -this pressure can, in any one case, be resisted by the mind; an act of -endorsement, of a kind of faith, is necessary on the part of the mind: -for these presentations, furnished with such pressure, do not transform -themselves into the Things-in-Themselves directly,--we do not come to -see objective reality simply face to face.”[329] And we find thus that -“_in principle_ the entire range of reality, right down to its last -depths, lies open to cognition, proceeding according to the principle -of the necessities of thought. For he who recognizes this principle, -thereby admits that the necessities of thought have trans-subjective -significance, so that, if any affirmation concerning the ultimate -reasons and depths of Reality can be shown to be necessary in thought, -this affirmation possesses as rightful a claim to trans-subjective -validity, as any determination, necessary in thought, which concern -only such parts of the Thing-in-Itself as are the nearest neighbours to -our sense-impressions concerning it. Everywhere our principle leaves us -only the question whether thought, as a matter of fact, does or does -not react, under the given problems, with the said logical constraint -and pressure.”[330] - -(2) We can next insist upon how we have thus already found that the -acquisition of even so rudimentary an outline of Reality, as to be -ever in part presupposed in the attacks of the most radical sceptics, -necessarily involves a certain emotive disposition and volitional -action. And, over and above this partially withholdable assent, such -quite elementary thinking will also ever require the concomitant -energizing of the picturing faculty. And again, the more interior and -spiritual are this thinking’s subject-matters, the more will it be -permeated by, and be inseparable from, deep feeling. It is then all -man’s faculties conjoined, it is the whole man, who normally thus -gives, without reflecting on it, his all, to gain even this elementary -nucleus of certainty as to Reality. “Even receptivity,” as Prof. Ward -well says, “is activity”; for even where non-voluntary, it is never -indifferent. “Not mere receptivity, but conative or selective activity, -is the essence of subjective reality.” Or, with Prof. Volkelt: “Purely -isolated thought,”--which, in actual life ever more or less of a -fiction, is not rarely set up by individuals as an ideal,--“is, however -intensified and interiorized, something ever only formal, something, in -the final resort, insignificant and shadowy.”--And, concurrently with -the recognition of this fact, man will come to find that “the ultimate -Substance or Power of and in the world,”--that objective reality which -is the essential counterpart to his own subjective reality,--“is -something possessed of a true, deep content and of a positive aim, -and alive according to the analogy of a willing individual. The -world would thus be a Logical Process only in the sense that this -concrete fundamental Power is bound by the ideal necessity of its own -nature.”[331] - -(3) And again, I would note with Volkelt how Kant, owing to his -notoriously intense natural tendency to universal Dualism, never -admits, even as a point for preliminary settlement, the possibility -that our subjective conceptions of Objective Reality may have some true -relation to that Reality. His professed ignorance as to the nature -of that Reality changes instantaneously, quite unbeknown to himself, -into an absolutely unvarying, negative knowledge concerning that -Reality,--he simply _knows_ that it is _utterly heterogeneous_ to our -conception of it. Thus he finds the view that “God has implanted into -the human mind certain categories and concepts of a kind spontaneously -to harmonize with things,” to be “the most preposterous solution that -we could possibly choose.”[332] Thus the epistemological difference -between Presentation and Thing-in-Itself becomes a metaphysical -exclusion of each by the other. And yet we know of no fact, whether -of experience or of thought, to prevent something which is _my_ -presentation existing also, in so far as it is the content of that -presentation, outside of this presentment. Indeed Psychology and -Epistemology have, driven by every reason and stopped by none, more and -more denied and refuted this excessive, indeed gratuitous, Dualism. - -As Prof. Henry Jones well puts it: “The hypothesis that knowledge -consists of two elements which are so radically different as to be -capable of description only by defining each negatively in terms of -the other, the pure manifold or differences of sense, and a purely -universal or relative thought,” breaks down under the fact that “pure -thought and the manifold of sense pass into each other, the one proving -meaningless and the other helpless in its isolation.” These elements -“are only aspects of one fact, co-relates mutually penetrating each -other, distinguishable in thought, but not separable as existences.” -Hence we must not “make logical remnants do the work of an intelligence -which is never purely formal, upon a material which is nowhere a pure -manifold”: for “the difference between the primary data of thought -on the one hand, and the highest kinds of systematized knowledge on -the other, is no difference … between a mere particular and a mere -universal, or a mere content and a mere form; but it is a difference -in comprehensiveness of articulation.” However primary may be the -distinction of subjective and objective, “we are not entitled to -forget the unity of the reality in which the distinction takes place.” -If we begin with the purely subjective, we must doubtless end there; -but then, in spite of certain, never self-consistent, philosophical -hypotheses, “the purely subjective is as completely beyond our reach as -the purely objective.”[333] - -Prof. Ward indeed pushes the matter, I think rightly, even a step -further. He points out how readily, owing to the ambiguous term -“consciousness,” “we confound experience with knowledge”; but holds -that experience is the wider term. “Knowledge must fall within -experience, and experience extend beyond knowledge. Thus I am not -left to infer my own being from my knowing.… Objective reality is -immediately ‘given,’ or immediately ‘there,’ not inferred.” But the -subjective reality is not immediately given, immediately there. -“There is no such parallelism between the two.… The subjective factor -in experience is not _datum_ but _recipiens_: it is not ‘there’ but -‘here’; a ‘here’ relative to that ‘there.’”[334] Nothing of this, -I think, really conflicts with the positions we have adopted from -Volkelt, since “experience” is evidently used here in a sense inclusive -of the presentations, the trans-subjective pressure and the endorsement -of the latter’s estimations,--the three elements which, according also -to Volkelt, form an organism which even the most daring subjectivism -can never consistently reject. At most, the term “experience” is more -extended in Prof. Ward, since it includes all three elements, than in -Prof. Volkelt, who restricts it to the two first. - -(4) And further, we must take care to find room for the only unforced -explanation of the wondrous fact that “although,” as Dr. Volkelt -strikingly says, “the various schools of philosophy “--this is largely -true of those of theology also,--are “in part essentially determined -by historical currents, forces which follow other standards than -those of logical necessity”: yet “these points of view and modes -of thought, thus determined by” apparently non-logical “history, -subserve nevertheless logical necessity, indeed represent its” slow, -intermittent, yet real “progressive realization.” The explanation is -that “the forces of history are, unbeknown to themselves, planned, -in their depths, for agreement with the necessities and ends of -thought and of truth.” “And thus the different spheres” and levels -“of spiritual life and endeavour appear as originally intended for -each other, so that each sphere, whilst consciously striving only -after its own particular laws and standards, in reality furthers -the objects of the rest.” For “only the operative presence of such -an original, teleological inter-relation can explain how historic -forces, by their influence upon, and determination of, philosophical -thinking, can, instead of staining and spoiling it by the introduction -of religious, artistic, political, and other motives, actually -advance it most essentially.”[335]--Here then we get a still further -enlargement of the already wide range of interaction, within the human -mind, between forces which, at first sight, appear simply external -to, indeed destructive of, each other; and a corresponding increase -in the indications of the immense breadth, depth, and closeness -of inter-penetration characterizing the operative ground-plan, -the pre-existing Harmony and Teleology of the fundamental forces -of Reality. Thus once more man’s spirit appears as possessed of a -large interiority; and as met, supported and penetrated, by a Spirit -stupendously rich in spiritual energy. - -(5) And finally, let us never forget that “the only experience -immediately accessible to us” men, “is our own; this, in spite of -its complexity, is the first we know.”[336] And this means that we -have direct experience and anything like adequate knowledge, (because -knowledge from within,) not of things, but of mind and will, of -spiritual life struggling within an animal life; and that in face, -say, of plant-life, and still more of a pebble or of a star, we have a -difficulty as to an at all appropriate and penetrative apprehension, -which, if opposite to, is also in a sense greater than, the difficulty -inherent to our apprehension of God Himself. For towards this latter -apprehension we have got the convergent testimony of certain great, -never quite obliterable facts without us and within ourselves. - -There is the upward trend, the ever-increased complexity of -organization, the growing depth and interiority in the animate -world,--Plant-Life itself being already, very probably, possessed of a -vague consciousness, and Man, at the other end of the scale, summing up -the tendency of the whole series in a deep self-consciousness which, at -the same time, makes him alone keenly aware of the great difference, -in the midst of the true kinship, between himself and the humbler -members of that one world. For Natural Selection can but describe the -results and explain part of the method of this upward trend, but cannot -penetrate to its ultimate cause and end. - -There is, again, the great, deep fact of the mutually necessary, -mutually stimulating presence and interaction, within our own mental -and spiritual life, of sense-impressions, imaginative picturings, -rational categories, emotional activities, and volitional acts; -and, again, of subject and object; and, once more, of general, -philosophic Thought and the contingencies of History. For the -immanental inter-adaptation and Teleology, that mysteriously link -together all these, profoundly disparate-seeming, realms and forces -is far too deep-down, it too much surprises, and exacts too much of -us, it too much reveals itself, precisely at the end of much labour -of our own and in our truest and most balanced moods, as the mostly -unarticulated presupposition and explanation of both the great cost -and the rich fruitfulness of every approximately complete actuation of -all our faculties, each with and in the others, and in and with their -appropriate objects, to be permanently ruled out of court as mere -sentimentalism or baseless apologetic. - -And there is the deepest fact of all, the one which precisely -constitutes the specific characteristic of all true humanity, the sense -of mental oppression, of intolerable imprisonment inflicted by the -very idea of the merely contingent, the simply phenomenal and Finite, -and the accompanying noble restlessness and ready dwarfing of all -man’s best achievements by the agent’s own Ideal of Perfection. For -this latter sense is, precisely in the greater souls, so spontaneous -and so keen, so immensely operative in never leaving our, otherwise -indolent and readily self-delusive, self-complacent race fully and -long satisfied with anything that passes entirely away, or that -is admittedly merely a subjective fancy, even though this fancy be -shared by every member of the human race; and this sense operates so -explosively within Sceptics as well as Dogmatists, within would-be -Agnostic Scientists as well as in the most Intellectualist Theologians; -it so humbles, startles, and alone so braces, sweetens, widens, indeed -constitutes our humanity: as to be unforcedly explicable only by -admitting that man’s spirit’s experience is not shut up within man’s -own clear analysis or picturing of it; that it is indefinitely wider, -and somehow, in its deepest reaches, is directly touched, affected, in -part determined, by the Infinite Spirit Itself. “Man never knows how -anthropomorphic he is,” says Goethe. Yes, but it was a man, Goethe, -it is at bottom all men, in proportion as they are fully, sensitively -such, who have somehow discovered this truth; who suffer from its -continuous evidences, as spontaneously as from the toothache or from -insomnia; and whose deepest moments give them a vivid sense of how -immensely the Spirit, thus directly experienced by their spirit, -transcends, and yet also is required by and is immanent in, their keen -sense of the Finitude and Contingency present throughout the world of -sense-perception and of clear intellectual formulation. - -(6) With Plato and Plotinus, Clement of Alexandria and St. Augustine, -St. Bernard, Cardinal Nicolas of Coes and Leibniz in the past; with -Cardinal Newman, Professors Maurice Blondel and Henri Bergson, -Siegwart, Eucken, Troeltsch and Tiele, Igino Petrone and Edward Caird, -in the present; with the explicit assent of practically all the great -Mystics of all ages and countries, and the implicit instinct, and at -least partial, practical admission, of all sane and developed human -souls; we will then have to postulate here, not merely an intellectual -reasoning upon finite data, which would somehow result in so operative -a sense of the Infinite; nor even simply a mental category of -Infinitude which, evoked in man by and together with the apprehension -of things finite, would, somehow, have so massive, so explosive an -effect against our finding satisfaction in the other categories, -categories which, after all, would not be more subjective, than itself: -but the ontological presence of, and the operative penetration by -the Infinite Spirit, within the human spirit. This Spirit’s presence -would produce, on occasion of man’s apprehension or volition of things -contingent and finite, the keen sense of disappointment, of contrast -with the Simultaneous, Abiding, and Infinite.--And let the reader note -that this is not Ontologism, for we here neither deduce our other ideas -from the idea of God, nor do we argue from ideas and their clarity, but -from living forces and their operativeness. - -We thus get man’s spirit placed within a world of varying degrees of -depth and interiority, the different levels and kinds of which are -necessary, as so many materials, stimulants, obstacles, and objects, -for the development of that spirit’s various capacities, which -themselves again interact the one upon the other, and react upon -and within that world. For if man’s experience of God is not a mere -discursively reasoned conclusion from the data of sense, yet man’s -spirit experiences the Divine Spirit and the spirits of his fellow-men -on occasion of, and as a kind of contrast, background, and support -to, the actuation of his senses, imagination, reason, feeling, and -volition, and, at least at first and in the long run, not otherwise. - - -2. _No distinct faculty of Mystical apprehension._ - -Is there, then, strictly speaking, such a thing as a specifically -distinct, self-sufficing, purely Mystical mode of apprehending Reality? -I take it, _distinctly not_; and that all the errors of the Exclusive -Mystic proceed precisely from the contention that Mysticism does -constitute such an entirely separate, completely self-supported kind of -human experience.--This denial does not, of course, mean that soul does -not differ quite indefinitely from soul, in the amount and kind of the -recollective, intuitive, deeply emotive element possessed and exercised -by it concurrently or alternately with other elements,--the sense of -the Infinite within and without the Finite springing up in the soul on -occasion of its contact with the Contingent; nor, again, that these -more or less congenital differences and vocations amongst souls cannot -and are not still further developed by grace and heroism into types of -religious apprehension and life, so strikingly divergent, as, at first -sight, to seem hardly even supplementary the one to the other. But it -means that, in even the most purely contingent-seeming soul, and in its -apparently but Institutional and Historical assents and acts, there -ever is, there never can fail to be, _some_, however implicit, however -slight, however intermittent, sense and experience of the Infinite, -evidenced by at least some dissatisfaction with the Finite, except as -this Finitude is an occasion for growth in, and a part-expression of, -that Infinite, our true home. And, again, it means, that even the most -exclusively mystical-seeming soul ever depends, for the fulness and -healthiness of even the most purely mystical of its acts and states, -as really upon its past and present contacts with the Contingent, -Temporal, and Spacial, and with social facts and elements, as upon its -movement of concentration, and the sense and experience, evoked on -occasion of those contacts or of their memories, of the Infinite within -and around those finitudes and itself. - -Only thus does Mysticism attain to its true, full dignity, which -consists precisely in being, not everything in any one soul, but -something in every soul of man; and in presenting, at its fullest, the -amplest development, among certain special natures with the help of -certain special graces and heroisms, of what, in some degree and form, -is present in every truly human soul, and in such a soul’s every, at -all genuine and complete, grace-stimulated religious act and state. -And only thus does it, as Partial Mysticism, retain all the strength -and escape the weaknesses and dangers of would-be Pure Mysticism, as -regards the mode and character of Religious Experience, Knowledge, and -Life. - - -3. _The first four pairs of weaknesses and strengths special to the -Mystics._ - -I take the Mystic’s weaknesses and strengths to go together in pairs, -and that there are seven such pairs. Only the first four shall be -considered here; the fifth and the last two couples are reserved -respectively for the following, and for the last section, of this -chapter. - -(1) The Mystic finds his joy in the recollective movement and moments -of the soul; and hence ever tends, _qua_ Mystic, to ignore and neglect, -or to over-minimize, the absolutely necessary contact of the mind and -will with the things of sense. He will often write as though, could he -but completely shut off his mind from all sense-perceptions,--even of -grand scenery, or noble works of art, or scenes of human devotedness, -suffering, and peace,--it would be proportionately fuller of God.--Yet -this drift is ever more or less contradicted by his practice, often -at the very moment of such argument: for no religious writers are -more prolific in vivid imagery derived from noble sensible objects -and scenes than are the Mystics,--whose characteristic mood is an -intuition, a resting in a kind of vision of things invisible.--And -this contradiction is satisfactory, since it is quite certain that -if the mind, heart, and will could be completely absorbed, (from the -first or for any length of time), in the flight from the sensible, -it would become as dangerously empty and languid concerning things -invisible themselves as, with nothing but an outgoing occupation -with the sensible, it would become distracted and feverish. It is -this aversion from Outgoing and from the world of sense, of the -contemporaneous contingencies environing the soul, that gives to -Mysticism, as such, its shadowy character, its floating above, rather -than penetrating into, reality,--in contradiction, where this tendency -becomes too exclusive, to the Incarnational philosophy and practice of -Christianity, and indeed of every complete and sound psychology. - -And yet the Incoming, what the deep religious thinker -Kierkegaard has so profoundly analyzed in his doctrine of -“Repetition,”[337]--recollection and peaceful browsing among the -materials brought in by the soul’s Outgoing,--is most essential. Indeed -it is the more difficult, and, though never alone sufficient, yet ever -the more centrally religious, of the two movements necessary for the -acquisition of spiritual experience and life. - -(2) Again, the Mystic finds his full delight in all that approximates -most nearly to Simultaneity, and Eternity; and consequently turns -away, _qua_ Mystic, from the Successive and Temporal presented by -History.--Yet here also there are two movements, both necessary for -man. He will, by the one, once more in fullest sympathy with the grand -Christian love of lowliness, strive hard to get into close, and ever -closer, touch with the successivenesses of History, especially those -of Our Lord’s earthly life and of His closest followers. Without this -touch he will become empty, inflated, as St. Teresa found to be the -case with herself, when following the false principle of deliberate and -systematic abstraction from Christ’s temporal words and acts: for man’s -soul, though it does not energize in mere Clock-Time, cannot grow if -we attempt to eliminate Duration, that interpenetrative, overlapping -kind of Succession, which is already, as it were, halfway to the -Simultaneity of God. It is this aversion from Clock-Time Succession and -even from Duration which gives to Mysticism, as such, its remarkable -preference for Spacial images, and its strong bent towards concepts of -a Static and Determinist type, profoundly antagonistic though these -are to the Dynamic and Libertarian character which ever marks the -occasions and conditions for the acquiring of religious experience. - -And yet, here again, the Mystic is clinging, even one-sidedly, to the -more central, more specifically religious, of the two movements. For -it is certain that God is indeed Simultaneous and Eternal; that it -is right thus to try and apprehend, what appears to us stretched out -successively in time, as simultaneously present in the one great Now -of God; and that our deepest experiences testify to History itself -being ever more than mere process, and to have within it a certain -contribution from, a certain approximation to and expression of, -Eternity. - -(3) And again, the Mystic finds his joy in the sense of a Pure -Reception of the Purely Objective; that God should do all and should -receive the credit of all, is here a primary requirement.--And yet -all penetrating Psychology, Epistemology, and Ethics find this very -receptivity, however seemingly only such, to be, where healthy and -fruitful, ever an action, a conation of the soul,--an energizing and -volition which, as we have seen, are present in its very cognition of -anything affirmed by it as trans-subjective, from a grain of sand up to -the great God Himself. This antipathy to even a relative, God-willed -independence and power of self-excitation, gives Mysticism, as such, -its constant bent towards Quietism; and hence, with regard to the -means and nature of knowledge, its tendency to speak of such a purely -spiritual effect as Grace, and such purely spiritual beings as the -Soul and God, as though they were literally sensible objects sensibly -impressing themselves upon the Mystic’s purely passive senses. This -tendency reinforces the Mystic’s thirst for pictorial, simultaneous -presentation and intuition of the verities apprehended by him, but is -in curious contradiction to his even excessive conceptions concerning -the utter separateness and difference from all things material of all -such spiritual realities.--And yet, here too, it is doubtless deeply -important ever to remember, and to act in accordance with, the great -truth that God Himself is apprehended by us only if there be action -of our own, and that, from elementary moral dispositions right up to -consummate sanctity, the whole man has ever to act and will more and -more manysidedly, fully, and persistently. - -But the corresponding, indeed the anterior and more centrally -religious, truth here is, that all this range of our activity could -never begin, and, if it could, would lose itself _in vacuo_, unless -there already were Reality around it and within it, as the stimulus -and object for all this energizing,--a Reality which, as Prof. Ward -has told us with respect to Epistemology, must, for a certain dim but -most true experience of ours, be simply given, not sought and found. -And indeed the operations of Grace are ever more or less penetrating -and soliciting, though nowhere forcing, the free assent of the natural -soul: we should be unable to seek God unless He had already found -us and had thus, deep down within ourselves, caused us to seek and -find Him. And hence thus again the most indispensable, the truest -form of experience underlies reasoning, and is a kind of not directly -analyzable, but indirectly most operative, intuition or instinct of the -soul. - -(4) And yet the Mystic, in one of his moods (the corresponding, -contradictory mood of a Pantheistic identification of his true self -with God shall be considered in our next chapter), finds his joy in -so exalting the difference of nature between himself and God, and the -incomprehensibility of God for every finite intelligence, as,--were -we to press his words,--to cut away all ground for any experience or -knowledge sufficient to justify him in even a guess as to what God is -like or is not like, and for any attempt at intercourse with, and at -becoming like unto, One who is so utterly unlike himself. - - -4. _Criticism of the fourth pair, mystical “Agnosticism.”_ - -Now this acutely paradoxical position, of an entire certainty as to -God’s complete difference from ourselves, has been maintained and -articulated, with a consistency and vividness beyond that of any -Mystic known to me, by that most stimulating, profound, tragically -non-mystical, religious ascetic and thinker, the Lutheran Dane, Sören -Kierkegaard (1813-1855). His early friend, but philosophical opponent, -Prof. Höffding, describes him as insisting that “the suffering incident -to the religious life is necessarily involved in the very nature of the -religious relation. For the relation of the soul to God is a relation -to a Being utterly different from man, a Being which cannot confront -man as his Superlative and Ideal, and which nevertheless is to rule -within him.” “What, wonder, then,” as Kierkegaard says, “if the Jew -held that the vision of God meant death, and if the Heathen believed -that to enter upon relations with God was the beginning of insanity?” -For the man who lives for God “is a fish out of water.”[338]--We have -here what, if an error, is yet possible only to profoundly religious -souls; indeed it would be easy to point out very similar passages in -St. Catherine and St. John of the Cross. Yet Höffding is clearly in -the right in maintaining that “Qualitative or Absolute difference -abolishes all possibility of any positive relation.… If religious zeal, -in its eagerness to push the Object of religion to the highest height, -establishes a yawning abyss between this Object and the life whose -ideal It is still to remain,--such zeal contradicts itself. For a God -who is not Ideal and Exemplar, is no God.”[339] - -Berkeley raised similar objections against analogous positions of the -Pseudo-Dionysius, in his Alciphron in 1732.[340] Indeed the Belgian -Jesuit, Balthazar Corderius, has a very satisfactory note on this -matter in his edition, in 1634, of the Areopagite,[341] in which -he shows how all the negative propositions of Mystical Theology, -_e.g._ “God is not Being, not Life,” presuppose a certain affirmative -position, _e.g._ “God is Being and Life, in a manner infinitely more -sublime and perfect than we are able to comprehend”; and gives reasons -and authorities, from St. Jerome to St. Thomas inclusive, for holding -that some kind and degree of direct confused knowledge (I should -prefer, with modern writers, to call it experience) of God’s existence -and nature is possessed by the human soul, independently of its -reasoning from the data of sense. - -St. Thomas’s admissions are especially striking, as he usually -elaborates a position which ignores, and would logically exclude, -such “confused knowledge.” In his _Exposition and Questions on the -Book of Boetius on the Trinity_, after arguments to show that we know -indeed _that_ God is, but not _what_ He is,--at most only what He is -not, he says: “We should recognize, however, that it is impossible, -with regard to anything, to know whether it exists, unless, in some -way or other, we know _what_ it is, either with a perfect or with a -confused knowledge.… Hence also with regard to God,--we could not -know whether He exists, unless we somehow knew _what_ He is, even -though in a confused manner.” And this knowledge of _what_ He is, is -interestingly, because unconsciously, admitted in one of the passages -directed to proving that we can but know _that_ He is. “In our earthly -state we cannot attain to a knowledge of Himself beyond the fact that -He exists. And yet, among those who know _that_ He is, the one knows -this more perfectly than the other.”[342] For it is plain that, even -if the knowledge of the existence of something were possible without -any knowledge of that thing’s nature, no difference or increase in -such knowledge of the thing’s bare existence would be possible. The -different degrees in the knowledge, which is here declared to be one -concerning the bare existence of God, can, as a matter of fact, exist -only in knowledge concerning His nature. I shall have to return to this -great question further on. - -Here I would only point out how well Battista Vernazza has, in her -_Dialogo_, realized the importance of a modification in such acutely -dualistic statements as those occasionally met with in the _Vita_. For, -in the _Dialogo_, the utter qualitative difference between God and the -Soul, and the Soul and the Body, which find so striking an utterance -in one of Catherine’s moods, is ever carefully limited to the soul’s -sinful acts and habits, and to the body’s unspiritualized condition; so -that the soul, when generous and faithful to God’s grace, can and does -grow less and less unlike God, and the body can, in its turn, become -more and more an instrument and expression of the soul. A pity only -that Battista has continued Catherine’s occasional over-emphasis in the -parallel matter of the knowledge of God: since, even in the _Dialogo_, -we get statements which, if pressed, would imply that even the crudest, -indeed the most immoral conception of God is, objectively, no farther -removed from the reality than is the most spiritual idea that man can -attain of Him. - -It would indeed be well if the Christian Mystics who, since about -500 A.D., are more and more dependent for their formulations upon -the Areopagite, had followed, in this matter, not his more usual -and more paradoxical, but his exceptional, thoroughly sober vein -of teaching,--that contained in the third chapter of his _Mystical -Theology_, where he finds degrees of worth and approximation among the -affirmative attributions, and degrees of unfitness and distance among -the negative ones. “Are not life and goodness more cognate to Him than -air and stone? And is He not further removed from debauchery and wrath, -than from ineffableness and incomprehensibility”?[343] But such a scale -of approximations would be utterly impossible did we not somehow, at -least dimly, experience or know _what_ He is. - -We shall then have to amend the Mystic’s apparent Agnosticism on three -points. We shall have to drop any hard and fast distinction between -knowledge of God’s Existence and knowledge of His Nature, since both -necessarily more or less stand and fall together. We shall have to -replace the terms as to our utter ignorance as to what He is, by terms -expressive of an experience which, if not directly and independently -clear and analyzable to the reflex, critical reason, can yet be shown -to be profoundly real and indefinitely potent in the life of man’s -whole rational and volitional being. It is this dim, deep experience -which ever causes our reflex knowledge of God to appear no knowledge at -all. And we shall reject any absolute qualitative difference between -the soul’s deepest possibilities and ideals, and God; and shall, in -its stead, maintain an absolute difference between God and all our -downward inclinations, acts, and habits, and an indefinite difference, -in worth and dignity, between God and the very best that, with His -help, we can aim at and become. With regard to every truly existent -subject-matter, we can trace the indefinitely wider range and the more -delicate penetration possessed by our dim yet true direct contact and -experience, as contrasted with our reflex analysis concerning all -such contacts and experiences; and this surplusage is at its highest -in connection with God, Who is not simply a Thing alongside of other -things, but the Spirit, our spirit’s Origin, Sustainer, and End, “in -whom we live and move and have our being.” - - -III. MYSTICISM AND THE QUESTION OF EVIL. - - -_Introductory: Exclusive and Inclusive Mysticism in Relation to -Optimism._ - -The four couples of weaknesses and corresponding strong points -characteristic of Mysticism that we have just considered, and the fact -that, in each case, they ever spring respectively from an attempt to -make Mysticism be the all of religion, and from a readiness to keep -it as but one of the elements more or less present in, and necessary -for, every degree and form of the full life of the human soul: make -one wish for two English terms, as useful as are the German names -“Mystik” and “Mystizismus,” for briefly indicating respectively “the -legitimate share of Feeling in the constitution of the religious life, -and the one-sidedness of a religion in which the Understanding and the -Will,” and indeed also the Memory and the Senses, with their respective -variously external occasions, vehicles, and objects, “do not come to -their rights,” as Prof. Rauwenhoff well defines the matter.[344] I -somehow shrink from the term “Mysticality” for his “Mystizismus”; and -must rest content with the three terms--of “Mysticism,” as covering -both the right and the wrong use of feeling in religion; and of “True” -or “Inclusive Mysticism,” and of “Pseudo-” or “Exclusive Mysticism,” -as denoting respectively the legitimate, and the (quantitatively or -qualitatively) mistaken, share of emotion in the religious life. - -Now the four matters, which we have just considered, have allowed us -to reach an answer not all unlike that of Nicolas of Coes, Leibniz, -and Hegel,--one which, if it remained alone or quite final, would, in -face of the fulness of real life, strike us all, nowadays, as somewhat -superficial, because too Optimistic and Panlogistic in its trend. The -fifth set of difficulties and problems now to be faced will seem almost -to justify Schopenhauer at his gloomiest. Yet we must bear in mind that -our direct business here is not with the problem of Evil in general, -but only with the special helps and hindrances, afforded by Inclusive -and by Exclusive Mysticism respectively, towards apprehending the true -nature of Evil and turning even it into an occasion for a deeper good. -In this case the special helps and hindrances fall under three heads. - - -1. _Mysticism, too optimistic. Evil positive, but not supreme._ - -(1) First of all, I would strongly insist upon the following great -fact to which human life and history bear witness, if we but take and -test these latter on a large scale and with a patient persistency. -It is, that not the smoother, easier times and circumstances in the -lives of individuals and of peoples, but, on the contrary, the harder -and hardest trials of every conceivable kind, and the unshrinking, -full acceptance of these, as part of the price of conscience and of -its growing light, have ever been the occasions of the deepest trust -in and love of God to which man has attained. In Jewish History, the -Exile called forth a Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and the profound ideal of -the Suffering Servant; the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes raised -up a Judas Maccabaeus; and the troubles under the Emperor Hadrian, a -Rabbi Akiba. And in Christian History, the persecutions from Nero to -Robespierre have each occasioned the formation of heroic lovers of -Love Crucified. And such great figures do not simply manage to live, -apart from all the turmoil, in some Mystic upper region of their own; -but they face and plunge into the very heart of the strife, and get -and give spiritual strength on occasion of this closest contact with -loneliness, outrage, pain, and death. And this fact can be traced -throughout history. - -Not as though suffering automatically deepens and widens man into -a true spiritual personality,--of itself it does not even tend to -this; nor as though there were not souls grown hard or low, or -frivolous or bitter, under suffering,--to leave madness and suicide -unconsidered,--souls in which it would be difficult to find any -avoidable grave fault. But that, wherever there is the fullest, -deepest, interiority of human character and influence, _there_ can -ever be found profound trials and sufferings which have been thus -utilized and transfigured. It is doubtless Our Lord’s uniquely full -and clear proclamation of this mysterious efficacity of all suffering -nobly borne; above all it is the supreme exemplification and fecundity -of this deepest law of life, afforded and imparted by His own -self-immolation, that has given its special power to Christianity, -and, in so doing, has, more profoundly than ever before or elsewhere, -brought home to us a certain Teleology here also,--the deepest ever -discovered to man. For though we fail in our attempts at explaining -how or why, with an All-knowing, All-powerful, and All-loving God, -there can be Evil at all, we can but recognize the law, which is ever -being brought home to us, of a mysterious capacity for purification and -development of man’s spiritual character, on occasion and with the help -of trouble, pain, and death itself. - -(2) Now all this, we must admit, is practised and noted, directly and -in detail, only by the Ascetical and the Outward-going elements in -Religion; whereas Mysticism, as such, is optimistic, not only as is -Christianity, with respect to the end, but, in practice, with regard -to the actual state of things already encircling it as well. For so -careful a selection and so rigorous an abstraction is practised by -Mysticism, as such, towards the welter of contingencies around it, that -the rough shocks, the bitter tonics, the expansive birth-pangs of the -spirit’s deeper life, in and by means of the flux of time and sense, -of the conflict with hostile fellow-creatures, and of the claimfulness -of the lower self, are known by it only in their result, not in their -process, or rather only as this process ebbs and fades away, in such -recollective moments, into the distance. - -No wonder, then, that Mysticism, as such, has ever tended to deny -all positive character to Evil. We have already found how strongly -this is the case with the prince of Mystic philosophers, Plotinus. -But even St. Augustine, with his massive experience, and (in his -other mood) even excessive realization, of the destructive force of -Evil and of the corrupt inclinations of man’s heart, has one whole -large current of teaching expressive of the purely negative character -of Evil. The two currents, the hot and concrete, and the cold and -abstract one, appear alternately in the very _Confessions_, of 397 -A.D. There, ten years after his conversion, he can write: “All things -that are corrupted, are deprived of good. But, if they are deprived -of all good, they will cease to exist.… In so far, then, as they -exist, they are good.… Evil is no substance.” Notwithstanding such -Neo-Platonist interpretations, he had found Evil a terribly powerful -force; the directly autobiographical chapters of this same great book -proclaim this truth with unsurpassable vividness,--he is here fully -Christian.[345] And in his unfinished work against the Pelagianizing -Monk Julianus, in 429 A.D., he even declares--characteristically, -whilst discussing the Origin of Sin: “Such and so great was Adam’s sin, -that it was able to turn (human) nature itself into this evil.” Indeed, -already in 418, he had maintained that “this wound” (of Original Sin) -“forces all that is born of that human race to be under the Devil, so -that the latter, so to speak, plucks the fruit from the fruit-tree of -his own planting.”[346] - -Pseudo-Dionysius, writing about 500 A.D., has evidently no such -massive personal experience to oppose to the Neo-Platonic influence, -an influence which, in the writings of Proclus (who died 485 A.D.), is -now at its height. “Evil,” he says, “is neither in Demons nor in us, -as an existent (positive) evil, but (only) as a failure and dearth of -the perfection of our own proper goods.”[347] He says this and more of -the same kind, but nothing as to the dread power of Evil. St. Thomas -Aquinas (who died in 1271 A.D.) is, as we know, largely under the -influence of the Negative conception: thus “the stain of sin is not -something positive, existent in the soul.… It is like a shadow, which -is the privation of light.”[348] - -Catherine, though otherwise much influenced by the Negative conception, -as _e.g._ in her definition of a soul possessed by the Evil Spirit -as one suffering from a “privation of love,” finds the stain of sin, -doubtless from her own experience, to be something distinctly positive, -with considerable power of resistance and propagation.[349]--Mother -Juliana of Norwich had, in 1373, also formulated both conceptions. “I -saw not Sin, for I believe it hath no manner of substance, nor no part -of being”: Neo-Platonist theory. “Sin is so vile and so mickle for to -hate, that it may be likened to no pain.… All is good but Sin, and -naught is evil but Sin”: Christian experience.[350] - -Eckhart had, still further back (he died in 1327 A.D.), insisted much -that “Evil is nothing but privation, or falling away from Being; not -an effect, but a defect”:[351] yet he also finds much work to do in -combating this somehow very powerful “defect.”--Not till we get to -Spinoza (who died in 1677) do we get the Negative conception pushed -home to its only logical conclusion: “By Reality and Perfection, I mean -the same thing.… All knowledge of Evil is inadequate knowledge.… If the -human mind had nothing but adequate ideas, it would not form any notion -of Evil.”[352] - -(3) As regards the Christian Mystics, their negative conception -of evil, all but completely restricted as it was to cosmological -theory, did those Mystics themselves little or no harm; since their -tone of feeling and their volitional life, indeed a large part of -their very speculation, were determined, not by such Neo-Platonist -theories, but by the concrete experiences of Sin, Conscience, and -Grace, and by the great Christian historical manifestation of the -powers of all three.--It is clear too that our modern alternative: -“positive-negative,” is not simply identical with the scholastic -alternative: “substantial-accidental,” which latter alternative is -sometimes predominant in the minds of these ancient theorizers; and -that, once the question was formulated in the latter way, they were -profoundly right in refusing to hypostatize Evil, in denying that there -exists any distinct thing or being wholly bad.--Yet it is equally -clear how very Greek and how little Christian is such a preoccupation -(in face of the question of the nature of Evil) with the concepts -of Substance and Accident, rather than with that of Will; and how -strangely insufficient, in view of the tragic conflicts and ruins of -real life, is all, even sporadic, denial, of a certain obstructive -and destructive efficacy in the bad will, and of a mysterious, direct -perversity and formal, intentional malignity in that will at its worst. - -(4) On these two points it is undeniable that Kant, (with all -his self-contradictions, insufficiencies, and positive errors on -other important matters), has adequately formulated the practical -dispositions and teachings of the fully awakened Christian -consciousness, and hence, pre-eminently, of the great Saints in the -past, although, in the matter of the perverse will, the Partial Mystics -have, even in their theory, (though usually only as part of the -doctrine of Original Sin), largely forestalled his analysis. “Nowhere -in this our world, nowhere even outside it, is anything thinkable as -good without any reservation, but the good will alone.” “That a corrupt -inclination to evil is rooted in man, does not require any formal -proof, in view of the clamorous examples furnished to all men by the -experience of human behaviour. If you would have such cases from the -so-called state of nature, where some philosophers have looked for the -chief home of man’s natural goodness, you need only compare, with such -an hypothesis, the unprovoked cruelties enacted in Tofoa, New Zealand -… and the ceaseless scenes of murder in the North-Western American -deserts, where no human being derives the slightest advantage from -them,--and you will quickly have more than sufficient evidence before -you to induce the abandonment of such a view. But if you consider that -human nature is better studied in a state of civilization, since there -its gifts have a better chance of development,--you will have to listen -to a long melancholy string of accusations: of secret falseness, even -among friends; of an inclination to hate him to whom we owe much; of -a cordiality which yet leaves the observation true that ‘there is -something in the misfortune of even our best friend which does not -altogether displease us’: so that you will quickly have enough of the -vices of culture, the most offensive of all, and will prefer to turn -away your look from human nature altogether, lest you fall yourself -into another vice,--that of hatred of mankind.”[353] - -It is sad to think how completely this virile, poignant sense of the -dread realities of human life again disappeared from the teachings of -such post-Kantians as Hegel and Schleiermacher,--in other important -respects so much more satisfactory than Kant. As Mr. Tennant has well -said, in a stimulating book which, on this point at least, voices -the unsophisticated, fully awakened conscience and Christian sense -with refreshing directness, “for Jesus Christ and for the Christian -consciousness, sin means something infinitely deeper and more real than -what it can have meant for Spinoza or the followers of Hegel.”[354] -Here again we have now in Prof. Eucken, a philosopher who, free from -ultimate Pessimism, lets us hear once more those tones which are alone -adequate to the painful reality. “In great things and in small, there -exists an evil disposition beyond all simple selfishness: hatred and -envy, even where the hater’s self-interest is not touched; an antipathy -to things great and divine; a pleasure found in the disfigurement or -destruction of the Good.… Indeed the mysterious fact of Evil, as a -positive opposition to Good, has never ceased to occupy the deepest -minds.… The concept of moral guilt cannot be got rid of, try as we -may.”[355] - -(5) And yet even with regard to this matter, Mysticism represents a -profound compensating truth and movement, which we cannot, without -grave detriment, lose out of the complete religious life. For in life -at large, and in human life and history in particular, it would be -sheer perversity to deny that there is much immediate, delightful, -noble Beauty, Truth, and Goodness; and these also have a right to -the soul’s careful, ruminating attention. And it is the Mystical -element that furnishes this rumination.--Again, “it is part of the -essential character of human consciousness, as a Synthesis and an -organizing Unity, that, as long as the life of that consciousness -lasts at all, not only contrast and tension, but also concentration -and equilibrium must manifest themselves. Taking life’s standard from -life itself, we cannot admit its decisive constituent to lie in tension -alone.”[356] And it is the Mystical mood that helps to establish this -equilibrium.--And finally, deep peace, an overflowing possession and -attainment, and a noble joy, are immensely, irreplaceably powerful -towards growth in personality and spiritual fruitfulness. Nothing, -then, would be more shortsighted than to try and keep the soul from a -deep, ample, recollective movement, from feeding upon and relishing, -from as it were stretching itself out and bathing in, spiritual air and -sunshine, in a rapt admiration, in a deep experience of the greatness, -the beauty, the truth, and the goodness of the World, of Life, of God. - - -2. _Mysticism and the Origin of Evil._ - -The second hindrance and help, afforded respectively by Exclusive and -by Inclusive Mysticism in the matter of Evil, concerns the question of -its Origin. - -(1) Now it appears strange at first sight that, instead of first -directly realizing and picturing the undeniable, profoundly important -facts of man’s interior conflict, his continuous lapses from his own -deepest standard, and his need of a help not his own to become what -he cannot but wish to be, and of leaving the theory as to how man -came by this condition to the second place; the Mystics should so -largely,--witness Catherine--directly express only this theory, and -should face what is happening _hic et nunc_ all but exclusively under -the picture of the prehistoric beginnings of these happenings, in the -state of innocence and the lapse of the first man. For men of other -religious modalities have held this doctrine as firmly as the Mystics, -yet have mostly dwelt directly upon the central core of goodness and -the weakness and sinfulness to be found in man; whilst the Mystics -had even less scruple than other kinds of devout souls in embodying -experimental truths in concepts and symbols other than the common ones. - -(2) I think that, here again, it was the Neo-Platonist literary -influence, so strong also on other points with the Mystics of the -past, and a psychological trend characteristic of the Mystical habit -of mind, which conjoined thus to concentrate the Mystics’ attention -upon the doctrines of Original Justice and of a First Lapse, and -to give to these doctrines the peculiar form and tone taken on by -them here. We have noted, for instance, in the case of Catherine -herself, how powerfully her thought and feeling, as to the first -human soul’s first lapse into sin, is influenced by the idea of each -human soul’s lapse into a body; and we have found this latter idea -to be, notwithstanding its echoes in the Deutero-Canonical Book of -Wisdom and in one non-doctrinal passage in St. Paul, not Christian -but Neo-Platonist. Yet it is this strongly anti-body idea that could -not fail to attract Mysticism, as such.--And the conception as to the -plenary righteousness of that first soul before its lapse, which she -gets from Christian theology, is similarly influenced, in her theorized -emotion and thought, by the Neo-Platonist idea of every soul having -already existed, perfectly spotless, previous to its incarnation: -a view which could not but immensely attract such a high-strung -temperament, with its immense requirement of something fixed and -picturable on which to rest. Thus here the ideal for each soul’s future -would have been already real in each soul’s past. In this past the soul -would have been, as it were, a mirror of a particular fixed size and -fixed intensity of lustre; its business here below consists in removing -the impurities adhering to this mirror’s surface, and in guarding it -against fresh stains. - -(3) Now it is well known how it was St. Augustine, that mighty and -daring, yet at times ponderous, intellect, who, (so long a mental -captive of the Manichees and then so profoundly influenced by -Plotinus,) was impelled, by the experiences of his own disordered -earlier life and by his ardent African nature, to formulate by far the -most explicit and influential of the doctrines upon these difficult -matters. And if, with the aid of the Abbé Turmel’s admirable articles -on the subject, we can, with a fairly open mind, study his successive, -profoundly varying, speculations and conclusions concerning the Nature -and Origin of Sin,[357] we shall not fail to be deeply impressed with -the largely impassable maze of opposite extremes, contradictions and -difficulties of every kind, in which that adventurous mind involved -itself.--And to these difficulties immanent to the doctrine,--at -least, in the form it takes in St. Augustine’s hands,--has, of course, -to be added the serious moral danger that would at once result, -were we, by too emphatic or literal an insistence upon the true -guiltiness of Original sin, to weaken the chief axiom of all true -morality--that the concurrence of the personality, in a freely-willed -assent, is necessarily involved in the idea of sin and guilt.--And -now the ever-accumulating number and weight of even the most certain -facts and most moderate inductions of Anthropology and Ethnology are -abolishing all evidential grounds for holding a primitive high level -of human knowledge and innocence, and a single sudden plunge into a -fallen estate, as above, apparently against, all our physiological, -psychological, historical evidences and analogies, (which all point -to a gradual rise from lowly beginnings), and are reducing such a -conception to a pure postulate of Theology. - -Yet Anthropology and Ethnology leave in undisturbed possession the -great truths of Faith that “man’s condition denotes a fall from the -Divine intention, a parody of God’s purpose in human history,” and that -“sin is exceedingly sinful for us in whom it is a deliberate grieving -of the Holy Spirit”; and they actually reinforce the profound verities -that “the realization of our better self is a stupendously difficult -task,” and as to “Man’s crying need of grace, and his capacity for -a gospel of Redemption.”[358] But they point, with a force great in -proportion to the highly various, cumulatively operative, immensely -interpretative character of the evidence,--to the conclusion that -“Sin,” as the Anglican Archdeacon Wilson strikingly puts it, “is … -the survival or misuse of habits and tendencies that were incidental -to an earlier stage of development.… Their sinfulness would thus lie -in their anachronism, in their resistance to the … Divine force that -makes for moral development and righteousness.” Certainly “the human -infant” appears to careful observers, as Mr. Tennant notes, “as simply -a non-moral animal,” with corresponding impulses and propensities. -According to this view “morality consists in the formation of the -non-moral material of nature into character …”; so that “if goodness -consists essentially in man’s steady moralization of the raw material -of morality, its opposite, sin, cannot consist in the material awaiting -moralization, but in the will’s failure to completely moralize it.” -“Evil” would thus be “not the result of a transition from the good, but -good and evil would” both alike “be voluntary developments from what -is ethically neutral.”[359] Dr. Wilson finds, accordingly, that “this -conflict of freedom and conscience is precisely what is related as -‘the Fall’ _sub specie historiae_.” Scripture “tells of the fall of a -creature from unconscious innocence to conscious guilt. But this fall -from innocence” would thus be, “in another sense, a rise to a higher -grade of being.”[360] - -(4) It is, in any case, highly satisfactory for a Catholic to remember -that the acute form, given to the doctrine of Original Sin by St. -Augustine, has never been finally accepted by the Catholic Roman -Church; indeed, that the Tridentine Definition expressly declares that -Concupiscence does not, in strictness, possess the nature of Sin, but -arises naturally, on the withdrawal of the _donum superadditum_,--so -that Mr. Tennant can admit, in strictest accuracy, that “in this -respect, the Roman theology is more philosophical than that of -the Symbols of Protestant Christendom.”[361] It is true that the -insistence upon “Original Sin” possessing somehow “the true and proper -nature of Sin” remains a grave difficulty, even in this Tridentine -formulation of the doctrine; whilst the objections, already referred -to as accumulating against the theory in general, retain some of -their cogency against other parts of this decree.--Yet we have here -an impressive proclamation of the profoundest truths: the spiritual -greatness of God’s plan for us, the substantial goodness of the -material still ready to our hand for the execution of that plan, and -His necessary help ever ready from the first; the reality of our lapse, -away from all these, into sin, and of the effects of such lapse upon -the soul; the abiding conflict between sense and spirit, the old man -and the new, within each one of us; and the close solidarity of our -poor, upward-aspiring, downward-plunging race, in evil as well as in -good. - -(5) And as to the Christian Mystics, their one particular danger -here,--that of a Static Conception of man’s spirit as somehow -constituted, from the first, a substance of a definite, final size and -dignity, which but demands the removal of disfiguring impurities, is -largely eliminated, even in theory, and all but completely overcome -in practice, by the doctrine and the practice of Pure Love. For -in “Charity” we get a directly dynamic, expansive conception and -experience: man’s spirit is, at first, potential rather than actual, -and has to be conquered and brought, as it were, to such and such -a size and close-knitness of organization, by much fight with, and -by the slow transformation of, the animal and selfish nature. Thus -Pure Love, Charity, Agape, has to fight it out, inch by inch, with -another, still positive force, impure love, concupiscence, Eros, -in all the latter’s multiform disguises. Here Purity has become -something intensely positive and of boundless capacities for growth; -as St. Thomas says, “Pure Love has no limit to its increase, for it -is a certain participation in the Infinite Love, which is the Holy -Spirit.”[362]--In this utterly real, deeply Christian way do these -Mystics overcome Neo-Platonist static abstractions, and simultaneously -regain, in their practical theory and emotional perception, the great -truth of the deep, subtle force of Evil, against which Pure Love has to -stand, in virile guard, as long as earth’s vigil lasts. And the longest -and most difficult of these conflicts is found,--here again in utterly -Christian fashion,--not in the sensual tendencies proceeding from the -body, but in the self-adoration, the solipsism of the spirit. We have -found this in Catherine: at her best she ever has something of the -large Stoic joy at being but a citizen in a divine Cosmopolis; yet but -Love and Humility, those profoundest of the Christian affections, have -indefinitely deepened the truth of the outlook, and the range of the -work to be done, in and for herself and others. - -(6) Yet even apart from Pure Love, Mysticism can accurately be said to -apprehend an important truth when, along its static line of thought -and feeling, it sees each soul as, from the first, a substance of a -particular, final size. For each soul is doubtless intended, from the -first, to express a particular thought and wish of God, to form one, -never simply replaceable member in His Kingdom, to attain to a unique -kind and degree of personality: and though it can refuse to endorse and -carry out this plan, the plan remains within it, in the form of never -entirely suppressible longings. The Mystic, then, sees much here also. - - -3. _The warfare against Evil. Pseudo-Mysticism._ - -The third of the relations between Mysticism and the conception and -experience of Evil requires a further elucidation of an important -distinction, which we have already found at work all along, more or -less consciously, between the higher and the lower Mysticism, and their -respective, profoundly divergent, tempers, objects, and range. - -(1) Prof. Münsterberg discriminates between these two Mysticisms with -a brilliant excessiveness, and ends by reserving the word “Mysticism” -for the rejected kind alone. “As soon as we speak of psychical -objects,--of ideas, feelings, and volitions,--as subject-matters of our -direct consciousness and experience, we have put before ourselves an -artificial product, a transformation, to which the categories of real -life no longer apply.” In this artificial product causal connections -have taken the place of final ends. But “History, Practical Life, -… Morality, Religion have nothing to do with these psychological -constructions; the categories of Psychology,” treated by Münsterberg -himself as a Natural, Determinist Science, “must not intrude into their -teleological domains. But if,” on the other hand, “the categories -belonging to Reality,” which is Spiritual and Libertarian, “are forced -on to the psychological system, a system which was framed” by our -mind “in the interest of causal explanation, we get a cheap mixture, -which satisfies neither the one aim nor the other. Just this is the -effect of Mysticism. It is the personal, emotional view applied, -not to the world of Reality, where it fits, but to the Physical and -Psychological worlds, which are constructed by the human logical will, -with a view to gaining an impersonal, unemotional causal system.… -The ideals of Ethics and Religion … have now been projected into the -atomistic structure” (of the Causal System), “and have thus become -dependent upon this system’s nature; they find their right of existence -limited to the regions where ignorance of Nature leaves blanks in the -Causal System, and have to tremble at every advance which Science -makes.” It is to this projection alone that Münsterberg would apply -the term “Mysticism,” which thus becomes exclusively “the doctrine -that the processes in the world of physical and psychical objects -are not always subject to natural laws, but are influenced, at times, -in a manner fundamentally inexplicable from the standpoint of the -causal conception of Nature.… Yet, the special interest of the Mystic -stands and falls here with his conviction that, in these extra-causal -combinations,” thus operative right within and at the level of this -causal system, “we have a” direct, demonstrable “manifestation of a -positive system of quite another kind, a System of Values, a system -dominated, not by Mechanism, but by Significance.”[363] - -(2) Now we have been given here a doubtless excessively antithetic and -dualistic picture of what, in actual life, is a close-knit variety in -unity,--that interaction between, and anticipation of the whole in, the -parts, and that indication of the later stages in the earlier,--which -is so strikingly operative in the order and organization of the various -constituents and stages of the processes and growth of the human mind -and character, and which appears again in the Reality apprehended, -reproduced, and enriched by man’s powers. - -Even in the humblest of our Sense-perceptions, there is already a -mind perceiving and a Mind perceived; and, in the most abstract -and artificial of our intellectual constructions, there is not -only a logical requirement, but also, underlying this requirement -as this cause’s deepest cause, an ever-growing if unarticulated -experience and sense that only by the closest contact with the most -impersonal-seeming, impersonally conceived forces of life and nature, -and by the deepest recollection within its own interior world of -mind and will, can man’s soul adequately develop and keep alive, -within itself, a solid degree and consciousness of Spirit, Free-will, -Personality, Eternity, and God. Thus, in proportion as he comes more -deeply to advance in the true occasions of his spirit’s growth, does -man still further emphasize and differentiate these two levels: the -shallower, spacial-temporal, mathematico-physical, quantitative and -determinist aspect of reality and level of apprehension; and the -deeper, alone at all adequate, experience of all the fuller degrees -of Reality and effectuations of the spirit’s life, with their -overlapping, interpenetrating Succession, (their Duration), and their -Libertarianism, Interiority, and Sense of the Infinite. He thus -emphasizes both levels, because the determinist level is found to be, -though never the source or direct cause, yet ever a necessary awakener -and purifier of the Libertarian level. - -Strictly within the temporal-spacial, quantitative method and level, -indeed, we can nowhere find Teleology; but if we look back upon these -quantitative superficialities from the qualitative, durational and -personal, spiritual level and standpoint, (which alone constitute -our direct experience), we find that the quantitative, causal level -and method is everywhere inadequate to exhaust or rightly to picture -Reality, in exact proportion to this reality’s degree of fulness and of -worth. From the simplest Vegetable-Cell up to Orchids and Insectivorous -Plants; from these on to Protozoans and up, through Insects, Reptiles, -and Birds, to the most intelligent of Domestic Animals; from these on -to Man, the Savage, and up to the most cultured or saintly of human -personalities: we have everywhere, and increasingly, an inside, an -organism, a subject as well as object,--a series which is, probably -from the first, endowed with some kind of dim consciousness, and which -increasingly possessed of a more and more definite consciousness, -culminates in the full self-consciousness of the most fully human man. -And everywhere here, though in indefinitely increasing measure, it is -the individualizing and historical, the organic and soul-conceptions -and experiences which constitute the most characteristic and important -truths and reality about and in these beings. For the higher up we -get in this scale of Reality, the more does the Interior determine -and express itself in the Exterior, and the more does not only kind -differ from kind of being, but even the single individual from the -other individuals within each several kind. And yet nowhere, not even -in free-willing, most individualized, personal Man do we find the -quantitative, determinist envelope simply torn asunder and revealing -the qualitative, libertarian spirit perfectly naked and directly -testable by chronometer, measuring-rod, or crucible. The spirit is thus -ever like unto a gloved hand, which, let it move ever so spontaneously, -will ever, in the first instance, present the five senses with a glove -which, to their exclusive tests, appears as but dead and motionless -leather. - -(3) Now we have already in Chapter IX studied the contrasting -attitudes of Catherine and her attendants towards one class of such -effects,--those attributed to the Divine Spirit,--and hence, in -principle, towards this whole question. Yet it is in the matter of -phenomena, taken to be directly Diabolic or Preternatural, that a -Pseudo-Mysticism has been specially fruitful in strangely materialistic -fantasies. As late as 1774 the _Institutiones Theologiae Mysticae_ -of Dom Schram, O.S.B., a book which even yet enjoys considerable -authority, still solemnly described, as so many facts, cases of -Diabolical _Incubi_ and _Succubae_. Even in 1836-1842 the layman -Joseph Görres could still devote a full half of his widely influential -_Mystik_ to “Diabolical Mysticism,”--witchcraft, etc.; a large space -to “Natural Mysticism,”--divination, lycanthropy, vampires, etc.; and -a considerable part of the “Divine Mysticism,” to various directly -miraculous phenomenalisms. The Abbé Ribet could still, in his _La -Mystique Divine, distinguée de ses Contrefaçons Diaboliques_, of 1895, -give us a similarly uncritical mixture and transposition of tests -and levels. But the terrible ravages of the belief in witchcraft in -the later Middle Ages, and, only a few years back, the humiliating -fraud and craze concerning “Diana Vaughan,” are alone abundantly -sufficient to warn believers in the positive character of Evil away -from all, solidly avoidable, approaches to such dangerous forms of this -belief.[364] - -(4) Yet the higher and highest Mystical attitude has never ceased -to find its fullest, most penetrating expression in the life and -teaching of devoted children of the Roman Church,--several of whom -have been proclaimed Doctors and Models by that Church herself. And by -a conjunction of four characteristics these great normative lives and -teachers still point the way, out of and beyond all false or sickly -Mysticism, on to the wholesome and the true. - -(i) There is, first, the grand trust in and love of God’s beautiful, -wide world, and in and of the manifold truth and goodness present -throughout life,--realities which we have already found rightly to -be dwelt on, in certain recollective movements and moments, to the -momentary exclusion of their positively operative, yet ever weaker, -opposites. “Well I wote,” says Mother Juliana, “that heaven and earth, -and all that is made, is great, large, fair and good”; “the full-head -of joy is to behold God in all,” and “truly to enjoy in Our Lord, is a -full lovely thanking in His sight.”[365] This completely un-Manichaean -attitude,--so Christian when held as the ultimate among the divers, -sad and joyful, strenuous and contemplative moods of the soul,--is -as strongly present in Clement of Alexandria, in the Sts. Catherine -of Siena and of Genoa, in St. John of the Cross, and indeed in the -recollective moments of all the great Mystics. - -(ii) There is, next, a strong insistence upon the soul having to -transcend all particular lights and impressions, in precise proportion -to their apparently extraordinary character, if it would become strong -and truly spiritual. “He that will rely on the letter of the divine -locution, or on the intellectual form of the vision, will necessarily -fall into delusion. ‘The letter killeth, the spirit quickeneth’; we -must therefore reject the literal sense, and abide in the obscurity -of faith.” “One desire only doth God allow in His presence, that of -perfectly observing His law and carrying the Cross of Christ.… That -soul, which has no other aim, will be a true ark containing the true -Manna, which is God.” “One act of the will, wrought in charity, is -more precious in the eyes of God, than that which all the visions -and revelations of heaven might effect.” “Let men cease to regard -these supernatural apprehensions … that they may be free.”[366] Here -the essence of the doctrine lies in the importance attached to this -transcendence, and not in the particular views of the Saint concerning -the character of this or that miraculous-seeming phenomenon to be -transcended. - -(iii) And this essential doctrine retains all its cogency, even though -we hold the strict necessity of a contrary, alternating movement -of definite occupation with the Concrete, Contingent, Historical, -Institutional, in thought and action. For this occupation will be with -the normal, typical means, duties, and facts of human and religious -life; and, whilst fully conscious of the Supernatural working in and -with these seemingly but natural materials, will, with St. Augustine, -pray God to “grant men to perceive in little things the common-seeming -indications of things both small and great,” and, with him, will see a -greater miracle in the yearly transformation of the vine’s watery sap -into wine, and in the germination of any single seed, than even in that -of Cana.[367] - -(iv) And then there is, upon the whole, a tendency to concentrate, at -these recollective stages, the soul’s attention upon Christ and God -alone. “I believe I understand,” says Mother Juliana, “the ministration -of holy Angels, as Clerks tell; but it was not shewed to me. For -Himself is nearest and meekest, highest and lowest, and doeth all. -God alone took our nature, and none but He; Christ alone worked our -salvation, and none but He.”[368] And thus we get a wholesome check -upon the Neo-Platonist countless mediations, of which the reflex is -still to be found in the Areopagite. God indeed is alone held, with -all Catholic theologians, to be capable of penetrating to the soul’s -centre, and the fight against Evil is simplified to a watch and war -against Self, in the form of an ever-increasing engrossment in the -thought of God, and in the interests of His Kingdom. “Only a soul -in union with God,” says St. John of the Cross, “is capable of this -profound loving knowledge: for this knowledge is itself that union.… -The Devil has no power to simulate anything so great.” “Self-love,” -says Père Grou, “is the sole source of all the illusions of the -spiritual life.… Jesus Christ on one occasion said to St. Catherine -of Siena: ‘My daughter, think of Me, and I will think of thee’: a -short epitome of all perfection. ‘Wheresoever thou findest self,’ says -the _Imitation_, ‘drop that self’: the soul’s degree of fidelity to -this precept is the true measure of its advancement.”[369] The highly -authorized _Manuel de Théologie Mystique_ of the Abbé Lejeune, 1897, -gives but one-sixth of its three-hundred pages to the discussion of -all quasi-miraculous phenomena, puts them all apart from the substance -of Contemplation and of the Mystical Life, and dwells much upon -the manifold dangers of such, never essential, things. The French -Oratorian, Abbé L. Laberthonnière, represents, in the _Annales de -Philosophie Chrétienne_, a spirituality as full of a delicate Mysticism -as it is free from any attachment to extraordinary phenomena. The same -can be said of the Rev. George Tyrrell’s _Hard Sayings_ and _External -Religion_. And the Abbé Sandreau has furnished us with two books of the -most solid tradition and discrimination in all these matters.[370] - -(5) And we should, in justice, remember that the Phenomenalist -Mysticism, objected to by Prof. Münsterberg and so sternly transcended -by St. John of the Cross, is precisely what is still hankered after, -and treated as of spiritual worth, by present-day Spiritualism. Indeed, -even Prof. James’s in many respects valuable _Varieties of Religious -Experience_ is seriously damaged by a cognate tendency to treat -Religion, or at least Mysticism, as an abnormal faculty for perceiving -phenomena inexplicable by physical and psychical science. - -(6) And finally, with respect to the personality of Evil, we must not -forget that “there are drawings to evil as to good, which are not mere -self-temptations, … but which derive from other wills than our own; -strictly, it is only persons that can tempt us.”[371] - - - - -CHAPTER XIV - -THE TWO FINAL PROBLEMS: MYSTICISM AND PANTHEISM. THE IMMANENCE OF GOD, -AND SPIRITUAL PERSONALITY, HUMAN AND DIVINE - - -INTRODUCTORY. - -_Impossibility of completely abstracting from the theoretical form in -the study of the experimental matter._ - -We now come to the last two of our final difficulties and problems--the -supposed or real relations between Inclusive or Exclusive Mysticism -and Pantheism; and the question concerning the Immanence of God and -Spiritual Personality, Human and Divine. - -(1) A preliminary difficulty in this, our deepest, task arises from -the fact that, whereas the evidences of a predominantly individual, -personal, directly experimental kind, furnished by every at all deeply -religious soul, have hitherto been all but completely overlooked -by trained historical investigators, in favour of the study of the -theological concepts and formulations accepted and transmitted by -such souls, now the opposite extreme is tending to predominate, as in -Prof. William James’s _Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, or -in Prof. Weinel’s interesting study, _The Effects of the Spirit and -of the Spirits in the Sub-Apostolic Age_, 1899. For here, as Prof. -Bousset points out in connection with the latter book, we get an all -but complete overlooking of the fact that, even in the most individual -experience, there is always some intellectual framework or conception, -some more or less traditional form, which had previously found lodgment -in, and had been more or less accepted by, that soul; so that, though -the experience itself, where at all deep, is never the mere precipitate -of a conventionally accepted traditional intellectual form, it is -nevertheless, even when more or less in conflict with this form, never -completely independent of it.[372]--Yet though we cannot discriminate -in full detail, we can show certain peculiarities in the traditional -Jewish, Mohammedan, Christian Mysticism to be not intrinsic to the -Mystical apprehensions as such, but to come from the then prevalent -philosophies which deflected those apprehensions in those particular -ways. - -(2) In view then of this inevitable inter-relation between the -experimental, personal matter and the theoretical, traditional form, -I shall first consider the Aristotelian and Neo-Platonist conceptions -concerning the relations between the General and the Particular, -between God and Individual Things, as being the two, partly rival yet -largely similar, systems that, between them, have most profoundly -influenced the intellectual starting-point, analysis, and formulation -of those experiences; and shall try to show the special attraction and -danger of these conceptions for the mystically religious temperament. -I shall next discuss the conceptions as to the relations between -God and the individual personality,--the Noûs, the Spirit, and the -Soul,--which, still largely Aristotelian and Neo-Platonist, have even -more profoundly commended themselves to those Mystics, since these -conceptions so largely met some of those Mystics’ requirements, and -indeed remain still, in part, the best analysis procurable. I shall, -thirdly, face the question as to any intrinsic tendency to Pantheism in -Mysticism as such, and as to the significance and the possible utility -of any such tendency, keeping all fuller description of the right -check upon it for my last chapter. And finally, I shall consider what -degree and form of the Divine Immanence in the human soul, of direct -Experience or Knowledge of God on the part of man, and of “Personality” -in God, appear to result from the most careful analysis of the deepest -religious consciousness, and from the requirements of the Sciences and -of Life. - - -I. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE GENERAL AND THE PARTICULAR, GOD AND INDIVIDUAL -THINGS, ACCORDING TO ARISTOTLE, THE NEO-PLATONISTS, AND THE MEDIEVAL -STRICT REALISTS. - - -1. _Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, Proclus._ - -(1) With regard to the relations between the General and Particular, -we should note Aristotle’s final perplexities and contradictions, -arising from his failure to harmonize or to transcend, by means of -a new and self-consistent conception, the two currents, the Platonic -and the specifically Aristotelian, which make up his thought. For, -with him as with Plato, all Knowledge has to do with Reality: hence -Reality alone, in the highest, primary sense of the word, can form -the highest, primary object of Knowledge; Knowledge will be busy, -primarily, with the Essence, the Substance of things. But with him, as -against Plato, every substance is unique, whence it would follow that -all knowledge refers, at bottom, to the Individual,--individual beings -would form, not only the starting-point, but also the content and -object of knowledge.--Yet this is what Aristotle, once more at one with -Plato, stoutly denies: Science, even where it penetrates most deeply -into the Particular, is never directed to individual things as such, -but always to General Concepts; and this, not because of our human -incapacity completely to know the Individual, as such, but because the -General, in spite of the Particular being better known to us, is more -primitive and more knowable, as alone possessing that Immutability -which must characterize all objects of true knowledge.[373] The true -Essence of things consists only in what is thought in their Concept, -which concept is always some Universal; yet this Universal exists only -in Individual Beings, which are thus declared true Substances: here -are two contentions, the possibility of whose co-existence he fails -to explain. Indeed at one time it is the Form, at another it is the -Individual Being, composed of Form and Matter, which appears as real; -and Matter, again, appears both as the Indefinite General and as the -Cause of Individual Particularity.[374] - -(2) Now Plato had indeed insisted upon ascending to even greater -abstraction, unity, and generality, as the sure process for attaining -to the truth of things; and had retained what is, for us, a strangely -unpersonal, abstract element, precisely in his highest concept, since -God here is hardly personal, but the Idea of Good, a Substance distinct -from all other things, yet not, on this account, an Individual. Yet -Plato’s profoundly aesthetic, social, ethical, above all religious, -consciousness forced him to the inconsistency of proclaiming that, as -the Sun is higher than the light and the eye, so the Good is higher -than (mere) Being and Knowledge; and this Supreme Idea of the Good -gives to things their Being, and to the understanding its power of -Cognition, and is the Cause of all Rightness and Beauty, the Source -of all Reality and Reason, and hence, not only a final, but also an -efficient Cause,--indeed _the_ Cause, pure and simple.[375] In the -_Philebus_ he tells us explicitly that the Good and the Divine Reason -are identical; and in the _Timaeus_ the Demiurge, the World-Former, -looks indeed to the Image of the World, in order to copy it: yet the -Demiurge is also himself this image which he copies.[376] We thus -still have a supreme Multiplicity in Unity as the characteristic of -the deepest Reality; and its chief attribute, Goodness, is not the -most abstract and aloof, but the most rich in qualities and the most -boundlessly self-communicative: “He was good, so he desired that all -things should be as like unto himself as possible.”[377] And Aristotle, -(although he places God altogether outside the visible world, and -attributes to Him there one sole action, the thinking of his own -thought, and one quasi-emotion, intellectual joy at this thinking), -still maintains, in this shrunken form, the identity of the Good and of -the Supreme Reason, Noûs, and a certain Multiplicity in Unity, and a -true self-consciousness, within Him. - -(3) It is Plotinus who is the first expressly to put the Godhead,--in -strict obedience to the Abstractive scheme,--beyond all Multiplicity, -hence above the highest Reason itself, for reason ever contains at -least the duality of Subject thinking and of Object thought; above -Being, for all being has ever a multitude of determinations; and above -every part and the totality of All Things, for it is the cause of them -all. The Cause is here ever outside the effect, the Unity outside the -Multiplicity, what is thought outside of what thinks. The First is -thus purely transcendent,--with one characteristic exception: although -above Being, Energy, Thought, and Thinking, Beauty, Virtue, Life, It -is still the Good; and because of this, though utterly self-sufficing -and without action of any kind, It, “as it were,” overflows, and -this overflow produces a Second.[378] And only this Second is here -the Noûs, possessed of what Aristotle attributes to the First: it is -no sheer Unity, “all things are together there, yet are they there -discriminated”: it is contemplative Thinking of itself; it is pure and -perfect Action.[379] - -(4) And Proclus who, through the Pseudo-Dionysius, is the chief -mediator between Plato and Plotinus on the one hand, and the Medieval -Mystics and Scholastics on the other, is, with his immense thirst for -Unity, necessarily absorbed by the question as to the Law according -to which all things are conjoined to a whole. And this Law is for him -the process of the Many out of the One, and their inclination back to -the One; for this process and inclination determine the connection -of all things, and the precise place occupied by each thing in that -connection. All things move in the circle of procession from their -cause, and of return to it; the simplest beings are the most perfect; -the most complex are the most imperfect.[380] - - -2. _The Anti-Proclian current, in the Areopagite’s view._ - -Now in the Pseudo-Dionysius we find an interesting oscillation between -genuine Neo-Platonism, which finds Beings perfect in proportion to the -fewness and universality of their attributes, although, with it, he -inconsistently holds Goodness,--the deepest but not the most general -attribute,--to be the most perfect of all; and Aristotelianism at its -richest, when it finds Beings perfect according to the multiplicity -and depth of their attributes. Dionysius himself becomes aware of the -dead-lock thence ensuing. “The Divine name of the Good is extended -to things being and to things not being,”--a statement forced upon -him by his keeping, with Plato and Plotinus, Goodness as the supreme -attribute, and yet driving home, more completely than they, their first -principle that Generality and Perfection rise and sink together. “The -Name of Being is extended to all things being” and stretches further -than Life. “The name of Life is extended to all things living” and -stretches further than Wisdom. “The Name of Wisdom is extended,” only, -“to all the intellectual, and rational, and sensible.” - -But if so, “for what reason do we affirm,” (as he has been doing in -the previous sections), “that Life,” the less extended, “is superior -to (mere) Being,” the more extended? “and that Wisdom,” though less -extended, “is superior to mere Life,” the more extended? And he answers -in favour of depth and richness of attributes. “If any one assumed -the intellectual to be without being or life, the objection might hold -good. But if the Divine Minds,” the Angels, “both are above all other -beings, and live above all other living creatures, and think and know -above sensible perception and reasoning, and aspire beyond all other -existent and aspiring beings, to … the Beautiful and Good: then they -encircle the Good more closely.” For “the things that participate more -in the one and boundless-giving God, are more … divine, than those that -come behind them in gifts.”[381] And with abiding truth he says: “Those -who place attributes on That which is above every attribute, should -derive the affirmation from what is more cognate to It; but those who -abstract, with regard to That which is above every abstraction, should -derive the negation from what is further removed from It. Are not, -_e.g._, Life and Goodness more cognate to It than air and stone? And is -It not further removed from debauch and anger than from ineffableness -and incomprehensibility?”[382] - -But more usually Dionysius shows little or no preference for any -particular attribution or denegation; all are taken to fall short so -infinitely as to eliminate any question as to degrees of failure. “The -Deity-Above-All … is neither Soul nor Mind, neither One nor Oneness, -neither Deity nor Goodness.”[383] God is thus purely transcendent. - - -3. _Continuators of the Proclian current._ - -The influence of the Areopagite was notoriously immense throughout -the Middle Ages,--indeed unchecked,--along its Proclian, Emanational, -Ultra-Unitive current,--among the Pantheists from the Christian, -Mohammedan and Jewish camps. - -(1) Thus Scotus Eriugena (who died in about 877 A.D.) insists: “In -strict parlance, the Divine Nature Itself exists alone in all things, -and nothing exists which is not that Nature. The Lord and the Creature -are one and the same thing.” “It is its own Self that the Holy Trinity -loves, sees, moves within us.” One of his fundamental ideas is the -equivalence of the degrees of abstraction and those of existence; he -simply hypostatizes the logical table.[384] Eriugena was condemned. - -(2) But the Pseudo-Aristotelian, really Proclian, _Liber de Causis_, -written by a Mohammedan in about 850 A.D., became, from its -translation into Latin in about 1180 A.D. onwards, an authority among -the orthodox Scholastics. It takes, as “an example of the (_true_) -doctrine as to Causes, Being, Living-Being, and Man. Here it is -necessary that the thing Being should exist first of all, and next -Living-Being, and last Man. Living-Being is the proximate, Being is -the remote cause of Man; hence Being is in a higher degree the cause -of Man than is Living-Being, since Being is the cause of Living-Being, -which latter again is the cause of Man.” … “Being, (of the kind) -which is before Eternity, is the first cause.… Being is more general -than Eternity.… Being of the kind which is with and after Eternity, -is the first of created things.… It is above Sense, and Soul, and -Intelligence.”[385] - -(3) The Mohammedan Avicenna, who died in 1037 A.D., is mostly -Aristotelian in philosophy and Orthodox in religious intention, and, -translated into Latin, was much used by St. Thomas. Yet he has lapses -into pure Pantheism, such as: “The true Being that belongs to God, -is not His only, but is the Being of all things, and comes forth -abundantly from His Being. That which all things desire is Being: -Being is Goodness; the perfection of Being is the perfection of -Goodness.”[386] - -(4) And the Spanish Jew, Ibn Gebirol (Avicebron), who died about 1070 -A.D., is predominantly Proclian, but with a form of Pantheism which, in -parts, strikingly foreshadows Spinoza. His masterly _Fons Vitae_, as -translated into Latin, exercised a profound influence upon Duns Scotus. -“Below the first Maker there is nothing but what is both matter and -form.” “All things are resolvable into Matter and Form. If all things -were resolvable into a single root,” (that is, into Form alone), “there -would be no difference between that one root and the one Maker.” There -exists a universal Matter and a universal Form. The first, or universal -Matter, is a substance existing by itself, which sustains diversity, -and is one in number: it is capable of receiving all the different -kinds of forms. The universal Form is a substance which constitutes the -essence of all the different kinds of forms.… By means of the knowledge -of this universal Form, the knowledge of every (less general) form is -acquired,--is deduced from it and resolved into it.” “Being falls under -four categories, answering to: whether it is, what it is, what is its -quality, and why it is: but, of these, the first in order of dignity -is the category which inquires whether it is at all.”[387] We thus -get again the degree of worth strictly identical with the degree of -generality. - - -4. _Inconsistencies of Aquinas and Scotus._ - -(1) St. Thomas, the chief of the orthodox Scholastics, has embodied -the entire Dionysian writings in his own works, but labours -assiduously--and successfully, as far as his own statements are -concerned--to guard against the Pantheistic tendencies special to -strict Realism. Yet it is clear, from his frequent warnings and -difficult distinctions regarding the double sense of the proposition, -“God is sheer Being,” and from the ease with which we find Eckhart, -an entirely consistent Realist, lapse into the Pantheistic sense, how -immanent is the danger to any severe form of the system.[388] And he -fails to give us a thoroughly understandable and consistent account -as to the relations between the General and the Particular, between -Form and Matter, and between these two pairs of conceptions. Thus -“Materia signata,” matter, as bearing certain dimensions, “is the -principle of individuation”:[389] yet this _quantum_ is already an -individually determined quantity, and _this_ determination remains -unexplained. And certain forms exist separately, without matter, in -which case each single form is a separate species; as with the Angels -and, pre-eminently, with God.--Yet, as already Duns Scotus insisted, -Aquinas’ general principle seems to require the non-existence of pure -forms as distinct beings, and the partial materiality of all individual -beings.[390] - -(2) And Duns Scotus teaches, in explicit return to Avicebron, that -every created substance consists of matter as well as of form, and that -there is but one, First Matter, which is identical in every particular -and derivative kind of matter. The world appears to him as a gigantic -tree, whose root is this indeterminate matter; whose branches are -the transitory substances; whose leaves the changeable accidents; -whose flowers, the rational souls; whose fruit are the Angels: and -which God has planted and which He tends. Here again the order of -Efficacity,--with the tell-tale exception of God,--is identical with -that of Generality.[391] - - -5. _Eckhart’s Pantheistic trend._ - -But it is Eckhart who consistently develops the Pantheistic trend of -a rigorous Intellectualism. The very competent and strongly Thomistic -Father Denifle shows how Eckhart strictly followed the general -scholastic doctrine, as enunciated by Avicenna: “In every creature -its Being is one thing, and is from another, its Essence is another -thing, and is not from another”; whereas in God, Being and Essence are -identical. And Denifle adds: “Eckhart will have been unable to answer -for himself the question as to what, in strictness, the ‘Esse’ is, in -distinction from the ‘Essentia’; indeed no one could have told him, -with precision.… Eckhart leaves intact the distinction between the -Essence of God and that of the creature; but, doubtless in part because -of this, he feels himself free,--in starting from an ambiguous text -of Boetius,--to break down the careful discriminations established by -St. Thomas, in view of this same text, between Universal Being, Common -to all things extant, and Divine Being, reserved by Aquinas for God -alone.”[392] “What things are nearer to each other, than anything that -_is_ and Being? There is nothing between them.” “Very Being,” the Being -of God, “is the actualizing Form of every form, everywhere.” “In one -word,” adds Denifle, “the Being of God constitutes the formal Being of -all things.”[393] The degrees of Generality and Abstract Thinkableness -are again also the degrees of Reality and Worth: “the Eternal Word -assumed to Itself, not this or that human being, but a human nature -which existed bare, unparticularized.” “Being and Knowableness are -identical.” - -When speaking systematically Eckhart is strictly Plotinian: “God -and Godhead are as distinct as earth is from heaven.” “The Godhead -has left all things to God: It owns nought, wills nought, requires -nought, effects nought, produces nought.” “Thou shalt love the Godhead -as It truly is: a non-God, non-Spirit, non-Person … a sheer, pure, -clear One, severed from all duality: let us sink down into that One, -throughout eternity, from Nothing unto Nothing, so help us God.” “The -Godhead Itself remains unknown to Itself.” “It is God who energizes and -speaks one single thing,--His Son, the Holy Ghost, and all creatures.… -Where God speaks it, there it is all God; here, where man understands -it, it is God and creature.”[394] No wonder that the following are -among the propositions condemned by Pope John XXII in 1329: “God -produces me as His own Being, a Being identical, not merely similar”; -and, “I speak as falsely when I call God (the Godhead) good, as if I -call white, black.”[395] - - -6. _The logical goal of strict Realism._ - -This series of facts, which could be indefinitely extended, well -illustrates the persistence of “the fundamental doctrine common to all -forms of Realism,--of the species as an entity in the individuals, -common to all and _identical_ in each, an entity to which individual -differences adhere as accidents,” as Prof. Seth-Pattison accurately -defines the matter. “Yet when existence is in question, it is the -individual, not the universal, that is real; and the real individual -is not a compound of species and accidents, but is individual to the -inmost fibre of his being.” Not as though Nominalism were in the right. -For “each finite individual has its” special “place in the one real -universe, with all the parts of which it is inseparably connected. But -the universe is itself an individual or real whole, containing all -its parts within itself, and not a universal of the logical order, -containing its exemplifications under it.”[396] And, above all, minds, -spirits, persons,--however truly they may approximate more and more -to certain great types of rationality, virtue, and religion, which -types are thus increasingly expressive of God’s self-revealing purpose -and nature,--are ever, not merely numerically different, as between -one individual and the other, but, both in its potentialities and -especially in its spiritual actualization, no one soul can or does take -the place of any other. - -And if we ask what there is in any strict Realism to attract the -Mystical sense, we shall find it, I think, in the insistence of -such Realism upon Unity, Universality, and Stability. Yet in so -far as Mysticism, in such a case Exclusive Mysticism, tends to oust -the Outgoing movement of the soul, it empties these forms of their -Multiple, Individual, and Energizing content. Inclusive Mysticism may -be truly said alone to attain to the true Mystic’s desires; for only -by the interaction of both movements, and of all the powers of the -soul, will the said soul escape the ever-increasing poverty of content -characteristic of the strict Realist’s pyramid of conceptions; a -poverty undoubtedly antagonistic to the secret aspiration of Mysticism, -which is essentially an apprehension, admiration, and love of the -infinite depths and riches of Reality--of this Reality no doubt present -everywhere, yet in indefinitely various, and mutually complementary and -stimulative forms and degrees. And the readiness with which Mysticism -expressed itself in the Nominalist Categories,--distinctly less -adequate to a healthy, Partial Mysticism than the more moderate forms -of Realism,--shows how little intrinsic was the link which seemed to -bind it to a Realism of the most rigorous kind. - - -II. RELATIONS BETWEEN GOD AND THE HUMAN SOUL. - -In taking next the question as to the relations between God and the -Human Soul, we shall find our difficulties increased, because, here -especially, the Philosophers and even the Biblical Writers have, -with regard to religious experience, used expressions and furnished -stimulations of a generally complex and unclarified, intermittent, -and unharmonized kind; and especially because certain specifically -religious experiences and requirements have operated here with a unique -intensity, at one time in a Pantheistic, at another in a more or less -Deistic direction. The reader will specially note the points in the -following doctrines which helped on the conception that a certain -centre or highest part of the soul is God, or a part of God, Himself. - - -1. _Plato and Aristotle. “The Noûs.”_ - -(1) Plato teaches the pre-existence and the post-existence -(immortality) of the soul, as two interdependent truths. In his -earlier stage, _e.g._ the _Phaedrus_, he so little discriminates, in -his argument for immortality, between the individual soul and the -World-Soul, as to argue that “the Self-Moving” Soul generally “is the -beginning of motion, and this motion,” (specially here in connection -with the human soul), “can neither be destroyed nor begotten, since, -in that case, the heavens and all generation would collapse.” Yet -individual souls are not, according to him, emanations of the -World-Soul; but, as the particular ideas stand beside the Supreme Idea, -so do the particular souls stand beside the Soul of the Whole, in a -distinct peculiarity of their own.[397]--And again, since the soul -has lapsed from a purer, its appropriate, life into the body, and has -thus no original, intrinsic relation to this body, the activity of the -senses, indeed in strictness even that of the emotions, cannot form -part of its essential nature. Only the highest part of the soul, the -Reason, _Noûs_, which, as “sun-like, God-like,” can apprehend the sun, -God, is one and simple, as are all the ideas, immortal; whereas the -soul’s lower part consists of two elements,--the nobler, the irascible, -and the ignobler, the concupiscible passions. But how the unity of the -soul’s life can co-exist with this psychical tritomy, is a question -no doubt never formulated even to himself by Plato: we certainly have -only three beings bound together, not one being active in different -directions.[398] - -(2) Aristotle, if more sober in his general doctrine, brings some -special obscurities and contradictions. For whilst the pre-existence -of the soul, taken as a whole, is formally denied, and indeed its very -origin is linked to that of the body, its rational part, the Noûs, -comes into the physical organism from outside of the matter altogether, -and an impersonal pre-existence is distinctly predicated of it,--in -strict conformity with his doctrine that the Supreme Noûs does not -directly act upon, or produce things in, the world.[399] - - -2. _St. Paul. The “Spirit.”_ - -But it is St. Paul who, in his Mystical outbursts and in the systematic -parts of his doctrine, as against the simply hortatory level of -his teaching, gives us the earliest, one of the deepest, and to -this hour by far the most influential, among the at all detailed -experiences and schemes, accepted by and operative among Christians, -as to the relations of the human soul to God. And here again, and -with characteristic intensity, certain overlapping double meanings -and conceptions, and some vivid descriptions of experiences readily -suggestive of the divinity of the soul’s highest part, repeatedly -appear. - -(1) In the systematic passages we not only find the terms _Psyche_, -“Soul,” for the vital force of the body; and _Noûs_, (“Mind,”) -“Heart,” and “Conscience,” for various aspects and functions of -man’s rational and volitional nature: but a special insistence upon -_Pneuma_, “Spirit,” mostly in a quite special sense of the word. -Thus in 1 Cor. ii, 14, 15, we get an absolute contrast between the -psychic or sarkic, the simply natural man, and the Pneumatic, the -Spiritual one, all capacity for understanding the Spirit of God being -denied to the former. The Spiritual thus appears as itself already -the Divine, and the Spirit as the exclusive, characteristic property -of God, something which is foreign to man, apart from his Christian -renovation and elevation to a higher form of existence. Only with the -entrance of faith and its consequences into the mind and will of man, -does this transcendent Spirit become an immanent principle: “through -His Spirit dwelling in you.”[400]--Hence, in the more systematic -Pauline Anthropology, _Pneuma_ cannot be taken as belonging to man’s -original endowment. Certainly in 1 Cor. ii, 11, the term “the spirit -of a man” appears simply because the whole passage is dominated by a -comparison between the Divine and the human consciousness, which allows -simultaneously of the use of the conversely incorrect term, “the mind -of God,”--here, v. 16, and in Rom. xi, 34. And the term “the spirit -of the world,” 1 Cor. ii, 12, is used in contrast with “the Spirit of -God,” and as loosely as the term “the God of this world,” is applied, -in 2 Cor. iv, 4, to Satan.--Only some four passages are difficult to -interpret thus: _e.g._ “Every defilement of flesh and of spirit” (2 -Cor. vii, 1); for how can God, Spirit, be defiled? Yet we can “forget -that our body is a temple of the Holy Spirit,” 1 Cor. vi, 19; and its -defilement can “grieve the Holy Spirit” (Eph. iv, 30).[401] - -And note how parallel to his conception of this immanence of the -transcendent Spirit is St. Paul’s conception, based upon his personal, -mystical experience, of the indwelling of Christ in the regenerate -human soul. Saul had indeed been won to Jesus Christ, not by the -history of Jesus’ earthly life, but by the direct manifestation of -the heavenly Spirit-Christ, on the way to Damascus: whence he teaches -that only those who know Him as Spirit, can truly “be in Christ,”--an -expression formed on the model of “to be in the Spirit,” as in Mark -xii, 36, and Apoc. 1, 10. - -(2) And then these terms take on, in specifically Pauline Mystical -passages, a suggestion of a local extension and environment, and -express, like the corresponding formulae “in God,” “in the Spirit,” the -conception of an abiding within as it were an element,--that of the -exalted Christ and His Divine glory. Or Christ is within us, as the -Spirit also is said to be, so that the regenerate personality, by its -closeness of intercourse with the personality of Christ, can become -one single Spirit with Him, 1 Cor. vi, 17. “As the air is the element -in which man moves, and yet again the element of life which is present -within the man: so the Pneuma-Christ is for St. Paul both the Ocean -of the Divine Being, into which the Christian, since his reception -of the Spirit, is plunged,” and in which he disports himself, “and a -stream which, derived from that Ocean, is specially introduced within -his individual life.”[402] Catherine’s profound indebtedness to this -Mystical Pauline doctrine has already been studied; here we are but -considering this doctrine in so far as suggestive, to the Mystics, -of the identity between the true self and God,--an identity readily -reached, if we press such passages as “Christ, our life”; “to live is -Christ”; “I live, not I, but Christ liveth in me.”[403] - - -3. _Plotinus._ - -Some two centuries later, Plotinus brings his profound influence to -bear in the direction of such identification. For as the First, the -One, which, as we saw, possesses, for him, no Self-consciousness, -Life, or Being, produces the Second, the Noûs, which, possessed of -all these attributes, exercises them directly in self-contemplation -alone; and yet this Second is so closely like that First as to be -“light from light”: so does the Second produce the Third, the Human -Psyche, which, though “a thing by itself,” is a “godlike (divine) -thing,” since it possesses “a more divine part, the part which is -neighbour to what is above, the Noûs, with which and from which Noûs -the Psyche exists.”--The Psyche is “an image of the Noûs”: “as outward -speech expresses inward thought, so is the Psyche a concept of the -Noûs,--a certain energy of the Noûs, as the Noûs itself is an energy -of the First Cause.” “As with fire, where we distinguish the heat that -abides within the fire and the heat that is emitted by it … so must we -conceive the Psyche not as wholly flowing forth from, but as in part -abiding in, in part proceeding from the Noûs.”[404] - -And towards the end of the great Ninth Book of the Sixth Ennead, he -tells how in Ecstasy “the soul sees the Source of Life … the Ground of -Goodness, the Root of the Soul.… For we are not cut off from or outside -of It … but we breathe and consist in It: since It does not give and -then retire, but ever lifts and bears us, so long as It is what It is.” -“We must stand alone in It and must become It alone, after stripping -off all the rest that hangs about us.… There we can behold both Him and -our own selves,--ourselves, full of intellectual light, or rather as -Pure Light Itself, having become God, or rather as being simply He … -abiding altogether unmoved, having become as it were Stability Itself.” -“When man has moved out of himself away to God, like the image to its -Prototype, he has reached his journey’s end.” “And this is the life of -the Gods and of divine and blessed men … a flight of the alone to the -Alone.”[405] - - -4. _Eckhart’s position. Ruysbroek._ - -(1) Eckhart gives us both Plotinian positions--the God-likeness and -the downright Divinity of the soul. “The Spark (_das Fünkelein_) -of the Soul … is a light impressed upon its uppermost part, and an -image of the Divine Nature, which is ever at war with all that is not -divine. It is not one of the several powers of the soul.… Its name -is Synteresis,”--_i.e._ conscience. “The nine powers of the soul are -all servants of that man of the soul, and help him on to the soul’s -Source.”[406]--But in one of the condemned propositions he says: “There -is something in the soul which is Increate and Uncreatable; if the -whole soul were such, it would be (entirely) Increate and Uncreatable. -And this is the Intellect,”--standing here exactly for Plotinus’s -Noûs.[407] - -(2) Ruysbroek (who died in 1381) combines a considerable fundamental -sobriety with much of St. Paul’s daring and many echoes of Plotinus. -“The unity of our spirit with God is of two kinds,--essential and -actual. According to its essence, our spirit receives, in its -innermost highest part, the visit of Christ, without means and without -intermission; for the life which we are in God, in our Eternal Image, -and that which we have and are in ourselves, according to the essence -of our being … are without distinction.--But this essential unity of -our spirit with God has no consistency in itself, but abides in God and -flows out from and depends on Him.” The actual unity of our spirit with -God, caused by Grace, confers upon us not His Image, but His Likeness, -“and though we cannot lose the Image of God, nor our natural unity with -Him,--if we lose His Likeness, His Grace, Christ, who, in this case, -comes to us with mediations and intermissions, we shall be damned.”[408] - - -5. _St. Teresa’s mediating view._ - -St. Teresa’s teachings contain interesting faint echoes of the old -perplexities and daring doctrines concerning the nature of the Spirit; -but articulate a strikingly persistent conviction that the soul holds -God Himself as distinct from His graces, possessing thus some direct -experience of this His presence. “I cannot understand what the mind -is, nor how it differs from the soul or the spirit either: all three -seem to me to be but one, though the soul sometimes leaps forth out -of itself, like a fire which has become a flame: the flame ascends -high above the fire, but it is still the same flame of the same fire.” -“Something subtle and swift seems to issue from the soul, to ascend -to its highest part and to go whither Our Lord will … it seems a -flight. This little bird of the spirit seems to have escaped out of -the prison of the body.” Indeed “the soul is then not in itself … it -seems to me to have its dwelling higher than even the highest part of -itself.”[409]--“In the beginning I did not know that God is present in -all things.… Unlearned men used to tell me that He was present only by -His grace. I could not believe that.… A most learned Dominican told me -He was present Himself … this was a great comfort to me.” “To look upon -Our Lord as being in the innermost parts of the soul … is a much more -profitable method, than that of looking upon Him as external to us.” -“The living God was in my soul.” And even, “hitherto” up to 1555, “my -life was my own; my life, since then, is the life which God lived in -me.”[410] - - -6. _Immanence, not Pantheism._ - -St. Teresa’s teaching as to God’s own presence in the soul points -plainly, I think, to the truth insisted on by the Catholic theologian -Schwab, in his admirable monograph on Gerson. “Neither speculation nor -feeling are satisfied with a Pure Transcendence of God; and hence the -whole effort of true Mysticism is directed, whilst not abolishing His -Transcendence, to embrace and experience God, His living presence, -in the innermost soul,--that is, to insist, in some way or other, -upon the Immanence of God. Reject all such endeavours as Pantheistic, -insist sharply upon the specific eternal difference between God and -the Creature: and the Speculative, Mystical depths fade away, with -all their fascination.”[411] Not in finding Pantheism already here, -with the imminent risk of falling into a cold Deism, but in a rigorous -insistence, with all the great Inclusive Mystics, upon the spiritual -and moral effects, as the tests of the reality and worth of such -experiences, and, with the Ascetical and Historical souls, upon also -the other movement--an outgoing in some kind of contact with, and -labour at, the contingencies and particularities of life and mind--will -the true safeguard for this element of the soul’s life be found.[412] - - -III. MYSTICISM AND PANTHEISM: THEIR DIFFERENCES AND POINTS OF LIKENESS. - -But does not Mysticism, not only find God in the soul, but the soul -to be God? Is it not, as such, already Pantheism? Or, if not, what is -their difference? - - -1. _Plotinus and Spinoza compared._ - -Now Dr. Edward Caird, in his fine book, _The Evolution of Theology in -the Greek Philosophers_, 1904, tells us that “Mysticism is religion in -its most concentrated and exclusive form; it is that attitude of mind -in which all other relations are swallowed up in the relation of the -soul to God”; and that “Plotinus is the Mystic _par excellence_.”[413] -And he then proceeds to contrast Plotinus, the typical Mystic, with -Spinoza, the true Pantheist. - -“Whether” or not “Spinoza, in his negation of the limits of the finite, -still leaves it open to himself to admit a reality in finite things -which is _not_ negated,” and “to conceive of the absolute substance -as manifesting itself in attributes and modes”: “it is very clear -that he does so conceive it, and that, for all those finite things -which he treats as negative and illusory in themselves, he finds in -God a ground of reality … which can be as little destroyed as the -divine substance itself.” “God, _Deus sive Natura_, is conceived as -the immanent principle of the universe, or perhaps rather the universe -is conceived as immanent in God.”--Thus to him “the movement by which -he dissolves the finite in the infinite, and the movement by which he -finds the finite again in the infinite, are equally essential. If for -him the world is nothing apart from God, God is nothing apart from His -realization in the world.” This is true Pantheism.[414] - -But in Plotinus the _via negativa_ involves a negation of the finite -and determinate in all its forms; hence here it is impossible to find -the finite again in the infinite. The Absolute One is here not immanent -but transcendent.[415] “While the lower always has need of the higher, -the higher is regarded as having no need” for any purpose “of the -lower”; and “the Highest has no need of anything but Itself.” “Such -a process cannot be reversed”: “in ascending, Plotinus has drawn the -ladder after him, and left himself no possibility of descending again. -The movement, in which he is guided by definite and explicit thought, -is always upwards; while, in describing the movement downwards, he -has to take refuge in metaphors and analogies,” for the purpose of -indicating a purely self-occupied activity which only accidentally -produces an external effect, _e.g._, “the One as it were overflows, and -produces another than itself.”[416] “Thus we have the strange paradox -that the Being who is absolute, is yet conceived as in a sense external -to the relative and finite, and that He leaves the relative and finite -in a kind of unreal independence.” “On the one side, we have a life -which is nothing apart from God, and which, nevertheless, can never be -united to him, except as it loses itself altogether; and, on the other -side, an Absolute, which yet is not immanent in the life it originates, -but abides in transcendent isolation from it.… It is this contradiction -which … makes the writings of Plotinus the supreme expression of -Mysticism.”[417] - -Now I think, with this admirable critic, that we cannot but take -Spinoza as the classical representative of that parallelistic -Pantheism to which most of our contemporary systems of psycho-physical -parallelism belong. As Prof. Troeltsch well puts it, “we have here a -complete parallelism between every single event in the physical world, -which event is already entirely explicable from its own antecedents -within that physical world, and every event of a psychical kind, -which, nevertheless, is itself also entirely explicable from its own -psychical antecedents alone.” And “this parallelism again is but two -sides of the one World-Substance, Which is neither Nature nor Spirit, -and Whose law is neither natural nor spiritual law, but Which is Being -in general and Law in general.” In this one World-Substance, with its -parallel self-manifestations as extension and as thought, Spinoza -finds the ultimate truth of Religion, as against the Indeterminist, -Anthropomorphic elements of all the popular religions,--errors which -have sprung, the Anthropomorphic from man’s natural inclination to -interpret Ultimate Reality, with its complete neutrality towards -the distinctions of Psychical and Physical, by the Psychic side, as -the one nearest to our own selves; and the Indeterminist from the -attribution of that indetermination to the World-Substance which, even -in Psychology, is already a simple illusion and analytical blunder. - -“It is in the combination,” concludes Professor Troeltsch, “of such a -recognition of the strict determination of all natural causation, and -of such a rejection of materialism (with its denial of the independence -of the psychic world), that rests the immense power of Pantheism at -the present time.”[418] On the other hand, the supposed Pantheistic -positions of the later Lessing, of Herder, Goethe and many another -predominantly aesthetic thinker, must, although far richer and more -nearly adequate conceptions of full reality, be assigned, _qua_ -Pantheism, a secondary place, as inconsistent, because already largely -Teleological, indeed Theistic Philosophies. - - -2. _Complete Pantheism non-religious; why approached by Mysticism._ - -Now the former, the full Pantheism, must, I think, be declared, with -Rauwenhoff, to be only in name a religious position at all. “In its -essence it is simply a complete Monism, a recognition of the _Pan_ in -its unity and indivisibility, and hence a simple view of the world, not -a religious conception.”[419]--Yet deeply religious souls can be more -or less, indeed profoundly, influenced by such a Monism, so that we can -get Mystics with an outlook considerably more Spinozist than Plotinian. -There can, _e.g._, be no doubt as to both the deeply religious temper -and the strongly Pantheistic conceptions of Eckhart in the Middle Ages, -and of Schleiermacher in modern times; and indeed Spinoza himself is, -apart from all questions as to the logical implications and results -of his intellectual system, and as to the justice of his attacks upon -the historical religions, a soul of massive religious intuition and -aspiration. - -But further: Mystically tempered souls,--and the typical and -complete religious soul will ever possess a mystical element in its -composition,--have three special _attraits_ which necessarily bring -them into an at least apparent proximity to Pantheism. - -(1) For one thing Mysticism, like Pantheism, has a great, indeed (if -left unchecked by the out-going-movement) an excessive, thirst for -Unity, for a Unity less and less possessed of Multiplicity; and the -transition from holding the Pure Transcendence of this Unity to a -conviction of its Exclusive Immanence becomes easy and insignificant, -in proportion to the emptiness of content increasingly characterizing -this Oneness. - -(2) Then again, like Pantheists, Mystics dwell much upon the strict -call to abandon all self-centredness, upon the death to self, the loss -of self; and in proportion as they dwell upon this self to be thus -rejected, and as they enlarge the range of this petty self, do they -approach each other more and more. - -(3) And lastly, there is a peculiarity about the Mystical habit of -mind, which inevitably approximates it to the Pantheistic mode of -thought, and which, if not continuously taken by the Mystic soul -itself as an inevitable, but most demonstrable, inadequacy, will -react upon the substance of this soul’s thought in a truly Pantheistic -sense. This peculiarity results from the Mystic’s ever-present double -tendency of absorbing himself, away from the Successive and Temporal, -in the Simultaneity and Eternity of God, conceiving thus all reality -as partaking, in proportion to its depth and greater likeness to -Him, in this _Totum Simul_ character of its ultimate Author and -End; and of clinging to such vivid picturings of this reality as -are within his, this Mystic’s reach. Now such a Simultaneity can be -pictorially represented to the mind only by the Spacial imagery of -co-existent Extensions,--say of air, water, light, or fire: and these -representations, if dwelt on as at all adequate, will necessarily -suggest a Determinism of a Mathematico-Physical, Extensional type, -_i.e._ one, and the dominant, side of Spinozistic Pantheism.--It is -here, I think, that we get the double cause for the Pantheistic-seeming -trend of almost all the Mystical imagery. For even the marked -Emanationism of much in Plotinus, and of still more in Proclus,--the -latter still showing through many a phrase in Dionysius,--appears in -their images as operating upon a fixed Extensional foundation: and -indeed these very overflowings, owing to the self-centredness and -emptiness of content of their Source, the One, and to their accidental -yet automatic character, help still further to give to the whole -outlook a strikingly materialistic, mechanical, in so far Pantheistic, -character. - - -3. _Points on which Mysticism has usefully approximated to Pantheism._ - -And yet we must not overlook the profound, irreplaceable services that -are rendered by Mysticism,--provided always it remains but one of two -great movements of the living soul,--even on the points in which it -thus approximates to Pantheism. These services, I think, are three. - -(1) The first of these services has been interestingly illustrated by -Prof. A. S. Pringle Pattison, from the case of Dr. James Martineau’s -writings, and the largely unmediated co-existence there of two -different modes of conceiving God. “The first mode represents God -simply as another, higher Person; the second represents Him as -the soul of souls. The former, Deistic and Hebraic, rests upon an -inferential knowledge of God, derived either from the experience of -His resistance to our will through the forces of Nature, or from that -of His restraint upon us in the voice of Conscience,--God, in both -cases, being regarded as completely separated from the human soul, and -His existence and character apprehended and demonstrated by a process -of reasoning.--The second mode is distinctly and intensely Christian, -and consists in the apprehension of God as the Infinite including -all finite existences, as the immanent Absolute who progressively -manifests His character in the Ideals of Truth, Beauty, Righteousness, -and Love.” And Professor Pattison points out, with Professor Upton, -that it was Dr. Martineau’s almost morbid dread of Pantheism which was -responsible for the inadequate expression given to this Mystical, or -“Speculative” element in his religious philosophy. For only if we do -not resist such Mysticism, do we gain and retain a vivid experience of -how “Consciousness of imperfection and the pursuit of perfection are -alike possible to man only through the universal life of thought and -goodness in which he shares, and which, at once an indwelling presence -and an unattainable ideal, draws him on and always on.” “Personality -is” thus “not ‘unitary’ in Martineau’s sense, as occupying one side -of a relation, and unable to be also on the other. The very capacity -of knowledge and morality implies that the person … is capable of -regarding himself and all other beings from what Martineau well names -‘the station of the Father of Spirits.’”[420] - -I would, however, guard here against any exclusion of a seeking -or finding of God in Nature and in Conscience: only the contrary -exclusion of the finding of God within the soul, and the insistence -upon a complete separation of Him from that soul, are inacceptable in -the “Hebraic” mood. For a coming and a going, a movement inwards and -outwards, checks and counter-checks, friction, contrast, battle and -storm, are necessary conditions and ingredients of the soul’s growth in -its sense of appurtenance to Spirit and to Peace. - -(2) A further service rendered by this Pantheistic-seeming -Mysticism,--though always only so long as it remains not the only or -last word of Religion,--is that it alone discovers the truly spiritual -function and fruitfulness of Deterministic Science. For only if Man -deeply requires a profound desubjectivizing, a great shifting of the -centre of his interest, away from the petty, claimful, animal self, -with its “I against all the world,” to a great kingdom of souls, in -which Man gains his larger, spiritual, unique personality, with its -“I as part of, and for all the world,” by accepting to be but one -amongst thousands of similar constituents in a system expressive of the -thoughts of God; and only if Mathematico-Physical Science is specially -fitted to provide such a bath, and hence is so taken, with all its -apparently ruinous Determinism and seeming Godlessness: is such Science -really safe from apologetic emasculation; or from running, a mere -unrelated dilettantism, alongside of the deepest interests of the soul; -or from, in its turn, crushing or at least hampering the deepest, the -spiritual life of man. Hence all the greater Partial Mystics have got -a something about them which indicates that they have indeed passed -through fire and water, that their poor selfishness has been purified -in a bath of painfully-bracing spiritual air and light, through which -they have emerged into a larger, fuller life. And Nicolas of Coes, -Pascal, Malebranche are but three men out of many whose Mysticism and -whose Mathematico-Physical Science thus interstimulated each other and -jointly deepened their souls. - -We shall find, further on, that this purificatory power of such Science -has been distinctly heightened for us now. Yet, both then and now, -there could and can be such purification only for those who realize -and practise religion as sufficiently ultimate and wide and deep to -englobe, (as one of religion’s necessary stimulants), an unweakened, -utterly alien-seeming Determinism in the middle regions of the -soul’s experience and outlook. Such an englobement can most justly -be declared to be Christianity driven fully home. For thus is Man -purified and saved,--if he already possesses the dominant religious -motive and conviction,--by a close contact with Matter; and the Cross -is plunged into the very centre of his soul’s life, operating there a -sure division between the perishing animal Individual and the abiding -spiritual Personality: the deathless Incarnational and Redemptive -religion becomes thus truly operative there. - -(3) And the last service, rendered by such Mysticism, is to keep -alive in the soul the profoundly important consciousness of the -prerequisites, elements and affinities of a Universally Human kind, -which are necessary to, and present in, all Religion, however -definitely Concrete, Historical and Institutional it may have become. -Such special, characteristic Revelations, Doctrines and Institutions, -as we find them in all the great Historical Religions, and in their -full normative substance and form in Christianity and Catholicism, can -indeed alone completely develop, preserve and spread Religion in its -depth and truth; yet they ever presuppose a general, usually dim but -most real, religious sense and experience, indeed a real presence and -operation of the Infinite and of God in all men. - -It is, then, not an indifferentist blindness to the profound -differences, in their degree of truth, between the religions of -the world, nor an insufficient realization of man’s strict need of -historical and institutional lights and aids for the development and -direction of that general religious sense and experience, which make -the mind revolt from sayings such as those we have already quoted from -the strongly Protestant Prof. Wilhelm Hermann, and to which we can -add the following. “Everywhere, outside of Christianity, Mysticism -will arise, as the very flower of the religious development. But -the Christian must declare such Mystical experience of God to be a -delusion.” For “what is truly Christian is _ipso facto_ not Mystical.” -“We are Christians because, in the Humanity of Jesus, we have struck -upon a fact which is of incomparably richer content, than are the -feelings that arise within our own selves.” Indeed, “I should have -failed to recognize the hand of God even in what my own dead father -did for me, had not, by means of my Christian education, God appeared -to me, in the Historic Christ.”[421]--As if it were possible to -consider Plato and Plotinus, in those religious intuitions and feelings -of theirs which helped to win an Augustine from crass Manichaeism -to a deep Spiritualism, and which continue to breathe and burn as -part-elements in countless sayings of Christian philosophers and -saints, to have been simply deluded, or mere idle subjectivists! As if -we could apprehend even Christ, without some most real, however dim and -general, sense of religion and presence of God within us to which He -could appeal! And as if Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Maccabaean Martyrs, -and many a devoted soul within Mohammedanism or in Brahmanic India, -could not and did not apprehend something of God’s providence in their -earthly father’s love towards them! - -No wonder that, after all this, Hermann can,--as against Richard Rothe -who, in spite of more than one fantastic if not fanatical aberration, -had, on some of the deepest religious matters, a rarely penetrating -perception,--write in a thoroughly patronizing manner concerning -Catholic Mysticism. For this Mysticism necessarily appears to him not -as, at its best, the most massive and profound development of one type -of the ultimate religion,--a type in which one necessary element of all -balanced religious life is at the fullest expansion compatible with a -still sufficient amount and healthiness of the other necessary elements -of such a life,--but only as “a form of religion which has brought out -and rendered visible such a content of interior life as is capable of -being produced within the limits of Catholic piety.”[422] The true, -pure Protestant possesses, according to Hermann, apparently much less, -in reality much more,--the Categorical Imperative of Conscience and the -Jesus of History, as the double one-and-all of his, the only spiritual -religion.--Yet if Christianity is indeed the religion of the Divine -Founder, Who declared that he that is not against Him is for Him; or -of Paul, who could appeal to the heathen Athenians and to all men for -the truth and experience that in God “we live and move and have our -being”; or of the great Fourth Gospel, which tells us that Christ, -the True Light, enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world, a -light which to this hour cannot, for the great majority, be through -historic knowledge of the Historic Christ at all; or of Clement of -Alexandria and of Justin Martyr, who loved to find deep apprehensions -and operations of God scattered about among the Heathen; or of Aquinas, -who, in the wake of the Areopagite and others, so warmly dwells upon -how Grace does not destroy, but presupposes and perfects Nature: then -such an exclusive amalgam of Moralism and History, though doubtless a -most honest and intelligible reaction against opposite excesses, is -a sad impoverishment of Christianity, in its essential, world-wide, -Catholic character. - -Indeed, to be fair, there have never been wanting richer and more -balanced Protestant thinkers strongly to emphasize this profound -many-sidedness and universality of Christianity: so, at present, -in Germany, Profs. Eucken, Troeltsch, Class, Siebeck and others; -and, in England, Prof. A. S. P. Pattison and Mr. J. R. Illingworth. -In all these cases there is ever a strong sympathy with Mysticism -properly understood, as the surest safeguard against such distressing -contractions as is this of Hermann, and that of Albrecht Ritschl before -him. - - -4._ Christianity excludes complete and final Pantheism._ - -And yet, as we have repeatedly found, Christianity has, in its -fundamental Revelation and Experience, ever implied and affirmed such a -conception of Unity, of Self-Surrender, and of the Divine Action, as to -render any Pantheistic interpretation of these things ever incomplete -and transitional. - -(1) The Unity here is nowhere, even ultimately, the sheer Oneness -of a simply identical Substance, but a Unity deriving its very -close-knitness from its perfect organization of not simply identical -elements or relations. - -The Self-Surrender here is not a simply final resolution, of -laboriously constituted centres of human spiritual consciousness and -personality, back into a morally indifferent All, but a means and -passage, for the soul, from a spiritually worthless self-entrenchment -within a merely psycho-physical apartness and lust to live, on to a -spiritual devotedness, an incorporation, as one necessary subject, into -the Kingdom of souls,--the abiding, living expression of the abiding, -living God. - -And, above all, God’s Action is not a mechanico-physical, determinist, -simultaneous Extension, nor even an automatic, accidental, unconscious -Emanation, but, as already Plato divined,--an intuition lost again by -Aristotle, and, in his logic, denied by Plotinus,--a voluntary outgoing -and self-communication of the supreme self-conscious Spirit, God. For -Plato tells us that “the reason why Nature and this Universe of things -was framed by Him Who framed it, is that God is good … and desired -that all things should be as like Himself as it was possible for them -to be.”[423] Yet this pregnant apprehension never attains here to its -full significance, because the Divine Intelligence is conceived only as -manifesting itself in relation to something given from without,--the -pre-existing, chaotic Matter. And for Aristotle God does not love this -Givenness; for “the first Mover moves” (all things) only “as desired” -by them: He Himself desires, loves, wills nothing whatsoever, and -thinks and knows nothing but His own self alone.[424] And in Plotinus -this same transcendence is still further emphasized, for the Absolute -One here transcends even all thought and self-consciousness. - -(2) It is in Christianity, after noble preludings in Judaism, that we -get the full deliberate proclamation, in the great Life and Teaching, -of the profound fact,--the Self-Manifestation of the Loving God, the -Spirit-God moving out to the spirit-man, and spirit-man only thus -capable of a return movement to the Spirit-God. As Schelling said, “God -can only give Himself to His creatures as He gives a self to them,” -and, with it, the capacity of participating in His life. We thus get -a relation begun and rendered possible by God’s utterly prevenient, -pure, _ecstatic_ love of Man, a relation which, in its essence -spiritual, personal and libertarian, leaves behind it, as but vain -travesties of such ultimate Realities, all Emanational or Parallelistic -Pantheism, useful though these latter systems are as symbols of the -Mathematico-Physical level and kind of reality and apprehension. -Yet this spiritual relation is here, unlike Plotinus’s more or less -Emanational conception of it, not indeed simply invertible, as Spinoza -would have it, (for Man is ontologically dependent upon God, whereas -God is not thus dependent upon Man), but nevertheless largely one of -true mutuality. And this mutuality of the relation is not simply a -positive enactment of God, but is expressive, in its degree and mode, -of God’s intrinsic moral nature. For God is here the Source as well -as the Object of all love; hence He Himself possesses the supreme -equivalent for this our noblest emotion, and is moved to free acts of -outgoing, in the creation and preservation, the revelation to, and -the redemption of finite spirits, as so many successive, mutually -supplementary, and increasingly fuller expressions and objects of this -His nature. “God is Love”; “God so loved the world, as to give His -only-begotten Son”; “Let us love God, for God hath first loved us”; “if -any man will do the will of God, he shall know of the doctrine if it be -from God”: God’s Infinity is here, not the negation of the relatively -independent life of His creatures, but the very reason and source of -their freedom.[425] - -In the concluding chapter I hope to give a sketch of the actual -operation of the true correctives to any excessive, Plotinian or -Spinozistic, tendencies in the Mystical trend, especially when -utilizing Mathematico-Physical Science at the soul’s middle level; and -of History at the ultimate reaches of the soul’s life. - - -IV. THE DIVINE IMMANENCE; SPIRITUAL PERSONALITY. - - -1. _Panentheism._ - -As to our fourth question, the Divine Immanence and Personality, -our last quotations from St. Teresa give us, I think, our true -starting-point. For it is evident that, between affirming the simple -Divinity of the innermost centre of the soul, and declaring that the -soul ever experiences only the Grace of God, _i.e._ certain created -effects, sent by Him from the far-away seat of His own full presence, -there is room for a middle position which, whilst ever holding the -definite creatureliness of the soul, in all its reaches, puts God -Himself into the soul and the soul into God, in degrees and with -results which vary indeed indefinitely according to its good-will -and its call, yet which all involve and constitute a presence ever -profoundly real, ever operative before and beyond all the soul’s own -operations. These latter operations are, indeed, even possible only -through all this Divine anticipation, origination, preservation, -stimulation, and, at bottom,--in so far as man is enabled and required -by God to reach a certain real self-constitution,--through a mysterious -Self-Limitation of God’s own Action,--a Divine Self-Restraint. - -There can be little doubt that such a _Panentheism_ is all that -many a daring, in strictness Pantheistic, saying of the Christian, -perhaps also of the Jewish and Mohammedan, Mystics aimed at. Only the -soul’s ineradicable capacity, need and desire for its Divine Lodger -and Sustainer would constitute, in this conception, the intrinsic -characteristic of human nature; and it is rather the too close -identification, in feeling and emotional expression, of the desire -and the Desired, of the hunger and the Food, and the too exclusive -realization of the deep truth that this desire and hunger do not cause, -but are themselves preceded and caused by, their Object,--it is the -over-vivid perception of this real dynamism, rather than any _a priori_ -theory of static substances and identities--which, certainly in many -cases, has produced the appearance of Pantheism. - -And again it is certain that we have to beware of taking the apparent -irruption or ingrafting,--in the case of the operations of Grace,--of -an entirely heterogeneous Force and Reality into what seems the already -completely closed circle of our natural functions and aspirations, -as the complete and ultimate truth of the situation. However utterly -different that Force may feel to all else that we are aware of within -ourselves, however entirely unmeditated may seem its manifestations: -it is clear that we should be unable to recognize even this Its -difference, to welcome or resist It, above all to find It a response to -our deepest cravings, unless we had some natural true affinity to It, -and some dim but most real experience of It from the first. Only with -such a general religiosity and vague sense, from a certain contact, -of the Infinite, is the recognition of definite, historical Religious -Facts and Figures as true, significant, binding upon my will and -conscience, explicable at all. - - -2. _Aquinas on our direct semi-consciousness of God’s indwelling._ - -St. Thomas, along one line of doctrine, has some excellent teachings -about all this group of questions. For though he tells us that “the -names which we give to God and creatures, are predicated of God” -only “according to a certain relation of the creature to God, as its -Principle and Cause, in which latter the perfections of all things -pre-exist in an excellent manner”: yet he explicitly admits, in one -place, that we necessarily have some real, immediate experience of the -Nature of God, for that “it is impossible, with regard to anything, -to know whether it exists,”--and he has admitted that natural reason -can attain to a knowledge of God’s bare existence,--“unless we somehow -know what is its nature,” at least “with a confused knowledge”; whence -“also with regard to God, we could not know whether He exists, unless -we somehow knew, even though confusedly, what He is.”[426]--God, though -transcendent, is also truly immanent in the human soul: “God is in all -things, as the agent is present in that wherein it acts. Created Being -is as true an effect of God’s Being, as to burn is the true effect of -fire. God is above all things,--by the excellence of His nature, and -yet He is intimately present within all things, as the cause of the -Being of all.”--And man has a natural exigency of the face-to-face -Vision of God, hence of the Order of Grace, however entirely its -attainment may be beyond his natural powers: “There is in man a natural -longing to know the cause, when he sees an effect: whence if the -intellect of the rational creature could not attain to the First Cause -of things,”--here in the highest form, that of the Beatific vision of -God--“the longing of its nature would remain void and vain.”[427] - -But it is the great Mystical Saints and writers who continuously have, -in the very forefront of their consciousness and assumptions, not a -simply moral and aspirational, but an Ontological and Pre-established -relation between the soul and God; and not a simply discursive -apprehension, but a direct though dim Experience of the Infinite -and of God. And these positions really underlie even their most -complete-seeming negations, as we have already seen in the case of the -Areopagite. - - -3. _Gradual recognition of the function of subconsciousness._ - -Indeed, we can safely affirm that the last four centuries, and even -the last four decades, have more and more confirmed the reality and -indirect demonstrableness of such a presence and sense of the Infinite; -ever more or less obscurely, but none the less profoundly, operative -in the innermost normal consciousness of mankind: a presence and sense -which, though they can be starved and verbally denied, cannot be -completely suppressed; and which, though they do not, if unendorsed, -constitute even the most elementary faith, far less a developed -Historical or Mystical Religion, are simply necessary prerequisites to -all these latter stimulations and consolidations. - -(1) As we have already found, it is only since Leibniz that we -know, systematically, how great is the range of every man’s Obscure -Presentations, his dim Experience as against his Clear or distinct -Presentations, his explicit Knowledge; and how the Clear depends even -more upon the Dim, than the Dim upon the Clear. And further discoveries -and proofs in this direction are no older than 1888.[428] - -(2) Again, it is the growing experience of the difficulties and -complexities of Psychology, History, Epistemology, and of the apparent -unescapableness and yet pain of man’s mere anthropomorphisms, that -makes the persistence of his search for, and sense of, Objective Truth -and Reality, and the keenness of his suffering when he appears to -himself as imprisoned in mere subjectivity, deeply impressive. For the -more man feels, and suffers from feeling himself purely subjective, -the more is it clear that he is not merely subjective: he could never -be conscious of the fact, if he were. “Suppose that all your objects -in life were realized … would this be a great joy and happiness -to you?” John Stuart Mill asked himself; and “an irrepressible -self-consciousness distinctly answered ‘No.’”[429] Whether in bad -health just then or not, Mill was here touching the very depths of -the characteristically human sense. In all such cases only a certain -profound apprehension of Abiding Reality, the Infinite, adequately -explains the keen, operative sense of contrast and disappointment. - -(3) And further, we have before us, with a fulness and delicate -discrimination undreamed of in other ages, the immense variety, -within a certain general psychological unity, of the great and small -Historical Religions, past and present, of the world. Facing all this -mass of evidence, Prof. Troeltsch can ask, more confidently than -ever: “Are not our religious requirements, requirements of Something -that one must have somehow first experienced in order to require It? -Are they not founded upon some kind of Experience as to the Object, -Which Itself first awakens the thought of an ultimate infinite meaning -attaching to existence, and Which, in the conflict with selfishness, -sensuality and self-will, draws the nobler part of the human will, -with ever new force, to Itself?” “All deep and energetic religion is -in a certain state of tension towards Culture, for the simple reason -that it is seeking something else and something higher.”[430] And -Prof. C. P. Tiele, so massively learned in all the great religions, -concludes: “‘Religion,’ says Feuerbach, ‘proceeds from man’s wishes’ …; -according to others, it is the outcome of man’s dissatisfaction with -the external world.… But why should man torment himself with wishes -which he never sees fulfilled around him, and which the rationalistic -philosopher declares to be illusions? Why? surely, because he cannot -help it.… The Infinite, very Being as opposed to continual becoming -and perishing,--or call It what you will,--_that_ is the Principle -which gives him constant unrest, because It dwells within him.” And -against Prof. Max Müller,--who had, however, on this point, arrived at -a position very like Tiele’s own,--he impressively insists that “the -origin of religion consists,” not in a “perception of the Infinite,” -but “in the fact that Man _has_ the Infinite within him.”--I would -only contend further that the instinct of the Infinite awakens -simultaneously with our sense-perceptions and categories of thinking, -and passes, together with them and with the deeper, more volitional -experiences, through every degree and stage of obscurity and relative -clearness. “Whatever name we give it,--instinct; innate, original, -or unconscious form of thought; or form of conception,--it is the -specifically human element in man.”[431] But if all this be true, then -the Mystics are amongst the great benefactors of our race: for it is -especially this presence of the Infinite in Man, and man’s universal -subjection to an operative consciousness of it, which are the deepest -cause and the constant object of the adoring awe of all truly spiritual -Mystics, in all times and places. - - - - -CHAPTER XV - -SUMMING UP OF THE WHOLE BOOK. BACK THROUGH ASCETICISM, SOCIAL RELIGION, -AND THE SCIENTIFIC HABIT OF MIND, TO THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION. - - -I now propose to conclude, by getting, through three successively -easier matters, back to the starting-point of this whole book, -and, in doing so, to sum up and delimitate, more and more clearly, -the practical lessons learnt during its long course. These three -last matters and points of observation shall be Asceticism, -Institutionalism, and Mental Activity and Discipline, or the Scientific -Habit--all three in their relation to the Mystical Element of Religion. - - -I. ASCETICISM AND MYSTICISM. - -Now in the matter of Asceticism, we can again conveniently consider -three points. - - -1. _Ordinary Asceticism practised by Mystics._ - -There is, first, the (generally severe) Asceticism which is ever -connected with at least some one phase, an early one, of every genuine -Mystic’s history, yet which does not differ essentially from the direct -training in self-conquest to which practically all pre-Protestant, and -most of the old Protestant earnest Christians considered themselves -obliged. - -(1) Now it is deeply interesting to note how marked has been, off -and on throughout the last century and now again quite recently, -the renewal of comprehension and respect for the general principle -of Asceticism, in quarters certainly free from all preliminary bias -in favour of Medieval Christianity. Schopenhauer wrote in 1843: -“Not only the religions of the East but also genuine Christianity -shows, throughout its systems, that fundamental characteristic of -Asceticism which my philosophy elucidates.… Precisely in its doctrines -of renunciation, self-denial, complete chastity, in a word, of -general mortification of the will, lie the deepest truth, the high -value, the sublime character of Christianity. It thus belongs to the -old, true, and lofty ideal of mankind, in opposition to the false, -shallow, and ruinous optimism of Greek Paganism, Judaism and Islam.” -“Protestantism, by eliminating Asceticism and its central point, the -meritoriousness of celibacy, has, by this alone, already abandoned the -innermost kernel of Christianity.… For Christianity is the doctrine -of the deep guilt of the human race … and of the heart’s thirst after -redemption from it, a redemption which can be acquired only through the -abnegation of self,--that is, through a complete conversion of human -nature.”[432]--And the optimistically tempered American Unitarian, -the deeply versed Psychologist, Prof. William James, tells us in -1902: “In its spiritual meaning, Asceticism stands for nothing less -than for the essence of the twice-born philosophy.” “The Metaphysical -mystery, that he who feeds on death, that feeds on men, possesses life -supereminently, and meets best the secret demands of the Universe, -is the truth of which Asceticism has been the faithful champion. The -folly of the cross, so inexplicable by the intellect, has, yet, its -indestructible, vital meaning.… Naturalistic optimism is mere syllabub -and sponge-cake in comparison.”[433] - -(2) Indeed, the only thing at all special to Mysticism, in its attitude -towards this general principle and practice of Asceticism, is that -it ever practises Asceticism as a means towards, or at least as the -make-weight and safeguard of, Contemplation, which latter is as -essentially Synthetic, and, in so far, peaceful and delightful, as the -former is Analytic, polemical and painful; whereas non-Mystical souls -will practise Asceticism directly with a view to greater aloofness -from sin, and greater readiness and strength to perform the various -calls of duty. And hence, if we but grant the legitimacy of the general -principle of ordinary Asceticism, we shall find the Mystical form of -this Asceticism to be the more easily comprehensible variety of that -principle. For the Mystic’s practice, as concerns this point, is more -varied and inclusive than that of others, since he does not even tend -to make the whole of his inner life into a system of checks and of -tension. The expansive, reconciling movement operates in him most -strongly also, and, where of the right kind, this expansive movement -helps, even more than the restrictive one, to purify, humble, and -deepen his heart and soul. - - -2. _God’s Transcendence a source of suffering._ - -There is, however, a second, essentially different source and kind of -suffering in some sorts and degrees of Mysticism, and indeed in other -_attraits_ of the spiritual life, which is deeply interesting, because -based upon a profound Metaphysical apprehension. Although, at bottom, -the opposite extreme to Pantheism, it readily expresses itself, for -reasons that will presently appear, in terms that have a curiously -Pantheistic colour. - -(1) St. John of the Cross writes in 1578: “It is a principle of -philosophy, that all means must … have a certain resemblance to the -end, such as shall be sufficient for the object in view. If therefore -the understanding is to be united to God, … it must make use of -those means which can effect that union, that is, means which are -most like unto God.… But there is no essential likeness or communion -between creatures and Him, the distance between His divine nature and -their nature is infinite. No creature therefore … nothing that the -imagination may conceive or the understanding comprehend … in this life -… can be a proximate means of union with God,” for “it is all most -unlike God, and most disproportionate to Him.” “The understanding … -must be pure and empty of all sensible objects, all clear intellectual -perceptions, resting on faith: for faith is the sole proximate and -proportionate means of the soul’s union with God.”[434] - -Now it is certain, as we have already found, that the awakened human -soul ever possesses a dim but real experience of the Infinite, and -that, in proportion as it is called to the Mystical way, this sense -will be deepened into various degrees of the Prayer of Quiet and of -Union, and that here, more plainly than elsewhere, will appear the -universal necessity of the soul’s own response, by acts and the habit -of Faith, to all and every experience which otherwise remains but -so much unused material for the soul’s advance. And it is equally -certain that St. John of the Cross is one of the greatest of such -contemplatives, and that neither his intuition and actual practice, -nor even his sayings, (so long as any one saying belonging to one -trend is set off against another belonging to the other trend), -contravenes the Christian and Catholic positions.--Yet it cannot be -denied that, were we to press his “negative way” into becoming the only -one; and especially were we to take, without discount, such a virtual -repudiation, as is furnished by any insistence upon the above words, -of any essential, objective difference in value between our various -apprehensions of Him and approaches to Him: the whole system and -_rationale_ of External, Sacramental and Historical Religion, indeed of -the Incarnation, in any degree and form, would have to go, as so many -stumbling-blocks to the soul’s advance. For the whole principle of all -such Religion implies the profound importance of the Here and the Now, -the Contingent and the Finite, and of the Immanence of God, in various -degrees and ways, within them. - -Indications of this incompatibility, as little systematically realized -here as in the Areopagite, are afforded by various remarks of his, -belonging in reality to another trend. Thus, immediately before his -denial of any essential likeness or communion between any creature and -God, he says: “It is true that all creatures bear a certain relation to -God and are tokens of His being, some more, some less, according to the -greater perfection of their nature.” And of Our Lord’s sacred Humanity -he says: “What a perfect living image was Our Saviour upon earth: yet -those who had no faith, though they were constantly about Him, and saw -His wonderful works, were not benefited by His presence.”[435] But even -here the immense importance, indeed downright necessity for Faith, -of such external and historical stimuli, objects and materials,--in -the latter instance all this at its very deepest,--remains -unemphasized, through his engrossment in the necessity of Faith for the -fructification of all these things. - -In other places this Faith appears as though working so outside of all -things imageable, as to have to turn rapidly away from all picturings, -as, at best, only momentary starting-points for the advanced soul. -“Let the faithful soul take care that, whilst contemplating an -image, the senses be not absorbed in it, whether it be material or -in the imagination, and whether the devotion it excites be spiritual -or sensible. Let him … venerate the image as the Church commands -and lift up his mind at once from the material image to those whom -it represents. He who shall do this, will never be deluded.”[436] -Here, again, along the line of argument absorbing the saint in this -book, there is no fully logical ground left for the Incarnational, -Historical, Sacramental scheme of the Infinite immanent in the finite, -and of spirit stimulated in contact with matter, with everywhere the -need of the condescensions of God and of our ascensions by means of -careful attention to them. - -Sören Kierkegaard, that deep solitary Dane, with so much about him -like to Pascal the Frenchman, and Hurrell Froude the Englishman, and -who, though Lutheran in all his bringing up, was so deeply attracted -by Catholic Asceticism, has, in recent times (he died in 1855), pushed -the doctrine of the qualitative, absolute difference between God and -all that we ourselves can think, feel, will or be, to lengths beyond -even the transcendental element,--we must admit this to be the greatly -preponderant one,--in the great Spaniard’s formal teaching. And it -is especially in this non-Mystical Ascetic that we get an impressive -picture of the peculiar kind of suffering and asceticism, which results -from such a conviction to a profoundly sensitive, absorbedly religious -soul; and here too we can, I think, discover the precise excess and -one-sidedness involved in this whole tendency. Professor Höffding, -in his most interesting monograph on his friend, tells us how “for -Kierkegaard, … the will gets monopolized by religious Ethics from the -very first; there is no time for Contemplation or Mysticism.” “To tear -the will away,” Kierkegaard himself says, “from all finite aims and -conditions … requires a painful effort and this effort’s ceaseless -repetition. And if, in addition to this, the soul has, in spite of all -its striving, to be as though it simply were not, it becomes clear -that the religious life signifies a dedication to suffering and to -self-destruction. What wonder, then, that, for the Jew, death was the -price of seeing God; or that, for the Gentile, the soul’s entering -into closer relations with the Deity meant the beginning of madness?” -For “the soul’s relation to God is a relation to a Being absolutely -different from Man, who cannot confront him as his Superlative or -Ideal, and who, nevertheless, is to rule in his inmost soul. Hence a -necessary division, ever productive of new pains, is operative within -man, as long as he perseveres in this spiritual endeavour.… A finite -being, he is to live in the Infinite and Absolute: he is there like a -fish upon dry land.”[437] - -Now Prof. Höffding applies a double, most cogent criticism to this -position.--The one is religious, and has already been quoted. “A -God Who is not Ideal and Pattern is no God. Hence the contention -that the Nature of the Godhead is, of necessity, qualitatively -different from that of Man, has ever occasioned ethical and religious -misgivings.”--And the other is psychological. “Tension can indeed be -necessary for the truth and the force of life. But tension, taken -by itself, cannot furnish the true measure of life. For the general -nature of consciousness is a synthesis, a comprehensive unity: not only -contrast, but also concentration, must make itself felt, as long as the -life of consciousness endures.”[438] - -It is deeply interesting to note how Catherine, and at bottom St. John -of the Cross and the Exclusive Mystics generally, escape, through -their practice and in some of their most emphatic teachings, from -Kierkegaard’s excess, no doubt in part precisely because they _are_ -Mystics, since the exclusive Mystic’s contemplative habit is, at -bottom, a Synthetic one. Yet we should realize the deep truth which -underlies the very exaggerations of this one-sidedly Analytic and -Ascetical view. For if God is the deepest ideal, the ultimate driving -force and the true congenital element and environment of Man, such as -Man cannot but secretly wish to will deliberately, and which, at his -best, Man truly wills to hold and serve: yet God remains ever simply -incompatible with that part of each man’s condition and volition which -does not correspond to the best and deepest which that Man himself sees -or could see to be the better, _hic et nunc_; and, again, He is ever, -even as compared with any man’s potential best, infinitely more and -nobler, and, though here not in simple contradiction, yet at a degree -of perfection which enables Him, the Supreme Spirit, to penetrate, as -Immanent Sustainer or Stimulator, and to confront, as Transcendent -Ideal and End, the little human spirit, so great in precisely this its -keen sense of experienced contrast. - -Catherine exhibits well this double relation, of true contradiction, -and of contrast, both based upon a certain genuine affinity between -the human soul and God. On one side of herself she is indeed a -veritable fish out of water; but, on the other side of her, she is a -fish happily disporting itself in its very element, in the boundless -ocean of God. On the one side, snapping after air, in that seemingly -over-rarified atmosphere in which the animal man, the mere selfish -individual, cannot live; on the other side, expanding her soul’s -lungs and drinking in light, life, and love, in that same truly rich -atmosphere, which, Itself Spirit, feeds and sustains her growing -spiritual personality. And the _Dialogo_, in spite of its frequently -painful abstractness and empty unity, has, upon the whole, a profound -hold upon this great doctrine. - -Yet it is in Catherine’s own culminating intuition,--of the soul’s -free choice of Purgatory, as a joyful relief from the piercing pain of -what otherwise would last for ever,--the vividly perceived contrast -between God’s purity and her soul’s impurity, that we get, in the -closest combination, indeed mutual causation, this double sense of -Man’s nearness to and distance from, of his likeness and unlikeness to -God. For only if man is, in the deepest instincts of his soul, truly -related to God, and is capable of feeling, (indeed he ever actually, -though mostly dimly, experiences,) God’s presence and this, man’s -own, in great part but potential, affinity to Him: can suffering be -conceived to arise from the keen realization of the contrast between -God and man’s own actual condition at any one moment; and can any -expectation, indeed a swift vivid instinct, arise within man’s soul -that the painful, directly contradictory, discrepancy can and will, -gradually though never simply automatically, be removed. And though, -even eventually, the creature cannot, doubtless, ever become simply -God, yet it can attain, in an indefinitely higher degree, to that -affinity and union of will with God, which, in its highest reaches and -moments, it already now substantially possesses; and hence to that -full creaturely self-constitution and joy in which, utterly trusting, -giving itself to, and willing God, it will, through and in Him, form -an abidingly specific, unique constituent and link of His invisible -kingdom of souls, on and on. - - -3. _Discipline of fleeing and of facing the Multiple and Contingent._ - -But there is a third attitude, peculiar (because of its preponderance) -to the Mystics as such, an attitude in a manner intermediate between -that of ordinary Asceticism, and that of the Suffering just described. -The implications and effects of, and the correctives for, this third -attitude will occupy us up to the end of this book. I refer to the -careful turning-away from all Multiplicity and Contingency, from -the Visible and Successive, from all that does or can distract and -dissipate, which is so essential and prevailing a feature in all -Mysticism, which indeed, in Exclusive Mysticism, is frankly made into -the one sole movement towards, and measure of, the soul’s perfection. - -(1) It is true that to this tendency, when and in so far as it has -come so deeply to permeate the habits of a soul as to form a kind of -second nature, the name Asceticism cannot, in strictness, be any more -applied; since now the pain will lie, not in this turning away from all -that dust and friction, but, on the contrary, in any forcing of the -soul back into that turmoil. And doubtless many, perhaps most, souls -with a pronouncedly mystical _attrait_, are particularly sensitive to -all, even partial and momentary, conflict. Yet we can nevertheless -appropriately discuss the matter under the general heading of -Asceticism, since, as a rule, much practice and sacrifice go to build -up this habit; since, in every case, this Abstractive Habit shares -with Ordinary Asceticism a pronounced hostility to many influences and -forces ever actually operative within and around the undisciplined -natural man; and since, above all, the very complements and correctives -for this Abstractiveness will have to come from a further, deeper and -wider Asceticism, to be described presently. - -(2) As to Ordinary Asceticism and this Abstractiveness, the former -fights the world and the self directly, and then only in so far as they -are discovered to be positively evil or definitely to hinder positive -good; it is directly attracted by the clash and friction involved in -such fighting; and it has no special desire for even a transitory -intense unification of the soul’s life: whereas the Abstractiveness -turns away from, and rises above, the world and the phenomenal self; -their very existence, their contingency, the struggles alive within -them, and their (as it seems) inevitably disturbing effect upon the -soul,--are all felt as purely dissatisfying; and an innermost longing -for a perfect and continuous unification and overflowing harmony of its -inner life here possess the spirit. - -(3) Now we have just seen how a movement of integration, of -synthesizing all the soul’s piecemeal, inter-jostling acquisitions, -of restful healing of its wounds and rents, of sinking back, (from -the glare and glitter of clear, and then ever fragmentary perception, -and from the hurry, strain and rapidly ensuing distraction involved -in all lengthy external action), into a peaceful, dim rumination and -unification, is absolutely necessary, though in very various degrees -and forms, for all in any way complete and mature souls.--And we have, -further back, realized that a certain, obscure but profoundly powerful, -direct instinct and impression of God in the soul is doubtless at work -here, and, indeed, throughout all the deeper and nobler movements of -our wondrously various inner life. But what concerns us here, is the -question whether the _complete_ action of the soul, (if man would -grow in accordance with his ineradicable nature, environment, and -specific grace and call), does not as truly involve a corresponding -counter-movement to this intensely unitive and intuitive movement -which, with most men, and in most moments of even the minority of men, -forms but an indirectly willed condition and spontaneous background of -the soul. - -(4) We have been finding, further, that all the Contingencies, -Multiplicities and Mediations which, one and all, tend to appear to the -Mystic as so many resistances and distractions, can roughly be grouped -under two ultimate heads. These intruders are fellow-souls, or groups -of fellow-souls,--some social organism, the Family, Society, the State, -the Church, who provoke, in numberless degrees and ways, individual -affection, devotion, distraction, jealousy, as from person towards -person. Or else the intruders are Things and Mechanical Laws, and these -usually leave the Mystic indifferent or irritate or distract him; but -they can become for him great opportunities of rest, and occasions for -self-discipline. - -Yet this distinction between Persons and Things, (although vital for -the true apprehension of all deeper, above all of the deepest Reality, -and for the delicate discrimination between what are but the means and -what are the ends in a truly spiritual life), does not prevent various -gradations within, and continuous interaction between, each of these -two great groups. For in proportion as, in the Personal group, the -Individual appears as but parcel and expression of one of the social -organisms, does the impression of determinist Law, of an impersonal -Thing or blind Force, begin to mix with, and gradually to prevail -over, that of Personality. And in proportion as, in the Impersonal -group, Science comes to include all careful and methodical study, -according to the most appropriate methods, of any and every kind of -truth and reality; and as it moves away from the conceptions of purely -quantitative matter, and of the merely numerically different, entirely -interchangeable, physical happenings, (all so many mere automatic -illustrations of mechanical Law), on, through the lowly organisms of -plant-life, and the ever higher interiority and richer consciousness of -animal life, up to Man, with his ever qualitative Mind, and his ever -non-interchangeable, ever “effortful,” achievements and elaborations -of types of beauty, truth and goodness in Human History,--does Science -itself come back, in its very method and subject-matter, ever more -nearly, to the great personal starting-point, standard and ultimate -motive of all our specifically human activity and worth. - -(5) Indeed, the two great continuous facts of man’s life, first that -he thinks, feels, wills, and acts, in and with the help or hindrance -of that profoundly material Thing, his physical body, and on occasion -of, and with regard to, the materials furnished by the stimulations and -impressions of his senses; and again, that these latter awaken within -him those, in themselves, highly abstract and Thing-like categories of -his mind which penetrate and give form to these materials; are enough -to show how close is the pressure, and how continuous the effect, of -Things upon the slow upbuilding of Personality. - -(6) Fair approximations to these two kinds of Things, with their quite -irreplaceable specific functions within the economy of the human mental -life,--the intensely concrete and particular Sense-Impressions, and -the intensely abstract and general Mental Categories,--reappear within -the economy of Characteristic Religion, in its Sacraments and its -Doctrine. And conversely, there exists, _in rerum natura_, no Science -worth having which is not, ultimately, the resultant of, and which does -not require and call forth, on and on, certain special qualities, and -combinations of qualities, of the truly ethical, spiritual Personality. -Courage, patience, perseverance, candour, simplicity, self-oblivion, -continuous generosity towards others and willing correction of even -one’s own most cherished views,--these things and their like are -not the quantitative determinations of Matter, but the qualitative -characteristics of Mind. - -(7) I shall now, therefore, successively take Mysticism in its attitude -towards these two great groups of claimants upon its attention, -the Personal and the Impersonal, even though any strictly separate -discussion of elements which, in practice, ever appear together, cannot -but have some artificiality. And an apparent further complication will -be caused by our having, in each case, to contrast what Mysticism would -do, if it became Exclusive, with what it must be restricted to doing, -if it is to remain Inclusive, _i.e._ if it is to be but one element -in the constitution of that multiplicity in unity, the deep spiritual -Personality. The larger Asceticism will thus turn out to be a wider and -deeper means towards perfection than even genuine Mysticism itself, -since this Asceticism will have to include both this Mysticism and the -counter movement within the one single, disciplined and purified life -of the soul. - - -II. SOCIAL RELIGION AND MYSTICISM. - - -_Introductory: the ruinousness of Exclusive Mysticism._ - -Prof. Harnack says in his _Dogmengeschichte_: “An old fairy tale tells -of a man who lived in ignorance, dirt and wretchedness; and whom God -invited, on a certain day, to wish whatsoever he might fancy, and it -should be given him. And the man began to wish things, and ever more -things, and ever higher things, and all these things were given him. -At last he became presumptuous, and desired to become as the great God -Himself: when lo, instantly he was sitting there again, in his dirt and -misery. Now the history of Religion,--especially amongst the Greeks -and Orientals,--closely resembles this fairy tale. For they began by -wishing for themselves certain sensible goods, and then political, -aesthetic, moral and intellectual goods: and they were given them all. -And then they became Christians and desired perfect knowledge and a -super-moral life: they even wished to become, already here below, as -God Himself, in insight, beatitude and life. And behold, they fell, -not at once indeed, but with a fall that could not be arrested, down -to the lowest level, back into ignorance, dirt and barbarism.… Like -unto their near spiritual relations, the Neo-Platonists, they were at -first over-stimulated, and soon became jaded, and hence required ever -stronger stimulants. And in the end, all these exquisite aspirations -and enjoyments turned into their opposite extreme.”[439] - -However much may want discounting or supplementing here, there is, -surely, a formidable amount of truth in this picture. And, if so, is -Mysticism, at least in its Dionysian type, not deeply to blame? And -where is the safeguard against such terrible abuses? - -Now Prof. Harnack has himself shown us elsewhere that there is a sense -in which Monasticism should be considered eternal, even among and for -Protestants. “Monasticism,” he says plaintively, in his account of the -first three centuries of Protestantism, “even as it is conceivable -and necessary among Evangelical Christians, disappeared altogether. -And yet every community requires persons, who live _exclusively_ for -its purposes; hence the Church too requires volunteers who shall -renounce ‘the world’ and shall dedicate themselves entirely to the -service of their neighbour.”[440]--And again, scholars of such breadth -of knowledge and independence of judgement as Professor Tiele and -his school, insist strongly upon the necessity of Ecclesiastical -Institutions and Doctrines. The day of belief in the normality, -indeed in the possibility for mankind in general, of a would-be quite -individual, entirely spiritual, quite “pure” religion, is certainly -over and gone, presumably for good and all, amongst all competent -workers.--Nor, once more, can the general Mystical sense of the -unsatisfying character of all things finite, and of the Immanence of -the Infinite in our poor lives, be, in itself, to blame: for we have -found these experiences to mingle with, and to characterize, all the -noblest, most fully human acts and personalities.--But, if so, what -are the peculiarities in the religion of those times and races, which -helped to produce the result pictured in the _Dogmengeschichte?_ - -Now here, to get a fairly final answer, we must throw together -the question of the ordinary Christian Asceticism and that of the -Abstraction peculiar to the Mystics; and we must ask whether the -general emotive-volitional attitude towards Man and Life,--the -theory and practice as to Transcendence and Immanence, Detachment -and Attachment, which, from about 500 A.D. to, say, 1450 _A.D._, -predominantly preceded, accompanied, and both expanded and deflected -the specific ally Christian and normally human experience in Eastern -Christendom, were not (however natural, indeed inevitable, and in -part useful for those times and races), the chief of the causes -which turned so much of the good of Mysticism into downright harm. At -bottom this is once more the question as to the one-sided character of -Neo-Platonism,--its incapacity to find any descending movement of the -Divine into Human life. - - -1. _True relation of the soul to its fellows. God’s “jealousy.”_ - -Let us take first the relation of the single human soul to its -fellow-souls. - -(1) Now Kierkegaard tells us: “the Absolute is cruel, for it demands -_all_, whilst the Relative ever continues to demand _some_ attention -from us.”[441] And the Reverend George Tyrrell, in his stimulating -paper, _Poet and Mystic_, shows us that, as regards the relations -between man’s love for man and man’s love for God, there are two -conceptions and answers in reply to the question as to the precise -sense in which God is “a jealous God,” and demands to be loved alone. -In the first, easier, more popular conception, He is practically -thought of as the First of Creatures, competing with the rest for Man’s -love, and is here placed alongside of them. Hence the inference that -whatever love they win from us by reason of their inherent goodness, -is taken from Him: He is not loved perfectly, till He is loved alone. -But in the second, more difficult and rarer conception, God is placed, -not alongside of creatures but behind them, as the light which shines -through a crystal and lends it whatever lustre it may have. He is -loved here, not apart from, but through and in them. Hence if only -the affection be of the right kind as to mode and object, the more -the better. The love of Him is the “form,” the principle of order and -harmony; our natural affections are the “matter” harmonized and set in -order; it is the soul, they are the body, of that one Divine Love whose -adequate object is God in, and not apart from, His creatures.[442] Thus -we have already found that even the immensely abstractive and austere -St. John of the Cross tells us: “No one desires to be loved except -for his goodness; and when we love in this way, our love is pleasing -unto God and in great liberty; and if there be attachment in it, there -is greater attachment to God.” And this doctrine he continuously, -deliberately practises, half-a-century after his Profession, for he -writes to his penitent, Donna Juana de Pedrazas in 1589: “All that is -wanting now, is that I should forget you; but consider how that is to -be forgotten which is ever present to the soul.”[443] - -But Father Tyrrell rightly observes: “To square this view with the -general ascetic tradition of the faithful at large is exceedingly -difficult.”[444] Yet I cannot help thinking that a somewhat different -reconciliation, than the one attempted by him,[445] really meets all -the substantial requirements of the case. - -(2) I take it, then, that an all-important double law or twin fact, or -rather a single law and fact whose unity is composed of two elements, -is, to some extent, present throughout all characteristically human -life, although its full and balanced realization, even in theory -and still more in practice, is ever, necessarily, a more or less -unfulfilled ideal: viz. that not only there exist certain objects, -acts, and affections that are simply wrong, and others that are simply -right or perfect, either for all men or for some men: but that there -exist simply no acts and affections which, however right, however -obligatory, however essential to the perfection of us all or of some -of us, that do not require, on our own part, a certain alternation -of interior reserve and detachment away from, and of familiarity and -attachment to, them and their objects. This general law applies as -truly to Contemplation as it does to Marriage. - -And next, the element of detachment which has to penetrate and purify -simply all attachments,--even the attachment to detachment itself,--is -the more difficult, the less obvious, the more profoundly spiritual -and human element and movement, although only on condition that ever -some amount of the other, of the outgoing element and movement, and -of attachment, remains. For here, as everywhere, there is no good and -operative yeast except with and in flour; there can be no purification -and unity without a material and a multiplicity to purify and to unite. - -And again, given the very limited power of attention and articulation -possessed by individual man, and the importance to the human community -of having impressive embodiments and examples of this, in various -degrees and ways, universally ever all-but-forgotten, universally -difficult, universally necessary, universally ennobling renunciation: -we get the reason and justification for the setting apart of men -specially drawn and devoted to a maximum, or to the most difficult -kinds, of this renunciation. As the practically universal instinct, -or rudimentary capacity, for Art, Science, and Philanthropy finds its -full expression in artists, scientists, philanthropists, whose specific -glory and ever necessary corrective it is that they but articulate -clearly, embody massively and, as it were, precipitate what is dimly -and intermittingly present, as it were in solution, throughout the -consciousness and requirements of Mankind; and neither the inarticulate -instinct, diffused among all, would completely suffice for any one of -the majority, without the full articulation by a few, nor the full -articulation by this minority could thrive, even for this minority -itself, were it not environed by, and did it not voice, that dumb -yearning of the race at large: so, and far more, does the general -religiosity and sense of the Infinite, and even its ever-present -element and requirement of Transcendence and Detachment, seek and call -forth some typical, wholesomely provocative incorporation,--yet, here, -with an even subtler and stronger interdependence, between the general -demand and the particular supply. - -And note that, if the minority will thus represent a maximum of -“form,” with a minimum of “matter,” and the majority a maximum of -“matter,” with a minimum of “form”: yet some form as well as some -matter must be held by each; and the ideal to which, by their mutual -supplementations, antagonisms, and corrections, they will have more -and more to approximate our corporate humanity will be a maximum of -“matter,” permeated and spiritualized by a maximum of “form.” If it -is easy for the soul to let itself be invaded and choked by the wrong -kind of “matter,” or even simply by an excess of the right kind, so -that it will be unable to stamp the “matter” with spiritual “form”; the -opposite extreme also, where the spiritual forces have not left to them -a sufficiency of material to penetrate or of life-giving friction to -overcome, is ever a most real abuse. - - -2. _Ordinary Ascesis corrected by Social Christianity._ - -Now it is very certain that Ordinary Asceticism and Social Christianity -are, in their conjunction, far less open to this latter danger than is -the Mystical and Contemplative Detachment. For the former combination -possesses the priceless conception of the soul’s personality being -constituted in and through the organism of the religious society,--the -visible and invisible Church. This Society is no mere congeries of -severally self-sufficing units, each exclusively and directly dependent -upon God alone; but, as in St. Paul’s grand figure of the body, an -organism, giving their place and dignity to each several organ, each -different, each necessary, and each influencing and influenced by all -the others. We have here, as it were, a great living Cloth of Gold, -with, not only the woof going from God to Man and from Man to God, -but also the warp going from Man to Man,--the greatest to the least, -and the least back to the greatest. And thus here the primary and -full Bride of Christ never is, nor can be, any individual soul, but -only this complete organism of all faithful souls throughout time and -space; and the single soul is such a Bride only in so far as it forms -an operative constituent of this larger whole.--And hence the soul of a -Mystical habit will escape the danger of emptiness and inflation if it -keeps up some,--as much indeed as it can, without permanent distraction -or real violation of its special helps and call,--of that outgoing, -social, co-operative action and spirit, which, in the more ordinary -Christian life, has to form the all but exclusive occupation of the -soul, and which here, indeed, runs the risk of degenerating into mere -feverish, distracted “activity.” - -I take the right scheme for this complex matter to have been all but -completely outlined by Plato, in the first plan of his _Republic_, and -indeed to have been largely derived by Christian thinkers from this -source; and the excessive and one-sided conception to have been largely -determined by his later additions and changes in that great book, -especially as these have been all but exclusively enforced, and still -further exaggerated, by Plotinus and Proclus. As Erwin Rhode finely -says of this later teaching of Plato: “It was at the zenith of his -life and thinking that Plato completed his ideal picture of the State, -according to the requirements of his wisdom. Over the broad foundation -of a population discriminated according to classes, (a foundation -which, in its totality and organization, was to embody the virtue of -justice in a form visible even from afar, and which formerly had seemed -to him to fulfil the whole function of the perfect State), there now -soars, pointing up into the super-mundane ether, a highest crown and -pinnacle, to which all the lower serves but as a substructure to render -possible this life in the highest air. A small handful of citizens, -the Philosophers, form this final point of the pyramid of the State. -In this State, ordered throughout according to the ends of ethics, -these Philosophers will, it is true, take part in the Government, not -joyously, but for duty’s sake; as soon, however, as duty permits, -they will eagerly return to that super-mundane contemplation, which -is the end and true content of their life’s activity. Indeed, in -reality, the Ideal State is now built up, step by step, for the ‘one -ultimate’ purpose of preparing an abode for these Contemplatives, of -training them in their vocation, the highest extant, and of providing -a means for the insertion of Dialectic, as a special form of life and -the highest aim of human endeavour, into the general organism of the -earthly, civilized life. ‘The so-called virtues’ all here sink into the -shade before the highest force of the soul, the mystic Contemplation -of the Eternal.… To bring his own life to ripeness for its own -redemption, _that_ is now the perfect sage’s true, his immediate duty. -If, nevertheless, he has still to bethink himself of acting upon and of -moulding the world the virtues will spontaneously present themselves to -him: for he now possesses Virtue itself; it has become his essential -condition.”[446] - -It is truly impressive to find here, in its most perfect and most -influential form, that ruinously untrue doctrine of the separation of -any one set of men from the mass of their fellows, and of Contemplation -from interest in other souls, taking the place, (in the same great -mind, in the same great book), of the beautifully humble, rich, and -true view of a constant, necessary interchange of gifts and duties -between the various constituents of a highly articulated organism, a -whole which is indefinitely greater than, and is alone the full means, -end and measure of, all its several, even its noblest, parts.--Yet the -Christian, indeed every at all specifically religious, reader, will -have strongly felt that the second scheme possesses, nevertheless, at -least one point of advantage over the earlier one. For it alone brings -out clearly that element of Transcendence, that sense and thirst of the -Infinite, which we have agreed upon as the deepest characteristic of -man. And if this point be thus true and important, then another,--the -making of Contemplation into a special vocation,--can hardly be -altogether incorrect. - -But if this is our judgment, how are we to harmonize these two points -of Plato’s later scheme with the general positions of the earlier -one. Or, rather, how are we to actuate and to synthesize our complex -present-day requirements and duties, Christian and yet also Modern, -Transcendental and yet Immanental too? For if we have any delicately -vivid sense of, and sympathy with, the original, very simple, intensely -transcendental, form and emphasis of the Christian teaching, and any -substantial share in the present complex sense of obligation to various -laws and conceptions immanent in different this-world organizations and -systems: we shall readily feel how indefinitely more difficult and deep -the question has become since Plato’s, and indeed since the Schoolmen’s -time. - - -3. _Preliminary Pessimism and ultimate Optimism of Christianity._ - -Now I think it is Prof. Ernst Troeltsch who has most fully explicitated -the precise centre of this difficulty, which, in its acuteness, is a -distinctly modern one, and the direction in which alone the problem’s -true solution should be sought. - -(1) “The chief problem of Christian Ethics,” he says, “is busy,” not -with the relation between certain subjective means and dispositions, -but “with the relation between certain objective ends, which have, in -some way, to be thought together by the same mind as so many several -objects, and to be brought by it and within it to the greatest possible -unity. And the difficulty here lies in the fact, that the sublunar -among these ends are none the less moral ends, bearing the full -specific character of moral values,--that they are ends-in-themselves, -and necessary for their own sakes, even at the cost of man’s natural -happiness; and yet that they operate in the visible world, and adhere -to historical formations which proceed from man’s natural constitution, -and dominate his earthly horizon; whilst the Super-worldly End cannot -share its rule with any other end. Yet the special characteristic -of modern civilization resides precisely in such a simultaneous -insistence upon the Inner-worldly Ends, as possessing the nature of -ends-in-themselves, and upon the Religious, Super-worldly End: it is -indeed from just this combination that this civilization derives its -peculiar richness, power, and freedom, but also its painful, interior -tension and its difficult problems.” - -(2) The true solution of the difficulty surely is that “Ethical life is -not, in its beginnings, a unity but a multiplicity: man grows up amidst -a number of moral ends, whose unification is not his starting-point -but his problem. And this multiplicity can be still further defined -as the polarity of two poles, inherent in man’s nature, of which the -two chief types proceed respectively from the religious and from -the inner-worldly self-determination of the soul,--the polarity of -Religious, and that of Humane Ethics, neither of which can be dispensed -with without moral damage, yet which cannot be brought completely under -a common formula. On this polarity depends the richness, but also the -difficulty, of our life, since the sublunar ends remain, to a large -extent, conditioned by the necessities and prerequisites of their own -special subject-matters, and since only on condition of being thus -recognized as ends in themselves, can they attain to their morally -educative power.”[447] - -(3) Or, to put the same matter from the point of view of definitely -Christian experience and conviction: “The formula, for the specific -nature of Christianity, can only be a complex conception,--the special -Christian form,” articulation and correction, “of the fundamental -thoughts concerning God, World, Man and Redemption which,” with -indefinite variations of fulness and worth, “are found existing -together in all the religions. And the tension present in this -multiplicity of elements thus brought together is of an importance -equal to that of the multiplicity itself; indeed in this tension -resides the main driving-force of Religion. Christianity” in particular -“embraces a polarity within itself, and its formula must be dualistic; -it resembles, not a circle with one centre, but an ellipse with two -focuses. For Christianity is,” unchangeably, “an Ethics of Redemption, -with a conception of the world both optimistic and pessimistic, both -transcendental and immanental, and an apprehension both of a severe -antagonism and of a close interior union between the world and God. It -is, in principle, a Dualism, and yet a Dualism which is ever in process -of abolition by Faith and Action. It is a purely Religious Ethic, which -concentrates man’s soul, with abrupt exclusiveness, upon the values of -the interior life; and yet, again, it is a Humane Ethic, busy with the -moulding and transforming of nature, and through love bringing about -an eventual reconciliation with it. At one time the one, at another -time the other, of these poles is prominent: but neither of them may be -completely absent, if the Christian outlook is to be maintained.--And -yet the original germ of the whole vast growth and movement ever -remains an intensely, abruptly Transcendent Ethic, and can never simply -pass over into a purely Immanental Ethic. The Gospel ever remains, -with all possible clearness and keenness, a Promise of Redemption, -leading us, away from the world, from nature and from sin, from earthly -sorrow and earthly error, on and on to God; and which cannot allow -the last word to be spoken in this life. Great as are its incentives -to Reconciliation, it is never entirely resolvable into them. And the -importance of that classical beginning ever consists in continuously -calling back the human heart, away from all Culture and Immanence, to -that which lies above both.”[448] - -(4) We thus get at last a conception which really covers, I think, -all the chief elements of this complex matter. But the reader will -have noted that it does so by treating the whole problem as one of -Spiritual Dynamics, and not of Intellectual Statics. For the conception -holds and requires the existence and cultivation of three kinds of -action and movement in the soul. There are, first, the various centres -of human energy and duty of a primarily This-world character, each -of which possesses its own kind and degree of autonomy, laws, and -obligations. There is, next, the attempt at organizing an increasing -interaction between, and at harmonizing, (whilst never emasculating -or eliminating), these various, severally characteristic, systems of -life and production into an ever larger ultimate unity. And, lastly, -there is as strong a turning away from all this occupation with the -Contingent and Finite, to the sense and apprehension of the Infinite -and Abiding. And this dynamic system is so rich, even in the amount of -it which can claim the practice of the majority of souls, as to require -definite alternations in the occupations of such souls, ranging thus, -in more or less rhythmic succession, from earth to Heaven and from -Heaven back again to earth. - -(5) And so great and so inexhaustible is this living system, even by -mankind at large, that it has to be more or less parcelled out amongst -various groups of men, each group possessing its own predominant -_attrait_,--either to work out one of those immanental interests, say -Art, Natural Science, Politics; or to fructify one or more of these -relatively independent interests, by crossing it with one or more of -the others; or to attempt to embrace the whole of these intra-mundane -interests in one preliminary final system; or to turn away from this -whole system and its contents to the Transcendent and Infinite; or -finally to strive to combine, as far as possible, this latter Fleeing -to the Infinite with all that former Seeking of the Finite.--We shall -thus get specialists within one single domain; and more many-sided -workers who fertilize one Science by another; and philosophers of -Science or of History, or of both, who strive to reach the _rationale_ -of all knowledge of the Finite and Contingent; and Ascetics and -Contemplatives who, respectively, call forth and dwell upon the sense -and presence of the Infinite and Abiding, underlying and accompanying -all the definite apprehensions of things contingent; and finally, the -minds and wills that feel called to attempt as complete a development -and organization as possible of all these movements. - - -4. _Subdivision of spiritual labour: its necessity and its dangers._ - -And yet all the subdivision of labour we have just required can avoid -doing harm, directly or indirectly, (by leading to Materialism, -Rationalism, or Fanaticism, to one or other of the frequent but ever -mischievous “Atomisms”), only on condition that it is felt and worked -_as_ such a subdivision. In other words, every soul must retain and -cultivate some sense of, and respect for, the other chief human -activities not primarily its own. For, as a matter of fact, even the -least rich or developed individual requires and practises a certain -amount, in an inchoate form, of each and all of these energizings; and -he can, fruitfully for himself and others, exercise a maximum amount -of any one of them, only if he does not altogether and deliberately -neglect and exclude the others; and, above all, if, in imagination and -in actual practice, he habitually turns to his fellow-men, of the other -types and centres, to supplement, and to be supplemented by, them. - -It will be found, I think, that the quite undeniable abuses that have -been special to the Ascetic and Contemplative methods and states, -have all primarily sprung from that most plausible error that, if -these energizings are, in a sense, the highest in and for man, then -they can, at least in man’s ideal action and condition, dispense with -other and lower energizings and objects altogether. Yet both for man’s -practice here and even for his ideal state in the hereafter, this is -not so. There is no such thing,--either in human experience or in the -human ideal, when both are adequately analyzed and formulated,--as -discursive reasoning, without intuitive reason; or clear analysis and -sense of contrast, without dim synthesis and a deep consciousness of -similarity or continuity; or detachment of the will from evil, without -attachment of the higher feelings to things good; or the apprehension -and requirements of Multiplicity, without those of Unity; or the vivid -experience of Contingency, Mutation, and the Worthlessly Subjective, -without the, if obscure yet most powerful, instinct of the Infinite -and Abiding, of the true Objective and Valuable Subjective. Thus, for -humanity at large entirely, and for each human individual more or less, -each member of these couples requires, and is occasioned by, the other, -and _vice versa_. - -The maxims that follow from this great fact are as plain in reason, -and as immensely fruitful in practice, as they are difficult, though -ever freshly interesting, to carry out, at all consistently, even in -theory and still more in act. For the object of a wise living will now -consist in introducing an ever greater unity into the multiplicity of -our lives,--up to the point where this unity’s constituents would, -like the opposing metals in an electric battery, become too much alike -still to produce a fruitful interaction, and where the unity would, -thus and otherwise, become empty and mechanical; and an ever greater -multiplicity into the unity,--up to the point where that multiplicity -would, seriously and permanently, break up or weaken true recollection; -and in more and more expanding this whole individual organism, by its -insertion, as a constituent part, into larger groups and systems of -interests. The Family, the Nation, Human Society, the Church,--these -are the chief of the larger organizations into which the inchoate, -largely only potential, organism of the individual man is at first -simply passively born, yet which, if he would grow, (not in spite of -them, a hopeless task, but by them), he will have deliberately to -endorse and will, as though they were his own creations. - - -5. _Mystics and Spiritual Direction._ - -It is interesting to note the special characteristics attaching to the -one social relation emphasized by the medieval and modern varieties of -Western Catholic Mysticism; and the effect which a larger development -of the other chief forces and modalities of the Catholic spiritual life -necessarily has upon this relation. I am thinking of the part played -by the Director, the soul’s leader and adviser, in the lives of these -Mystics,--a part which differs, in three respects, from that of the -ordinary Confessor in the life of the more active or “mixed” type of -Catholic. - -(1) For one thing, there is here a striking variety and range, in the -ecclesiastical and social position of the persons thus providentially -given and deliberately chosen. The early German Franciscan Preacher, -Berthold of Regensburg, owes his initiation into the Interior Life to -his Franciscan Novice-Master, the Partial Mystic, David of Augsburg, -whose writings still give forth for us their steady light and genial -warmth; the French widowed noblewoman and Religious Foundress, St. -Jane Frances de Chantal, is helped on her course to high contemplation -by the Secular Priest and Bishop, St. Francis de Sales; the French -Jesuit, Jean Nicolas Grou, is initiated, after twenty-four years’ -life and training in his Order, by the Visitation Nun, Soeur Pélagie, -into that more Mystical spirituality, which constitutes the special -characteristic of his chief spiritual books; the great Spaniard, St. -Teresa herself, tells us how “a saintly nobleman … a married layman, -who had spent nearly forty years in prayer, seems to me to have been, -by the pains he took, the beginning of salvation to my soul”--“his -power was great”; and the English Anchorite, Mother Juliana of Norwich, -“a simple, unlettered creature,” seems to have found no special leader -on to her rarely deep, wide, and tender teachings, but to have been -led and stimulated, beyond and after her first general Benedictine -training, by God’s Providence alone, working through the few and quite -ordinary surroundings and influences of her Anchorage at Norwich.[449] -It would be difficult to find anything to improve in this noble liberty -of these great children of God; nor would a larger influence of the -other modalities necessarily restrict this ample range. - -(2) Again, the souls of this type seem, for the most part, to realize -more fully and continuously than those of the ordinary, simply active -and ascetical kind, that the “blind obedience” towards such leaders, so -often praised in their disciples and penitents, is, where wholesome -and strengthening, essentially a simple, tenacious adherence, during -the inevitable times of darkness and perplexity, to the encouragements -given by the guide to persevere along the course and towards the truths -which this soul itself saw clearly, often through the instrumentality -of this leader, when it was in light and capable of a peaceful, -deliberate decision. For however much the light may have been given it -through this human mediation, (and the most numerous, and generally -the most important, of our lights, have been acquired thus through -the spoken, written, or acted instrumentality of fellow-souls),--yet -the light was seen, and had (in the first instance), to be seen, by -the disciple’s own spiritual eye; and it is but to help it in keeping -faithful to this light (which, in the first and last instance, is God’s -light and its own) that the leader stands by and helps. But, given -this important condition, there remains the simple, experimental fact -that, not only can and do others often see our spiritual whereabouts -and God’s _attrait_ for us more clearly than we do ourselves, but such -unselfseeking transmission and such humbly simple reception of light -between man and man adds a moral and spiritual security and beauty to -the illumination, (all other conditions being equal and appropriate), -not to be found otherwise. It is interesting to note the courageous, -balanced, and certainly quite unprejudiced, testimony borne to these -important points, by so widely read, and yet upon the whole strongly -Protestant, a pair of scholars, as Miss Alice Gardner and her very -distinguished brother, Professor Percy Gardner.[450] - -(3) And finally, the souls of this type have, (at least for the two -purposes of the suscitation of actual insight, and for bearing witness -to this, now past, experience during the soul’s periods of gloom), -often tended,--in Western Christendom and during Medieval and still -more in Modern times,--to exalt the office and power of the Director, -in the life of the soul of the Mystical type, very markedly beyond the -functions, rights and duties of the ordinary Confessor in the spiritual -life of the ordinary Catholic. - -Indeed they and their interpreters have, in those times and places, -often insisted upon the guarantee of safety thus afforded, and upon the -necessity of such formal and systematic mediation, with an absoluteness -and vehemence impossible to conciliate with any full and balanced, -especially with any at all orthodox, reading of Church History. For -this feature is as marked in the condemned book of Molinos and of most -of the other Quietists, as it is in such thoroughly approved Partial -Mysticism as that of Père Lallemant and Père Grou: hence it alone -cannot, surely, render a soul completely safe against excesses and -delusions. And this feature was markedly in abeyance, often indeed, -for aught we know, completely wanting, at least in any frequent and -methodic form, in the numerous cases of the Egyptian and other Fathers -of the Desert: hence it cannot be strictly essential to all genuine -Contemplation in all times and places. - -(4) The dominant and quite certain fact here seems to be that, in -proportion as the Abstractive movement of the soul is taken as -self-sufficient, and a Contemplative life is attempted as something -substantially independent of any concrete, social, and devotional helps -and duties, the soul gets into a state of danger, which no amount -of predominance of the Director can really render safe; whereas, in -proportion as the soul takes care to practise, in its own special -degree and manner, the outgoing movement towards Multiplicity and -Contingency, (particular attention to particular religious facts and -particular service of particular persons), does such right, quite -ordinary-seeming, active subordination to, and incorporation within, -the great sacred organisms of the Family, Society, and the Church, -or of any wise and helpful subdivision of these, furnish material, -purgation and check for the other movement, and render superfluous any -great or universal predominance of Direction. St. Teresa is, here also, -wonderfully many-sided and balanced. Just as she comes to regret having -ever turned aside from Christ’s Sacred Humanity, so too she possesses, -indeed she never loses, the sense of the profoundly social character of -Christianity: she dies as she had lived, full of an explicit and deep -love for the Kingdom of God and the Church. - - -6. _Mysticism predominantly Individualistic._ - -Yet it is clear that the strong point of the Mystics, as such, does not -lie in the direction of the great social spirituality which finds God -in our neighbour and in the great human organizations, through and in -which, after all, man in great part becomes and is truly man. They are, -as such, Individualistic; the relation between God and the individual -soul here ever tends to appear as constituted by these two forces -alone. A fresh proof, if one were still wanting, that Mysticism is but -one of the elements of Religion,--for Religion requires both the Social -and the Individual, the Corporate and the Lonely movement and life. - -It is truly inspiring to note how emphatic is the concurrence of -all the deepest and most circumspect contemporary Psychology, -Epistemology, Ethics, and History and Philosophy of the Sciences and -of Religion, in these general conclusions, which find, within the slow -and many-sided growth and upbuilding of the spiritual personality, a -true and necessary place and function for all the great and permanent -capabilities, aspirations and energizings of the human soul. Thus no -system of religion can be complete and deeply fruitful which does not -embrace, (in every possible kind of healthy development, proportion -and combination), the several souls and the several types of souls -who, between them, will afford a maximum of clear apprehension and -precise reasoning, _and_ of dim experience and intuitive reason; of -particular attention to the Contingent (Historical Events and Persons, -and Institutional Acts and Means) _and_ of General Recollection and -Contemplation and Hungering after the Infinite; and of reproductive -Admiration and Loving Intellection, _and_ of quasi-creative, truly -productive Action upon and within Nature and other souls, attaining, by -such Action, most nearly to the supreme attribute, the Pure Energizing -of God. - -Thus Pseudo-Dionysius and St. John of the Cross will, even in their -most Negative doctrines, remain right and necessary in all stages of -the Church’s life,--on condition, however, of being taken as but one -of two great movements, of which the other, the Positive movement, -must also ever receive careful attention: since only between them is -attained that all-important oscillation of the religious pendulum, -that interaction between the soul’s meal and the soul’s yeast, that -furnishing of friction for force to overcome, and of force to overcome -the friction, that material for the soul to mould, and in moulding -which to develop itself, that alternate expiration and inspiration, -upon which the soul’s mysterious death-in-life and life-in-death so -continuously depends. - - -III. THE SCIENTIFIC HABIT AND MYSTICISM. - - -_Introductory. Difficulty yet Necessity of finding a True Place and -Function for Science in the Spiritual Life._ - -Now it is certain that such an oscillatory movement, such a -give-and-take, such a larger Asceticism, built up out of the alternate -engrossment in and abstraction from variously, yet in each case -really, attractive levels, functions and objects of human life and -experience, is still comparatively easy, as long as we restrict it -to two out of the three great groups of energizings which are ever, -at least potentially, present in the soul, and which ever inevitably -help to make or mar, to develop or to stunt, the totality of the -soul’s life, and hence also of the strictly spiritual life. The -Historical-Institutional, and the Mystical-Volitional groups and -forces, the High-Church and the Low-Church trend, the Memory- and -the Will-energies, do indeed coalesce, in times of peace, with the -Reason-energy, though, even then, with some difficulty. But in times -of war,--on occasion of any special or excessive action on the part of -this third group, the Critical-Speculative, the Broad-Church trend, -and the energizing of the Understanding,--they readily combine against -every degree of the latter. It is as though the fundamental vowels A -and U could not but combine to oust the fundamental vowel I; or as if -the primary colours Red and Blue _must_ join to crush out the primary -colour Yellow. - -Indeed, it is undoubtedly just this matter of the full and continuous -recognition of, and allocation of a special function to, this third -element within the same great spiritual organism which englobes the -other two, which is now the great central difficulty and pressing -problem of more or less every degree and kind of religious life. For -the admission of this third element appears frequently to be ruinous to -the other two; yet the other two, when kept away from it, seem to lose -their vigour and persuasive power.--And yet it is, I think, exactly -at this crucial point that the conception of the spiritual life as -essentially a Dynamism, a slow constitution of an ever fuller, deeper, -more close-knit unity in, and by means of, the soul’s ineradicable -trinity of forces, shows all its fruitfulness, if we but work down to a -sufficiently large apprehension of the capacities and requirements of -human nature, moved and aided by divine grace, and to a very precise -delimitation of the special object and function of Mysticism. - - -1. _Science and Religion: each autonomous at its own level; and, thus, -each helpful to the other._ - -Erwin Rhode has well described Plato’s attitude towards Science -and Mysticism respectively, and towards the question of their -inter-relation. “The flight from the things of this World is, for -Plato, already in itself an acquisition of those of the Beyond, and -an assimilation to the Divine. For this poor world, that solicits our -senses, the philosopher has, at bottom, nothing but negation. Incapable -as it is of furnishing a material that can be truly known, the whole -domain of the Transitory and Becoming has no intrinsic significance -for Science as understood by him. The perception of things which are -ever merely relative, and which simultaneously manifest contradictory -qualities, has its sole use in stimulating and inviting the soul to -press on to the Absolute.”[451] - -Here we should frankly admit that the soul’s hunger for the Infinite -is, as the great Athenian so deeply realized, the very mainspring of -Religion; and yet we must maintain that it is precisely this single -bound away, instead of the ever-repeated double movement of a coming -and a going, which not only helped to suppress, or at least gravely -to stunt, the growth of the sciences of external observation and -experiment, but (and this is the special point,--the demonstrable -other side of the medal,) also, in its degree, prevented religion from -attaining to its true depth, by thus cutting off, as far as Plato’s -conviction prevailed, the very material, stimulation, and in part the -instruments, for the soul’s outgoing, spiritualizing work, together -with this work’s profound reflex effect upon the worker, as a unique -occasion for the growth and self-detachment of the soul. - -Now the necessity for such a first stage and movement, which, as far -as possible both immanental and phenomenalist, shall be applied and -restricted to the special methods, direct objects, and precise range -of each particular Science, and the importance of the safeguarding of -this scientific liberty, are now clearly perceived, by the leading men -of Religion, Philosophy, Psychology and Physics, in connection with -the maintenance and acquisition of sincere and fruitful Science.--It -is also increasingly seen that, even short of Religion, a second, -an interpretative, an at least Philosophical stage and movement is -necessary for the full explicitation of Science’s own assumptions and -affinities. And the keeping of these two movements clearly distinct or -even strongly contrasted, is felt, by some far-sighted Theologians, -to be a help towards securing, not only a candid attitude of Science -towards its own subject matters, but also a right independence of -Philosophy and Theology towards the other Sciences. Thus Cardinal -Newman has brought out, with startling force, the necessarily -non-moral, non-religious character of Physico-Mathematical Science, -taken simply within its direct subject-matter and method. “Physical -science never travels beyond the examination of cause and effect. -Its object is to resolve the complexity of phenomena into simple -elements and principles; but when it has reached those first elements, -principles and laws, its mission is at an end; it keeps within that -material system with which it began, and never ventures beyond the -‘flammantia moenia mundi.’ The physicist as such will never ask himself -by what influence, external to the universe, the universe is sustained; -simply because he is a physicist. If, indeed, he be a religious man, -he will, of course, have a very different view of the subject; … and -this, not because physical science says anything different, but simply -because it says nothing at all on the subject, nor can do by the very -undertaking with which it set out.” Or, as he elsewhere sympathetically -sums up Bacon’s method of proceeding: “The inquiry into physical causes -passes over for the moment the existence of God. In other words, -physical science is, in a certain sense, atheistic, for the very reason -that it is not theology.”[452] - - -2. _Science builds up a preliminary world that has to be corrected by -Philosophy and Religion, at and for their deeper levels._ - -The additional experience and analysis of the last half-century -apparently forces us, however, to maintain not only that -Physico-Mathematical Science, and all knowledge brought strictly to -the type of that Science, does not itself pronounce on the Ultimate -Questions; but that this Science, as such, actually presents us with a -picture of reality which, at the deeper level even of Epistemology and -of the more ultimate Psychology, and still more at that of Religion, -requires to be taken as more or less artificial, and as demanding, not -simply completion, but, except for its own special purposes, correction -as well. Thus we have seen how M. Bergson finds Clock-Time to be an -artificial, compound concept, which seriously travesties Duration, the -reality actually experienced by us; and Space appears as in even a -worse predicament. M. Emil Boutroux in France, Dottore Igino Petrone -in Italy, Profs. Eucken and Troeltsch in Germany, Profs. James Ward -and Pringle Pattison in Great Britain, and Profs. William James, Hugo -Münsterberg and Josiah Royce in America are, in spite of differences -on other points, united in insistence upon, or have even worked out -in much detail, such a distinction between the first stage and level -of Determinist, Atomistic, Inorganic Nature and our concepts of it, -and the second stage and level of Libertarian, Synthetic, and Organic -Spiritual Reality, and our experience of it. And the penetrating -labours of Profs. Windelband, Rickert, and others, towards building up -a veritable _Organon_ of the Historical Sciences, are bringing into -the clearest relief these two several degrees of Reality and types -of Knowledge, the Historical being the indefinitely deeper and more -adequate, and the one which ultimately englobes the other.[453] - -A profoundly significant current in modern philosophy will thus be -brought, in part at least, to articulate expression and application. -This current is well described by Prof. Volkelt. “German philosophy -since Kant reveals, in manifold forms and under various disguises, the -attempt to recognize, in Epistemology, Metaphysics, and Ethics, such -kinds of Certainty, such domains of Being, such human Volitions and -Values, as lie beyond reason, constitute a something that it cannot -grasp, and are rooted in some other kind of foundation. In variously -struggling, indeed stammering utterances, expression is given to the -assurance that not everything in the world is resolvable into Logic -and Thought, but that mighty resisting remainders are extant, which -perhaps even constitute the most important thing in the world.… Such a -longing after such a Reality can be traced in Hamann, Jacobi, Herder, -in Novalis, Friedrich Schlegel, the youthful Schleiermacher, and Jean -Paul. Indeed, even in Hegel, the adorer of Reason, the movement of -Negation, which is the very soul of his philosophy, is, at bottom, -nothing but the Irrational,” the Super-Rational, “element violently -pressed into the form of Reason; and again the single Thing, the This, -the Here and the Now, are felt by him as … a something beyond Reason. -And has not the Irrational found expression in Kant, in his doctrines -of the unconditional Liberty of the Will and of Radical Evil? In the -later Schelling and his spiritual relatives the Irrational has found -far more explicit recognition; whilst Schopenhauer brings the point -to its fullest expression. Yet even Nietzsche still possesses such an -element, in his doctrine of the ‘Over-Man.’”[454] And in England we -find this same element, in various degrees and in two chief divergent -forms, in the Cambridge Platonists, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and Thomas -Hill Green on the one hand; and in Bishop Butler and Cardinal Newman on -the other hand. - -We can thus point to much clear recognition, or at least to a -considerable influence, of the profound truth that Science and Wisdom -can each prosper and help and supplement the other, only if each -possesses a certain real autonomy, a power fully to become and to -remain itself, and, in various degrees and ways, to stimulate, check -and thwart the other. And this truth ever presupposes, what human -experience, in the long run, proves to be a fact,--that the different -kinds, spheres, and levels of man’s apprehension, and of the total -reality thus apprehended by him, are already immanently planned each -for the other, within a great, largely dormant system of the world. -Thus Man can and should call this congenital inter-relatedness into -ever more vigorous and more fruitful play; whereas, if it were not -already present deep within the very nature of things, no amount of -human effort or ingenuity could ever evoke or insert it. Prof. Volkelt -has, as we have seen, illustrated this great fact very strikingly, -with regard to the relation extant between the apparently sheer -contingencies of human History and the requirements of Philosophy, of -normative thought and ideal truth. Yet a similar inter-connection can -be traced elsewhere, between any other two or more levels and spheres -of wholesome and permanent human apprehension and action, in their -relation to various degrees and kinds of reality, as this environs man -or inheres in him. - - -3. _Necessity of the “Thing-element” in Religion._ - -But let us note that the recognition, of an at all emphatic, systematic -kind, of such inter-relatedness is, so far, almost limited to the -moods and persons preoccupied with the right claims of Science or of -Philosophy upon each other or upon the remainder of Life; and is, as -yet, all but wanting, when Life is approached from the side of the -specifically Religious requirements and of the Spiritual consolidation -of man’s soul. Yet here especially, at by far the most important point -of the whole matter, the unique place and significance of Science can -now be very clearly grasped. - -Indeed it is deeply interesting to note how largely the fundamental -characteristics of Catholicism really meet, or rather how they strictly -require, some such vivid conception and vigorous use of the Determinist -Thing and of its level for the full constitution of our true depth, -our Spiritual Personality itself. If we take, _e.g._, the criticisms -addressed, by so earnest and acute a mind as the intensely Protestant -Emile Sulze, to the whole Thing-Element and -Concept, as these are at -work in the Catholic practice and position, we shall find his sense of -the difference between Thing and Spirit to be as enviably keen, and his -idea of the end and ultimate measure of Religion to be as sound and -deep, as his conception of the means towards developing Religion and -the Spirit is curiously inadequate. - -(1) “Personality,” says Sulze, “is, for Religion and Morality, the -supreme Good, of which the source is in God, and the end, the fruit, -and the manifestation is in Man.”[455] This I take to be profoundly -true, especially if we insist upon Perfect Personality being Supreme -and Perfect Spirit; and, again, upon our imperfect personality -and spirit as possessed of certain profound affinities to, and as -penetrable and actually moved by, that Perfect Spirit. - -(2) “The value of Personality nowhere finds a full recognition in -Catholicism; Catholicism indeed is Pantheism.” Now this harsh judgment -is based upon two sets of allegations, which, though treated by Sulze -as of the same nature, are, I would submit, essentially different, and -this because of their definitely different places and functions in the -Catholic system. - -“The Impersonal Godhead, the bond which unites the three Persons, -stands above the Persons. Hence those who took religion seriously had -to lose themselves, pantheistically, in the abyss of the Divinity. -And in Christ the Person was even looked upon as the product of -two Natures, the Divine and the Human, hence of two Impersonal -Forces.”[456] Here two peculiarities in the early Conciliar Definitions -are emphasized, which were doubtless as helpful, indeed necessary, -for the apprehension of the great abiding truths thus conveyed to the -Graeco-Roman mind, as they are now in need of reinterpretation in the -light of our greater sensitiveness to the difference, in character and -in value, which obtains between the concept of Spirit and Personality -and that of Substances and Things. - -But Sulze continues, without any change in the kind or degree of his -criticism: “Impersonal miraculous means, created by the Hierarchy, are -put by it in the place of the sanctifying mutual intercourse of the -children of God.” “Christianity, torn away from the religious and moral -life, became thus a special, technical apparatus, without any religious -or spiritual worth. Ecclesiastical Christianity has become a Pantheism, -Materialism, indeed Atheism.”[457] We have so continuously ourselves -insisted upon the profound danger, and frequently operative abuse, of -any and all complete apartness between any one means, function, or -_attrait_ of the spiritual life and the others, that we can, without -any unfairness, restrict ourselves here to the attack upon the general -acceptation of Impersonal means as helps towards the constitution of -Personality. Now Sulze’s principle here,--that only directly personal -means can help to achieve the end of Personality,--is most undoubtedly -false, unless Mathematico-Physical Science is also to be ruled out -of life, as necessarily destructive of, or at least as necessarily -non-conductive to, Personality. - -(3) Indeed Sulze himself tells us, most truly, that, “for Religion -also, Science is a bath of purification”; and that “Doctrine and the -Sacraments are aids, in the hands of Christ and of the Community, -towards representing the riches of their interior life and offering -these to believing hearts.”[458] This latter pronouncement is, however, -still clearly insufficient. For if there is a double truth which, -at the end of well-nigh five centuries, ought to have burnt itself -indelibly into the mind and conscience of us all, it is, surely, -the following. On the one hand, Man, unless he develops a vigorous -alternating counter-movement, ever grows like to the instruments of -his labour and self-development, and hence, whilst busy with Things, -(whether these be Natural Happenings and their Sciences, or Religious -Institutions and Doctrines), he inclines to become, quite unawares, -limited and assimilated to them,--himself thus a Thing among Things, -instead of, through such various Things, winning an ever fuller -apprehension of and growth in Spiritual Personality. Yet, on the -other hand, without such a movement of close contact with the Thing, -(both the intensely concrete, the Here and Now Contingency, and the -profoundly Abstract, the stringent Universal Law) and without the -pleasure and pain derived from the accompanying sense of contraction -and of expansion, of contrast, conflict, supplementation and -renovation,--there is no fullest discipline or most solid growth of the -true spiritual Personality. - -(4) Thus Science, as Sulze himself clearly sees, not merely aids us -to represent and to communicate our personality acquired elsewhere, -but the shock, friction, contrast, the slow, continuous discipline, -far more, beyond doubt, than any positive content furnished by such -science, can and should constitute an essential part of the soul’s -spiritual fertilization. And similarly, if we move on into the directly -religious life, the Sacramental contacts and Doctrinal systems (the -former so intensely concrete, the latter often so abstract,) are -not simply means towards representing and transmitting spirituality -acquired elsewhere: but they are amongst the means, and, in some form -and degree, the necessary, indeed actually universal means, towards -the awakening and developing and fulfilling of this our spiritual -personality. - - -4. _Three possible relations between Thing and Thought, Determinism and -Spirit._ - -It remains no doubt profoundly true that, with the awakening of the -Mystical sense, will come a more or less acute consciousness of an at -least superficial and preliminary, difference between this sense, with -its specific habits and informations, and those means and forms, in -part so contingent and external, in part so intensely abstract and yet -so precise. But it is equally certain that such a soul, and at such a -stage, even as it continues to require, in some respects more than -ever, for its general balanced development, some of the irreplaceable -discipline and manly, bracing humiliation of the close external -observation and severe abstract generalization of Science: so also -does it continue to require, for the deepening of the spirit and for -the growth of creatureliness, the contact with religious Things,--the -profoundly concrete Sacraments and the intensely abstract Doctrines of -the religious community. - -(1) In one of Trendelenburg’s most penetrating essays, he shows us -how, between blind Force and conscious Thought,--if we presuppose -any tendency towards unity to exist between them,--there can be but -three possible relations. “Either Force stands before Thought, so that -Thought is not the primitive reality, but the result and accident of -blind Force; or Thought stands before Force, so that blind Force is not -itself the primitive reality, but the effluence of Thought; or finally, -Thought and Force are, at bottom, only one and the same thing, and -differ only in our mind’s conception of them.” And only one of these -three positions can, by any possibility, be the true one: hence their -internecine conflict.[459] - -(2) Now Religion, in its normal, central stream, stands most -undoubtedly for Thought before Force, the second, the Theistic view. -And yet it would be profoundly impoverishing for our outlook and -practice, and would but prepare a dangerous reaction in ourselves or -others, were we ever to ignore the immense influence, in the history, -not only of philosophical speculation, but even of religious feeling -and aspiration, not indeed of the first, the Materialist, view, (which -owes all its strength to non-religious causes or to a rebound against -religious excesses), but of the third, the Pantheistic, Monistic, view, -whose classical exponent Spinoza will probably remain unto all time. - -(3) If we examine into what constitutes the religious plausibility and -power of this view, we shall find, I think, that it proceeds, above -all, from the fact that, only too often, the second, the Theistic view -and practice, leaves almost or quite out of sight the purification -and slow constitution of the Individual into a Person, by means of -the Thing-element, the apparently blind Determinism of Natural Law -and Natural Happenings. Yet nothing can be more certain than that we -must admit and place this undeniable, increasingly obtrusive, element -and power _somewhere_ in our lives: if we will not own it as a means, -it will grip us as our end. The unpurified, all but merely natural, -animal, lustful and selfish individual man, is far too like to the -brutes and plants, indeed even to the inorganic substances that so -palpably surround him, for it not to be a fantastic thought to such -thinkers as Spinoza, (and indeed it would be an excessive effort to -himself,) to believe that he is likely, taken simply in this condition, -to outlast, and is capable of dominating, the huge framework of the -visible world, into which his whole bodily and psychical mechanism -is placed, and to which it is bound by a thousand ties and closest -similarities: his little selfish thinkings cannot but seem mere bubbles -on a boundless expanse of mere matter; all creation cannot, surely, -originate in, depend from, and move up to, a Mind and Spirit in any way -like unto this trivial ingenuity. - -(4) It is true, of course, that Spinoza ended,--as far as the logic -of his system went,--by “purifying” away not only this animal -Individualism, but Spiritual Personality as well, and this because he -takes Mathematico-Physical concepts to be as directly applicable and as -adequate to Ultimate Reality as are the Ethico-Spiritual categories. -We have then to admit that even so rich and rare, so deeply religious -a spirit as Spinoza could insist upon purification by the “preliminary -Pantheism,” and yet could remain, in theory, the eager exponent of -an ultimate Pantheism. Like the Greeks, he not only passes through -a middle distance, a range of experience which appears dominated -by austere Fate and blind Fortune, but finds Fate even in ultimate -Reality. Whilst, however, the Greeks often thought of Fate as superior -even to the Gods, Spinoza finds Ultimate Reality to be neither Nature -nor Spirit, but simply Being in General, with a Law which is neither -Natural nor Spiritual Law, but Law in general. This General Being and -General Law then bifurcate, with the most rigorous determinism and -complete impartiality, step by step, into parallel and ever co-present -manifestations of Nature and of Spirit, and of their respective laws, -which, though different, are also each strictly determined within their -own series.[460] - -(5) But Spinoza’s error here undoubtedly lies in his _de facto_ -violent bending (in spite of this theoretical Parallelism) of all -Knowledge, Reality, and Life, under the sole Mathematico-Physical -categories and method; and in the insistence upon attaining to ultimate -Truth by one single bound and with complete adequacy and clearness. -And the greatness here consists in the keen and massive sense of three -profound truths. He never forgets that Mathematico-Physical Science -is rigidly determinist, and that it stands for a certain important -truth and penetrates to a certain depth of reality. He never ceases -to feel how impure, selfish, petty is the natural man, and how pure, -disinterested, noble, can and should be the spiritual personality. And -he never lets go the sense that, somehow, that science must be able to -help towards this purification. - -(6) Now these three truths must be preserved, whilst the -Mathematico-Physical one-sidedness and the “one-step” error must -be carefully eliminated. And indeed it is plain that only by such -elimination can those truths operate within a fully congenial -system. For only thus, with a dissimilarity between the Ultimate, -Libertarian, Spiritual Reality, and the Intermediate, Determinist, -Physico-Mathematical Range, can we explain and maintain the pain, not -only of the selfish but also of the true self, in face the Mere Thing; -and only thus is all such pain and trouble worth having, since only -thus it leads to the fuller development and the solid constitution of -an abiding, interior, mental and volitional Personality. - - -5. _Purification of the Personality by the impersonal._ - -Prof. H. J. Holtzmann has got an eloquent page concerning the kind of -Dualism which is more than ever desirable for souls, if they would -achieve a full and virile personality in this our day. “It would appear -to be the wiser course for us to recognize the incompatibility between -merely natural existence and truly personal life, just as it is, in -its whole acute non-reconciliation; to insert this conflict into our -complete outlook on to Life in its full breadth and depth, and to find -the harmonization in God the Infinite, in whom alone such parallels can -meet, and not deliberately to blind our right eye or our left, in order -to force that outlook into one single aspect,--a degree of unification -which, when achieved in this violent manner, would mean for us, at the -same time, a point of absolute inertia, of eternal stagnation.” And -he then shows how it is precisely the interaction within our minds, -feelings, and volitions, of, on the one hand, the boundless world -of nature, with its majestic impersonality, and on the other hand, -the inexhaustible, indefinitely deeper realm of personal life, as it -appears within the stream of human history, which is best adapted -to give us some fuller glimpses of the greatness of God and of the -specific character of religion.[461] - -The religious imagination, mind, heart, and will,--that is to say, -the complete, fully normal human being at his deepest,--has thus been -more and more forced, by an increasingly articulated experience of -the forces and requirements of actual life, to hold and to practise, -with ever-renewed attempts at their most perfect inter-stimulation and -mutual supplementation, a profoundly costing, yet immensely fruitful, -trinity in unity of convictions on this point. - -In every time, place, and race, man will continue to be or to become -religious, in proportion to his efficacious faith in, and love of, -the overflowing reality and worth of the great direct objects of -religion,--God and the soul, and their inter-relation in and through -the Kingdom of God, the Church, and its Divine-Human Head,--the whole -constituting God’s condescension towards and immanence in man, and -man’s response and orientation towards the transcendent God. - -And again, in every age, place, and race, man will be or will become -deeply religious, in proportion to the keenness with which he realizes -the immense need of spiritual growth and purification for his, at best, -but inchoate personality. - -But,--and this third point we must admit, in the precise extension and -application given to it here, to be characteristically modern,--man -will, (if he belongs to our time and to our Western races, and is -determined fully to utilize our special circumstances, lights and -trials, as so many means towards his own spiritualization), have -carefully to keep in living touch with that secondary and preliminary -reality, the Thing-world, the Impersonal Element, Physical Science and -Determinist Law. He will have to pass and repass beneath these Caudine -forks; to plunge and to replunge into and through this fiery torrent; -and, almost a merely animal individual at the beginning and on this -side of such docile bendings and such courageous plungings, he will, -(if he combines them with, and effects them through, those two other, -abiding and ultimate, directly religious convictions), straighten -himself up again to greater heights, and will come forth from the -torrent each time a somewhat purer and more developed spiritual person -than he was before such contraction and purgation. - - -6. _This position new for Science, not for Religion._ - -Yet even this third point has, if we will but look to its substantial -significance and religious function, been equivalently held and -practised ever since the Twice-Born life, the deeper religion, has been -lived at all. - -(1) The Ascetic’s self-thwarting, and the Mystic’s self-oblivion and -seeking after Pure Love, what are they but the expressions of the very -same necessities and motives which we would wish to see fully operative -here? For we are not, of course, here thinking of anything simply -intellectual, and fit only for the educated few. Any poor laundry-girl, -who carefully studies and carries out the laws of successful washing, -who moves, in alternation, away from this concentration on the Thing, -to recollection and increasingly affective prayer and rudimentary -contemplation, and who seeks the fuller growth of her spirit and of -its union with God, in this coming and going, to and from the Visible -and Contingent, to and from the Spiritual and Infinite, and in what -these several levels have of contrast and of conflict; or any lowly -farm-labourer or blacksmith or miner, who would proceed similarly with -his external determinist mechanical work, and with his deeply internal -requirements and spiritual growth and consolidation: would all be -carrying out precisely what is here intended. - -(2) As a matter of fact, the source of such novelty, as may be -found here, is not on the side of religion, but on that of science. -For the conception of Nature of the ancient Greek Physicists, and -indeed that of Aristotle, required to be profoundly de-humanized, -de-sentimentalized: a rigorous mathematical Determinism and soulless -Mechanism became the right and necessary ideal of Physical Science. -But, long before the elaboration of this concept of the ruthless Thing, -and of its blind Force, Our Lord had, by His Life and Teaching, brought -to man, with abidingly unforgettable, divine depth and vividness, the -sense of Spirit and Personality, with its liberty and interiority, its -far-looking wisdom and its regenerating, creative power of love. And -for some thirteen centuries after this supreme spiritual revelation -and discovery, that old anthropomorphic and anthropocentric conception -of the Physical Universe continued, well-nigh unchanged, even among -the earlier and middle schoolmen, and was readily harmonized with -that Spiritual world. Yet they were harmonized, upon the whole, by a -juxtaposition which, in proportion as the conception of Nature became -Determinist and Mechanical, has turned out more and more untenable; -and which, like all simple juxtapositions, could not, as such, have -any spiritually educative force. But Spiritual Reality has now,--for -those who have become thoroughly awake to the great changes operated, -for good and all, in man’s conception of the Physical Universe during -now three centuries,--to be found under, behind, across these Physical -Phenomena and Laws, which both check and beckon on the mind and soul of -man, in quest of their ultimate mainstay and motivation. - -(3) And let us note how much some such discipline and asceticism is -required by the whole Christian temper and tradition, and the weakening -of some older forms of it. - -During the first three generations Christians were profoundly sobered -by the keen expectation of Our Lord’s proximate Second Coming, and -of the end of the entire earthly order of things, to which all their -natural affections spontaneously clung; and again and again, up to -well-nigh the Crusading Age, this poignant and yet exultant expectation -seized upon the hearts of Christians. And then, especially from St. -Augustine’s teaching onwards, an all-pervading, frequently very severe, -conviction as to the profound effects of Original Sin, a pessimistic -turning away from the future of this sublunar world, as leading up -to the great Apostacy, and a concentration upon Man’s prehistoric -beginnings, as incomparably eclipsing all that mankind would ever -achieve here below, came and largely took the place, as the sobering, -detaching element in Christianity, of the vivid expectation of the -Parousia which had characterized the earlier Christian times. - -Clearly, the Parousia and the Original Sin conception have ceased to -exercise their old, poignantly detaching power upon us. Yet we much -require some such special channel and instrument for the preservation -and acquisition of the absolutely essential temper of Detachment -and Other-Worldiness. I think that this instrument and channel of -purification and detachment--if we have that thirst for the More and -the Other than all things visible can give to our souls, (a thirst -which the religious sense alone can supply and without which we are -religiously but half-awake)--is offered to us now by Science, in the -sense and for the reasons already described. - - -7. _Three kinds of occupation with Science._ - -Let the reader note that thus, and, I submit, thus only, we can and -do enlist the religious passion itself on the side of disinterested, -rightly autonomous science. For thus the harmony between the different -aspects and levels of life is not, (except for our general faith in -its already present latent reality, and in its capacity for ultimate -full realization and manifestation), the static starting-point or -automatically persisting fact in man’s life; but it is, on the -contrary, his ever difficult, never completely realized goal,--a goal -which can be reached only by an even greater transformation within the -worker than within the materials worked upon by him,--a transformation -in great part effected by the enlargement and purification, incidental -to the inclusion of that large range of Determinist Thing-laws and -experiences within the Spirit’s Libertarian, Personal life. - -It is plain that there are three kinds and degrees of occupation with -Things and Science, and with their special level of truth and reality; -and that in proportion as their practice within, and in aid of, the -spiritual life is difficult, in the same proportion, (given the soul’s -adequacy to this particular amount of differentiation and pressure)--is -this practice purifying. And though but few souls will be called to -any appreciable amount of activity within the third degree, all souls -can be proved, I think, to require a considerable amount of the first -two kinds, whilst mankind at large most undoubtedly demands careful, -thorough work of all three sorts. - -The first kind is that of the man with a hobby. His directly religious -acts and his toilsome bread-winning will thus get relieved and -alternated by, say, a little Botany or a little Numismatics, or by any -other “safe” science, taken in a “safe” dose, in an easy, _dilettante_ -fashion, for purposes of such recreation. This kind is already in -fairly general operation, and is clearly useful in its degree and way, -but it has, of course, no purificatory force at all. - -The second kind is that of the man whose profession is some kind -of science which has, by now, achieved a more or less secure place -alongside of, or even within, religious doctrines and feelings,--such -as Astronomy or Greek Archaeology. Here the purification will be in -proportion to the loyal thoroughness with which he fully maintains, -indeed develops, the special characteristics and autonomy both of -these Sciences, as the foreground, part-material and stimulation, and -of Religion, as the groundwork, background and ultimate interpreter -and moulder of his complete and organized life; and with which he -makes each contribute to the development of the other and of the -entire personality, its apprehensions and its work. This second kind -is still comparatively rare, doubtless, in great part, because of the -considerable cost and the lifelong practice and training involved in -what readily looks like a deliberate complicating and endangering of -things, otherwise, each severally, simple and safe. - -And the third kind is that of him whose systematic mental activity -is devoted to some science or research, which is still in process of -winning full and peaceful recognition by official Theology,--say, -Biological Evolution or Biblical Criticism. Here the purification will, -for a soul capable of such a strain, be at its fullest, provided such a -soul is deeply moved by, and keeps devotedly faithful to, the love of -God and of man, of humble labour and of self-renouncing purification, -and, within this great ideal and determination, maintains and -ameliorates with care the methods, categories and tests special both to -these sciences and investigations, and to their ultimate interpretation -and utilization in the philosophy and life of religion. For here there -will, as yet, be no possibility of so shunting the scientific activity -on to one side, or of limiting it to a carefully pegged-out region, -as to let Religion and Science energize as forces of the same kind -and same level, the same clearness and same finality; but the Science -will here have to be passed through, as the surface-level, on the way -to Religion as underlying all. What would otherwise readily tend to -become, as it were, a mental Geography, would thus here give way to -what might be pictured as a spiritual Geology. - - -8. _Historical Science, Religion’s present, but not ultimate, problem._ - -The reader will have noted that, for each of these three stages, I have -taken an Historico-Cultural as well as a Mathematico-Physical Science, -though I am well aware of the profound difference between them, both as -to their prerequisites and method, and their aim and depth. And, again, -I know well that, for the present, the chief intellectual difficulty -of Religion, or at least the main conflict or friction between the -Sciences and Theology, seems to proceed, not from Physical Science but -from Historical Criticism, especially as applied to the New Testament, -so that, on this ground also, I ought, apparently, to keep these two -types of Science separate.--Yet it is clear, I think, that, however -distinct, indeed different, should be the methods of these two sorts of -Science, they are in so far alike, if taken as a means of purification -for the soul bent upon its own deepening, that both require a slow, -orderly, disinterested procedure, capable of fruitfulness only by -the recurring sacrifice of endless petty self-seekings and obstinate -fancies, and this in face of that natural eagerness and absoluteness -of mind which strong religious emotions will, unless they too be -disciplined and purified, only tend to increase and stereotype. - -The matters brought up by Historical Criticism for the study and -readjustment of Theology, and for utilization by Religion, are indeed -numerous and in part difficult. Yet the still more general and -fundamental alternatives lie not here, but with the questions as to the -nature and range of Science taken in its narrower sense,--as concerned -with Quantity, Mechanism, and Determinism alone. - -If Science of this Thing-type be all that, in any manner or degree, we -can apprehend in conformity with reality or can live by fruitfully: -then History and Religion of every kind must be capable of a strict -assimilation to it, or they must go. But if such Science constitute -only one kind, and, though the clearest and most easily transferable, -yet the least deep, and the least adequate to the ultimate and -spiritual reality, among the chief levels of apprehension and of life -which can be truly experienced and fruitfully lived by man; and if the -Historical and Spiritual level can be shown to find room for, indeed to -require, the Natural and Mechanical level, whilst this latter, taken -as ultimate, cannot accommodate, but is forced to crush or to deny, -the former: then a refusal to accept more than can be expressed and -analyzed by such Physico-Mathematical Science would be an uprooting and -a discrowning of the fuller life, and would ignore the complete human -personality, from one of whose wants the entire impulse to such Science -took its rise. - -As a matter of fact, we find the following three alternatives. - -Level all down to Mathematico-Physical Science, and you deny the -specific constituents of Spirituality, and you render impossible the -growth of the Person out of, and at the expense of, the Individual. -Proclaim the Person and its Religion, as though they were static -substances adequately present from the first, and ignore, evade or -thwart that Thing-level and method as far as ever you can, and you -will, in so far, keep back the all but simply animal Individual from -attaining to his full spiritual Personality. But let grace wake up, -in such an Individual, the sense of the specific characteristics of -Spirituality and the thirst to become a full and ever fuller Person, -and this in contact and conflict with, as well as in recollective -abstraction from, the apparently chance contingencies of History and -Criticism, and the seemingly fatalistic mechanisms of Physics and -Mathematics: and you will be able, by humility, generosity, and an -ever-renewed alternation of such outgoing, dispersive efforts and of -such incoming recollection and affective prayer, gradually to push out -and to fill in the outlines of your better nature, and to reorganize it -all according to the Spirit and to Grace, becoming thus a deep man, a -true personality. - -Once again: take the intermediate, the Thing-level as final, and you -yourself sink down more and more into a casual Thing, a soulless Law; -Materialism, or, at best, some kind of Pantheism, must become your -practice and your creed.--Take the anterior, the Individual-level as -final, and you will remain something all but stationary, and if not -merely a Thing yet not fully a Person; and if brought face to face -with many an Agnostic or Pantheist of the nobler sort, who is in -process of purification from such childish self-centredness by means -of the persistently frank and vivid apprehension of the Mechanical, -Determinist, Thing-and-Fate level of experience and degree of truth, -you will, even if you have acquired certain fragmentary convictions and -practices of religion, appear strangely less, instead of more, than -your adversary, to any one capable of equitably comparing that Agnostic -and yourself--you who, if Faith be right, ought surely to be not less -but more of a personality than that non-believing soul. - -But take the last, the Spiritual, Personal level as alone ultimate, -and yet as necessarily requiring, to be truly reached and maintained, -that the little, selfish, predominantly animal-minded, human being -should ever pass and repass from this, his Individualistic plane -and attitude, through the Thing-and-Fate region, out and on to the -“shining table-land, whereof our God Himself is sun and moon”: and -you will, in time, gain a depth and an expansion, a persuasive force, -an harmoniousness and intelligibleness with which, everything else -being equal, the Pantheistic or Agnostic self-renunciation cannot -truly compare. For, in these circumstances, the latter type will, at -best, but prophesy and prepare the consummation actually reached by -the integrational, dynamic religiousness, the Individual transformed -more and more into Spirit and Person, by the help of the Thing and of -Determinist Law. Freedom, Interiority, Intelligence, Will, Grace, and -Love, the profoundest Personality, a reality out of all proportion -more worthy and more ultimate than the most utterly unbounded universe -of a simply material kind could ever be, thus appear here, in full -contradiction of Pantheism, as ultimate and abiding; and yet all -that is great and legitimate in Pantheism has been retained, as an -intermediate element and stage, of a deeply purifying kind. - - -9. _Return to Saints John of the Cross and Catherine of Genoa._ - -And thus we come back to the old, sublime wisdom of St. John of the -Cross, in all that it has of continuous thirst after the soul’s -purification and expansion, and of a longing to lose itself, its -every pettiness and egoistic separateness, in an abstract, universal, -quasi-impersonal disposition and reality, such as God here seems -to require and to offer as the means to Himself. Only that now we -have been furnished, by the ever-clearer self-differentiation of -Mathematico-Physical Science, with a zone of pure, sheer Thing, mere -soulless Law, a zone capable of absorbing all those elements from out -of our thought and feeling which, if left freely to mingle with the -deeper level of the growing Spiritual Personality, would give to this -an unmistakably Pantheistic tinge and trend. Hence, now the soul will -have, in one of its two latter movements, to give a close attention to -contingent facts and happenings and to abstract laws, possessed of no -direct religious significance or interpretableness which, precisely -because of this, will, if practised as part of the larger whole of -the purificatory, spiritual upbuilding of the soul, in no way weaken, -but stimulate and furnish materials for the other movement, the one -specially propounded by the great Spaniard, in which the soul turns -away, from all this particularity, to a general recollection and -contemplative prayer. - -And we are thus, perhaps, in even closer touch with Catherine’s -central idea,--the soul’s voluntary plunge into a painful yet joyous -purgation, into a state, and as it were an element, which purges away, -(since the soul itself freely accepts the process), all that deflects, -stunts, or weakens the realization of the soul’s deepest longings,--the -hard self-centredness, petty self-mirrorings, and jealous claimfulness, -above all. For though, in Catherine’s conception, this at first both -painful and joyful, and then more and more, and at last entirely, -joyful, ocean of light and fire is directly God and His effects upon -the increasingly responsive and unresisting soul: yet the apparent -Thing-quality here, the seemingly ruthless Determinism of Law, in -which the little individual is lost for good and all, and which only -the spiritual personality can survive, are impressively prominent -throughout this great scheme. And though we cannot, of course, take the -element and zone of the sheer Thing and of Determinist Law as God, or -as directly expressive of His nature, yet we can and must hold it, (in -what it is in itself, in what it is as a construction of our minds, -and in its purificatory function and influence upon our unpurified but -purifiable souls), to come from God and to lead to Him. And thus here -also we escape any touch of ultimate Pantheism, without falling into -any cold Deism or shallow Optimism. For just because we retain, at the -shallower level, the ruthlessly impersonal element, can we, by freely -willed, repeated passing through such fatalistic-seeming law, become, -from individuals, persons; from semi-things, spirits,--spirits more and -more penetrated by and apprehensive of the Spirit, God, the source and -sustainer of all this growth and reality. - -And yet, let us remember once more, the foreground and preliminary -stage to even the sublimest of such lives will never, here below at -least, be abidingly transcended, or completely harmonized with the -groundwork and ultimate stage, by the human personality. Indeed our -whole contention has been that, with every conceivable variation of -degree, of kind, and of mutual relation, these two stages, and some -sort of friction between them, are necessary, throughout this life, -for the full development, the self-discipline, and the adequate -consolidation, at the expense of the childish, sophistic individual, of -the true spiritual Personality. - - - - -IV. FINAL SUMMARY AND RETURN TO THE STARTING-POINT OF THE WHOLE -INQUIRY: THE NECESSITY, AND YET THE ALMOST INEVITABLE MUTUAL HOSTILITY, -OF THE THREE GREAT FORCES OF THE SOUL AND OF THE THREE CORRESPONDING -ELEMENTS OF RELIGION. - - -Our introductory position as to the three great forces of the soul, -with the corresponding three great elements of religion, appears, then, -to have stood the test of our detailed investigation. For each of these -forces and corresponding elements has turned out to be necessary to -religion, and yet to become destructive of itself and of religion in -general where this soul-force and religious element is allowed gravely -to cripple, or all but to exclude, the other forces and elements, and -their vigorous and normal action and influence. - - -1. _Each of these three forces and elements is indeed necessary, but -ruinously destructive where it more or less ousts the other two._ - -(1) The psychic force or faculty by which we remember and picture -things and scenes; the law of our being which requires that -sense-impressions should stimulate our thinking and feeling into -action, and that symbols, woven by the picturing faculty out of these -impressions, should then express these our thoughts and feelings; and -the need we have, for the due awakening, discipline and supplementation -of every kind and degree of experience and action, that social -tradition, social environment, social succession should ever be before -and around and after our single lives: correspond to and demand the -Institutional and Historical Element of Religion. This element is as -strictly necessary as are that force and that law. - -Yet if this force and need of the soul, and this religious element -are allowed to emasculate the other two primary soul-forces and needs -and the religious elements corresponding to them, it will inevitably -degenerate into more or less of a Superstition,--an oppressive -materialization and dangerous would-be absolute fixation of even quite -secondary and temporary expressions and analyses of religion; a ruinous -belief in the direct transferableness of religious conviction; and a -predominance of political, legal, physically coercive concepts and -practices with regard to those most interior, strong yet delicate, -readily thwarted or weakened, springs of all moral and religious -character,--spiritual sincerity and spontaneity and the liberty of -the children of God. We thus get too great a preponderance of the -“Objective,” of Law and Thing, as against Conviction and Person; of -Priest as against Prophet; of the movement from without inwards, as -against the movements from within outwards. - -The Spanish Inquisition we found to be probably the most striking -example and warning here. Yet the Eastern Christian Churches have -doubtless exhibited these symptoms, if less acutely, yet more -extensively and persistently. And the Protestant Reformation-Movement, -(even in the later lives of its protagonists, Luther, Zwingli, and -Calvin), much of orthodox Lutheranism and Calvinism, and some forms and -phases of Anglican Highchurchism and of Scotch Presbyterianism, show -various degrees and forms of a similar one-sidedness. In Judaism the -excesses in the Priestly type of Old Testament religion, especially -as traceable after the Exile, and their partial continuation in -Rabbinism, furnish other, instructive instances of such more or less -partial growth,--the Pharisees and the Jerusalem Sanhedrin being here -the fullest representatives of the spirit in question. The classical -Heathen Roman religion was, throughout, too Naturalistic for its, -all but exclusive, externalism and legalism to be felt as seriously -oppressive of any other, considerable element of that religion. And -much the same could doubtless be said of Indian Brahmanism to this -day. But in orthodox Mohammedanism we get the truly classical instance -of such a predominance, in all its imposing strength and terrible, -because all but irremediable, weakness--with its utterly unanalytic, -unspeculative, unmystical, thing-like, rock-solid faith; its detailed -rigidity and exhaustive fixity; its stringent unity of organization -and military spirit of entirely blind obedience; its direct, quite -unambiguous intolerance, and ever ready appeal to the sword, as the -normal and chief instrument for the propagation of the spirit; and its -entirely inadequate apprehension of man’s need of purification and -regeneration in all his untutored loves, fears, hopes and hates. - -(2) Then there is the soul-force by which we analyze and synthesize, -and the law of our being which requires us to weigh, compare, combine, -transfer, or ignore the details and the evidential worth of what has -been brought home to us through the stimulation of our senses, by our -picturing faculty and memory, and by means of our Social, Historical, -and Institutional environment, and which orders us to harmonize all -these findings into as much as may be of an intelligible whole of -religion, and to integrate this religious whole within some kind of, -at least rough, general conception as to our entire life’s experience. -And this force and law are answered by the Critical-Historical and -Synthetic-Philosophical element of religion. We thus get Positive -and Dogmatic Theology. And this element is as humanly inevitable and -religiously necessary as is that soul-force and law. - -Yet here again, if this force, law, and element are allowed -superciliously to ignore, or violently to explain away, the other kinds -of approaches and contributions to religious truth and experience, -special to the other two soul-forces and religious elements, we shall -get another destructive one-sidedness, a Rationalistic Fanaticism, -only too often followed by a lengthy Agnosticism and Indifference. -Whilst the Rationalist Fanaticism lasts, everything will doubtless -appear clear and simple to the soul, but then this “everything” will -but represent the merest skimmings upon the face of the mighty deep -of living, complete religion,--a petty, artificial arrangement by the -human mind of the little which, there and then, it can easily harmonize -into a whole, or even simply a direct hypostatizing of the mind’s own -bare categories. - -The worship of the Goddess of Reason at Notre-Dame of Paris we found to -be here, perhaps, the most striking instance. Yet Rationalist excesses, -varying from a cold Deism down to an ever short-lived formal Atheism, -and the lassitude of a worldly-wise Indifferentism, are traceable -within all the great religions. Thus a large proportion of the educated -members of the ancient Graeco-Roman world were, from the Sophists and -the Second Punic War onward, stricken with such a blight. The Sadducees -are typical of this tendency among the Jews for some two centuries. -The tough persistence of a mostly obscure current of destructive -free-thought throughout Western Europe in the Middle Ages shows well -the difficulty and importance of a mental and spiritual victory over -these forces of radical negation, and of not simply driving them -beneath the surface of society. And the ready lapse of the most daring -and intense of the Medieval, Jewish and Christian, Scholastics into a -thoroughly Pantheistic Panlogism, points to the prevalence, among these -circles, of a certain tyranny of the abstractive and logical faculty -over the other powers and intimations of the soul.--Unitarianism again -is, in its origins and older form, notwithstanding its even excessive -anti-Pantheism, strongly Scholastic in its whole temper and method, and -this without the important correctives and supplementations brought -to that method by the largely Mystical and Immanental Angel of the -Schools. The greater part of the “Aufklärung”-Movement was vitiated -by an often even severer, impoverishment of the whole conception of -religion. And, in our day, the Liberal movements within the various -Christian bodies, and again among Brahmanic religionists in India, -rarely escape altogether from ignoring or explaining away the dark -and toilsome aspects of life, and the inevitable excess of all deep -reality, and indeed of our very experience of it, above our clear, -methodical, intellectual analysis and synthesis of it. Too often and -for too long all such groups have inclined to assimilate all Experience -to clear Knowledge, all clear Knowledge to Physico-Mathematical -Science, all Religion to Ethics, and all Ethics to a simple belief -in the ultimacy of Determinist, Atomistic Science. The situation is -decidedly improving now; History and Culture are being found to have -other, more ultimate categories, than are those of Mathematics and -Physics, and to bring us a larger amount of reality, and Ethics and -Religion are discovered to be as truly distinct as they are closely -allied and necessary, each to the deepest development of the other. - -(3) The faculty and action of the soul, finally, by which we have an -however dim yet direct and (in its general effects) immensely potent, -sense and feeling, an immediate experience of Objective Reality, of -the Infinite and Abiding, of a Spirit not all unlike yet distinct from -our own, Which penetrates and works within these our finite spirits -and in the world at large, especially in human history; and by which -we will, and give a definite result and expression to, our various -memories, thinkings, feelings, and intuitions, as waked up by their -various special stimulants and by the influence of each upon all the -others: is met by the Mystical and the directly Operative element of -Religion. And here again we have a force and law of the human spirit, -and a corresponding element of religion, which can indeed be starved -or driven into a most dangerous isolation and revolt, but which are -simply indestructible. - -The Apocalyptic Orgies of the Münster Anabaptists we found to be -perhaps the most striking illustration of the dire mischief that can -spring from this third group of elemental soul-forces, when they ignore -or dominate the other two. Yet some such Emotional Fanaticism can be -traced, in various degrees and forms, throughout all such religious -groups, schools, and individuals as seriously attempt to practise Pure -Mysticism,--that is, religious Intuition and Emotion unchecked by the -other two soul-forces and religious elements, or by the alternation of -external action and careful contact with human Society and its needs -and helps, Art and Science, and the rest. - -Thus we find that, after the immense, luxuriant prevalence of an -intensely intuitive, emotional, tumultuously various apprehension -and manifestation of religion during the first two generations -of Christians, and even after the deep, wise supplementation and -spiritualization of this element by St. Paul, who in his own person so -strikingly combined the Institutional, Rational and Intuitive-Emotional -forces and elements, this whole force and element rapidly all but -disappeared for long from Western Christian orthodoxy. And Montanism -in still early times, and, during the very height of the Middle -Ages, the Waldensian and Albigensian movements--all predominantly -intuitive, enthusiastic, individualist--appear as so many revolutionary -explosions, threatening the whole fabric of Christendom with -dissolution. The “Eternal Gospel” movement of Abbot Joachim, on -the other hand, gives us the intuitional-emotive element in a more -purified, institutionally and rationally supplemented form. - -Again we find that, for a while, in reaction from an all but hopelessly -corrupt civilization, the Fathers of the Desert attained in many cases, -by means of an all but Exclusive Mysticism, to a type of sanctity -and to the inculcation of a lesson which the Church has gratefully -recognized. We have to admit that many of the Italian, French and -Spanish Quietists of the Seventeenth Century were no doubt excessively, -or even quite unjustly, suspected or pursued, as far at least as their -own personal motives and the effect of their doctrines upon their own -characters were concerned; and that the general reaction against even -the proved, grave excesses of some of these men and women, went often -dangerously far in the contrary direction. Indeed even the fierce -fanaticism of the Dutch-Westphalian Apocalyptic Intuitionists can but -excuse, not justify, the policy of quite indiscriminately ruthless -extermination pursued by Luther, Zwingli and Calvin, and by their -official churches after their deaths, towards any and all Illuminism, -however ethically pure and socially operative. The “Society of Friends” -which, measured by the smallness of its numbers, has given to the world -an astonishingly large band of devoted lovers of humankind, is a living -witness to the possibility of such an Illuminism. - -And we can note how the sane and solid, deep and delicate constituents, -which had existed, mixed up with all kinds of fantastic, often -hysterical and anti-moral exaltations, within most of those all but -purely Intuitionist circles, gradually found their escape away into all -sorts of unlikely quarters, helping to give much of their interiority -and religious warmth, not only to various, now fairly sober-minded, -Nonconformist Protestant bodies on the Continent, in England and -America, but also to the more religious-tempered and more spiritually -perceptive among modern philosophers--such as Spinoza, Kant, Fichte, -Schleiermacher, Schelling and Fechner. - -Within the Jewish world, we get much of this element at its noblest -and at its worst, in the true and false Prophets respectively; then -among the Essenes, for the times between the Maccabean resistance and -the revolt of Bar Cochba; and later on in the Kabbala. The Mohammedans -still furnish the example of the Sufi-movement. The Classical Heathen -world produced the Neo-Platonist and the Mithraic movements; and we can -still study, as a living thing, the Buddhist Mysticism of Thibet. - -We have then, here too, something thoroughly elemental, which requires -both persistent operative recognition and a continuous and profound -purification and supplementation by becoming incorporated within a -large living system of all the fundamental forces of the soul, each -operating and operated upon according to the intrinsic nature and -legitimate range of each. - - -2. _Each element double; endless combinations and conflicts._ - -We have also found that these three forces and elements are each -double, and that collisions, but also most fruitful interactions, can -and do obtain between even these yoke-fellows: between Institutionalise -and History,--the Present and the Past, a direct Sense-Impression and -Picture and a Memory; between Criticism and Construction,--Analysis -and acuteness of mind, and Synthesis and richness and balance of -imagination, head, heart, and will; and between Mysticism and Action, -as respectively Intuitive and quiescent and Volitional and effortful. - -And both the three forces and elements as a whole, and the single -members of each pair, can and do appear in every possible variety of -combination with, and of opposition against, the others, although -there is a special affinity between the Critical-Speculative and the -Intuitive-Volitional pairs (in combination against the Sense-and-Memory -pair); between the Sense-and-Memory pair and the single member of -Action; and between the single members of Speculation and of Intuition. -Yet, ultimately, not any one pair or member can bear its fullest fruit, -without the aid of all the others; and there is not one that, in actual -human nature, does not tend to emasculate, or to oust as much as -possible from the soul, the other pairs or single members. - - -3. _Our entire religious activity but one element of our complete -spirit-life._ - -And we have noted further, how even the fullest development in -any one soul of all these three couples of specifically religious -activities--even supposing that they could be developed to their -fullest, without any participation in and conflict with other degrees -and kinds of life and reality--do not, by any means, exhaust the range -of even the simplest soul’s actual energizings. - -(1) For over and beyond the specifically religious life--though this, -where genuine, is ever the deepest, the central life--every soul lives, -and has to live, various other lives. And indeed--and this is the -point which specially concerns religion--the soul cannot attain to its -fullest possible spiritual development, without the vigorous specific -action and differentiation of forces and functions of a not directly -religious character, which will have to energize, each according -to its own intrinsic nature, within the ever ampler, and ever more -closely-knit, organization of the complete life of the soul. - -(2) And within this complete life, the three pairs of religious forces -and elements each possess their own special affinities and antipathies -for certain of the forces and elements which constitute the other, -less central organizations of man’s marvellously rich activity. -The Historical-Institutional element of Religion has necessarily -a special affinity for, and borrows much of its form from, social, -legal, political history and institutions of a general kind. The -Critical-Speculative element of religion is necessarily cognate to, and -in a state of interchange with, the general historical criticism and -philosophical insight attained during the ages and amongst the races in -which any particular religion is intellectually systematized. And the -Mystical-Operative element is necessarily influenced by, and largely -utilizes the general emotive and volitional gifts and habits, peculiar -to the various ages and peoples within which this double religious -element is in operation. - -(3) It is thus abundantly clear how greatly a work so manifold in its -means, and so harmonious in its end, requires, if it is to come to -a considerable degree of realization, that single souls, and single -classes and types of souls, should have around them a large and varied -Historical and Institutional, a Social life both of a specifically -religious and of a general kind, and that, within this large ambit of -the actualized religion of others and of the still largely potential -religion of their own souls, they shall develop and be helped to -realize their own deepest spiritual capacities and _attrait_. They -will have to develop these special capabilities to the utmost degree -compatible with some practice of the other chief elements of religion, -with a continuous respect for and belief in the necessity of the other -types of soul, and with a profound belief in, and love of, the full, -organized community of all devoted souls, which builds up, and is built -up by, all this variety in unity. The Kingdom of God, the Church, will -thus be more and more found and made to be the means of an ever more -distinct articulation, within an ever more fruitful interaction, of -the various _attraits_, gifts, vocations, and types of souls which -constitute its society. And these souls in return will, precisely -by this their articulation within this ampler system, bring to this -society an ever richer content of variety in harmony, of action and -warfare within an ever deeper fruitfulness and peace. - - -4. _Two conditions of the fruitfulness of the entire process._ - -Yet even the simplest effort, within this innumerable sequence and -simultaneity of activities, will lack the fullest truth and religious -depth and fruitfulness, unless two experiences, convictions and motives -are in operation throughout the whole, and penetrate its every part, -as salt and yeast, atmosphere and light penetrate, and purify and -preserve our physical food and bodily senses. - -The vivid, continuous sense that God, the Spirit upholding our poor -little spirits, is the true originator and the true end of the whole -movement, in all it may have of spiritual beauty, truth, goodness -and vitality; that all the various levels and kinds of reality and -action are, in whatever they have of worth, already immanently -fitted to stimulate, supplement and purify each other by Him Who, an -Infinite Spiritual Interiority Himself, gives thus to each one of us -indefinite opportunities for actualizing our own degree and kind of -spiritual possibility and ideal; and that He it is Who, however dimly -yet directly, touches our souls and awakens them, in and through all -those minor stimulations and apprehensions, to that noblest, incurable -discontent with our own petty self and to that sense of and thirst for -the Infinite and Abiding, which articulates man’s deepest requirement -and characteristic: this is the first experience and conviction, -without which all life, and life’s centre, religion, are flat and -dreary, vain and philistine. - -And the second conviction is the continuous sense of the ever -necessary, ever fruitful, ever bliss-producing Cross of Christ--the -great law and fact that only through self-renunciation and suffering -can the soul win its true self, its abiding joy in union with the -Source of Life, with God Who has left to us, human souls, the choice -between two things alone: the noble pangs of spiritual child-birth, of -painful-joyous expansion and growth; and the shameful ache of spiritual -death, of dreary contraction and decay. - -Now it is especially these two, ever primary and supreme, ever deepest -and simplest yet most easily forgotten, bracing yet costing, supremely -virile truths and experiences--facts which increasingly can and -ever should waken up, and themselves be vivified by, all the other -activities and gifts of God which we have studied--these two eyes -of religion and twin pulse-beats of its very heart, that have been -realized, with magnificent persistence and intensity, by the greatest -of the Inclusive Mystics. - -And amongst these Mystics, Caterinetta Fiesca Adorna, the Saint -of Genoa, has appeared to us as one who, in spite of not a little -obscurity and uncertainty and vagueness in the historical evidences for -her life and teaching, of not a few limitations of natural character -and of opportunity, and of several peculiarities which, wonderful to -her _entourage_, can but perplex or repel us now, shines forth, in -precisely these two central matters, with a penetrating attractiveness, -rarely matched, hardly surpassed, by Saints and Heroes of far more -varied, humorous, readily understandable, massive gifts and actions. -And these very limits and defects of her natural character and -opportunities, of her contemporary disciples and later panegyrists, -and of our means for studying and ascertaining the facts and precise -value of the life she lived, and of the legend which it occasioned, -may, we can hope, but help to give a richer articulation and wider -applicability to our study of the character and necessity, the limits, -dangers and helpfulness of the Mystic Element of Religion. - - - - -INDEX - - -(_Some corrections of mistakes in names and references, as given in the -foregoing work, have been silently effected in the following Index_) - - -I. OF SUBJECT-MATTERS - - Abelard, I. 61 - - Absorptions of St. Catherine, I. 226-229 - - Acarie, Madame, I. 89 - - Acquasola, Genoa, I. 144, 145 _n._ 1, 168 - - Action (reflex), its three elements, I. 57-58 - - Adorni Family, I. 96, =101=, 102 - various, I. 102, 145 _n._ 1, 151, 153-155, 173, 300, 327, 377 - - Adorno, Giuliano, I. =101=, =102=, 103, 138, 145 _n._ 1, =149=, 153, - 173, 187, 225, 296, 297 _n._ 1, 300, 307, 308, 309, 311, 313, - 325 _n._ 1, 377, 378, 379, 382, 386, 388, 394, 454, 455; II. 29, 74 - he becomes a Tertiary of the Order of St. Francis, I. 130 - his bankruptcy, I. 128-129 - character, I. 102 - conversion, I. 129 - his death, I. 149-156, 379 - his illness, I. 149 _n._ 1. - his life in the little house within the Hospital, I. 129-131 - his monument, I. 297 _n._ 1 - his natural daughter, I. 129 - his will, I. =151-152=, 378-379 - moves into the Hospital, I. 141, 142 - sells his palace, I. 148 _n._ 1 - - Adorno Palazzo, I. 108, 128, 148, 327, 377, 379, 403 - - Aeschylus, II. 189, 271 - - Afer, Victorinus, I. 266 _n._ 3 - - Affinities, human, furthered by Mysticism, II. 331-335 - - After-life beliefs, in Asiatic countries, II. 183-185 - in Greece, II. 185-189 - of the Jews, II. 189-191 - problems, ethico-practical difficulties of, II. 197-199 - historical difficulties of, II. 182-194 - philosophical difficulties of, II. 194-197 - - After-life, its forecasts in St. Catherine, II. 200-203 - Plato’s influence on them, II. 203-211 - - Agnosticism (Mystical), criticism of, II. 287-296 - - Agrigentum, II. 188 - - Aix, Cathedral of, and triptych, I. 96 - - Akiba, Rabbi, II. 233, 268, 292 - - Alacoque, St. Marie Marguerite, II. 42, 56, 58 - - Albigensian movement, II. 391 - - Alcantara, St. Peter of, II. 143 - - Alexander VI, Pope (Borgia), I. 95 - VII, Pope (Chigi), II. 168 _n._ 1 - - Alexandrian School, I. 61 - - Alfred, King, II. 44 - - Aloysius, St. Gonzaga, I. 88 - - Alvarez, Venerable Balthazar, S.J., I. 64 - - Ambrosian Library, Milan, I. 411 _n._ 1, 466 - - America, II. 370, 392 - - Amos, II. 189, 268 - - Anabaptists, I. 9, 63; II. 391 - their orgies, I. 10, 340; II. 391 - - Anaxagoras, I. 12 - - Andrew, Monastery of St., Genoa, I. 325 _n._ 2 - - Andrewes, Anglican Bp. Lancelot, I. 63 - - Angelica Library, Rome, I. 411 _n._ 1 - - Angelo, Castel S., Rome, I. 327 - of Chiavasso, Blessed, O.S.F., I. 116 - - Anglican Highchurchism, II. 63, 388 - - Anglicanism, its three elements, I. 8, 9, 63 - - Anguisola, Donna Andronica, I. 359, 361, 363, 364, 403, 413, 416 - - Animal-life, St. Catherine’s sympathy with, I. 163, 164 - - Anjou, Charles I. of, I. 96 - Margaret of, I. 96 - René of, King of Naples, I. 96 - - Annunciation, Church of the, Sturla, I. 451 - - Annunziata in Portorio, Church of Sma., Genoa, I. 98 _n._ 1 (99), 130, - 201 _n._ 3, 297 _n._ 1, 313, 325 _n._ 1 - Monastery of, I. 319, 325 - - Annunziata, Piazza della Sma., Genoa, I. 102 - - Anselm, St., Archbishop, I. 78; II. 142, 181 - - Anthony, St., I. 373 - - Antiochene School, I. 61 - - Antiochus Epiphanes, II. 292 - - Antonietta (servant), I. 149, 153, 226 - - Apocalypse, II. 269 - - Apollo Katharsios, II. 93 - - Apostles, I. 27, 389 - - Apprehension, Mystical, no distinct faculty of, II. =283-284= - - Arc, Jeanne d’, Ven., II. 47 - - Archives, Archiepiscopal, of Genoa, I. 411 _n._ 1 - of the Cathedral Chapter, Genoa, I. 384 - - Archivio di Stato in Genoa, I. 153 _n._ 1, 172, 176 _n._ 1, 2, - 378 _n._ 1, 379 _n._ 1, 381 _n._ 1, 203 _n._ 1, 213; II. 10 _n._ 1. - - Argentina, del Sale (de Ripalta), I. 149, 151, 162 _n._ 2 (163), - =169-171=, 173, 175, 197 _n._ 4 (198), 210 _n._ 1, 213 _n._ 1, - =215-219=, 223, 226, 297 _n._ 1, 298, 299, 367, 310-312, =313=, - =314=, 387-389, 402, =452=, =453=, 464; II. 4, 26 - adopted by St. Catherine, I. 170, 171 - her fate, I. 313, 314 - much alone with St. Catherine in 1510, she helps on growth of - legends, I. 203; II. 4, 26, 197 _n._ 4 (198), 203, 209, 210 _n._ 1, - 219, 452, 453 - wills of, I. 313, 381 - - Arias, Francisco, S.J., I. 89 - - Aristotle, I. 7, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 41, 42; II. 131, 132, 194, 203, 249, - 250, 252, 264, 310, 311, 312, 320, 324, 379 - his conception of “Unmoving Energy,” II. =131=, =132=, 250 - of the Noûs, II. 32 - of God as sheer abstract Thought, II. 251 - his general doctrine, I. 19-23 - - Arnold, Dr. Thomas, of Rugby, I. 63 - - Ars, Curé d’, the Bl. J. B. Vianney, II. 143 - - Arvenza, on the Riviera, I. 318 - - Asceticism and Mystical abstractiveness, II. 348-349 - ordinary and social Christianity, II. 355-358 - ordinary, as practised by Mystics, II. 341-343 - - Asia Minor, II. 188 - - Assyria, II. 185 - - Atman, II. 183 - - Augsburg, David of, O. S. F., II. 363 - - Augustine, St., I. 61, 100; II. 117, 129, 131, 142, 205, 211, 212, 213, - 214, 215, 261, 266 _n._ 3, 270, 282, 298, 380 - on Evil as negative, II. 293 - on fire of Hell, II. 216 - on mitigation of sufferings of the Lost, II. 225 - on Purgatory, II. 216, 217 - on soul’s Rest between death and resurrection, II. 211, 212 - on Original Sin, II. 298-301 - on God and the soul as out of Space, II. =212=, =213= - on Time and Eternity, II. 165 _n._, =248= - - Augustinian Canonesses, I. 103 _n._ 1; II. 62 - Canons, I. 103 _n._ 1 - - Augustinianesses, Chapel of the, Genoa, I. 109, 170 - - Avicebron, _see_ Gebirol Ibn - - Avicenna, II. 317 - - Avignon exile, I. 94 - - Azzolini, Cardinal, I. 305 - dei Manfredi, cavaliere, I. 99 _n._ - - - Babylonia, II. 185 - - Bacon, Francis, II. 369 - - Baius, condemnation of, II. 242 - - Balilla, via, Genoa, I. 129 - - Ballerini, Father Antonio, S. J., I. 121 - - Bar Cochba, revolt of, II. 392 - - Barnabites, I. 340 - - Baronius, Cardinal, I. 318 - - Basil, St., II. 166 - - Beethoven, L. von, II. 27, 42, 265 - - Beguards, II. 131 _n._ 1 - - Bellarmine, Cardinal, S.J., I. 88 - - Bell’Huomo, G., S.J., II. 144 - - Benedetta Lombarda, servant, I. 130, 149, 153, 172, 176, 226, - =311=, =312=, 317, 379 - - Benedict XIV, Pope (Lambertini), I. 136, 253 - St., I. 104, 127, 240, 460 - - Benedictines, I. =63=, =64=, 103 _n._ 1, 373; II. 161, - 363 - - Bentham, Jeremy, II. 272 - - Bergson, Henri, Professor, II. 247, 282, 370 - - Bernard, St., of Clairvaux, I. 7, 61, 69; II. 242, 182 - Claude, II. 192 - - Bernières-Louvigny, Jean de, II. 141 - - Bernouilli, Dr. C. A., I. 373 - - Berulle, Venerable Cardinal de, I. 88, 317 - - Bible, Catherine’s love of the, I. 258 - - Biographies, religious, the three attitudes possible concerning, - I. =374-375= - - Biography, religious, laws regulating its growth, I. =371= - - Bismarck, Otto von, II. 272 - - Bliss, its “pain”-element, II. =255= - - Blondel, Prof. Maurice, II. 282 - - Body, Catherine’s view concerning it, and the elements of this view, - II. 123-126 - dualistic view concerning it, ever only pragmatic, II. =126-129= - dualistic view, un-Catholic, II. 126, 127 - its valuation in the N. T., II. 122-123 - - Boerio, Maestro G. B., I. 200, 201 _n._ 3, 202, 208, 217, 218, 389, 451, - 464; II. 14, 15, 17 - Don Giovanni, I. 201 _n._ 3 (202), 208, 451 - - Boetius, II. 317 - - Bollandists, I. 372 - - Bona, Cardinal, Cistercian, I. 88 - - Boniface VIII, Pope (Gaetani), II. 83 - his Bull “Unam Sanctam,” I. 94 - - Bosco Bartolomeo, I. 130 - - Bossuet, Bishop J. B., I. 64, 89; II. 141, 161, 162, 171, 173 - - Boudon, Archdeacon H. M., II. 141 - - Bousset, Prof. W., on individual experience and traditional form, II. 309 - - Brahman, II. 183 - - Brahmanism, II. 388 - its three elements, I. 60 - - Brescia, Hospital in, I. 322 - Vincenzo da, painter, I. 99 - - Bridgettines, Convent of the, Genoa, I. 312 - - Browning, Robert, II. 57, 108, 223, 227, 271 - - Buddha, Gautama, I. 71; II. 184, 268 - - Buddhism, II. 183, 184, 273 - its three elements, I. 60 - - Buddhist Mysticism, II. 392 - - Bunyan, John, his works, I. 63 - - Burke, Edmund, II. 271 - - Burmah, II. 183 - - Burnet, Anglican Bishop Gilbert, II. 145 - - Busenbaum, Hermann, S. J., I. 121 - - Butler, Anglican Bishop Joseph, II. 371 - - - Caesar, II. 272 - - Caird, Professor Edward, II. 91 _n._ 1, 282 - - Cajetanus, Thomas de Vio, Cardinal, O.P., II. 162 - - Callisto da Piacenza, Padre, I. 323, 324 - - Calvin, I. 341, 414, 415; II. 117, 118, 388, 392 - _Institutio Religionis Christianæ_ I. 340 - Calvinism, I. 9, 63 - early stages of, I. 339-341 - - Cambridge Platonists, the, II. 371 - - Camillus of Lellis, St., I. 129 _n._ 2 - - Campanaro Family, of Genoa, I. 101 - - Campion, Blessed Edmund, S.J., I. 64; II. 129 - - Campofregoso, Paolo, of Genoa, I. 101 - - Canada, II. 141 - - _Canticle of Canticles_, I. 258, 356 - its imagery dear to V. Battista Vernazza, I. 111, 356, 432 - remote from St. Catherine’s mind, I. 229, 258, 432; - II. 100, 101, 107 - - Capuchins, I. 311, 340, 341 - - Caraccioli, Cardinal, Archbishop of Naples, II. 139 - - Caraffa, Cardinal, _see_ also Paul IV. (Pope), I. 327, 340 - - Carenzio, Don Jacobo, 155 _n._ 1, 175, 202, 204 _n._ 1, 213, 216, 217, - 295, 299, 301, =307-309=, 310 _n._ 1, 384, 464; II. 26 - his fate, I. 307-309 - - Carenzio, Don Jacobo, his funeral, I. 381 - - Carlyle, Thomas, II. 271 - - Cassian, I. 78 - - Cassino, Monte, I. 103 _n._ 1 - - Castagneto, Brigidina, I. 175 - - Catherine, of Alexandria, St., I. 97, 348 - - Catherine of Genoa, St. (Caterinetta Fieschi Adorno), I. 86, 95, 97, - 98 _n._ 1, 100, 101, 102, 103, 103 _n._ 1, 104, 105, 111, 112, - 113, 123, 151, 168, 169, 170, 171, 338, 339, 376, 382, 387, 388, - 389; II. 42, 50, 56, 58, 63, 64, 96, 97, 98, 109, 131, 136, 142, - 146, 170, 172, 206, 208, 209, 218, 288, 289, 297, 298, 304, 306, - 395, 396 - - Catherine, St., her AFTER-LIFE CONCEPTIONS, II. 199-218 - her apparitions after death, I. 216, 218 - her external appearance, I. 97 - ecclesiastical approbation of her doctrine, I. 255, 256, 413, - =448=, =449=, 464 - and Argentina del Sale, I. 170, 171, 203, 209, 210, 213, 217, 298 - her BAPTISM, I. 97 - and Baptism, I. 436; II. 76 - her birth, I. 93, 97 - her breadth of sympathy and unsuspiciousness, II. 83, 84 - her brothers, I. 97, 167, 172, 176 - her burial, I. 296, 297 - her burial-place, shifting of, I. 152, =185-187=, 213 - and business, I. 154, 186 - the three CATEGORIES of her teaching, ‘In,’ ‘Out,’ ‘Over,’ - I. 273-276 - her codicils of 1503, I. 168, 169, 380 - of 1508, I. 175, 176, 380 - of 1510, I. 212-214, 380 - colours, her sensitiveness to, I. 208, 210, 298; II. 17, 24 - compared with St. Augustine, II. 211-214, 216, 225, 248, 293, 294 - with Clement and Origen of Alexandria, II. 219, 234-236 - with Pseudo-Dionysius, II. 90-101, 205, 236 - with the Joannine writings, II. 79-90 - with St. John of the Cross, II. 257, 258, 346, 347, 385, 386 - with the Pauline writings, I. 140; II. 63-79, 322 - with Plato, II. 66, 201-211, 235, 251 - with Plotinus, II. 204, 322, 323 - with Proclus, II. 204, 205, 294, 313 - with the Synoptic Gospels, II. 122-124, 153-158 - with St. Teresa, II. 288, 289, 324, 325 - with St. Thomas Aquinas, I. 120; II. 162-164, 222-224, 301, - 337, 338 - with Ven. Battista Vernazza, I. =332-366=, 408, 409, 423, - 429-433 - with Ettore Vernazza, I. 317-323, 328, 329, 331-335 - and Confession, I. 109, =117-121=, 158, 159, =424-427= - and her Confessor (Don Marabotto), I. 155-158, 184, 185, 193-196, - 455-457 - her Conversion, I. 104-109, 403-406, 458-462; II. 29-31 - Cross and Passion, her attitude towards, I. 108, 109, 205, 209, 210, - =403-406=, 409, =411-413=, 452, 453 - Cultus, her popular, I. 301-303, 332, 335, 394 - her DEATH, I. 215, 216 - her Deed of Cession, 1456, I. 376, 377 - her _Deposito_, I. 98 _n._ - her desire for death, I. 183, 184, 192, 210 - for life, I. 200-202 - for human sympathy, I. 195 - and the Devil, I. 124, 125, 205, 206, 264; II. 36, 37 - men devoted to her spirit, I. 89, 90 - her DIALOGO, _see_ Vita (D) in Index II - her _Dicchiarazione, see_ Vita (T) in Index II - her doctrine presented in theological order, I. 257, 260-294 - dualistic tendencies in, considered, II. 121-129 - her ECSTATIC states, I. 161, 162, 226, 229; II. 34 - and the H. Eucharist, I. 113, 114, 116, 204, 208, 214, 240, 241, - 288, 289, 263; II. =87=, =88= - her attitude towards Evil, I. 266-270; II. 294 - her FASTS, I. 135-139, 155; II. 34 - her Father, I. 96, 97, 101 - and Tommasa Fiesca, I. 131, 132, 168, 169, 174 - GROWTH, her spiritual, I. 112, 113, =236-239= - and HEAVEN, I. 159-161; II. =246-258= - and Hell, I. 281-288; II. =218-230= - her attitude towards historical and institutional religion, I. 190, - 204, 206, =239-241= - and the Hospital _Chronici_, I. 173, 174 - and the Hospital _Pammatone_, I. 129-131, 141-143, 175, 202 - and her husband, I. 102-104, 129, 152, 153 - hysteriform appearances in her health, II. 20, 21, 23-25 - her fundamental difference from hysteria-patients, II. =25-27= - her ILLNESS, during last days, I. 207, 214; II. 13 - during last months, I. 193; II. 9, 10 - and Indulgences, I. 123-126, 202 - and intercessory prayer, I. 127 - and invocation of saints, I. 104, 127 - LESSONS of her life, I. 244-246 - Life, conceptions of, in, II. 88-90 - her literary obligations, I. 234-238; II. 62-110, 203-211 - Pure Love, her doctrine of, I, 108, =139-141=, =159-161=, 262, 263, - 265, 266 - her practice of, I. 116, 144, 170, 184, 185, 187, 197 - and MARRIAGE, I. 101, 223-225, 246, 248, 249 - her Marriage-settlement, I. 377 - materialization of her experiences and ideas, I. 218, 219 - matron of Hospital, I. 143, 147, 148 - and her NEPHEWS, I. 154, 167, 171, 176, 213 - and her Nieces, I. 154, 167, 172, 173 - ORIGINALITY of her doctrine, I. =246-250=, 347 - and PAIN, physical and psycho-physical, 196-198, 198-200; II. 10, 11 - her penitence, I. 109-112, 131-134 - the periods of her convert life, I. 111, 112, 112 _n._ 1, 118, 119, - 138, 390-393 - first period, I. 128-131 - second period, I. 128-140 - third period, I. 157-159, 175, 176 - and physicians, I. 200, 201, 208, 211, 212 - pictures, her care for religious, I. 99, =168=, =169=, 188, 189, - 191; II. 29, 30 - portraits of, I. 98 _n._ i, 301 - her possessions at time of her death, I. 297-299 - her psycho-physical peculiarities, in themselves, I. 176-181, 193, - 196-200; II. 10-13, 17-21 - her attitude towards them, I. 164, 165, 211, 212; II. 16, =35-39= - and Purgatory, I. 283-294; II. =230-246= - and prayer of QUIET, I. 227 - her quietistic-sounding sayings, I. =236=, =237=, 265, 266, 271, 279 - causes of her apparent quietism, II. =34-36= - her RELICS, I. 98, _n._ 1, 300-304 - her Rigoristic trend, I. 342 - her “SCINTILLA”-experience, I. 187-191, 451 - and Holy Scripture, I. 258 - her self-knowledge, I. 164, 165, =206=, =207=, 247; II. 14, 15 - her extreme sensitiveness, I. 176-181, 207-209 - “Serafina,” I. 161, 262 - and her servants, I. 148, 149, 161, 162, 169, 171, 172, 175, 176, - 217; II. 26 - and her sister, I. 100, 105, 167 - social interests in 1506, I. 172-174 - in 1506-1510, I. 175-176 - Spirit, the, her conception of, II. =67-69=, =84=, 320-322 - symbols used by,: air and flying, I. 189; II. 103 - arrow and wounding, I. 97; II. 105, 106 - bread and eating or being devoured, I. 288, 289, =270= - cork under water, I. 275 - dog and his master, I. 263 - drops, liquid, I. 159, 160, 189; II. 52 - fountain, I. 189, 260, 261 - fragments and table, I. 277 - heat and cold, I. 194, 197; II. 109 - light, rays of the sun, and fire, sparks of, I. 178-180, 187, - 188, 269, 276, =290-292=; II. 94, 95, 323 - motes, spots, stains, rust, I. 189, 267; II. 236, =238=, =239= - nakedness and garments, I. =275=, =276=, 290-292, 428, 432; - II. 77, 78, 98, 123, =209=, =210= - places and abiding in them, I. =277=, =278=; II. =69=, =70=, - 77, =80=, =81=, 212, 213, 322 - the plunge, I. 268, =284=, =285=, 332; II. 70, 89, =207=, - =208=, 385 - prison, exile, I. 273, 274; II. 105, 126, 239 - the (golden) rope, I. 432; II. 92, 93 - water (the sea) and drowning, I. =274=, =275=; II. 103, 106, - =108=, =109=, 322 - symbols used by her, why material and extensional, not personal - and successive, I. 237-239, =245-247=; II. =39=, =40=, =100=, =101=, - 285, 286, 330, 331, 349, 350 - her TEACHING, general character of, I. 229-234 - fortunate circumstances of, I. 255, 256 - her special temperament, I. 220-223 - and Thobia, I. 129, 153, 169 - her times, I. 94, 95 - and Transcendence, I. 274-277; II. =100= - and UNCTION, Extreme, I. 195, 197, 204, 206 - Union, her thirst for absolute, I. 116, 159-161, 263, =265=, - =266=, 269-271, 280 - and Battista VERNAZZA, I. 149, 337 - and Ettore Vernazza, I. 145-147, 191-193, 203, 204, 226, 331-335, - =453-455= - veracity of her mind, I. 119 - her VISION of the Bleeding Christ, I. =107-109=, 181, 209, 239, - 403, 405, 418, =460-462=, 466 _n._ 2; II. 31, 32, 71 - WARFARE, method of her spiritual, II. =34-39= - and the two ways, negative and positive, I. 276-280 - words, her last, I. 216, 465 - her Wills, i, I. 152, 153, 377-378 - ii, I. 152-154, 380 - iii, I. 172-174, 380 - iv, I. 172-173, 174, 176, 185-187, 202, 203, 308, 380 - her wills in general, I. 297-299; II. 26 - her “writings” not her composition, I. 87, 407, 433, 447, 448, =466= - her YOUTH, I. 99-101 - of Siena, I. 87, 94, 306, 341, 382; II. 42, 47, 306, 307 - - Catholicism, its three elements, I. 63-64 - - Catholic mind, its characteristics, I. =122-123= - - Caussade, Père de, S.J., II. 143 - - Censor, Dominican, the, of the _Vita_, I. 372, =413=, 464 - - Centurione, Adam, Lord, I. 385 - Ginetta, Lady, I. 385 - Orientina, Donna, I. 385, 391 - - Cesarini, Cardinal, I. 305 - - Chantal, St. Jane Frances de, II. 142, 143, 363 - - Child, the, its apprehension of religion, I. 51 - - China, II. 182, 183 - - Chios, Isle of, I. 101, 151; II. 27, 83 - - Christian conception of life, I. 48-49 - doctrine (survey of), I. =25-28= - its three N. T. presentations, I. =28-39= - - Christianity, conflicts between its Intuitive-Emotional and its other - elements, I. =70-77= - excludes Pantheism, II. 334-335 - its preliminary Pessimism and ultimate Optimism, II. 358-361 - its three elements, II. 61 - in the Humanist Renaissance, I. 62 - the Middle Ages, I. 61-62 - the Protestant Reformation, I. 62-63 - - Christina, Queen of Sweden, I. 305, 305 _n._ 1 - - Christofero of Chiavari, I. 168, 298 - - _Chronici_, Spedale dei, Genoa, I. =173=, =174=, 317, 319, 326, 327, 333; - II. 10 - Protectors of, I. 318, 326 - Sindaco of, I. 319 - - Chroniclers of St. Catherine, rivalry between them, I. 216 - - Chronicles, Books of, David in, I. 373 - - Church, the, her life and spirit, I. 123 - - Cibo Donna Maddalena (born Vernazza), I. 322 - - Cicero, Don Blasio, I. 152 - - Clement of Alexandria, I. 61, 78; II. 131, 142, =166=, =219=, =235=, 239, - 268, 282, 306, 333 - - Clement XI, Pope (Albani), II. 131, 161 - Fénelon’s letter to, I. 69 - X, Pope (Altieri), I. 305 - XII, Pope (Orsini), I. 306 - his Bull of Catherine’s Canonization, I. 466 - - Cogoleto, on Riviera, I. 318 - - Coleridge, Samuel Taylor, II. 371 - - Collino, Padre Serafino, C.R.L., I. 364, 366 - - Colonna, Vittoria, I. 341, 342 _n._ 2 - - Chrysostom, St. John, II. 225 - - Columbus, Christopher, I. 94, 146 - - Confucianism, II. 182, 183 - - Confucius, II. 183 - - Constance, Council of, I. 94, 342 - - Constantinople, I. 94 - - Contarini, Gaspar, Cardinal, I. 342 _n._ 2 - - Contemplation and Social Christianity, II. =355-358= - - _Conversione_-booklet, I. 449, 464 - - _Convertite_ the, Genoa, I. 327 - - Corsica, I. 156 - - Counter-reformation, I. 62 - - Covenant, Book of the, I. 373 - - Criticism, of the writings of Saints, how far allowed, I. 254 and foll. - - Croton, II. 188 - - Crusading Age, the, II. 380 - - Cynic school, I. 23 - - Cyprian, St., II. 43 - - Cyrenaic school, I. 23 - - - Dante, II. 165, 265 - - Darwin, Charles, II. 271 - - David, three stages of his biography, I. 373 - - Delphi, II. 187 - - Demeter, II. 97 - - Democritus, II. 12 - - Descartes, René, I. 7, 40, 317 - his apprehension of law, I. 40 - - Determinism, its place in the spiritual life, II. 330, 331, =369-379=, - 385, 386 - - Deuteronomy, Book of, Moses in, I. 373 - - Developments, partial, of the Gospel-Ideal, II. 116-120 - - de Vere, Aubrey, paraphrases the _Trattato_, I. 89 - - _Dialogo_ of St. Catherine, see _Vita e Dottrina_ - - Diano, Castello of, on Riviera, I. 308, 309 - - _Dicchiarazione_-booklet, I. 464, and see _Vita_ (T) - - Dionysiac sect, II. 188 - - Dionysius (Pseudo-) Areopagite, I. 163 _n._, 177, 256, 259, 266 _n._ 3; - II. 63, 109, 131, 142, 205, 211, 288, 307, 313, 329, 333, 344, 366 - and Catherine, II. =90-101= - Catherine’s direct knowledge of, II. 258, 259 - his conception of God’s general action, II. 91-94 - Deification, II. 99, 100 - the soul’s reaction, II. 94-99 - his influence in Middle Ages, II. 314-317 - Neo-Platonism in, II. 91-99, 294, 312, 313 - Platonism, in, II. 93, 94, 96, 97, 101 - - Diotima, in Plato’s _Symposium_, St. Catherine compared to, I. 257 - - Direction, spiritual, its advantages, II. 364 - - Disciple, the Beloved, symbol of, I. 111 - - Domenico, Monastero Nuovo di S., Genoa, I. 132, 168, 174, 451 - de Ponzo, Padre, O.S.F., I. 140 _n._ 4 - - Dominicans, I. =63=, =64=, 253, 413, 464; II. 52, 53 _n._ 1, 316, - 317, 324 - - Doria, Andrea, Admiral, I. 93, 104-146 - other members of family, I. 96, 376 - - Draco, laws of, II. 87 - - Drexel, Jeremias, S.J., I. 89 - - Droysen, J. G., II. 271 - - Dualism, as regards body, II. 121-129, 289, 298 - and question of Evil, II. =290-308= - unconscious, in Kant’s Epistemology, II. 278 - - - Eberhard, Father, O.P., II. 52 - - Ecclesiastes, II. 189 - - Eckhart, Meister, his Deistic tendencies, II. 252 - on Evil as purely negative, II. 294 - on Godhead as distinct from God, II. 317, 318 - Father Denifle, on, II. 317 - - Ecstasies, difficulty in testing them, I. 161, 162; II. 49-51 - of St. Catherine, I, 139-140, 226-229; II. 34 - - Ecstasy, in Dionysius, II. 95, 96 - in Plotinus and Proclus, I. 24; II. 95, 96 - - Ecstatics, their psycho-physical organisation, II. =40-47= - - Egypt, II. 185, 233 - - Eleatic philosophers, II. 188 - - Eleazar, Rabbi, II. 153 - - Eleusinian Mysteries, II. 185, 187, 189 - - Elijah, II. 268 - - Eliot, George, II. 199 - - Elohist, the, writer, and figure of Moses, I. 373 - - Embriaco, Guilielmo, I. 100 - - Emmerich, Anne Catherine, I. 334, 335 - - Emotional-intuitive element in Religion, I. 8-10 - in the various Churches, I. 8-10 - in Christian Religion, its exclusiveness, I. =73-79= - its danger and yet necessity, I. 6, 59, 60; II. =260-263=, =387-393= - - Emotional-intuitive personalities, movements and races, I. 6-7 - - Empedocles, I. 11; II. 188 - - _Energeia_, Aristotle’s great contribution, II. 250-251 - - England, I. 62, 63, 65, 200; II. 371, 392 - - Epictetus, II. 268 - - Epicurean school, I. 23 - - Epistles, Pastoral, II. 269 - - Epopteia, the Eleusinian, II. 97 - - Erasmus of Rotterdam, I. 311, 340; II. 119 _n._ 1 - - Eschatology, Catherine’s simplifications of it, II. =211-218= - - Esparta, Father Martin, S.J., II. 144 - - _Essays and Reviews_, I. 63 - - Essenes, I. 61; II. 392 - - Este, Eleonora d’, I. 341 - - Estius, William, II. 63 _n._ 2 - - Eucken, Prof. R., II. 63 _n._ 2, 282, 333, 370 - on Evil as positive, II. 296 - hyper-empirical processes as a _sine qua non_ for religion, - II. 270, 271 - “universal” religion and “characteristic” religion, II. 296 - - Euripides, II. 189 - - Evangelicalism, I. 8-10; II. 392 - - Evil denied by extreme Mysticism, II. 292-293 - its origin and Mysticism, II. =279-302= - Mysticism and the warfare against, II. 302-308 - positive but not supreme, II. =291-297= - positive conceptions of, II. 304, 305 - - Experience not directly transmissible, I. 4-5 - of the human race, I. 6-7 - personal, its influence upon our convictions, I. 4 - - Experiences, distinguished from their expression, and their analysis, - II. =130-134= - - Experimental matter and theoretical form, II. 308-309 - - Ezekiel, II. 189, 220, 268, 292, 332 - his ecstasies and psycho-physical peculiarities, II. =45-46= - his individualistic trend, II. 189, 220 - - - Faber, Frederick, Father, I. 65 - - Falconi, Juan, II. 146 - his _Alfabeto_ and _Lettera_ II. 143, 144 - - Falconieri, St. Juliana, I. 306; II. 56 - - Fasts, Catherine’s, II. 33 - end of, II. 148 - - Fechner, G. T., II. 392 - - Felicitas, St., I. 361 - - Fénelon, I. 64, 68, 89; II. 138, 141, 142, 143, =160-162=, 174, 177 - his condemnation, the questions to which it applies, II. =165-169= - on need of Metaphysics in Theology, II. 181 - on “Passivity,” II. 141, 142 - works of, distinction between them, II. 160, 161 - - Ferrara, Duchess of (Renée de Valois), I. 340, 341 - - Ferretto, Dottore Augusto, I. 125 _n._ 1, 152 _n._ 1, 155 _n._ 1, - 172 _n._ 2, 176 _n._ 1, 2; 203 _n._ 1, 213 _n._ 1, 378 _n._ 1, - 381 _n._ 1 - - Feuerbach, Ludwig, II. 332 - - Fichte, J. G., II. 271, 392 - - Ficino Marsilio, his translation of Dionysius’ works, I. 259 - - Fiesca, Adorna Caterinetta, _see_ Catherine, St. - - Fiesca, Francesca, I. 376, 377 - Maria, B., I. 176, 302 - Tommasa Suor, I. =131=, =132=, 143, 217, 259, 384, 387, 457, 464; - II. 62, 175 - possible contributions to the _Vita_, by, I. 457 - death of, I. 381 - life and works (upon the Areopagite and the Apocalypse), I. 132 - - Fieschi, Battista, I. 153, 154, 172 - Family, I. 95-97, 101, 157, 303 - Francesco, I. 125, 213, 315 - Giorgio, Cardinal, I. 102 - Giovanni, I. 97, 153, 154, 377, 378 - death of, I. 167 _n._ 3 (168), 172 - sons of, I. 167 - Cardinal, I. 125, 126 - Jacobo, I. 149 _n._ 1; 153, 167 _n._ 3 (168), 376, 384 - death of, I. 172 - his daughters, I. 167, 379 - Limbania, I. 97, 100, 105, 153, 167, 172, 186, 321, 379; II. 62 - Lorenzo, I. 97, 153, 154, 167 _n._ 3 (168), 172, 187, 215, 299, - 370, 377 - Cardinal, I. 302 - Luca, Cardinal, I. 96 - Maria, I. 153, 154, 167, 172 - Marietta, I. 146 - Napoleone, Cardinal, I. 102 - Nicolò, Cardinal, I. 96 - Roberto dei, I. 95 - - Fieschi, Sinibaldo de, _see_ Innocent IV, Pope - - Fiesco, Emmanuele, I. 175 - - Fisher, Bishop John, Blessed, I. 340 - - Florence, Council of, II. 226 - decisions concerning Purgatory, II. 217, 242 - - Fontana, Padre, Barnabite, II. 226 - - France, I. 64, 94; II. 148 - - Franchi, de’, Archbishop, I. 306 - Tobia dei, I. 102 - - Francis, St., of Assisi, I. 8, 65, 389; II. 42, 47, 261 - his life and legend, I. 372 - - Franciscans, I. =61=, =64=, 130, 140 _n._ 4, 385, 386, 389, 390; - II. 105, 106, 109, 143, 144, 316, 317, 363 - - Francis, St., de Sales, I. 88; II. 142, 143, 363 - - Frank, Sebastian, I. 63 - - Fregosi Family, Genoa, I. 96, 101 - - Ottaviano, Doge, I. 327, 329, 330 - - Friendship, St. Catherine’s attitude concerning, I. 225, 226 - - Fust, Printer, I. 94 - - - Galilei, Galileo, I. 7 - - Gamaliel, II. 63 - - Ganymede, II. 187 - - Gardner, Prof. P. and Miss A. on Confession and Direction, - II. 364 _n._ 1 - - Gemiluth Chasadim, II. 153 - - General, its relation to Particular according to Greek philosophy, - I. 10-25; II. =310-319= - - Geneva, I. 9 - - Genoa, I. 96, 100-102, and _passim_ - position and climate, I. 93 - Republic of, I. 303, 305, 306, 449 - - Genoese Republic, I. 203 - the people, their character, I. 93-94 - - George, Bank of Saint, I. 125, 152, 153, 169, 172, 318, 326 _n._ 1, - 330, 365, 376, 379 - cartulary of the, I. 149 _n._ 1, 365, 379 - - Germano, Borgo San, Genoa, I. 145 _n._ 1 - - Germany, I. 62, 94; II. 370 - - Geronimo of Genoa, Fra, O.P., I. 253, 413, 464 - - Gerson, John, Chancellor of Paris, I. 62, 94, 342 - - Gertrude, Saint, I. 64 - - Giovo, Angelo L., Prot. Ap., I. 93, 172 _n._ 1, 208 _n._ 2, 297 _n._ 1, - 395, 396 - - _Giuseppine_, Genoa, I. 327 - - Giustiniano, Agostino, Bishop, his account of St. Catherine’s life, - remains and biography, I. 382-384 - - Gnosticism, approximations and antagonisms to, in Fourth Gospel, II. 81, - 82 - - God as supremely concrete, II. 249, 255 - natural conformity between, and all rational creatures, I. 261 - hunger after, I. 263 - His illumination of souls, I. 270-271 - His way of winning souls, I. 271-272 - co-operation of the living, and the living soul, I. 73 - ever apprehended in His relation to ourselves, II. =169-170= - as the _Actus Purus_, II. 80, 81, 131, 132 - the essence of things, I. 256, 266 - Unity and Trinity of, I. 66-67 - various conceptions concerning His relations with the human soul, - II. 319-325 - God’s “anger” and offendedness, I. 292; II. 69, 70 - “ecstasy,” I. 260, 262, 352; II. 95, 96, =254= - immanence, I. 276, 280; II. 280-284, =287-290=, 324, 325, 330, - =336-340= - “jealousy,” II. 353, 355 - transcendence, I. 276, 280 - - Goethe, II. 229, 271, 327 - - Gordon, Charles, General, I. 89; II. 271 - - Görres, Joseph von, and question of true Mysticism, II. 315 - - Gospels, pre-Pauline and Pauline, apprehensions in the, II. 117-118 - - Gospels, the, _see_ John, St., Evangelist, and Synoptic Gospels - - Grace and Free Will, I. =69=, =70=; II. 141, 142, =174= - - Graces, Interior, I. 263, 265 - - Grasso, Don Giacomo C., I. 299 _n._ 1 - - Greece, II. 185, 191, 192 - - Greeks, I. =10-25=, 151, 155, 246, 259; II. 83, 90-101, 131, 132, - 185-189, 205-211, 294, 310-314, 319, 320, 325-327, 333, 356-358, - 389 - - Green, Thomas Hill, II. 371 - - Gregory I, the Great, Pope, Saint, I. 64 - VII, Pope (Hildebrand), I. 64 - St., of Nazianzum, II. 166, 181 - of Nyssa, I. 61; II. 31, 166 - - Grimm, Jacob, II. 271 - - Grisell, Hartwell, I. 98 _n._ 1 (99) - - Grou, Père J. N., S.J., I. 64; II. 143, 363, 365 - combines deep mystical life and critical labours, II. =138= - - Gutenberg (John Gensfleisch), I. 94 - - Guyon, Madame la Mothe, II. 138, 143, 175 - - - Hadrian, Emperor, II. 292 - V, Pope (Fieschi), I. 95 - VI, Pope (Dedel), I. 340 - - Hamann, J. C., II. 371 - - Hannibal, II. 272 - - Heaven and Pure Love according to St. Catherine’s conception, - I. =159-160= - and Time; concreteness; and pain, II. =247-258= - - Hecker, Father Isaac, I. 89; II. 58 - - Hedley, Bishop J. C., O.S.B., on the condemnation of Fènelon, II. 161 - - Hegel, G. W. F., II. 271, 291, 296, 371 - - Hegelian school, II. 269 - - Hell, St. Catherine and, II. =218-230= - disposition of souls in, II. 221-225 - endlessness of, II. 227-230 - fire of, II. 215-218 - mitigation of its pains, II. 225-227 - St. Catherine’s doctrine concerning, I. =281-283= - - Hellenism, I. =11-25= - its qualities, I. 48 - its three religious elements, I. 60 - - Henry VI, of England, I. 96 - VII, of England, I. 200, 201, and _n._ 2 - VIII, of England, I. 311 - - Hensel, Luise, I. 334 - - Heraclitus, I. 11, 12; II. 188 - his doctrine, I. 4, 11 - - Herder, J. G., II. 327, 371 - - Hermann, Prof. Wilhelm, II. 263, 264, 265 - impossible simplification of religion, II. =269-272= - Panchristism of, II. 266 - - Heroes, Cultus of, II. 187 - - Hezekiah, II. 190 - - Hildegard of Bingen, St., I. 64 - - Hindooism, II. 273 - - Historical element of Religion, its division, I. 85 - science, _see_ Science - - Hobbes, Thomas, I. 7 - - Höffding, Prof. Harald, on religious “Agnosticism,” II. =287=, =288= - - Holtzmann, Prof. H., on retaining vivid sense both of determinist - physical law and of libertarian spiritual life, II. =377=, =378= - on Conditional Immortality, II. 229 - on Metaphysical factors in N. T. writings, II. =269=, =270= - - Holtzmann, Prof. H., on category of time, as secondary in man’s spiritual - life, II. =247=, =248= - - Hume, David, II. 272 - - Hus, John, I. 94 - - Huxley, Prof. Thomas, II. 272 - - Huysmans, J. K., II. 56 - - Hylozoism, I. 12 - - Hysteria, St. Catherine’s condition only superficially like, II. =22-27= - three popular errors concerning, II. 22, 23 - - - Ignatius, of Antioch, St., I. 219 _n._ 2; II. 43, 133 _n._ - of Loyola, St., I. =68, 80=; II. 142 - - Illingworth, Rev. J. B., II. 333 - - Illuminists, I. 9 - - Imagery, Battista Vernazza’s, I. 409, 432 - St. Catherine dominates her own imagery, I. 237, 238 - St. Catherine’s imagery, I. 266-268, 270, 277, 284-285, 287-293 - compared to B. Vernazzas, I. 409, 432 - - Immanence, Divine, II. 287-290, =336-340= - facts indicative of the, II. =280-284= - in V. Battista Vernazza, I. 352; II. 289 - St. Catherine, I. 261-263; II. 347 - St. Paul, II. 70 - Plotinus, II. 92, 96 - St. Teresa, II. =324=, =325= - St. Thomas, II. 288, 289, =337=, =338= - recent thinkers, I. 270, 271, =339-340= - - Immortality, belief in, among great Eastern religions, II. 181-185 - its beginnings amongst Greeks and Jews, II. 185-191 - morbid, character of the Greek beginnings, II. 191-194 - philosophical and ethical difficulties of, II. =194-199= - - Imperiali, Cardinal, I. 305 - - Incarnational doctrine, I. 369; II. 136, 139, 194, 195, 237, 238, - =253-255=, 343, 344, =355-357=, 395, 396 - - Incorruption of St. Catherine’s body, I. 302 and _n._ 2 - - India, II. 183, 332 - - Individual, the, its apparent power over the emotions and the will, - I. 3-6; - its power derived from expressing the Abiding and Personal, - =I. 367-370= - - Individuality, right, of every soul, II. =255=, =256= - - Indulgences, St. Catherine’s assertions about them, I. 123-124 - authenticity of, I. 124 - St. Catherine’s attitude towards them, I. 124-125 - the Congregation of Rites on St. Catherine’s attitude towards - indulgences, I. 125-126 - - Innocent IV, Pope (Fieschi), I. 95 - XI. Pope (Odescalchi), I, 253, 305; II. 140, 144, 168 _n._ 1 - - Inquisition, Roman, I. 341 - Spanish, I. 72; II. 380 - - Intellectual element of Religion, its division, I. 85-86 - personalities, movements and races, I. 6-7 - gaps in, stopped by the Emotional-volitional element, I. 7 - - Intercommunication, will-moving, between men, its conditions, I. 367-370 - - Interiorization, the soul’s, of God, I. 263 - - Intuitionists, Dutch-Westphalian Apocalyptic, I. 63; II. 392 - - Invocation of Saints, by St. Catherine, I. 240 - her attitude concerning it, I. 126-127 - - Isolation, moral and spiritual, I. 5-6 - - Isaiah, I. 258; II. 189, 268 - - Italy, I. 65, 94, 259, 311, 315, 341; II. 29, 270, 370 - Quietism in, II. 148 - - - Jacobi, F. H., II. 371 - - Jacopone, da Todi, I. 130, 163 _n._, 177, 234, 235, 255, 258, 259, 275, - 386; II. 62, 63, 83, 205 - his _Lode_, their influence upon Catherine’s conceptions, - II. =102-110= - Neo-Platonism in, II. 104, 109 - Platonism in, II. 103-105, 109 - - Jahvist and Elohist writings, Moses in, I. 373 - - Jamblichus, I. 6 - - James, Saint, _Epistle of_, II. 116, 269 - Prof. William, II. 6, 265 - on psychical normality and fruitfulness of formless recollection, - II. =266= - on pace of conversion, as primarily a temperamental matter, II. 30 - - Janet, Pierre, Professor, II. 265 - on three popular errors concerning Hysteria, II. 22, 23 - hysterical peculiarities registered by him, II. 23-25 - - Japan, II. 183 - - Jean Baptiste de la Salle, St., I. 78 - - Jean, François St. Regis, S.J., I. 306 - - Jean Paul Friedrich Richter, II. 371 - - Jeremiah, II. 189, 190, 268, 292, 332 - - Jerome, St., I. 78 - - Jesuits, I. =63=, =64=, 121; II. 129, 142, 144, 162, 170 _n._, 225, 226, - 241, 242, 245, 288, 307 - - Jesus Christ, compared with Buddha and Mohamed, I. 71 - His Cross, its necessity for the soul’s fullest life, I. 82; - II. 331, =360=, =361=, 395 - multiplicity within unity of His action and interests, I. =25-28= - His place in teaching of V. Battista Vernazzo, I. 359, 360, 405, - 406, 413 - St. Catherine, I. 108, 109, 209, =239-241=, 360, 412, 413; - II. 70-74, 77, 79-83, 85 - Joannine writings, II. 80, 81 - St. Paul, II. 71, 72, 76-79, 158, 159 - in conception of Prof. W. Hermann, II. 263-268, 332 - His teaching, primarily not moral, but religious, II. =274= - on Pure Love, II. 153-158 - its Petrine, Pauline, Joannine presentations, II. 28-39 - - Jews, II. =189-191=, 194, 213, 214, 220, 224, 233, 234, 239, 315, 316 - - Joachim, Abbot, II. 391 - - Job, II. 189 - - John, St. Damascene, II. 225 - St., Evangelist; the Joannine writings, I. 223, 234, 235, 258, 353, - 374; II. 62, 63, 116, 202, 205, 253 - and organized Ecclesiastical Christianity, II. 83, 84 - and St. Paul, II. 80, 82, 85, 87, 88 - and the Synoptic Gospels, II. =81-86=, =116=, =117= - and other systems, II. 79, 80, 81-83 - on God, Salvation, Sacraments, Last Things, compared with St. - Catherine’s teachings, II. =84-90= - - John, St., on Pure Love, II. 160 - the Baptist, St., I. 65, 97 - chapel of, Cathedral, Genoa, I. 77, 161 - the Beheaded, Company of, I. 327, 328, 430 - XXII, Pope (Duèse), II. 318 - St., of the Cross, I. 67, 87, 180, 247; II. 50, 59, 142, 143, 146, - 147, 288, 306-308, 346, 366 - on right attachment, II. =353= - on faith, as sole proportionate means of union with God, II. 343, - 348 - on a loving knowledge producible by God’s aid alone, II. 307 - on perception of God’s incomprehensibleness, II. =257=, =258= - on the true test of perfection, II. =51= - his helpfulness towards finding place for temper of determinist - science within the spiritual life, II. 385 - his predominant theory requires continuous remembrance of his - practice and occasional description of the soul’s other movement, - II. =343-345= - - Josephus, II. 233 - - Jowett, Benjamin, I. 63 - - Judaism, II. 79 - its three elements, I. =61=; II. 388, 389, 392 - - Judas Maccabaeus, II. 233, 292 - - Juliana, Mother, of Norwich, on Eternal Punishment, II. 218, 219 - on negative character of Evil, II. 394 - and Direction, II. 363 - her Christian optimism, II. =305=, =306= - - Julianus, Monk, Pelagianizer, II. 293 - - Julius II, Pope (Rovere), I. 94, 146, 155 - - Justina, Benedictine, Congregation of St., Padua, I. 103 _n._ 1 - - Justin, St., Martyr, II. 268, 333 - - - Kabbala, II. 392 - - Kant, Immanuel, I. 43; II. 27, 42, 168, 179, 247, 261, 264, 275, 295, 370, - 371, 392 - deepens contrast between quantitative science and qualitative - spiritual life, I. 43 - his defective religious sense, II. =260-262= - on disinterested religion, II. 177-179 - his dualistic assumption in epistemology, II. 278 - on Evil as positive and radical, II. =295=, =296= - on obscure apprehensions, II. 265 - - Keble, Rev. John, I. 63 - - Kempen, Thomas of, I. 62 - - Kepler, Johann, I. 7; II. 27 - - Kierkegaard Sören, his radical Asceticism, II. 345, 346, 353 - on God’s utter difference from Man, II. =287=, =288= - on “Repetition,” II. 285 - - Knowledge, its three constituents, I. 54-57 - - - Laberthonnière, Abbé L., _Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne_, 1905, 1906, - II. 307 - - Lallemant, Louis, Pére, S.J., I. 64; II. 365 - - Lancisius, Nicolas, S.J., I. 89 - - Laplace, P. S. de, II. 272 - - Lateran, Fourth Council of, I. 120, 121 - - Laud, William, Anglican Archbishop, I. 63 - - Laurence, St., quarter of, Genoa, I. 377 - - Lavagna, on Riviera, I. 95 - - Lazaretto, Genoa, I. 332 - - Lazzaro, S., Genoa, I. 406 - poor of, I. 145 _n._ 1 - - Leibniz, I. 42, 113; II. 145, 177, 231, 261, 271, 282, 291 - on dim Presentations, II. =338= - on Pure Love, II. =176= - his share in development of modern scientific spirit, I. =42=, =43= - - Leo X (Medici), Pope, I. 259, 311, 321, 322 - _Bull “Exurge Domine,”_ I. 340, 448 - - Lessing, G. E., II. 271, 327 - on soul’s incapacity for any unmixed emotion, II. =256= - on Purgatory, II. 231 - - Leucippus, I. 11 - - Library, University, of Genoa, I. 171 _n._ 1, 172 _n._ 1 - - Life, Spiritual, three stages of, I. =241-244= - - Liguria, I. 96 - - Ligurians, I. 96 - - Limbania, Beata, of Genoa, I. 97, 100 - - Littré, Emil, II. 271 - - Locke, John, II. 261 - - Loisy, Alfred, Abbé, II. 360 _n._ 1 - - Lombard, Peter, I. 120; II. 325 _n._ 3 - - Lomellini family, Genoa, I. 327 - - Lorenzo, Cathedral of S., Genoa, I. 97, 101, 320 - Piazza S., I. 97 - - Lost, mitigation of sufferings of the, II. 225-227 - perversion, their total moral, II. =221-225= - - Lotze, Hermann, II. 271 - - Louis XII, King of France, I. 340 - XIV, King of France, I. 305 - St., King of France, I. 361 - - Love, of God and of oneself, I. 262-263 - Pure, I. 261 - according to St. Catherine’s conception, I. 159-160 - according to the New Testament, I. =153-159= - acts, single, of, II. =163-164= - pleasurableness that follows them, II. =170-172= - relation of, to Contemplative Prayer, II. 172 - and its cognate problems, II. =169-174= - Catherine’s, I. 140-141 - controversy concerning, II. =160-169= - distinction from Quietism, II. 151-181 - exactingness of, I. 268-269 - Fénelon on, II. 161, 165 - the Joannine writings on, II. 160 - Kant on, II. 177 - Leibniz on, II. 176 - Our Lord’s teaching concerning, II. =153-158= - St. Paul on, II. =158-160= - three rules of, according to St. Catherine, I. 138-139 - Spinoza’s view concerning, II. 175, 176 - state of, II. =165-169= - St. Thomas Aquinas on, II. =162-165=, 301 - - Loyola, St. Ignatius of, I. 68, 80; II. 142 - - Lucretius, II. 271 - - Lugo, John Cardinal de, S.J., I. 121 - - Lukardis, Venerable Sister, Cistercian, II. 52, 53, 54, 55, 58 - - Luke, St., I. 351, 374 - _Acts of the Apostles_, I. 162, 374; II. 269 - _Gospel according to_, I. 223 - and St. Paul, II. 157, 158 - - Lunga, Signora, I. 329 - - Luther, I. 9, 62, 63, 95, 340, 412, 448; II. =117-119=, 263, 388, 392 - Theses of, I. 252, 311, =448= - - Lutheranism, I. 9; II. 388 - early stages of, I. 339-341 - - Lyell, Sir Charles, II. 271 - - - Maccabean Heroes, I. 373 - resistance, I. 392 - - Maccabees, First and Second Books of, the, the Maccabean heroes in, - I. 373 - - “Maestà” (triptych), I. =168=, 172, 181, 239, 298 - - Magdalen, Mary, St., I. 110, 170 - - Maldonatus, Juan, S.J., I. 64 - - Malebranche, Nicholas, Père, I. 63; II. 331 - - _Mandiletto_, Compagnia del, I. 154, 332 - - Manichaeans, II. 221, 289 - - Manichaeism, II. 230 - - Manning, H. E., Cardinal, I. 89 - - Manuscripts, Genoese, of the _Vita_, I. 93 - - Manuscript “A” (University Library), I. 112 _n._ 1, 159 _n._ 1, - 162 _n._ 3 (163), 166, 188 _n._ 1, 197 _n._ 2, 214, 304, 434, - 435, 442, 451 - additions and variations of, as compared with Printed _Vita_, - I. =384-394= - and Argentina del Sale, I. 387 - characteristics of, I. 396 - authentic contributions of, I. =387-388= - date and scribe of, I. 385 - modification from a tripartite to a quadripartite scheme, - I. =390-394= - - Manuscript “B” (Archives of the Cathedral-chapter), I. 162 _n._ 3 (163), - 166, 188, 197 _n._ 2, 214, 396, 412, 415, 442 - dependence from MS. “A”, I. 394 - its divisions, I. 394-395 - its very primitive heading, I. =394= - - Manuscript “C” (University Library), differences from MSS. A and B, - origin and attribution, I. 395-396 - - “Maona” Company, Genoa, I. 151 - - Marabotti, various, I. 156, 157 - - Marabotto Cattaneo, Don, I. 90, 98 _n._ 1, 110, 117 _n._ 2, 118, 119, - 120, 121 _n._ 3, 135 _n._ 1, 140 _n._ 4, 147 _n._ 1, =156-159=, - 162 _n._ 3 (163), 166, 172, 173, 175, 176, =185=, =186=, 187, 191, - 193, 204 _n._ 1, 207, 213, 216, 217, 218, 225, 252, 256, 264, 296, - 299, 300, 301, 308, 309, 313, 314, 356, 371, 384, 390, 393, =415=, - =416=, =419=, =421=, 431, 432, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 454, 455, - =463=, =464=; II. 9, =15=, =17=, =25=, =26= - attitude concerning Catherine, I. 218 - character of, I. =157= - Catherine’s confessor, I. =157-158= - contributions to _Vita_-proper, I. 392-394, =455-457= - contributions to _Dicchiarazione_ (_Trattato_), I. 447-448 - death of, I. 381 - family, I. 156-157 - fate of, I. 310-311 - first relations with Catherine, I. 155-156 - influence and work concerning Catherine, I. 193-196 - misunderstandings, I. 120 _n._ 1 - scruples, I. 194-195 - scent-impression from his hand, I. 184-185 - will of, I. 381 - - Marco del Sale, I. 127, 203, 388, 402 - story of his death, I. =169-171= - - Marcus Aurelius, Emperor, II. 268 - - Maria delle Grazie, Santa, Genoa, church and convent of, I. =99-101=, - 132, 143, 170, 186, 319, 321, 325, 339, 365, 366 n. 2, =395=, 460; - II. 205 - - Maria delle Grazie Vecchia, S., church of, Genoa, I. 170 - - Maria di Castello, church of S., Genoa, I. 100, 101, 366 _n._ 1 - - Marie de l’Incarnation, the Ven., Ursuline, II. 141 - - Mariola Bastarda, servant, I. 149, 153, 161, 162 _n._ 3 (163), 172, 175, - 176, 216, 217, 226, =310-313=, 379, 381, 384, 457 - - Mark, Bishop of Ephesus, II. 225 - - Mark, St., Gospel according to, I. 67, 257, 374 - - Marriage, Catherine’s attitude concerning, I, 223-225; II. 124 - settlement, Catherine’s, I. 337 - Church teaching concerning, II. =128-129= - - Martineau, Dr. James, II. 329, 330 - - Martin St., of Tours, I. 373 - - Mary, Blessed Virgin, I. 99, 127, 168, 338, 426, 432 - (Tudor), Queen of England, I. 95 - (Stuart), Queen of Scots, I. 366 - - Matthew, St., Gospel according to, I. 374 - Levi, Apostle, I. 374 - - Maurice, Frederic Denison, II. 227 - - Mazone, Giovanni, painter, I. 98 _n._ 1 (99) - - Mazzini, Giuseppe, I. 97 - - Megaric School, I. 23 - - Melanchthon, and his _Loci_, I. 341 - - Menelaus, II. 186 - - Mercier, D. Cardinal, _Critériologie Générale_, II. 7 _n._ 1 - - Merovingian Saints, I. 373 - - Metaphysics and Religion, II. 181, 262, =269-272= - - Micah, Prophet, II. 189 - - Michael Angelo Buonarotti, I. 94 - - Milan, Dukes of, I. 96 - - Milano, Carlo da, painter, I. 98 _n._ 1 (99) - - Mill, John Stuart, I. 51; II. 227, 271 - - Misericordia, Donne della, Genoa, I. 130, 131, 401, 402 - Office of, Genoa, I. 152, 154, 319 - - Missione Urbana, Biblioteca della, Genoa, I. 98 _n._ 1, 125 _n._ 1, - 167 _n._ 3 (168), 171 _n._ 1 (172), 202 _n._ 2, 203 _n._ 1, - 208 _n._ 2, 3; 296 _n._ 1, 297 _n._ 1, 299 _n._ 1, 301 _n._ 1, - 308 _n._ 1, 309 _n._ 1, 312 _n._ 1, 313 _n._ 1, 381 _n._ 1, 2 - - Mithraic movement, II. 392 - - Mohamed, compared with Christ, I. 71 - - Mohammedanism, II. 270, 388 - its three elements, I. =60-61= - - Mohammedans, II. 392 - - Molinos, Miguel de, I. 253; II. 131 _n._ 1, 141, 145, 365 - his condemnation, its history, motives, limits, II. =136-148= - _Guida Spirituale_, II. 140, 143, 144 - _Breve Trattato_, II. 144 - - Moltke, Field-Marshal von, II. 271 - - Mommsen, Theodor, II. 272 - - Monasticism, the abiding needs met by, II. =352-355= - - Monica, St., I. 361 - - Monism, I. 40; II. 294, 314, 326, =377-379= - - Montanism, II. 391 - - Morality, relations to Mysticism, Philosophy and Religion, II. =259-275= - - More, Sir Thomas, Blessed, I. 62, 340; II. 129 - - Moro, Dottore Tommaso, I. 149, 252, 337, 341, 358, 364, 414, 415; II. 83 - becomes a Calvinist, I. 341-342 - - Moro, Dottore Tommaso, his letter to Battista Vernazza; and her letter - to him, I. 341-342, =342-344= - his return to the Catholic Church, I. 344 - Morone, Giovanni, Cardinal, I. 327, 342 _n._ 2 - - Moses, I. =373=; II. 189, 268 - - Mühlhausen, Father Henry of, O.P., II. 52 - - Multiplicity, within every living Unity, I. =66-70= - difficulty of its maintenance, I. 65, =70-77=; II. 264, =273-275= - needful for all spiritual life, II. =150-152=, 283, 284, 343, 344 - - Münsterberg, Prof. Hugo, II. 308, 370 - - Mysteries, Eleusynian, I. 60; II. 97 - - Mystical Element, its apparent worthlessness but essential importance, - I. 6-10, 48, 49, 50-53, 58-65; II. =260-269= - - Mysticism and Pantheism, II. 325-340 - and the limits of human knowledge, II. 275-290 - and the question of Evil, II. 290-308 - and historical religion, II. 263-269 - Christian, II. 251, 252 - “exclusive” or pseudo-mysticism and “inclusive” or true mysticism, - II. 283, =290-291=, 319 - ruinousness of exclusive, II. 304-308, =351-353= - its place in complete Religion, II. =272-275= - and the scientific habit of mind, II. =367-372= - points on which it approaches Pantheism, II. =329-334= - predominantly individualistic, II. 365-366 - tends to neglect the sensible, the successive, and spiritual - self-excitation, II. =284-287= - - Mystic Saints, II. 142-143 - - Mystics, I. 61, 247 - and spiritual Direction, II. 362-363 - their special weaknesses and strengths, II. =284-289=, =289-295=, - 297, 298, 301, 302, =343-346=, 385, 386 - - - Naples, I. 97 - Hospital in, I. 323, 329 - Kingdom of, I. 96 - Society for escorting culprits to death, I. 323-324 - - Napoleon, II. 41-42, 133, 272 - - Negri Family, Genoa, various members of, I. 97, 100, 377 - - Nelson, Admiral Lord, II. 133 - - Neo-Platonism, in general, I. =23-25=, 61 - its direct influence with St. Augustine, II. =212=, =213=, =248=, - =293= - Pseudo-Dionysius, II. =91-99=, 294, =312=, =313= - Its influence, through Dionysius, with V. Battista Vernazza, - I. =352-354=, 356, 358, 428 - St. Catherine, II. =91-99=, =123-126=, =234-239=, 294 - Jacopone da Todi, II. 104, 108, 109 - Medieval Mystics and Pantheists, II. 131, 147, 314, 315, 317, - 318, 323, 324 - St. Thomas Aquinas, II. =249-252=, 254, 294, 316, 317 - its truth, II. =92=, =248= - its weaknesses and errors, II. 252, =287=, =288=, =293=, =294=, - =351-353= - - Neri, St. Philip, I. 318 - Church of, Genoa, I. 102 - - Nero, Emperor, II. 292 - - Nervous system, late realization of, II. 4, 5 - - “Nettezza,” I. 266 _n._ 3 - - Newman, John Henry, Cardinal, I. 65, 78; II. 371 - _Dream of Gerontius_, I. 89; II. 245 - on Eternal Punishment, II. 230 - on Physical Science, its limited scope and its autonomy, II. =369= - - Newton, John, I. 63 - Sir Isaac, II. 27, 41, 42, 271 - - Nicolas of Coes (Cusanus), Cardinal, I. 62, 78, 96; II. 131, 142, 282, - 291, 331 - - Nicolas V, Pope (Parentucelli), I. 103 _n._ 1 - - Nicolo in Boschelto, S., near Genoa, church and monastery of, I. 103, - 189, 213, 313, 319, 321, 325; II. 274 - - Nietzsche, Friedrich, II. 274 - - Nominalism, I. 61, 62 - - Nonconformists, I. 63; II. 392 - - Nonconformity, I. 8, 9 - - Novara, Luca da, painter, I. 98 _n._ 1 (99) - - - Occam, William of, O.S.F., I. 64 - - Occhino, Bernardino, I. 341, 342 - - Oldenberg, H., on _Nirvana_, II. 183-185 - - Oratory (French), I. 63 - - Orders, Catholic, religious, their three tendencies, I. 64 - - Organic life, the successive stages of, II. 281, 304 - - Origen, I. 6; II. 131, 142, 219, 239, 268 - his _Apocatastasis_--doctrine, II. 225, 228 - on fire of Hell, II. 216 - on an ameliorative Purgatory, II. 234-237 - - Originality, treble, of St. Catherine, I. 246-249 - - Orphic belief, II. 193 - influence, through Plato, upon Christian thought, II. 123, 124, - =235-238= - literature, II. 235 - mysteries, II. 188 - sect, II. 192 - - - Palaeologus, Michael, his confession of faith, II. 242 - - Palladius, _Historia Monachorum_, I. 373 - - Pammatone, Hospital of, I. =129-132=, 142, 145 _n._ 1, 148-153, 169, - 170, 213, 226, 300, 303, 310 _n._ 1, 311, 317, 325-327, 377, 380, - 395, 401, 407; II. 9, 10, 17, 27, 33, 62 - Books, of the, I. 143 _n._ 2, 208 - Cartulary, of, I. 202 _n._ 2, 313 - Church, of the, I. 98 _n._ 1, 152, 202 and _n._ 3, 296, 297 _n._ 1, - 300, 302, 309, 321, 332, 382 - House surgeon, of the, I. 200; II. 14 - Protectors, of the, I. 175, 187, 216, 297, 299, 307 - Book of the Acts of the, I. 172 _n._ 1, 175 _n._ 1 - - Pantheism in Middle Ages, II. 314-318 - useful preliminary, of Inclusive Mystics, II. =329-334= - escaped by full development of scientific habit within shallower - level of a deep spiritual life, II. =374-386= - in Spinoza, secret of its power, II. =326-329= - ultimate, not Christian, nor generally religious, II. =334=, =335= - - Paracelsus, I. 7 - - Paris, II. 389 - University of, I. 62 - - Parker, Rev. James, I. 250, 266 _n._ 3 - - Parmenides, I. 11; II. 188 - his doctrine, I. 11 - - _Parousia_, the, II. 380 - - Parpera, Giacinto, P., Oratorian, I. 92, 390 - - Pascal, I. 78; II. 261, 331 - - Pascoli, Giovanni, II. 199 - - Passivity, _see_ Quietism - - Pattison, A. S. Pringle, II. 329, 330, 333, 370 - - Paul, Saint, I. 111, 256, 265, 320, 363, 361, 373, 453; II. 43, 44, 47, - 80, 82, 87, 122, 124, 125, 129, 131, 142, 181, 186, 209, 237, 253, - 298, 324, 333, 356 - and Joannine writings, II. 84-88 - and Synoptic Gospels, II. 65, =122-125=, =157=, =158= - anthropology of, II. =64-67= - his conceptions of God, II. =69-71= - of Spirit, II. =67-69=, =320-322= - of reconciliation, justification and sanctification, II. 71-74 - ecstasies and psycho-physical peculiarities of, II. 43-44 - Epistles of, I. 162, 234, 235, 258, 353, 374; II. 62, 63, 116, - 202, 205 - Eschatology of, II. 76-79, =209=, =210= - Judaic conceptions of, II. 69, 71, 72 - Platonic influences in, II. 64, =66=, =67=, 69, 122, 123 - and the Risen Christ, II. 71 - Sacramental teachings of, II. 75-76 - Social ethics of, II. =74-75= - IV, Pope (Caraffa), I. 322, 327 - - Pazzi, Maria Magdalena dei, St., II. 42, 56 - - Peasants’ War, I. 10, 311, 340 - - Personality, its purification, II. =377-387= - Spiritual, II. =336-340= - - Petau, Denys, S.J., II. 225 - - Peter, St., I. 67, 374 - Epistles of, II. 116 - - Peters, Margarethe, Lutheran Quietist, II. 139 - - Petrone, Igino, Prof., II. 282, 370 - - Petrucci, Pietro M., Cardinal, II. 140, 141 - his writings, II. 144, 145 - - Pharisees, I. 61, 68; II. 388 - - Philo, I. 61; II. 63, 69, 93, 131, 196, 233 - and the Joannine writings, II. 80, 81 - and St. Paul, II. 69, 70 - - Physicians, and St. Catherine, I. 200, 201, 208, 211, 212 - - Physicists, the ancient Greek, II. 379 - - Pico della Mirandoia, I. 7 - - “Pietà,” picture, I. 181, 209, 239, 460; II. 28 - - Pietism, Protestant, I. 10 - - Pindar, II. 188, 189, 271 - - Pius IV, Pope (Medici), I. 123 - VII, Pope (Chiaramonti), II. 226 - - Plague, in Genoa, 1493, I. 143 - St. Catherine and the, I. 143-145 - Ettore Vernazza and the, I. 330-332 - - Plant-life, Catherine’s sympathy for, I. 163, 164 - probably dimly conscious, II. 281, 304 - - Plato, I. 12, 14, 19, 20, 21, 23, 28, 234, 257, 266 _n._ 3, 353; - II. =66=, =124=, 185 _n._ 2, 186, 188, 192, 193, 196, 199, =202=, - =203=, =204=, 249, 252, 253, 268, 282, 311, 357 - on amelioration by suffering, II. 208, 209 - his earlier and later beliefs as to place of contemplation in - complete life, II. =306-309= - Immortality, II. 186 - his abidingly fruitful combination of four characteristics, - I. =17-19= - on the Heavenly Eros, I. 17; II. 101, 203, 251 - God, how far concrete and ethical in, II. 311, 312 - on God’s goodness as cause of His framing this universe, I. 24; - II. =334= - on the Noûs, II. 319-320 - the Orphic strain in, II. 66, 67, =123-126=, 235, 236 - his five preformations of St. Catherine’s _Trattato_ teachings, - II. =205-211= - his _Republic_, Catherine’s purgatorial picturings compared with, - II. 200, 201 - on the soul’s determinedness and liberty, II. 210, 211 - the soul’s nakedness, II. 209, 210 - the soul’s “places,” II. 205-207 - the soul’s plunge, II. 207, 208 - on Science and Mysticism, respectively, II. 368 - on _Thumos_, II. 203 - - Plotinus, I. 6, 234, 257, 266 _n._ 3; II. 93, 97, 98, 99, 101, 109, 120, - 196, 202, 204, 212, 213, 248, 268, 282, 298, 324, 326, 327, 329, 356 - his doctrine generally, I. =23-25= - on Ecstasy, II. 322, 323 - places Godhead above all multiplicity, II. 312, 313 - on the Henad, the Noûs and the Soul, II. 322, 323 - and Spinoza, II. 325-328 - - Plunge, voluntary of the Soul, I. 249, 250, =284=, =285=; II. 89, =207=, - =208=, =385-386= - - Plutarch, II. 236 - - Poor, Catherine’s love for the, I. 225-226 - - Positivist, Epistemology, II. =275-283= - - Possession, Persons in state of, I. 161, 162 _n._ 3 - - Possessions, Catherine’s, at her death, I. 297-299 - - Poveri, Albergo dei, Genoa, I. 332 - - Prà, near Genoa, I. 102, 103, 128, 129, 186, 313 - - Prayers for the Dead, Jewish, II. 233-234 - - Presbyterianism, II. 388 - - Pre-Socratics, their doctrines, I. 11-12 - - Priestly code, Moses in, I. 373 - - Proclus, I. 234, 257; II. 91, 96, 97, 98, 100, 101, 109, 120, 196, 204, - 205, 211, 294, 356 - doctrine of, I. =23-25=; II. 313, 329, 356 - the Areopagite reproduces directly, not Plotinus but, II. 91, - 96-101, 205 - - Prophets, Hebrew, I. 353 - - Protestantism, II. 273 - continental, I. 8, =62=, =63= - English, I. =8-9= - German, I. 9 - - Proverbs, Book of, Individual retribution in, II. 189 - - Psalms, Book of, St. Catherine and, I. 258 - Future life in, II. 189-191 - David in, I. 373 - - Psycho-physical and temperamental characteristics of St. Catherine during - 1447-1477, II. 28-32 - 1477-1499, II. 32-40 - 1497-1510, II. 9-21 - Aug. 10-27, 1510, I. 204-209 - occasions or expressions, not causes, of Catherine’s doctrine, - I. 211, 212, 260; II. =14-20= - - Psycho-physical and temperamental characteristics of St. Catherine, - inquiry into, difficulty of, II. 7-9 - organism, of St. Catherine, I. 176-181 - peculiarities of great men, II. 41, 42 - peculiarities of ecstatic saints, II. =42-47=, =52-56= - abidingly sure spiritual tests of, applied by great mystical - saints, II. =48-51= - theory, defects and value of ancient, II. 3-6, 47, 48 - - Purgatory, I. 190, 249, 382 - Alexandrine Fathers on, II. 234-236 - Catherine’s conceptions of, harbour two currents of thought, II. 232 - Catherine’s doctrine concerning, I. 179. 189, =283-294=; - II. =230-246= - the three sets of theological “corrections” of, traceable in - Trattato’s text, I. =434-449= - and the New Testament, II. 233, 239, 240 - initial experience and act of the soul in, I. 283-285 - subsequent state of the soul in, I. 285-294 - change of feeling among Protestant thinkers concerning, II. 230-232 - fire of, II. 215-218 - Judaeo-Roman conceptions of, II. 239-245 - Luther’s theses concerning, I. 311, 448 - Orphic conception and, II. 237, 238 - Platonic conception of, II. =206-211= - a truly purging, and Suarez’ simple _Satisfactorium_, II. =240-245= - - “Purità,” I. 266 _n._ 3 - - Puritan excesses, I. 10 - - Pusey, Dr. Edward B., I. 63 - - Pythagoras, II. 188, 192 - - - Quietism, II. 130, 131, 133, 135, 138, 139, 142, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, - 160, 168 - four aberrations of, II. =136-139= - Rome’s condemnation of, II. 139-143 - distinct from Pure Love question, II. 152, 193 - four needs recognized by, II. =148-150= - Rome’s alleged change of front concerning, II. 143-148 - - - Rabbinism, II. 63, 213, 214, 233, 234, 268, 388 - - Rafael Sanzio, the painter, II. 132, 165 - - Ranke, Leopold von, II. 271 - - Rationalism, I. 8, 9; II. =260-263=, 275, 276, =382-387=, 389, 390 - - Rauwenhoff, Prof. L. W. E., on Mysticism as a necessary form of - religion, II. 268, 269 - - Realism, I. 61, 62 - advantages of, II. =318-319= - Pantheistic trend of strict, II. =314-319= - - Reason, goddess of, II. 389 - - Redactor of _Conversione_-booklet, I. 464 - of _Dicchiarazione_-booklet, I. 464 - 1 of _Vita_-proper, I. 162 _n._ 3, 188 _n._ 1, 372, 414 - 2 of _Vita_-proper, I. 159, 162 _n._ 3, 372 - of _Vita-Dicchiarazione-Dialogo_, I. 464 - - Reformation, Protestant, I. 62, 282, 339-341, 448; II. 232, 388 - - Reform, Franciscan, I. 341 - - Regio, Clerk Regular, criticizes Molinos, II. 144 - - Reinach Salomon, on beginnings of Jewish prayers for the dead, II. 233, - 234 - - Religion and morality, II. =272-275= - apprehension by man of, I. =50-55= - through sense and memory, I. 51 - through Mysticism, I. 53 - through speculation, I. 51-52 - apprehension by St. Catherine of, I. 247 - conflicts between its elements, I. =70-77=; II. 392-393 - difficulties of the subjective element of, II. 112-114 - disinterested, _see_ Love, Pure - emotional-volitional element, its exclusiveness, I. 73-77 - historical, relations with Mysticism, II. 266-268 - institutional element, its exclusiveness, I. 71-73 - relation to Science of, I. 45-48; II. =367-386= - Social, and Mysticism, II. 351-366 - Subjective and Objective elements of, II. 118-120, =263-266=, 270 - the three elements of, I. 50-55; II. =387-396= - and their due proportions, II. 387-388 - continuous concomitance of, I. 53-55 - distribution among men of, I. 58-59 - distribution among religions of, I. 60-65 - multiplicity of each of them, I. 85, 86 - succession in history of, I. 59-60 - - Religious temper, its longing for simplification, I. 65-66 - - Renaissance, humanist, I. 62 - - Renté, Baron de, I. 89 - - Rhode, Erwin, on the Dionysian and Orphic movements, II. 191, 192 - on Plato’s later teaching as to contemplation, II. 356, 357 - - Ribet, Abbé, and question as to true Mysticism, II. 305 - - Riccordo, Padre, da Lucca, I. 136 - - Richelieu, Cardinal, II. 41 - - Rickert, H., his building up an Organon of the Historical Sciences, - II. 370 - - Rig-Veda, II. 183 - - Rigorism among pre-Reformation devoted Catholics, I. 339-342 - touches of, in V. Battista Vernazza, I. 400-407, 422, 431 - St. Catherine, I. 342 - - Rites, Sacred Congregation of, Rome, I. 126, 253, 305, 306 - - Ritschl, Albrecht, and his school; their excessive reaction against - Hegel, II. 263, 269 - - Ritschlian school, II. 263 - - Robespierre, II. 292 - - Rodriguez, Alfonso, Fr., S.J., I. 89 - - Romans, the ancient, I. 93; II. 185, 239, 240 - - Rome, I. 98, 99 _n._ ; 156, 203, 305, 322; II. 185 - Arch-Hospital in, I. 322 - Church of, I. 8, 9, 10, 63; II. 273 - condemns some propositions of Fénelon, II. 160, 162 - condemns Quietism, II. =139-143= - sack of, I. 311 - - Rosmini, Antonio, I. 65, 78 - - Rothe, Richard, II. 229, 332, 333 - - Royce, Josiah, Professor, II. 370 - - Ruysbroek, Johannes, Augustinian Canon-Regular, on the two-fold unity - of our spirit with God, II. 323 - - - Sabatier, Paul, his critical labours in early Franciscan history, I. 372 - - Saccheri, Notary, Genoa, I. 213 - - Sacraments and St. Catherine: - Baptism, I. 436; II. 76, 87 - Holy Eucharist, I. 113-116, 204, 208, 240, 241; II. 19, 87, 88 - Penance, I. 117-123 - Extreme Unction, I. 195, 197, 204, 206 - - Sadducees, I. 61; II. 389 - - Saint-Jure, de, S.J., I. 89 - - Saint-Simon, Duc de, II. 271 - - Saints, canonized, Catholic principles concerning the teaching of, - I. 253-255 - invocation of, Catherine’s, I. 240 - - Samaria, Woman of, I. 188, 189, 406; II. 17 - - Samaritans, I. 27, 38 - - Samuel, Books of, David in, I. 373 - - Sandreau, Abbé A., his sober Mystical doctrine, II. 307 - - Sauli, Cardinal, of Genoa, I. 322, 327 - - Savonarola, Fra Girolamo, contrasted with Luther and Calvin, II. 118 - - Sceptical schools, the, of ancient Greece, I. 23 - - Schelling, W. S. von, II. 335, 371, 392 - - Schiller, Friedrich, his “Fiesco,” I. 96 - - Schism, Papal, I. 95 - - Schlegel, Friedrich von, I. 89, 424; II. 371 - - Schleiermacher, Friedrich, II. 231, 296, 371, 392 - - Scholastics, the, I. 61, 62; II. 162-168, 214, 215, 217, 222-225, 236, - 242, 244, 245, =252-254=, 294, 301, =316=, =317= - - Schopenhauer, Arthur, II. 271, 291, 371 - his appreciation of Asceticism, II. 341, 342 - - Schram, Dom, _Institutiones Theologiae Mysticae_, the Preternatural in, - II. 305 - - Schwab, J. B., on Mysticism requiring the Immanence of God, II. 325 - - Science, character and motives of spirit’s occupation with, I. 40-43 - historical and physical sciences have each their specific method - and level, II. 370, 382, 384 - historical, Religion’s present, but not ultimate, problem, - II. =382-385= - occupation with, three kinds, II. 381-382 - its place and function in man’s spiritual life, I. 43-45, 369, 370; - II. =330=, =331=, =376=, =377= - and Religion, each autonomous at its own level, I. 45-48; II. 368, - 369 - Religion and Metaphysics, I. 39-40 - Religion, and Philosophy, their respective functions, II. 369-372 - to be taken throughout life in a double sense and way, I. 45-47; - II. =374-379= - and Things, and Religious Doctrine and Sacraments, as variously - deep, parallel helps and necessities in man’s spiritual life, - II. =372-379= - novelty of this position very limited, II. =379-381=, 385, 386 - - “Scintilla,” experience of St Catherine, I. 187-190, 451; II. 19 - - Scotland, I. 72 - - Scott, Thomas, the Evangelical, I. 63 - Walter, Sir, his _Anne of Geierstein_, I. 96 - - Scotus, John Duns, I. 64, 78 - Proclus’ indirect influence upon, II. 315, 316 - - Scotus, John, Eriugena, II. 252 - Proclus’ influence upon, II. 314, 315 - - Segneri, Paolo, S.J., I. 89; II. 144 - his critiques of Molinos, II. 144 - - Self-knowledge, persistent in St. Catherine, I. 206-207; II. 14, 15 - - Semeria, --, _Secoli Cristiani della Liguria_, I. 337 - - Sensitiveness, extreme, of Catherine, I. 176-181 - - Sensuousness, lack of, in Catherine, I. 246 - - Shakespeare, _Romeo and Juliet_, I. 101 - - Siegwart, Professor Christian, II. 282 - - Sight, Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 181 - - Silvestro, Convent of S., Genoa, I. 457 - - Simmel, Georg, Dr., on the specifically religious sense, II. 260, 261 - on religion as _requiring_ that man should seek his own beatitude, - II. 179 - - Simon, the Just, Rabbi, II. 153 - - Simon, Richard, I. 63, 64 - - Simplicity, causes of, Quietists’ inadequate analysis of, II. 134-136 - longing of religious temper for, I. 65-66 - all living, ever constituted in multiplicity, I. =66-70= - - Sin, and the body, according to St. Catherine, I. 230, 235, 236, 264, - 265, 298; II. =123-125= - the Orphics, II. 192, 237 - St. Paul, II. 66, =68=, =69=, 122, 123 - Proclus, II. 98 - the Synoptists, II. 69, =122= - as purely negative, in Ps.-Dionysius, Eckhart, Spinoza, II. 294 - as positive in Kant, Eucken, II. 294-296 - as positive and negative in St. Augustine, St. Thomas, Mother - Juliana, II. 293, 294 - in St. Catherine, II. 235, 294 - original, according to Neo-Platonists, II. =298= - St. Augustine, II. 298, 299 - Tridentine definition concerning, II. 300, 301 - difficulty in doctrine of, and Tennant’s interpretation, - II. =298-300= - value of Mystics’ attitude towards, II. =301=, =302= - - Sixtus IV. (Della Rovere), Pope, I. 94 - - Sixtus V. (Peretti), Pope, I. 366 - - Smell, Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 180-181 - - Socinianism, I. 9, 342; II. 390 - - Socino, Fausto and Lelio, I. 63, 342 - - Socrates, I. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 41, 60; II. 64, 186 - doctrine of, I. =12-13= - - Socratic school, I. 23 - - Sophists, I. 12 - - Sophocles, II. 189 - - Sorbonne, the, Paris, II. 325 _n._ 3 - - Soul, according to Aristotle, I. 20, 22 - Plato, I. 16, 17 - Plotinus, I. 24 - and the _Noûs_ in Eckhart, II. 323 - St. Paul, II. 64, 65 - Plotinus, II. 322, 323 - and the spirit in V. Battista, I. 353, 354, 399, 431 - St. Catherine, I. 189; II. 68 - St. Paul, II. =67-69=, =320-322= - St. Teresa, II. 324 - the three forces of, I. 50-53; II. 387-396 - Immanence of God in the, II. 324-325, =336-338= - life of, according to St. Catherine, I. 266-270 - usual succession in, I. 50-55 - its relation to its fellows, II. =353-355= - - Soul, its unity in multiplicity, I. 66 - - Sources, literary of Catherine’s conceptions I. 254, 255, 258-260; - II. =62-110= - difficulties in their utilization, I. 251-253 - - Space, and the soul and spirit, in St. Augustine, II. =212=, =213= - St. Catherine. I. =277=, =278=; II. 69, 70, 77-81, =212=, =213= - Plato, II. 205-207 - Plotinus, II. 248 - St. Thomas, II. 214 - recent writers, II. 247 - - Spain, I. 62, 64, 72, 95, 96, 305; II. 388 - - Spencer, Herbert, II. 271 - - Speyer, Diet of, I. 340 - - Spinola, Archbishop of Genoa, I. 305 - family, and members of, I. 96, 146, 175 - - Spinoza, I. 7, 40-42; II. 169, 197, 198, 271, 296, 315, 326, 327, 375, - 376, 392 - compared with Plotinus, II. 325-328 - on disinterested Religion, II. 175, 176 - doctrine of, I. 41-43 - errors of his speculation, greatness of his intuitions, II. =376=, - =377= - greatest Pure Pantheist, II. 325-327 - Reality and Perfection identical for, II. 294 - - Spirit, Christ as, II. 70, 84, =320=, =321= - God as, II. 84, 322 - the soul as, _see_ under Soul - visitations of the, their suddenness and vehemence, I. 105, 107; - II. 30, 96, 97 - and Space, II. 212, 213 - and Time and Duration, II. =247-249= - - Stanley, Arthur P., Dean, I. 63 - - Stein, Freiherr von, II. 271 - - Stigmata “Spiritual,” legend of St. Catherine’s, the, I. 209 _n._ 1, - 210 _n._ 1, =452=, =453= - - Stoics, I. 23 - - Strata, Battista, Notary, I. 155, 308, 379 - - Strauss, David F., on Purgatory, II. 231 - - Suarez, Francis, Father, S.J., I. 121; II. =241= - - Subconsciousness, late full recognition of, II. 47, 48, 265, =338-340= - often described by Plotinus and St. Augustine, II. 91, 92, 248 - its deepest equivalent in St. Thomas’s “confused knowledge,” - II. =288-289=, 337 - - Sulze, Emile, fails to recognize necessity of Thing-element in religion, - II. =372-374= - - Surin, Jean Joseph, S.J., I. 64, 89; II. 141 - - Suso, Henry, Blessed, Dominican, I. 64, 94 - - Sylvius, Francis, II. 162 - - Synoptic Gospels and St. Catherine, II. 69, 84, 87, 89, =122-126=, - 153-158 - and Joannine writings, II. 84-88 - and St. Paul, II. 65, 122-125, =157-158= - on forgiveness as of single acts, II. 245, 246 - God’s direct interest in world, II. =254=, =255= - Pure Love, II. =153-158= - present most manifold picture of Jesus’ life and teaching, - II. =116-120= - - - Tacitus, II. 271 - - Taigi, Anna Maria, Venerable, I. 78 - - Tarsus, II. 63, 66 - - Tasso, Torquato, I. 341 - - Taste, Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 180 - - Tauler, John, Dominican, I. 64, 94 - - Taylor, Prof. A. E., his criticism of Kant’s doctrine of Pure Love, - II. 179-180 - - Tennant, Rev. F. R., on Original Sin, II. 299, 300 - - Tennyson, Alfred, I. 112; II. 227, 247 - - Teresa, St., I. 64, 68, 87, 247; II. 5, 27 _n._ 1, 42, 45, 47, 48, 59, - 137, 142, 143, 336, 363, 365 - and Direction, II. 363 - on occupation with our Lord’s Humanity, II. 169, =365= - God’s immanence in the soul, II. =324=, =325= - nerves and muscles, II. 5 - her psycho-physical peculiarities, II. notes to pp. 14-18, 20, 21, - 27, 43, 44 - on soul and spirit, II. 324 - her tests for locutions and visions, =II. 47=, =50= - and social Religion, II. 365 - - Tertullian, on St. Paul’s “thorn,” “stake” in the flesh, II. 43 - prayer for the dead, II. 233, 234 - - Thales, I. 12 - - Theatines, I. 322, 340 - - Thibet, II. 392 - - Thing-element, its necessity in Religion, I. 245-247; II. =372-374=, - =377-381=, 385, 386 - - Thing, three relations of, with thought. II. =374-377= - - Thobia, I. 129, 151, 153, 154, 223, 225, 378, 380; II. 26, 29, 169, 172 - - Thobia’s Mother, I. 151, 153, 154, 172, 176, 225; II. 29 - - Thomas, St., Aquinas, I. 7, 61, 78, 120, 121; II. 142, 162, 181, 217, - 218, 245, 253, 288, 315, 317, 325, 333 - on God as _Actus Purus_, II. 132, 250 - on God’s Being as distinct from His Essence, II. 316, 317 - on the soul’s direct dim knowledge of God, II. =288=, =289=, 337 - on obligation of Confession, I. 120 - on the dispositions of the Lost, II. 222, 223 - on the fire of Purgatory and Hell, II. 217 - on God’s _ecstacy_ and creative acts, as His supreme - self-expression, II. =252-254= - on every soul’s individuality, II. =255=, =256= - on Pure Love, II. =162-168= - on man’s natural exigency of the vision of God, II. =337=, =338= - on term “person” as applicable to God, II. 257, 258 - on the other-world “places,” II. 214 - on Purgatory as truly purgative, II. 244, 245 - on simultaneity of soul’s vision of all things in future life, - II. 248 - St., of Canterbury, I. 372 - - Thomassin, Louis, Oratorian, I. 64 - - Thucydides, II. 271 - - Tiele, C. P., Professor, on the Infinite as present within man, II. 268, - =339=, =340= - necessity for Ecclesiastical Institutions, II. 352 - for metaphysical convictions in Religion, II. 270 - - Tobit, Book of, the Eminent Good Works in, II. 154 - - Toleto, Gaspare, Father, Inquisitor, I. 464 - - Toqueville, Alexis de, II. 271 - - Touch, St. Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 178-180 - - _Tracts for the Times_, I. 63 - - Transcendence of God, attitude towards, of V. Battista Vennazza, II. 289 - St. Catherine, I. 276, 280; II. =346=, =347= - - Transcendence of God, attitude towards, of St. John of the Cross, - II. =257=, =258=, 343-345 - Sören Kierkegaard, II. 287, 288, =345=, =346= - St. Thomas, II. =257= - recent thinkers, II. 270, 271, 339, 340, =358=, =359= - - Translations of St. Catherine’s relics, I. 300-302, 381 _n._ - - _Trattato_, see _Vita_ (_Dic._ or _T._). - - Trendelenburg, Adolf, on blind Force and conscious Thought, their only - possible relations, II. =375= - - Trent, Council of, on abuses connected with purgatorial doctrines and - practices, II. 232 - on Purgatory, II. =242= - on Original Sin, II. 300 - - Troeltsch, Prof. Ernst, II. 282, 333, 370 - on Christianity as Inner-worldly and Super-worldly, II. =358-360= - abiding individuality of all things historical, II. 256, 257 - Kant’s actual conceptions as more religious than his theory of - religion, II. 261, 262 - the testimony involved in our religious requirements, II. =339= - - Tyrrell, Rev. G., on the possibly _Totum-Simul_ consciousness of the - Lost, II. 230 - the relations between love of God and love of creatures, - II. 354, 355 - purely natural religion, what might have been but never was, - II. =288= - - - Unity, constituted by multiplicity, I. =66-70= - needful for all spiritual life, II. 150 - - Universe, conditions of its power upon human will, I. 3 - - _Upanishads_, the, II. 183 - - Upton, Prof., II. 330 - - Urban VIII, Pope (Barberini), I. 98, 304 - Bull on Cultus of Saints, I. 98 _n._ i (99), 304, 305 - - - Varni, Santo, sculptor, I. 332 - - Vaughan, Diana, II. 305 - - Venice, I. 93, 203 - Hospital in, I. 322 - - Vergil, II. 271 - on the burning out of the soul’s stains, II. 236 - - Vernaccia (Vernazza) Family, I. 146 - - Vernazza, Venerable Battista (Tommasa), I. 91, 117 _n._ 1, 146 _n._ 2, - 217, 252, 253, 316, 321, 322, 325, 327 _n._ 1, 328, 329, 330, 331, - 372, 381, 384, 395, 403, 407, 410, 413, 414, 429, 432, 447, 451, - 453, 454, 457, 461, 462; II. 27, 38 _n._ 1, 48 - and Tommaso Moro, I. 339-344 - author of Dialogo I, I. =407-410= - II, III, I. =429-433= - _Preface_ (ancient) of _Vita_ (probably), I. 416 - birth of, I. 419 - character of, I. 365, 366 - death of, I. =366=, =367=, 366 _n._ 2, 381 - _Colloquies_, I. =344-358=, 416, 433 - compared with Catherine’s doctrine, I. 346-358 - the _Dialogo_, I. 399, 403, 408, 431 - compared to St. Catherine and E. Vernazza, I. 336, 337 - _Dialogo della Beata Caterina_ based practically throughout upon - _Vita-Dicchiarazione_ yet shows everywhere thought, feeling, aims, - information of, I. 397-410, =417-433= - _Letters of_, I. 345 - to Donna Anguisola, I. 359-364 - to Padre Collino (1), I. 316-318, 321-324, 327-331 (2), I. 366 - to Tommaso Moro, I. 342-344 - portrait, I. 366 _n._ 2 - final redactor of _Vita_, _Dicchiarazione_, _Dialogo_, I. 464 - her youth, I. 337-339 - her writings, I. 344, 345 - Catetta (Daniela), I. 166, 321, 325, 339 - Ettore, I. 90, 91, 105 _n._ 1, 114 _n._ 2, 121 _n._ 3, 127, - 140 _n._ 4, 145 _n._ 1, 147 _n._ 1, 150 _n._ 1, 154, 159, 166, - 167, 169, 174, 175, 183 _n._ 1, 187, 191, 193, 202, 213, 216, - 217, 246, 252, 256, 279, 299, 308, 337, 338, 339, 340, 371, 384, - 415, 430, 444, 449, 450, 451, 456, 463, 464; II. 9, 16, 26, 27, 29 - his philanthropic work, its character, I. 319-321, 323, 327 - its effects, I. 364, 365 - in Genoa, _Chronici_, I. 173, 316, 317 - Lazaretto, I. 330, 331 - _Mandiletto_, I. 154, 332 - Prisons, I. 327-329 - his wills, ii, I. 318-321 - iii, I. 166, =324-327= - Ven. Battista and, in general, I. 314-316, 336, 337 - in June 1524, I. =330-332= - traces of their intercourse in _Dialogo_, I. =406=, =407=, - =429-431= - St. Catherine and his absence from her death-bed, I. 202-204, 226 - his authorization to write about her, I. =191-192= - her influence with him, I. 314, 315, 320, 321, 331, 332 - his influence with her, I. 159-161, 191-193 - upon her memory, I. 145, 146, 453-457 - their mutual likeness and unlikeness, I. 314, 315 - his character, I. =146=, =147= - his contributions to St. Catherine’s biography in _Vita_-proper, - I. 166, =453-455=, 464 - in _Trattato_, I. 447, 448 - their general character, I. 147 - daughters of, I. 149, 166, 299, 300, 325, 326 - his death, I. =331=, 381 - his posthumous fame, its unlikeness to Catherine’s, I. 332, 333 - Leo X, Pope, and, I. 322 - Lunga, Señora, and, I. 329, 330 - Manuscript C wrongly attributed to, I. 395, 396 - married life of, I. 316-318, 330 - monuments to, I. 332, 333 - Ginevrina (Maria Archangela), I. 166, 325, 326, 339 - Tommasa, _see_ Vernazza Battista - village, I. 318 - - Vernazzi, clan of, I. 318, 320 - - Vincent, St., de Paul, I. 306 - - Vinci, Leonardo da, School of, I. 98 _n._ 1 (99) - - Visions of St. Catherine’s, I. 181 - - _Vita e Dottrina di S. Caterina_, as in Thirteenth, Ninth Genoese, ed., - _Sordi Muti_, and its three parts, _Vita_-proper, _Dicchiarazione_ - or _Trattato_, _Dialogo_, I. 90, 91 - its additions to MSS. A and B in _Vita_-proper, I. 389, 390, 394, - 451-453 - in _Trattato_, I. 442 - of entire _Dialogo_ I. 389, 395 - its additions to MS. C in _Vita_-proper, I. 396 - of _Dialogo_, Parts II, III, I. 396, 397 - to MSS. A, B, C of Title, Approbation, Preface, Subscription, - I. 411-417 - its changes since first printed edition, 1551, I. 464-466 - final redaction for printing of entire corpus, I. 464 - booklets, evidence for _Conversione-_, _Dicchiarazione-_, - _Passione-_, in about 1512, I. 394, 434, =447-449=, 450, 451, 464 - the _Dialogo_, Part I, I. 396, 397 - its author (Battista Vernazza), I. 407, 410 - compared with _Vita_-proper, I. =399-407= - its authentic contributions, I. 406, 407 - the _Dialogo_, Parts II, III, their author and character, - I. 418, 419, =427-433= - compared with _Vita_-proper, I. 419-424, =424-427= - the _Trattato_ (_Dicchiarazione_), earlier and later part - of, I. 439, 440 - earlier part, its theological glosses, I. =440-442= - later part, its secondary expansions, I. =435-440= - upbuilding of whole, and authorship (predominantly Ettore - Vernazza), I. 447-449 - the _Vita_-proper, original tripartite scheme of, become - quadripartite, I. =390-394= - its great divisions and secondary constituents, I. 453 - age and authorship of retained constituents, I. =453-463= - three tests for discriminating authentic from secondary - sayings, I. 462, 463 - - Volkelt, Johannes, Prof., on immanental inter-relatedness of History and - Philosophy, II. =279=, =280= - dualism in Kant’s Epistemology, II. 278 - fallacy of Positivistic Epistemology, II. =275-278= - ultimate Power in world, alive in analogy to a willing individual, - II. 277, 278 - - - Wagner, Richard, II. 165 - - Waldensian movement, II. 391 - - Ward, James, Prof., II. 265, 287, 370 - on receptivity as activity; experience as wider than knowledge; and - our own experience, the only one immediately accessible to us, - II. =277-280= - - Weinel, Heinrich, on visions and psycho-physical peculiarities in - sub-apostolic times, II. 42, 43, 308 - - White, Edward, on Conditional Immortality, II. 229 _n._ 2 - - Will, the things and conditions that move the human, I. 3, 367-370; - II. 375-385 - - Wilson, Archdeacon Andrew, on the Fall of Man, II. 299-300 - - Windelband, W., Prof., on religion’s various elements including - metaphysical life, II. 262 - - Wisdom, Book of, I. 61 - attitude towards the body in, and St. Paul, I. 234; II. 227 - - Wittenberg, I. 9, 95, 311 - - Wordsworth, William, II. 271 - - Wycliffe, I. 94 - - - Xenophon, I. 28 - - Ximenes, Cardinal Francis, O.S.F., I. 62 - - - Youth, its apprehension of religion, I. 51-52 - - - Zaccaria, F. A., S.J., II. 225 _n._ 2 - - Zedakah, II. 153 - - Zeller, Edward, _Philosophie der Griechen_, I. 11 _n._ 1; II. 320 - - Zeus, II. 93, 187 - - Zwingli, I. 62, 63; II. 119 _n._ 1, 388, 392 - - Zwinglianism, I. 9 - - -II. OF LITERARY REFERENCES - -(_The more general literary references given under names of authors in -Part I_) - - -HOLY SCRIPTURE--OLD TESTAMENT - - Daniel ix. 24; I. 408 - xii. 2; II. 190 - - Ecclesiasticus vii. 17; II. 224 - - Ezekiel i. 1-28, etc.; II. 45 _n._ - iv. 1-3, 7, etc.; II. 45 _n._ - iv. 4-8; II. 45, 46 _n._ - viii. i-ix. 11, etc.; II. 45 _n._ - viii. 16, xi. 13, xxiv. 1; II. 45 _n._ - - Genesis i. 5, iii. 18; II. 89 - xv. 1; I. 348 - - Isaiah vi. 3; I. 352 - xxvi. 1-19; II. 190 - xliii. 10, xliv. 1, xlviii. 10; I. 349 - xlix. 6; I. 351 - - Job xix. 25, 26; II. 190 - - Maccabees, Book of, ii. 43-45; II. 233 - - Psalms lxxiii. (lxxii.) 25; II. 159 - ci. 13; I. 362 - ciii. 13, 14; II. 69 - cix. 31; I. 358 - - Solomon, Cant. v. 10; I. 349 - Prov. viii. 31; I. 360 - Wisd. of., ix. 15; II. 66, 123 - - Tobit, Book of, xii. 8, 9; II. 154 - - -NEW TESTAMENT - - Acts of the Apostles xxvi. 9-10; I. 33 - - John, St., Apocalypse, v. 11; I. 349 - vii. 9; II. 254 - 1 Ep., i. 1; I. 36 - i. 2; I. 37 - iii. 2; II. 82, 257 - iii. 14; I. 39; II. 89 - v. 10; I. 37 - v. 20; I. 39; II. 84 - Gospel according to, i. 4, 5; II. 82 - i. 9-11; II. 79 - i. 14; I. 36 - i. 17; II. 79 - i. 18; I. 358; II. 81 - i. 29; II. 85 - ii. 11; I. 37; II. 86 - ii. 23, 24; I. 38 - iii. 2-5; I. 38 - iii. 16; II. 79-80, 83 - iii. 18; II. 89 - iii. 19; II. 82 - iii. 21; I. 37; II. 79-83, 82 - iii. 31; II. 82 - iii. 34; II. 84 - iii. 36; I. 39 - iv. 18; II. 160 - iv. 24; I. 37; II. 80, 88 - iv. 31; II. 81 - iv. 42; I. 38; II. 79-80 - v. 6; I. 38 - v. 24; II. 88-89, 90 - v. 28-29; I. 36 - vi. 27; II. 88 - vi. 35; I. 37; II. 90 - vi. 44; I. 37; II. 87 - vi. 61, 63; II. 88 - vi. 69; II. 86, 88 - viii. 21; II. 80 - viii. 23; II. 81 - viii. 44; II. 80 - ix. 41; II. 80 - x. 8; II. 80 - x. 38; I. 360 - xiii. 23; I. 358 - xiv. 6; I. 37 - xiv. 10; II. 80 - xiv. 11; I. 38 - xiv. 20-21; I. 39 - xiv. 23; I. 360 - xvii. 1-13; I. 210 _n._ 1 - xvii. 3; II. 82, 90 - xvii. 6; II. 90 - xvii. 8, etc.; II. 82 - xvii. 18; I. 37 - xvii. 21; II. 83 - xviii. 9; I. 362 - xviii. 37; II. 79 - xix. 24; II. 83 - xx. 8; II. 86 - xx. 29; I. 38; II. 86 - - Luke, St., Gospel according to, ii. 32; I. 351 - vi. 33, 34; II. 158 - vi. 38; II. 155 - vii. 47; II. 157 - ix. 23-24; I. 31 - ix. 51-56; I. 27-28 - x. 7; II. 154 - xii. 6; II. 254 - xiv. 27; I. 31 - xvi. 23; I. 358 - xvii. 10; II. 157 - xvii. 33; I. 31 - xx. 34-38; I. 32 - xxii. 3-11; I. 33 - xxii. 15-19; I. 31 - xxvi. 9-18; I. 33 - - Mark, St., Gospel according to, i. 13; II. 122 - iv. 27-28; I. 30 - vii. 14, 15; I. 31 - viii. 34; I. 31 - ix. 30-32; I. 27-28 - ix. 35-36; I. 32 - ix. 38-41 (& Par.); II. 84 - ix. 41; II. 154 - x. 13-16; I. 27-28 - x. 14, 15; I. 32 - x. 21; II. 154 - x. 23; II. 155 - xii. 28-34 (& Par.); II. 254 - xii. 36; II. 322 - xiv. 22-25; I. 31 - xiv. 25; II. 254 - xiv. 38 (& Par.); II. 122 - - Matth., St., Gospel according to, iii. 13-19; I. 31 - v. 3; I. 31 - v. 5; II. 155 - v. 7; II. 154 - v. 8; I. 31; II. 154, 155 - v. 12; II. 154 - v. 17; I. 30 - v. 23; I. 30 - v. 44, 45, 48; II. 157 - vi. 4, 6; II. 154 - vi. 16; I. 30 - vi. 14, 18, 20; II. 154 - vi. 23, 26, 28; I. 30 - vi. 33; II. 157 - x. 29; II. 254 - xii. 24-27; I. 32 - xiii. 30-32; II. 122 - xvi. 24, 25; I. 31 - xvii. 12-14; II. 255 - xviii. 32; II. 154 - xxii. 3; II. 155 - xxii. 11; II. 156 - xxii. 12; II. 155-156 - xxii. 29-33; I. 32 - xxiv. 47; II. 155 - xxv. 10; II. 254 - xxv. 14-30; II. 157 - xxv. 21; II. 155 - xxvi. 26-29; I. 31 - xxxiv. 42; II. 122 - xxxvi. 51, 52; II. 27-28 - - Paul, St., Ep. to Col. i. 15-17; I. 35 - i. 26; I. 34 - ii. 2; I. 34 - iii. 1; I. 35 - iii. 3-4; I. 34 - iii. 4; II. 322 - 1 Ep. to Cor. i. 18; I. 33 - i. 22-25; I. 33 - ii. 6; I. 34 - ii. 10; I. 34 - ii. 11; I. 34; II. 321 - ii. 14, 15; I. 33; II. 321 - iii. 1; I. 34 - iii. 10-15; II. 239 - v. 5; II. 68 - v. 11; II. 67 - vi. 19; II. 72, 321 - vii. 7; II. 43 - x. 3; II. 76 - x. 4; I. 35 - xi. 7; II. 75 - xi. 11; I. 32; II. 75 - xi. 23, 26; I. 32 - xii.; I. 33; II. 65-66 - xiii. 7; II. 160 - xiv.; I. 33 - xiv. 25; II. 65 - xv. 3-8; I. 32 - xv. 19, 32; II. 158 - xv. 35, 53; II. 64 - 2 Ep. to Cor. i. 22; II. 65 - ii. 4; II. 65 - iii. 17; II. 70, 88 - iii. 18; I. 35 - iv. 4; II. 68, 321 - iv. 16; II. 64, 159 - v. 1-4; II. 66, 77, 123 - v. 4; II. 66 - v. 11; II. 73 - vi. 14; II. 73, 77 - vii. 1; II. 68, 73, 321 - x. 10; II. 43 - xii. 9; II. 159 - xiii. 4; II. 78 - xviii. 7-8; II. 43 - Ep. to Eph. i. 10; I. 35 - i. 18; II. 65 - iii. 5; I. 35 - iv. 13; I. 35 - Ep. to Gal. ii. 20; I. 35; II. 322 - iv. 6; II. 65 - iv. 14-15; II. 43 - iv. 30; II. 160 - Ep. to Phil. i. 23; II. 77 - iii. 12; II. 257 - iv. 1; I. 361 - Ep. to Rom. ii. 5; II. 65 - ii. 6; II. 158 - iii.-xi.; I. 32 - v. 5; I. 360; II. 65, 72 - v. 15-19; I. 352 - vi. 6, 8; I. 35 - vi. 12-13; II. 68, 73 - vi. 14; II. 68-69 - vii. 18; II. 123 - vii. 23; II. 65, 68 - vii. 24; II. 123 - viii. 4-13; II. 68-69 - viii. 10; II. 68 - viii. 11; I. 35; II. 321 - viii. 16; II. 68 - viii. 19; II. 74 - viii. 31; II. 159 - viii. 35, 37-39; II. 159 - x. 9; II. 65 - xii. 2; II. 65 - xiii. 11-14; II. 73 - xiv. 14-20; II. 74 - 1 Ep. to Thess. iv. 15, 16; II. 77 - v. 4-8; II. 73 - - Peter, St., 2 Ep. of, iii. 12; II. 239 - - - Abbott, Dr. E. A., _St. Thomas of Canterbury, his Death and Miracles_, - 2 vols., 1898; I. 372 - - Alizieri, Federico, “Vita di Suor Tommasa Fieschi,” in _Atti della Soc. - di Storia Patria_, Vol. VIII., 1868; II. 381 _n._ 2 - - Ambrose, St., _In Lucam_, VII. 205; II. 216 - - Anrich, G., “Clemens und Origenes als Begründer, etc.,” in _Theol. - Abhandlungen für H. J. Holtzmann_, 1892; II. 236, 244 _n._ 1 - - Aristotle, _de Anima_, III. 5, 430_a_; II. 320 - _Gen. animal_, II. 3, 736_b_; II. 320 - _Metaph._ VII. 1072_b_, IX. 1074_b_; II. 334 - XII. 7-10; II. 320 - XII. 1072_b_-1074_b_; II. 251 - - Pseudo-Aristotle, _Liber de Causis_, ed. Bardenhewer, 1882, §§ 2, 4; - II. 315 - - Arnold, Matthew, _Culture and Anarchy_, 1869; II. 57 - - Atzberger, Dr. L., continuation of Dr. J. Scheeben’s _Dogmatik_, - Vol. IV., 1903; II. 227 - - Augustine, St., ed. Ben. Reprint Gaume, _Confessiones_, I. c. 2; II. 213 - VI. c. 15, VII. c. 12, VIII. cc. 5, 11; II. 293 - X. c. 26, XIII. c. 17; II. 213 - XI. cc. 11, 20; II. 248 - XI. c. 23 § 1; II. 306 - XI. c. 27 § 3; II. 248 - _De Civitate Dei_, lib. xxi. c. 26 _n._ 4; II. 211 - _Contra Julianum_, IV. 58 (Vol. X. col. 1073 _c_); II. 128 - _De Nuptiis et concupisc._, I. 8 (Vol. X. col. 613 _a_); II. 128 - I. 23; II. 293 - _De Octo Dulcitii quaest._, 12, 13; II. 217, 244 - _De Trinitate_, L. XV. c. 16; II. 248 - _Enarratio_ in Ps. xxxvi. § i _n._ 10; II. 211 - _Enchiridion_, CX. CXII; II. 225 - _Liber de Fide_, I. 27, 29; II. 317 - _Opus imperfectum_, III. 56; II. 293 - _De Peccato Orginali_, 40 (Vol. X. col. 590 _b_); II. 128 - _Tract in Joannis Ev._, VIII. 1; II. 306 - XXIV. 1; II. 306 - - Avicenna, _Comm. in Arist. Metaph., Tract._ VIII. c. 6; II. 315 - - - Bacher, Prof. W., _Die Agada der Palästinensischen Amoräer_, Vol. I. - 1892; II. 234 - - Baring-Gould, Rev. S., _Lives of the Saints_, 1898, Vol. X., Sept. - 15; I. 92; II. 22 - - Baruch, _Apocalypse of_, XXX. 2; II. 214 - - Basil, St., _Prooemium in Reg. Fus. Tract_, _n._ 3; II. 166 - - Bellarmine, Cardinal, _De Gratia primi hominis_, XIV.; II. 214 - _De Purgat_, I. c. IV. 6, c. XIV. 22; II. 245 - Lib. II. c. 11; II. 217 - - Benedicti XIV., _De Servorum Beatificatione et Beatorum - Canonizatione_, 1743, Vol. II. p. 239 _a_; I. 126, 253, 254 - - Bergson, H., _Les Données Immédiates de la Conscience_, ed. 1898; - II. 7 _n._ 1, 165 - - Berkeley, George, Bp., _Alciphron_, IV. _nos._ 17-21; II. 288 - - Bernard, St., _Sermons on the Canticle of Cant._, ch. XXVI.; I. 385 - _Tract. de Gratia et Lib. Arbitrio_, ch. XIV. § 47; I. 69-70 - - Blondel, Maurice, Prof., _L’Action_, 1893; I. 48 _n._ 1; II. 7 _n._ 1 - - Bossuet, J. B., Bishop, Œuvres, ed. 1816, 1817, _Sermons_, Vol. XI. - p. 376; II. 218 - _Instruction sur les Etats d’Oraison_, and Documents, Vol. XXVII.; - II. 131 _n._ - _Relation sur le Quiétism_, Vol. XXIX.; II. 141 - - Boudhinon, Abbé A., “Sur l’Histoire des Indulgences,” in _Revue d’Hist. - et de Litt. Relig._, 1898; I. 121; II. 242 - - Bousset, W., _Die Religion des Judenthums_, 1903; II. 153 _n._ 1 - - Boutroux, Emile, Prof., “La Psychologie du Mysticisme,” _Bull. de l’Inst. - Psych. Internat._, 1902; II. 61 - - Brieger, T., Prof., “N. Paulus’ Johann Tetzel,” in _Theol. - Literaturzeitung_, 1900; II. 232 - - Bugge, _Die Hauptparabeln Jesu_, 1900; II. 156 - - Butler, Abbot, E. Cuthbert, O.S.B., _The Lausiac History of Palladius_, - 1898, 1904; II. 371 - - - Cadrès, Alphonse, S.J., _le Père Jean N. Grou_, 1866; II. 363 _n._ - - Caird, Edward, _Evolution of Theology in the Greek Philosophers_, Vol. I, - Lecture XIII.; II. 264 _n._ 2 - Vol. II. L. XIV.; II. 251, 320 - LL. XXII. XXIII.; II. 325-327 - L. XXV.; II. 273 - L. XXVI.; II. 335 - “St. Paul and the Idea of Evolution,” _Hibbert Journal_, Vol. II.; - II. 119 - - Cajetanus, Card, _Comm. in Summam_, II., ii., qu. 23, art. 1.; II. 162 - - Celesia, P., Vinc., _Storia dell’Ospedale di Pammatone_ (MS.); I. - 155 _n._ 1, 308 _n._ 1 - - Chantepie de la Saussaye, _Lehrbuch der Religions-Geschichte_, Vol. I., - ed. 1887; ed. 1905; II. 183 - - Charles, Dr. R. H., _Critical Hist. of the doctrine of Future Life_, - 1899; II. 189, 190, 220 - - Class, Prof. G., _Phänomenologie u. Ontologie des menschl-Geistes_, 1896; - II. 229 _n._ 2 - - Clement, of Alexandria, _Paedagogus_, I. c. VIII.; II. 235 - _Stromata_, I. c. XXVI. 168, 2 (Stählin); II. 234 - IV. c. IV. 15, 6 (St.); II. 166 - IV. c. VI. 30, 1 (St.); II. 166 - IV. c. XXIV. 154, 3 (St.); II. 236 - V. c. III. 16, 7 (St.); II. 236 - VII. c. VI.; II. 216 - VII. c. XXVI.; II. 234 - - Coconnier, Père, M.Th., _L’Hypnotisme Franc_, 1897; II. 6 _n._ 2 - - Corderins, Bathazar, S.J., “Quaestio Mystica,” in _Dionysius Areop., - Migne._, Vol. I. pp. 1050-1058; II. 288 - - Crusius, O., _Erwin Rhode_, 1902; II. 191, 192 - - - Dante, _Purgatorio_, II. 40-42; II. 244 - - Deharbe, Joseph, S.J., _Die Volkommene Liebe Gottes_; II. 162, - 170 _n._ 1 - - Denifle, H. S., Father, “Meister Eckharts Lateinische Schriften,” in - _Arch f. Litt. u. Kirchengesch. des M. A._, 1886; II. 294, 315, 317 - - Denzinger, H., _Enchiridion Definitionum_, ed. 1888, No. 38; - I. 448 _n._ 1 - No. 73; I. 217 - Nos. 387, 588, 859; II. 242 - No. 363; I. 120, 121 - No. 454; II. 323 - Nos. 437, 455; II. 318 - - Dilthey, W., Prof., “Auffassung d. Menschen, i. 15 _u._ 16, Jahrh.,” in - _Arch. f. Gesh. der Philosophie_, 1892; II. 119 - - Dionysius, the Areopagite (tr. Parker, Oxford, 1897, 1899), _Divine - Names_, I. i; II. 95, 98 - I. 5; II. 97, 99 - I. 6; II. 100 - III. i; II. 91, 98 - IV. 1; II. 93 - IV. 2; II. 94 - IV. 5; II. 93 - IV. 6; II. 97 - IV. 8-10; II. 95 - IV. 13; II. 96 - IV. 13, 4, 16; I. 353 - IV. 22; II. 222 - IV. 23; II. 224, 228 - IV. 24; II. 222, 228, 236, 294 - V. 1; II. 314 - VII. 1, 3; II. 95 - VIII. 3, 5; II. 100 - VIII. 7; II. 92 - IX. 4; II. 91, 92 - IX. 5; II. 99 - XI. 1; II. 94 - _Eccl. Hierarchy_, I. 2; II. 99 - III. 3, 7; II. 99 - _Heavenly Hierarchy_, XV. 2; II. 94 - XV. 3; II. 98 - _Mystic Theology_, I.; II. 95, 97 - III.; II. 95, 97, 289-290, 314 - IV.; II. 314 - V.; II. 98 - - _Documenti su S. Caterina_ (Bibl-Univ. Genoa), I. 115 _n._ 1, 149 _n._ 1, - 171 _n._ 1, 172 _n._ 1, 179 _n._ 1, 310 _n._ 2, 376-379 - - Dubors, F., Abbé, “Le feu du Purgatoire, est-il un feu corporal?” _Revue - du Clergé Français_, 1902, II. 218 - - Duhm, B., Prof., _das Geheinniss in der Religion_, 1896; II. 6 _n._ 3, - 159 _n._ 2 - - - Eckhart, Meister, _Werke_, ed. Pfeiffer, 1857; II. 318, 323 - - Elliott, Walter, _The Life of Father Hecker_, 1894; II. 56 - - Emery, Abbé J. A., _Sur la Mitigation des Peines des Damnés_; II. 226 - - Enoch, Book of; II. 239 - - Esra, IV. iv. 35; II. 213-214 - - Eucken, R., Prof., _Der Kampf um einen geistig. Lebensinhalt_, 1896; - II. 271 - _Der Wahrheitsgehalt der Religion_, 1901; II. 269, 296 - _Die Lebensanschaungen der grossen Denker_; I. 39 _n._ 3 - - Euripides, _Orestes_, XXX.; II. 237 - - - Faber, Rev. F. W., _All for Jesus_, ed. 1889, ch. IX., § 3-5; I. 89; - II. 244, 245 - - Federici, F., _Famiglie Nobili di Genova_, MS., I. 157 _n._ 1; - II. 231 _n._ - - Fechner, G. T., _Die Drei Gründe u. Motive des Glaubens_, 1863; - II. 231 _n._ 1 - - Fénelon, Fr. de S., Archbishop; Œuvres, Versailles, 1817-1821, _Epistle - II to Pope Clement XI_, Vol. IX; I. 68, 69; II. 161 - _Explication … des Propositions de Molinos_, Vol. IV.; II. 142 - _Existence de Dieu_, Vol. I; I. 1, 31; II. 5 - _Instruction pastorale_, 1697, Vol. IV; II. 131, 161 - _Lettre sur la Charité_, Vol. IX; II. 161 - _Lettre sur l’Oraison Passive_, Vol. VIII; II. 131, 161, 173, 174 - _Première Réponse aux Difficultés de M. l’Evêque de Chartres_, Vol. - IV; II. 161 - _Seconde Lettre à M. de Paris_, Vol. V; II. 181 - - Ficino Marsilio, _Theologia Platonica_, 1482; II. 203, 204 - - Francis, St., de Sales, _Les Controverses_ in _Œuvres_, ed. 1892, Vol. I. - pt. iii. ch. II.; II. 245 - - Froude, R. E., “Scientific Speculation and the Unity of Truth,” _Dublin - Review_, Oct. 1900; II. 369 - - - Gardner, Percy, Prof., _New Chapters in Greek History_, 1892, pp. 333-334; - II. 188 - _Oxford at the Cross Roads_, 1903; II. 57 - - Gebirol Ibn., _Fons Vitae_, ed. 1895; II. 316 - - Giovo, Angelo, _Vita di S. Caterina_ (MS.); I. 172 _n._, 310 _n._ 2 - - Giustiniano, Agostino, _Castigatissimi Annali della Rep. di Genova_, - 1537; I. 382-384 - - Görres, Joseph, _Die Christliche Mystik_, 1836, 1842; II. 305 - - Gosselin, Abbé, _Analyse raisonnée de la Controverse du Quiétisme_ - (Fénelon, Œuvres, Vol. IV.); II. 162, 172, 173 - _Vie de M. Emery_, 1862, Vol. II.; II. 226 - - Gousset, Cardinal, _Théologie Dogmatique_, 1856, Vol. II.; II. 217 - - Grafe, E., “Verhältniss der paulinischen Schriften zur Sapientia - Salomonis,” in _Theol. Abhandl. C. von. Weizsäcker Gewidmet_, 1892; - II. 66 - - Grandgeorge, M. L., _St. Augustin et le Neo-Platonisme_, 1896; I. 126, - 127, 130, 131; II. 293 - - Greg, W. E., _Enigmas of Life_; II. 227, 231 - - Gregory, St., of Nazianzum, _Poema de Seipso_; I. 546; II. 216 - St., of Nyssa, _Catecheticus_, VIII. c. 35; II. 244 - _Orationes_, XL. 36; II. 216 - - Grou, Jean N., S.J., _Méditations sur l’Amour de Dieu_; II. 307 - - Gunkel, Prof. H., _die Wirkungen des H. Geistes_, ed. 1899; II. 6 _n._ 1 - - - Harnack, Prof. A., _Das Wesen des Christenthums_, 1902; II. 352 - _Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte_, ed. 1888, Vol. II.; II. 351 - - Hase, Carl von, _Handbuch der protest. Polemik_, ed. 1864; II. 231 _n._ 1 - - Hedley, Bishop J. C., _The Spiritual Letters of Fénelon_, 1892, Vol. I. - Preface; II. 161 - - Heppe, Heinrich, Prof., _Geschichte der Quietistischen Mystik_, 1875; - II. 139-140 - - Hermann, Wilhelm, Prof., _Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott_, 1892; II. - 263-265, 332, 333 - - Hesiod, _Works and Days_, II. 187 - - Höffding, H., Prof., _Söron Kirkegaard_, 1896; II. 285, 288, 345, 346, - 353 - - Holtzmann, H. J., Prof., _Lehrbuch der Neutestamentlichen Theologie_, - 1897; I. 30 _n._; II. 153 _n._ - Vol. II., ch. i.; II. 63 _n._ 2, 72, 73, 321, 322 - Vol. II., ch. iii.; II. 79 _n._, 190 - _Richard Rothe’s Speculative System_, 1899; II. 229, 247, 248, - 269, 270, 377, 378 - - Homer, _Iliad_, VIII. 17-20; II. 93 - XX. 232 _seq._; II. 186-187 - _Od._ IV. 560-568; II. 186-187 - - Hurter, H., Father, S.J., _Theologiae Dogmaticae Compendium_, 1893, - Vol. III.; II. 242 - - - Inge, W. R., Prof., _Christian Mysticism_, 1897; I. 30 _n._ 1; - II. 305 _n._ - - - Jacopone da Todi, _Laudi Spirituali_, ed. Florence, 1490; I. 259-260 - _Lauda_, XIII. _v._ 1-7, 8; II. 102 - XXIII. _v._ 1-6, 10; _ibid._ - XXV. _v._ 7, 10, 11; _ibid._ - XLV.; II. 103 - LVIII. _a_, _v._ 10, 11, 12; _ibid._ - LVIII. _b_, 1-9; II. 204 - LVIII. _v._ 3, 8, 11-14, 16, 19, 20-22; II. 104 - LVIII. _v._ 23; II. 104, 259, 275 - LVIII. _v._ 24, 26, 27, 28-30; II. 105 - LXXIV. _v._ 6; _ibid._ - LXXIV. _v._ 13; II. 106 - LXXIX. _v._ 3, 6, 16, 24, 26; II. 106 - LXXXI. _v._ 17; II. 106 - LXXXIII. _v._ 5, 15; _ibid._ - LXXXVII. _v._ 12-20; II. 109 - LXXXVIII. _v._ 5, 6, 7, 10; II. 107 - LXXXVIII. _v._ 11; II. 107, 219 _n._ 2 - LXXXVIII. _v._ 14, 21, 22, 27; II. 107 - LXXXVIII. _v._ 32, 33; II. 108 - LXXXIX. _v._ 12, 13, 52-54, 70, 98; _ibid._ - LXXXX. _v._ 4, 13; _ibid._ - LXXXX. _v._ 18; II. 109 - LXXXXIX. _v._ 6, 12, 13, 14; _ibid._ - - James, William, Prof., _The Principles of Psychology_, 1891, Vol. II.; - II. 194 - _Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902; II. 30, 41 _n._ 1, 48, - 266, 338 _n._ 1, 342 - _The Will to Believe_, 1897; I. 51 _n._ 1 - - Janet, Pierre, Prof., _l’Automatisme Psychologique_, ed. 1903; II. 192 - _Etat Mental des Hysteriques_, 1892, 1894, Vol. I.; II. 22-25 - Vol. II.; II. 22, 23, 25 - - Jastrow, Morice, Prof., _The Study of Religion_, 1901; II. 269 - - Jerome, St., _Apol. c. Rufinum_, II.; II. 216 - _Ep._, 124, 7; II. 216 - _In Isa._ lxv. 24; II. 216 - - John, St., of Cross, Works, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1889: - _Ascent of Mt. Carmel_, Bk. I. ch. v. (pp. 26, 27); II. 51, 206 - Bk. II. ch. viii. (94); II. 343, 344 - Bk. II. ch. viii. (95-97); II. 343 - Bk. II. ch. x. (102); II. 51 - Bk. II. ch. xix. (159); II. 51, 306 - Bk. II. ch. xix. (163); II. 51 - Bk. II. ch. xxii. (195); II. 51, 306 - Bk. III. ch. viii. (264, 265); II. 51, 306 - Bk. III. ch. xix. (298); I. 68 - Bk. III. ch. xxii. (307, 308); II. 354 - Bk. III. ch. xxxvi. (353); II. 345 - _Spiritual Canticle_, St. VII. (206, 207); II. 51, 257, 258 - St. XIII. (238); II. 51 - _Letters_, L. XIV. (541, 542); I. 68 - - John, St., Damascene, _De Fide Orthodoxa_, II. 216 _n._ 1 - - Joly, Henry, _Psychology of the Saints_, Engl. tr. 1898; II. 61 - - Jones, Henry, Prof., _A Critical Account of the Philosophy of Lotze_, - 1895; II. 278, 279 - - Josephus, _Antiquities_, XI. ii. 3; II. 239 - - Juliana, Mother, of Norwich, _Sixteen Revelations of Divine Love_, ed. - 1902; II. 94, 218, 306, 307 - - Jülicher, A., _Gleichnissreden Jesu_, Th. II. 1899; II. 153 _n._ 1 - - - Kant, Immanuel, _Anthropologie_, Werke, Berlin, Vol. VII., 1907; II. 165 - _Briefe_, Werke, Berlin, Vol. I., 1900; II. 278 - “Der Kanon der reinen Vernunft,” in _Kritik der reinen Vernunft_, - ed. Kehrbach: Werke, Berlin, Vol. III.; II. 177, 178 - _Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten_, Werke, Berlin, Vol. IV., - 1903; II. 178, 296 - _Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft_, ed. - Hartenstein, Werke, Berlin, Vol. VI., 1907; II. 260, 296 - - Koch, Dr. Hugo, _Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita_, 1900; II. 91 _n._ 1, 95 - - Krätzschmar, R., Prof., _Das Buch Ezechiel_, 1900; II. 46 - - - Laberthonnière, Abbé L., in _Annales de Philosophic Chrétienne_, 1905, - 1906; II. 307 _n._ 3 - - Leibniz, G. W. (Philosophische Schriften, ed. Gerhardt, 1882-1885). - _Nouveaux Essais sur l’Entendement_, Vol. V.; II. 265, 266, 338 - _Principes de la Nature et de la Grace_, Vol. VI., 1885; II. 176 - - Lejeune, Abbé P., _Manuel de Théologie Mystique_, 1897; II. 307 - - Lessing, G. E., _Leibniz von den Ewigen Strafen_, in Lessing’s, Werke, - ed. Lachmann-Muncker, Vol. XI., 1895; II. 257, 258 - - Lightfoot, Bishop J. B., _St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians_, 1881; - II. 43-44 _n._ 1 - - Loyola, St. Ignatius of, _Testament_, 1900, p. 91, 92; II. 31 - - - Maineri, Padre, S. J., _Vita di S. Caterina_; I. 92, 302, 303 _n._ 1, - 302 _n._ 1 - - Manning, H. E., Cardinal, _Treatise on Purgatory by St. Catherine of - Genoa_, 1886, Appendix; II. 237, 243 - - MS. “A”; I. 112 _n._ 1, 384, 392 - Ch. 7 (of MS.) p. 24; I. 136 _n._ 2 - Ch. 10 (of MS.) 40; I. 390 _n._ 4 - Ch. 15 (of MS.) 87, 88; I. 387 - (of MS.) 92; I. 162 _n._ 3 - Ch. 20 (of MS.) 134; I. 387 - Ch. 24 (of MS.) 160; I. 386-387 - (of MS.) 163; I. 388 - (of MS.) 168; I. 387, 390 _n._ 3 - Ch. 25 (of MS.) 169; I. 388 - (of MS.) 174; I. 402, _n._ 2 - Ch. 29 (of MS.) 193; I. 187 _n._ 1, 387-388 (no. is omitted in MS.) - Ch. 31 (of MS) 198-200; I. 387 - Ch. 42 (of MS.) 329; I. 387 - 348; I. 452 - 361, 363, 364; I. 386 - 366; I. 147 _n._ 1 - 394, 395, 396; I. 412-416 - - MS. “B,” 1 _v_; I. 396 - Ch. 5 (of MS.) f. 2 _r_, _v_; I. 394 - (of MS.) f. 19 _r_; I. 394 - Ch. 24 (of MS.) f. 30 _r_, _v_; I. 395 - - MS. “F”; I. 216 - - Mercier, D., Cardinal, _Critériologie Générale_, ed. 1900; II. 7 _n._ 1 - - Mill, J. Stuart, _Autobiography_, 1875; II. 339 - _Three Essays on Religion_, 1874; II. 231 - - Molinos, M. de, _Guida Spirituale_, French, tr., in Recueil de Diverses - Pièces concernant le Quiétisme, Amsterdam, 1688; II. 146 - - Morro, Giuseppe, _Inaugurazione della Statua d’Ettore Vernazza_, 1863; - I. 146 _n._ 1, 167, 317 _n._ 1, 320, 324-329, 331 _n._ 1, 333, 364, - 365, 381 _n._ 2, 382 _n._ 2 - - Münsterberg, Prof., _Grundzüge der Psychologie_, Vol I., 1900; II. 303 - _Psychology and Life_, 1899; II. 302-303 - - Mystiker, deutsche, des Mittelalters, Vol. I., David von Augsburg, ed. - Pfeiffer, 1845; II. 363 _n._ - - - Newman, John Henry, Cardinal, _Grammar of Assent_, 1870; II. 230 - _Idea of a University_, ed. 1873; II. 369 - _The Via Media_, Vol. I., Preface, 1877; I. 53 _n._ - - Nicholas, of Coes (Cusanus), Cardinal, _Exercitationum_, Lib. VIII.; - II. 256 - - - Oldenberg, _Buddha_, 1897; II. 183-185 - - Origen, _Contra Celsum_, IV. 13; II. 236 - VII. 13; II. 236, 239 - _De Orat._, XXIX. 15 (263); II. 234-235, 239 - _De Princ._, II. 10, 4; II. 216 - _In Rom._, T. II. i. 477; II. 245 - - - Pammatone Hospital _Cartulary_, 62; I. 98 _n._ i, 300, 312 - Doc. nos. 8, 14, 30; I. 125 - - Parpera, Giacinto, _B Caterina da Genova … illustrata_, 1682; I. 92, - 305 _n._ 1 - - Pattison, A. S. Pringle, Prof., _Hegelianism and Personality_, ed. 1893; - II. 318 - “Martineau’s Philosophy,” _Hibbert Journal_, Vol. I., 1902; II. 330 - - Pescetto, G. B., _Biografia Medica Ligure_, 1846, Vol. I.; I. 201 _n._ 3, - 451 _n._ 1 - - Petavius (Petau), Denys, S.J., _Dogmata Theologica_, ed. Fournials, 1866, - Vol. IV., _De Angelis_, III. viii. 16, 17; II. 225-226 - - Petre, M. D., _The Soul’s Orbit_, 1904; II. 308 - - Philo, _Legg. Alleg._, I. 3; II. 80 - - _Pirke Aboth_, V. 23; II. 154 - - Plato, _Cratylus_; II. 67 - 400 _c_; II. 237 - _Gorgias_, 477 _a_; II. 235 - 523 _b-e_, 525 _b_, _c_, 526 _c_, _d_; II. 208-209 - _Laws_, 904 _a-e_; II. 206 - _Parmenides_, 134 _c_; I. 19 - _Phaedo_, 64, 67 _c_, 69 _c_; I. 18 - 81 _a_, 82 _a_; II. 205 - 81 _c_; II. 66 - 110 _b_-114 _d_; II. 206-208 - _Phaedrus_, 245 _d_; II. 320 - 246 _b_, _c_; II. 103 - 249 _b_; II. 210 - _Philebus_, 22 _c_; II. 312 - _Republic_, II. 10 _c_, V. 460 _c_; II. 186 - II. 364, _b_, _c_, _e_; II. 235 - II. 364 _e_; II. 236 - V. 471 _c_-VIII.; II. 186 - VI. 508 _c_; II. 94, 312 - VII. 517 _b_; II. 312 - VII. 518 _b_; I. 18 - IX 560 _d_-588 _a_; II. 186 - X. 595 _a_-608 _b_; II. 186 - X. 616 _b_, _c_; II. 93 - X. 617 _e_, 619 _e_, 920 _e_; II. 210 - _Symposium_, 197 _a_; II. 104 - 216 _e_; II. 64 - _Theaetetus_, 153 _c_; II. 93, 94 - 168 _a_; I. 18 - 176 _a_; I. 19 - _Timaeus_, 28 _a_, _c_; II. 312 - 29 _e_ seq.; II. 334 - 41 _d_, _e_, 42 _d_; II. 206 - 92 _c_; II. 312 - - Plotinus, _Enneads_, I. vii. 1, 61 _d_; II. 312 - I. viii. 2, 72 _e_; II. 312 - V. i. 3, 6; II. 323 - V. ii.; II. 326 - V. v. 8; II. 95 - VI. viii. 16; II. 312 - VI. ix. 4; II. 192 - VI. ix. 8-9; II. 96 - VI. ix. 9; II. 91 - VI. ix. 9-11; II. 323 - VI. ix. 11; II. 95, 104 - - Proclus, _In Cratylum_, 103, 107; II. 93 - _Institutio Theologica_, c. 31, 35; II. 91 - c. 129; II. 99 - _In Parmenidem_, IV. 34; II. 93, 100 - VI. 52; II. 95 - _In Platonis Alcibidem_, II. 78; II. 93 - Platonic Theology, III. 132; II. 95 - - - Rauwenhoff, L. W. E., Prof., _Religions-philosophie_, Germ. tr., 1894; - II. 269 _n._ 2, 291 _n._ 1, 328 - - Reinach, S., _Cultes, Mythes et Religions_, Vol. I. 1905; II. 233, 234 - - Reumont, Alfred von, _Vittoria Colonna_, 1881; I. 341 _n._ 1 - - Reusch, F. H., _Der Index der verbotenen Bücher_, 1885, Vol. II.; II. 141 - - Rhode, Erwin, _Psyche_, ed. 1898, Vol. I.; II. 185, 188 - Vol. II.; II. 125 _n._ 1, 185, 235, 237, 356, 357, 368 - - Rickert, H., Prof., _die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen - Begriffsbildung_, 1902; II. 370 _n._ - - Royce, Josiah, Prof., _The World and the Individual_, 1901, Vol. II.; - II. 256 _n._ 4 - - Ruysbroek Johannes, “Zierde der geistlichen Hochzeit,” _Vier Schriften_, - ed. Ullmann, 1848, ch. xlvi. 107, 108; II. 324 - - - Sandreau, Abbé A., _L’Etat Mystique_, 1903; _La Vie d’Union à Dieu_, - 1900; II. 307 _n._ 3 - - Schiller, F. C. S., Dr., “Activity and Substance,” in _Humanism_, 1903; - II. 131, 132, 250 _n._ 1 - “The Desire for Immortality,” in same; II. 197 - - Schmöger, K. E., _Leben der gottscligen Anna Katharina Emmerich_, - 1869-70; II. 335 - - Schopenhauer, Arthur, _Die Welt als Wille u. Vorstellung_, ed. Grisebach, - Vol. I., Anhang; II. 274 - Vol. II., bk. iv., ch. 48; II. 342 - - Schwab, J. B., _Johannes Gerson_, 1858; II. 325 - - Schweizer, Albert, _Die Religions-Philosophie Kants_; 1899, II. 177 - - Scotus, John, Eriugena, _De divisione naturae_; II. 314 - _De rerum principio_; II. 316, 317 - - Seneca, L. Annaeus, _Natur. Quaest._, Bk. III. ch. xx. 7, ch. xxx. 7, 8; - II. 240 - - Seth, James, _A Study of Ethical Principles_, 1894; II. 57 _n._ 1, - 180 _n._ 3 - - Simmel, Prof. Georg, _Kant_, 1904; II. 179, 260, 261 - - Smith, W. Robertson, Prof., _The Prophets of Israel_, ed. 1882; II. 267 - - Spinoza, ed. Van Vloten and Land, 1895, _Ethica_, Part II., Defin. - vi., 75; II. 294 - Part IV., Prop. lxiv., Coroll., 225; II. 294 - Part V., Prop. xix., 251; II. 175, 176 - Prop. xli., 264; II. 175, 176 - Prop. xli., Scholion, 265; II. 175, 176 - _Tractatus Theologico-Politicus_, Cap. IV., Vol. II. 3, 4; - II. 175-176 - - Stade, B., Prof., _Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments_, 1905, - Vol. I.; II. 191 - - Sticker, Fr., Urban, Bollandist, _Life of St. Catherine_, in Acta - Sanctorum, Sept., Vol. V., ed. 1866, 123-195; I. 94, 167 - 183 _b-e_; I. 466 _n._ 2 - 192-196; I. 342 _n._ 1 - - Strata Battista, _Atti Notarili_, in “Archivio di Stato,” Genova; - I. 379 _n._ 1 - - Suarez, Francesco, Fr., S.J., Opera, Vol. IV., Disp. XI., sec. iv., - art. 2; II. 241 - XLVII., sec. 1, art. 6; II. 241 - - Sulze, Emile, _Wie ist der Kampf um die Bedeutung … Jesu zu beendigen?_ - 1901; II. 372, 373 - - - Taylor, A. E., _The Problem of Conduct_, 1901; II. 169, 179-181, 274 - - Tennant, Rev. F. R., _The Origin and Propagation of Sin_, 1902; II. 296, - 299-300 - - Teresa, St., _Life Written by Herself_, Eng. tr., D. Lewis, 1888, Ch. - iv. 17; II. 11 - Ch. v. 23, 27, 28, 29; II. 14; 5, 11; 13, 20; 13 - Ch. vi. 30, 31; II. 10, 11 - Ch. vii. 40, 41; II. 21, 50 - Ch. ix. 57, 58; II. 18 _n._ 1 - Ch. xiii. 86; II. 15 - Ch. xviii. 124, 130; II. 324, 325 - Ch. xix. 136; II. 44 - Ch. xx. 146, 149; II. 324, 44 - Ch. xxii. 162-174: II. 169 - Ch. xxiii. 174; II. 325 - Ch. xxv. 190 _b_, _c_, 192 _c_, 193 _a_, 196 _b_; II. 48-49 - Ch. xxvii. 206; II. 50 - Ch. xxviii. 224; II. 48-49 - Ch. xxix. 231, 234, 235; II. 18; 10; 11, 20, 44 - Ch. xxx. 247; II. 18 - Ch. xxxi. 248, 249, 251; II. 21 - Ch. xxxii. 263; II. 11 - Ch. xxxv. 295; II. 48-49 - Ch. xxxviii. 335; II. 325 - Rel. vii. 408; II. 16 _n._ 1(2), 50 - Rel. viii. 420, 421, 423; II. 5, 44; 324; 20 - Rel. ix. 430, 431; II. 325; 48, 49 - - Thomas Aquinas, St., _De Beatitudine_, ch. iii. 3; II. 151-152 - _De Ente et Essentia_, c. 11; II. 316 - _In libr. Boetii de Trinitate_, ed. Ven. 2, ch. viii. 291 _a_, - 341 _b_, 342 _a_; II. 289, 337 - _In libros Sententiarum_, Sent. II., dist. 30, qu. 1, art. 2; - II. 163 - Sent. III., dist. 30, art. 5; II. 164 - _Summa contra Gentiles_, I. 1-3, c. 70 in fine; I. 81 - Lib. II. c. xciv. inst.; c. xciii; II. 256 - Lib. III. c. xxi. in fine; II. 253 - _Summa Theologica_, I. qu. 4, art. 1 concl.; II. 250 - I. qu. 8, art. 2; II. 338 - I. qu. 12, art. 1 in corp.; II. 257, 338 - I. qu. 12, art. 6 ad 1; II. 257 - I. qu. 12, art. 7, in corp.; II. 257 - I. qu. 12, art. 8 ad 4; II. 253 - I. qu. 12, art. 10, in corp.; II. 248 - I. qu. 13, art. 5, concl., et in corp.; II. 337 - I. qu. 14, art. 2 ad 2; II. 253 - I. qu. 14, art. 4, in corp.; II. 252 - I. qu. 14, art. 8, concl.; II. 253 - I. qu. 14, art. 11 ad. 3 contra et concl.; II. 253 - I. qu. 19, art. 1, concl.; II. 252 - I. qu. 19, art. 2, in corp.; II. 254 - I. qu. 20, art. 1 ad 1 ad 3; II. 254 - I. qu. 20, art. 1, concl.; II. 252 - I. qu. 20, art. 2 ad 1; II. 254 - I. qu. 25, art. 1 ad 2, and concl.; II. 250 - I. qu. 28, art 1, in corp. and ad 2; II. 163 - I. qu. 29, art. 3 ad 2 ad 4, and in corp.; II. 256 - I. qu. 47, art. 1, in corp.; II. 256 - I. ii. qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4; II. 253 - I. ii. qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4, and concl.; II. 252 - I. ii. qu. 28, art. 1 ad 2, and in corp.; II. 163 - I. ii. qu. 86, art. 1 ad 3, and concl.; II. 236, 294 - I. ii. qu. 114, art. 4, in corp.; II. 164 - II. ii. qu. 3, art. 4 ad 4; II. 254 - II. ii. qu. 17, art. 8, in corp.; II. 162 - II. ii. qu. 23, art. 6, concl. and in corp.; II. 163 - III. qu. 85, art. 2 ad 1; II. 164 - III. suppl., qu. 6, art. 3; I. 120, 121 - Suppl., qu. 62, art. 2; II. 127, 128 - Suppl., qu. 69, art. 1 ad 3, and in corp.; II. 214 - Suppl., qu. 69, art. 6, in corp.; _ib._ - Suppl., qu. 69, art. 7, concl.; _ib._ - Suppl., qu. 69, art. 7 ad 9; II. 223 - Append.; qu. 2, art 4, in corp. and ad 4; II. 244 - _App. de Purg._, art. 2, in corp.; II. 214 - - Tiele, C. P., Prof., _Elements of the Science of Religion_, 1897, - Vol. I.; II. 262-263 - Vol. II.; II. 268-270, 340 - - Touzard, Abbé J., “Le Développement de la Doctrine del Immortalité,” - _Revue Biblique_, 1898, pp. 207-241; II. 189 - - Trendelenburg, A., “Ueber den letzten Unterschied d. philos. Systeme,” - _Beiträge z. Philos._ 1855, II. 10; II. 375 - - Troeltsch, Prof. Ernst, “Das Historische in Kant’s - Religions-philosophie,” _Kant Studien_, 1904; II. 261, 262 - “Religions-philosophie,” in _Die Philosophie im Beginn des XXten - Jahrh._, 1904, Vol. I; II. 327, 376 _n._ 1 - “Die Selbständigkeit der Religion,” _Zeitschr. f. Theologie u. - Kirche_, 1895; II. 399 - “Grundprobleme der Ethik,” in _Zeitschr. f. Theologie u. Kirche_, - 1902; II. 127 _n._ 1, 273, 274, 358, 359 - “Geschichts philosophie,” _Theol. Rundschau_, 1893, II. 256, 257 - “Was heisst Wesen des Christenthums?” _Christliche Welt_, 1903; - II. 359, 360 - - Turmel, Abbé Joseph, “Le Dogme du Pêché Originel dans S. Augustin,” - _Rev. d’Hist. et de Litt. Rel._, 1901, 1902; II. 29 _n._ 1 - - Tyrrell, Rev. George, _Hard Sayings_, 1898; I. 89; II. 230 - _Lex Orandi_, 1903; II. 268, 337 _n._ 1 - _The faith of the Millions_, 1901, Vol. II.; II. 353, 354 - - - Ueberweg-Heinze, _Grundriss d. Gesch. d. Philosophie_, Part II., ed. - 1898; II. 314, 316, 317 - - - Vallebona, Sebastiano, _La Perla dei Fieschi_, ed. 1887, I. 129 _n._ 3, - 144, 145 _n._ 1, 337, 338 _n._ 1 - - Vernazza Battista, Ven., _Opere Spirituali, Genova_, 1755, Vol. I. - Preface; I. 100, 117, 344 _n._ 2 - Vol. V. 218-227, _Colloquii_; I. 346-358 - Vol. VI. 192-248, _Letters_; I. 343-344, 359-364, 409 _n._ 1, 2 - - _Vita e Dottrina di S. Caterina da Genova._ Nona Ed. Genovese. Sordi-Muti - (no date). Preface, vii_c_; I. 413, 414 - viii_a_, _b_; _ibid._ - viii_b_; I. 281 - - _Vita_-proper, Cap. I. 3; I. 104 _n._ 1 - 3_c_; I. 127 - Cap. II. 4_a_, _b_, _c_; I. 105 - 4_a_-5_b_; I. 404-406 - 4_a_-5_c_; I. 458-460 - 4_c_-5_a_; I. 107, 108 - 4_c_; I. 108 _n._ 1 - 5_a-c_; _ibid._ - 5_b_; I. 181-412 - 5_b-c_; I. 108 _n._ 2 - 5_c_-6; I. 112, 121 _n._ 3 - 6; I. 118-119 - 6_a_; I. 334 _n._ 1 - 6_b_; I. 118, 412 - 6_c_; I. 397 - Cap. III. 7_a_; I. 114 _n._ 2 - 7_b_; I. 116 - 8_a_; I. 280 - 8-9; I. 115 - 8_c_; I. 263, 273, 280 - 9_b_; I. 180 _n._ 3, 263, 265, 273 - Cap. IV. 10_a_; I. 135 _n._ 1, 136 _n._ 2 - 10_b_; I. 180 _n._ 1 - 11_b_; I. 273 - 11_b-c_; I. 264 - 11_c_; I. 137 _n._ 1 - Cap. V. 12_b_-13_b_; I. 121 _n._ 3 - 13_c_; I. 401 - 14_b_; I. 134 _n._ 2 - Cap. VI. 14_c_; I. 121 _n._ 3, 393 - 15_b_; I. 139, 267, 273, 280 - 15_c_-16_a_; I. 140, 265 - 16_b_; I. 118 _n._ 2, 139 - Cap. VII. 17_b_; I. 140 - 19_b_; I. 274 - Cap. VIII. 20_a_; I. 401 - 20_b_; I. 142 _n._ 2 - 20_c_; I. 143 - 21_a_; I. 407 - 21_a-b_; I. 401 - 21_b_; I. 144, 145 _n._ 1 - 21_c_; I. 143 _n._ 2 - 22_b_; I. 265 - Cap. IX. 22_c_; I. 267, 277 - 23_a_; I. 139, 279 - 23_b_; I. 267, 274 - 23_c_; I. 263, 277 - 24_a_; I. 277, 279 - 24_b_; I. 274 - Cap. X. 25_c_-26_a_; I. 265 - 26_b_; I. 266 - Cap. XI. 27_a_; I. 280 - 28_c_-29_b_; I. 269 - 29_c_; I. 262, 278 - 30_a_; I. 278 - Cap. XII. 30_b_; I. 262 - 31_b_; I. 271 - 31_c_-32_a_; I. 268 - Cap. XIII. 32_c_; I. 409 _n._ 1 - 33_c_-33_b_; I. 261 - 33_b_; I. 283; II. 222 - Cap. XIV. 34_c_; I. 277 - 36_b_; I. 263, 266 - 36_c_; I. 266 - 37; I. 259 - 38_b_-39_a_; I. 282 - 39_b_; I. 162 _n._ 3 - Cap. XV. 39_b_-116_b_; II. 294 - Cap. XVI. 42_a_; I. 270 - 42_b_; I. 269 - 43_c_; I. 269, 278 - Cap. XVII. 47_b_; I. 139, 161, 162 - 47_c_-48_a_; II. 92 - Cap. XVIII. 48_b_; I. 266 - 49_a_; I. 139, 267 - 50_a_; I. 161, 162 - 50_b_; I. 266 - Cap. XIX. 51-52; I. 140 _n._ 4, 141 _n._ 1 - 51_a_-53_b_; I. 390 _n._ 2, 451 - 51_b_; I. 279 - 52_a_; I. 279 - 52_c_-53_a_; I. 272 - 53_b_; I. 265, 276 - Cap. XX. 54_b-c_; I. 272 - 55_c_-56_a_; I. 262 - 56_b_, _c_; I. 123, 124 _n._ 1 - Cap. XXII. 59_c_; I. 274, 275 - Cap. XXIII. 60_c_; I. 280 - 61_a_; I. 262 - 61_c_; I. 277 - 62_a_; I. 259, 387 - Cap. XXIV. 64_b_; I. 287 - Cap. XXV. 66_a_; I. 268 - 66_b_; I. 268 - 67_c_; I. 265 - Cap. XXVI. 69_a_; I. 267 - Cap. XXVII. 71_c_; I. 198 _n._ 1 - 72_b_; I. 162, 163. 164 - Cap. XXIX. 74_b_; I. 263 - 75_b_; I. 268 - 76; I. 387 - 76_a_; I. 272 - 76_c_; I. 262, 275 - 77_a_; I. 275 - 77_b_; I. 277; II. 50 - Cap. XXX. 78_c_; I. 284 - Cap. XXXI. 79_c_; I. 262 - 80_b_; I. 265 - 80_c_-81_a_; I. 263 - 81_b-c_; I. 271 - 82_a_: I. 271 - 82_b_-83_a_; I. 394-395 - 83_a_; I. 259 - Cap. XXXII. 83_c_-84_a_; I. 270 - 86_b_; _ibid._ - 87_a_; _ibid._ - 87_c_; I. 268, 276; II. 50 - Cap. XXXIV. 91_c_; I. 262 - 92_a_; I. 259 - Cap. XXXVI. 94_b_-95_c_; I. 160 - 94_a_; I. 276 - 94_b_-95_c_; I. 455 - 94_c_; I. 159 _n._ 1, 279 - 95_b_; I. 279 - 95_c_; I. 127, 272 - 96_b_; I. 148 _n._ 1 - Cap. XXXVII. 97_b_; I. 140, 148 _n._ 1, 160, 161, 409 _n._ 2 - 97_c_; I. 388 - Cap. XXXVIII. 98-99; I. 166, 183 _n._ 1 - 98_a-b_; I. 183, 454 - 98_a_-99_b_; I. 454-455 - 98_c_; I. 192 _n._ 1 - 99_a_; I. 192 _n._ 1 - Cap. XXXIX. 100_c_-101_b_; I. 455 - 101_a-b_; I. 262 - 103_b_; I. 271 - Cap. XL. 105_c_; I. 147 _n._ 1, 265 - Cap. XLI. 106_a_, _c_; I. 268 - 107_a_; I. 268 - 107_b_; I. 274 - 108_b_; I. 270 - 109_b_; I. 276 - Cap. XLII. 113_b_; I. 164 _n._ 2; II. 10 - 113_c_; I. 274 - 114_a_; I. 269 - Cap. XLIII. 115_a_, _b_; I. 162 _n._ 3, 457 - 115_c_; I. 457 - Cap. XLIV. 116_c_; I. 117 _n._ 2, 118 _n._ 1 - 116_c_-121_b_; I. 390 _n._ 4, 455-456 - 117_b_; I. 118 _n._ 1 - 117_b_-121_b_; I. 451, 455-457 - 118_a_, _b_; I. 158 _n._ 1 - 119_b_; I. 185 _n._ 1 - 119_c_; I. 118, 195 _n._ 1, 391 - 120_a_, _b_; I. 195 _n._ 1 - Cap. XLV. 122_b_, _c_-123_a_; I. 150 _n._ 1 - 122_c_; I. 272, 388 - 123, 124; I. 132 _n._ 3 - 123_b_; I. 167, 402 - 123_b_-124_b_; I. 390 _n._ 3, 457 - 124_b_; I. 387 - Cap. XLVI. 124_b_-125; I. 169-171 - 124_c_; I. 388 - 125_a_; I. 272 - 125_b_; I. 402 _n._ 2 - Cap. XLVII. 127-132; I. 166 - 127_a_, _c_; I. 420 - 129_b_; I. 119 _n._ 2 - 129_c_; I. 164 _n._ 2; II. 4 - 130_a_; I. 164 _n._ 2 - 132_a_; I. 188 _n._ 1 - Cap. XLVIII. 132_b_; 188 _n._ 1 - 133_b_; I. 187 _n._ 1, 188, 450 - 134_a_; I. 164 _n._ 2 - 135_a_; I. 189 _n._ 1 - 135_c_-136_a_; I. 189 _n._ 2 - 136_b_; I. 274 - 138_b_; II. 10 - 138_c_; I. 193 - Cap. XLIX. 139_a_; I. 388 _n._ 1 - 139_a_-140_c_; I. 390 _n._ 4 - 139_c_-140_b_; I. 388 _n._ 1 - 140_a_; I. 194 _n._ 1 - 140_b_, _c_; I. 119-120 - 141_b_-145_b_; I. 204 _n._ 1 - 142_a_, _b_, _c_; I. 197 _n._ 2, 3 - 143_b_; I. 197 n, 4; II. 10 - 144_a_; I. 198 _n._ 2 - 144_b_; I. 281 - 144_c_; I. 434 - 145_c_-146_a_; I. 198 _n._ 3 - 146_c_-147_c_; I. 201 _n._ 3 (202), 390, 451 - Cap. L. 148_c_; I. 204 _n._ 2 - 149_b_; I. 205 _n._ 1; II. 10 - 149_c_; I. 205 _n._ 1 - 151_a_, _b_; I. 205 _n._ 4 - 152_b_-153_c_; I. 204 _n._ 1 - 152_c_; II. 10 - 153_a_; I. 209 _n._ 1 - 154_b_; I. 208 _n._ 3, 390, 451 - 155_a_; I. 209 _n._ 1, 273; II. 10 - 155_b_-156_a_; I. 210 _n._ 1, 389, 412, 452 - 156_b_, _c_; I. 210 _n._ 1 - 157_c_; I. 209 _n._ 1 - 158_a_; I. 209 _n._ 1 - 158_b_; I. 210 _n._ 3 - 158_c_-159_a_; I. 211 - 159_c_; I. 213 _n._ 1 - 160_a_, _b_; I. 214 - 160_c_; I. 215 - 161; I. 387 - 161_a_; I. 215 - Cap. LI. 161_c_-163_a_; I. 216-218 - 162_a_; I. 162 _n._ 3 - Cap. LII. 163_b_-164_a_; I. 218 _n._ 2 - 164_b_, _c_; I. 300 - 165_a_; I. 454-455 - 165_c_; I. 300, 454, 455 - - _Vita-Trattato_, Cap. I. 169_b_; I. 281 - 169_b_-175_c_; I. 435 - 169_b_-184_c_; I. 435-438 - 169_c_-170_a_; I. 286 - 169_c_-170_b_; I. 417 - 169_c_-170_c_; I. 440-442 - 170_b_; I. 283 - Cap. II. 170_c_; I. 287, 291 - 170_c_-171_b_; I. 442-444 - 171_b_; I. 287 - Cap. III. 171_c_; I. 278 - 172_a_; I. 278, 288 - 172_b_; I. 287, 444-445 - Cap. IV. 172_c_; I. 282 - 173_a_; I. 445 - 173_a_, _b_; I. 283 - 173_b_; I. 226; II. 222 - Cap. V. 173_c_, 174_a_; I. 287, 446-447 - Cap. VI. 174_b_; I. 288, 289 - Cap. VII. 175_a_; I. 277, 285 - 175_b_; I. 284 - Cap. IX. 176_a_; I. 284, 285 - Cap. X. 177_b_; I. 284, 287 - Cap. XI. 178_a-b_; I. 438-439 - 178_b_; I. 292, 293 - Cap. XIII. 180_a_-181_c_; I. 437 - 180_b_-181_c_; I. 438-439 - Cap. XVI. 181_c_, 182_b_; I. 438-439 - 182_b_; I. 286, 290 - Cap. XVII. 183_c_; I. 274 - - _Vita-Dialogo_, Part I. 185-225; I. 396-397 - 185_c_-190_c_, 191_a_-198_a_; I. 397 _n._ 1 - Cap. VI. 197_a_; I. 400 - 198_b_-206_b_; I. 398 _n._ 1 - Cap. VIII. 199_c_-202_c_; I. 404 - 201_b_; I. 409 _n._ 2 - 202_c_-208_b_; I. 404-406 - 203_a_; I. 124 - Cap. XI. 208_c_-209_b_; I. 404, 405 - Cap. XII. 209_c_-211_b_; I. 409 _n._ 1 - 207_c_-212_a_; I. 398 _n._ 4 - 211_a_; I. 404-406, 409 _n._ 2 - 211_b_; I. 400, 404-406, 409 _n._ 1, 412 - 211_c_; I. 409 _n._ 1 - Cap. XIII. 212_b_, _c_; I. 398 _n._ 5 - 212_c_; I. 146, 429 - 212_c_-213_a_; I. 406-407 - Cap. XIV. 213_c_-225_c_; I. 398 _n._ 6, 420-421 - Cap. XV. 215_c_-216_a_; I. 399 _n._ 2, 408 _n._ 5 - Cap. XVIII. 220_c_; I. 401, 406-407 - 221_b_; I. 431 - Cap. XIX. 221_c_; 400, 406-407 - 221, 222_a_; I. 402 - 222_b_; I. 406-407 - Cap. XX. 222_c_; I. 401 - 223_c_; I. 400 - Part II. 226_b_-242_b_; I. 419 - 226_c_-241_b_; I. 420 - 227_a_-241_b_; I. 420-421 - Cap. III. 231_a_; I. 430 - 232_b_-245_c_; I. 419 - 232_b_; I. 431 - Cap. V. 234_b_: I. 427 - Cap. IX. 241_b_; I. 427-428 - 241_c_-245_c_; I. 491 - Cap. X. 242_b_; I. 430, 431 - Cap. XI. 245_c_; I. 417 - Part III. Cap. I. 247_b_; I. 432 - 248_c_; I. 430, 432 - 249_a_; I. 430 - Cap. II. 250_a_, _b_; I. 160, 161 - 250_a_-263_c_; I. 422 - 250_b_; I. 430 - Cap. VI. 259_c_; I. 432 - 260_b_; I. 428 - 264_a_-271_a_; I. 423 - Cap. VIII. 264_b_; I. 412, 433 - Cap. IX. 266_a_, _c_; I. 425, 426 - 266_b_; I. 432 - Cap. X. 268_c_; I. 428 - Cap. XI. 269_c_; I. 428 - 270_b_; I. 428 - C. XII. XIII. 271_b_-275_a_; I. 424 - Cap. XIII. 273_a_; I. 429 - 275_a_; I. 429 - - _Vita-Brevi Notizie_ (Maineri), _Traslazione_, 278-282; - I. 306 _n._ 1 - 278_b_, _c_; I. 304 - _Miracoli_, 282_b_; I. 302 - - _Vita Venerabilis Lukardis_, in “Analecta Bollandiana,” XVIII. - 1899; II. 52-55 - - Volkelt, J., Prof., _Erfahrung u. Denken_, 1886; II. 280 - _Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie_, 1879; I. 56 _n._ 1; II. 276-278 - _Schopenhauer_, 1900; II. 370, 371 - - - Ward, James, Prof., _Naturalism and Agnosticism_, ed. 1905; - II. 196 _n._ 1 - “Mechanism and Morals,” _Hibbert Journal_, Oct. 1905; - II. 197 _n._ 1 - “On the Definition of Psychology,” _Journal of Psych._, Vol. I., - 1904; II. 280 - “Present Problems of Psychology,” (American) _Philosophical Review_, - 1904; II. 277-278 - - Weinel, Prof. H., _Die Wirkungen des Geistes u. der Geister_, 1899, 309; - II. 43 _n._ 1 - - Wesley, John, _Journal_, ed. Parker, 1903; II. 4 _n._ 4 - - Windelband, Prof. W., “Das Heilige,” in _Präludien_, 1903; II. 262 - - - Zeller, Prof. Edward, _Philosophie der Griechen_, Part II. ed. 1879; - I. 312 - Part III., Div. 2, ed. 1881; II. 313 - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] _Vita_, pp. 143_b_; 149_b_, 159_b_; 153_a_. - -[2] _Ibid._ p. 153_c_. - -[3] _Ibid._ pp. 129_c_, 134_a_. - -[4] I have already traced the steps in the growth of this legend. It -is no doubt this element in the biography which irritated John Wesley, -the man of absolute judgments; although he himself, with shrewd good -sense, indicates its possible secondary origin. “I am sure this was a -fool of a Saint; that is, if it was not the folly of her historian, who -has aggrandized her into a mere idiot” (_Journal_, ed. P. L. Parker, -London, 1903). - -[5] _Vita_, pp. 127_c_, 143_b_, 144_b_. - -[6] _Life_, tr. by D. Lewis, London, ed. 1888, pp. 27, 420. - -[7] _Existence de Dieu_, I, 1, 31: _Œuvres_, ed. Versailles, 1820, Vol. -I, p. 51. - -[8] Pierre Janet, _Automatisme Psychologique_, ed. 1903; _Etat Mental -des Hysteriques_, 2 vols., 1892, 1893. Hermann Gunkel, _Die Wirkungen -des heiligen Geistes_, Göttingen, 1899. Heinrich Weinel, _Die Wirkungen -des Geistes und der Geister_, Freiburg, 1899. William James, _The -Varieties of Religious Experience_, London, 1902. - -[9] Pierre Janet, _op. cit._ Alfred Binet, _Les Altérations de la -Personnalité_, Paris, 1902. M. Th. Coconnier, _L’Hypnotisme Franc_, -Paris, 1897. - -[10] W. James, _op. cit._, especially pp. 1-25. H. Weinel, _op. -cit._, especially pp. 128-137; 161-208. Bernouilli, _Die Heiligen der -Merowinger_, Tübingen, 1900, pp. 2-6. B. Duhm, _Das Geheimniss in der -Religion_, Tübingen, 1896. - -[11] H. Bergson, _Essai sur les Données Immédiates de la Conscience_, -ed. 1898. H. Jones, _The Philosophy of Lotze_, 1895. J. Ward, -_Naturalism and Agnosticism_, 2 vols., 1899. M. Blondel, _l’Action_, -1893. J. Volkelt, _Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie_, 1879; _Erfahrung und -Denken_, 1886. H. Münsterberg, _Psychology and Life_, 1899. D. Mercier -_Critériologie Générale_, ed. 1900. - -[12] _Vita_, pp. 96_c_; 117_b_; 127_a_; 97_c_, 133_b_ (dated November -11, 1509, in MSS.); 146_b_; 148_a_. - -[13] From my authenticated copies of the original wills in the Archivio -di Stato, Genoa. - -[14] _Vita_, pp. 113_b_, 149_c_; 143_b_, 152_c_; 138_b_, 155_a_. Note -the parallels in St. Teresa’s _Life_, written by herself, tr. D. -Lewis, ed. 1888. P. 234: “When these (spiritual) impetuosities are -not very violent, the soul seeks relief through certain penances; the -painfulness of which, and even the shedding of blood, are no more felt -than if the body were dead.” P. 30: “I was unable to move either arm or -foot, or hand or head, unless others moved me. I could move, however, -I think, one finger of my right hand.” P. 31: “I was paralytic, though -getting better, for about three years.” - -[15] Hyper-aesthesia and sensation of heat: _Vita_, pp. 142_a_, 153_a_. -Increase of movement: _ibid._, and pp. 145_b_, 143_a_, 153_c_, 141_a_. -Loss of speech and sight: pp. 141_b_, 141_c_, 159_c_. Localization of -heat: p. 157_b_. Haemorrhages: 138_c_, 159_c_, 160_a_. Concavities -and jaundice: pp. 144_a_, 153_a_. Spasms: pp. 143_c_, 71_c_, 141_c_, -142_b_. Cf. St. Teresa, _loc. cit._ p. 30: “As to touching me, that was -impossible, for I was so bruised that I could not endure it. They used -to move me in a sheet, one holding one end, and another the other.” P. -31: “I began to crawl on my hands and feet.” P. 263: “I felt myself on -fire: this inward fire and despair.…” P. 17: “The fainting fits began -to be more frequent; and my heart was so seriously affected, that those -who saw it were alarmed.” P. 27: “It seemed to me as if my heart had -been seized by sharp teeth.” P. 235: “I saw, in the Angel’s hand, a -long spear of gold, and at the iron’s point there seemed to be a little -fire. He appeared to me to be thrusting it at times into my heart, and -to pierce my very entrails.… The pain is not bodily, but spiritual.” - -[16] Swallow: _Vita_, pp. 149_c_, 150_a_; 159_b_; 159_c_; 150_a_. -Odours and colours: 153_c_, 154_b_. Cf. St. Teresa, _loc. cit._ p. 27: -“I could eat nothing whatever, only drink. I had a great loathing for -food.” P. 43: “I have been suffering for twenty years from sickness -every morning.” P. 30: “There was a choking in my throat … I could -not swallow even a drop of water.” P. 263: “A sense of oppression, of -stifling.” - -[17] Exclamations: _Vita_, pp. 144_a_, 148_b_, 155_a_. Laughter: -_ibid._ 145_c_, 148_b_, 149_b_, 157_c_. Sudden changes of condition: -135_b_, 138_c_, 159_b_. Cf. St. Teresa, _loc. cit._ pp. 28, 29: “That -very night,” Feast of the Assumption, 1537, “my sickness became so -acute that, for about four days, I remained insensible. For a day and a -half the grave was open, waiting for my body. But it pleased Our Lord I -should come to myself. I wished to go to confession at once. Though my -sufferings were unendurable, and my perceptions dull, yet my confession -was, I believe, complete. I communicated with many tears.” - -[18] _Vita_, pp. 71_c_; 145_c_; 147_b_; 159_c_, 159_a_; 127_a_. Cf. -St. Teresa, _loc. cit._ p. 23: “I was in my sister’s house, for the -purpose of undergoing medical treatment--they took the utmost care of -my comfort.” P. 27: “In two months, so strong were the medicines, my -life was nearly worn out.” “The physicians gave me up: they said I was -consumptive.” - -[19] Self-knowledge as to “quietudes”: _Vita_, pp. 153_b_, 157_a_. -Marabotto’s attitude: 139_b_; 141_c_, 143_c_, 149_a_. Relations with -Boerio: 147_c_, 147_b_. Cf. St. Teresa, _loc. cit._ p. 86: “My health -has been much better since I have ceased to look after my ease and -comforts.” - -[20] Remark to Vernazza: _Vita_, pp. 98_c_, 99_a_. Persistence of -intelligence: 141_c_; 159_b_, _c_; 143_a_; 143_c_; 145_b_. Cf. St. -Teresa, _loc. cit._ p. 408: “She” (Teresa herself) “never saw anything -with her bodily eyes, nor heard anything with her bodily ears.” P. -189: “The words of the divine locutions are very distinctly formed; -but by the bodily ear they are not heard.” P. 191: “In ecstasy, the -memory can hardly do anything at all, and the imagination is, as it -were, suspended.” P. 142: “You see and feel yourself carried away, you -know not whither.” P. 187: “I fell into a trance; I was carried out of -myself. It was most plain.” - -[21] Picture: _Vita_, p. 135_a_;. Red and black robes: 154_b_, 156_c_. -Suggestions of odour: 118_c_, 119_a_; 9_c_, 8_a_, 9_b_. Cf. St. Teresa, -_loc. cit_. pp. 57, 58: “One day, I saw a picture of Christ most -grievously wounded: the very sight of it moved me.” P. 247: “I used to -pray much to Our Lord for that living water of which He spoke to the -Samaritan woman: I had always a picture of it with this inscription: -‘Domine, da mihi aquam.’” P. 231: “Once when I was holding in my -hand the cross of my rosary, He took it from me into His own hand. -He returned it; but it was then four large stones incomparably more -precious than diamonds: the five wounds were delineated on them with -the most admirable art. He said to me that for the future that cross -would appear so to me always, and so it did. The precious stones were -seen, however, only by myself.” - -[22] Synchronisms: _Vita_, pp. 148_b_; 150_b_; 152_a_, 160_c_, 161_b_. -Communion and ordinary food: 154_a_, 154_c_, 138_c_; 154_c_. Heats: -“Assalto,” _e.g._ 138_b_, _c_; 143_a_, _c_; “ferita” and “saetta,” -_e.g._ 141_a_, _c_; 145_a_. Their localization: 135_a_, 141_c_; 153_a_; -142_a_, 158_a_. Their psycho-physical character: 135_b_, 144_b_. Thirst -and its suggestion: 149_c_, 159_c_; 76_c_; 152_b_, 135_a_. Paralyses: -134_b_; 149_c_. Cf. St. Teresa, _op. cit._ p. 28: her death-swoon -occurs on evening of the Assumption. P. 235: Heat, piercing of the -heart as by a spear, and a spiritual (not bodily) pain, are all united -in the experience of the heart-piercing Angel. P. 423: “Another prayer -very common is a certain kind of wounding; for it really seems to the -soul as if an arrow were thrust through the heart or through itself. -The suffering is not one of sense, nor is the wound physical; it is in -the interior of the soul.” - -[23] _Vita_, pp. 158_a_; 160_a_. Cf. St. Teresa, _op. cit._ p. 41: “We -saw something like a great toad crawling towards us.… The impression -it made on me was such, that I think it must have had a meaning.” -Contrast, with this naïvely sensible sight and the absence of all -interior assurance, such a spiritual vision as “Christ stood before me, -stern and grave. I saw Him with the eyes of the soul. The impression -remained with me that the vision was from God, and not an imagination” -(pp. 40, 41). Another quasi-sensible sight, with no interior assurance, -or question as to its provenance and value, is given on pp. 248, 249: -“Once Satan, in an abominable shape, appeared on my left hand. I looked -at his mouth in particular, because he spoke, and it was horrible. A -huge flame seemed to issue out of his body, perfectly bright without -any shadow.” Another such impression is recorded on p. 252: “I thought -the evil spirits would have suffocated me one night.… I saw a great -troop of them rush away as if tumbling over a precipice.” - -[24] _Lives of the Saints_, ed. 1898, Vol. X, September 15. - -[25] Pierre Janet, _Etat Mental des Hysteriques_, 2 vols., Paris, 1892, -1894: Vol. II, pp. 260, 261; 280; Vol. I, pp. 225, 63. - -[26] _Ibid._ Vol. I, pp. 63, 225, 226. - -[27] Pierre Janet, _Etat Mental_, Vol. I, pp. 226, 227. - -[28] _Ibid._ Vol. II, pp. 253, 257. - -[29] Pierre Janet, _Etat Mental_, Vol. I, pp. 7, 8, 11, 12, 57, 21. - -[30] _Ibid._ Vol. II, pp. 82, 91; 70, 71. - -[31] _Ibid._ Vol. II. Troubles of movement, pp. 105, 106; of nutrition, -pp. 285, 70, 71; strangulation, heart palpitation, fever heats, p. 282; -haemorrhages and red patches, p. 283; jaundice (_ictère emotionnel_), -p. 287; and note the “ischurie,” p. 283, top, compared with _Vita_, p. -12_a_. - -[32] Pierre Janet, _Etat Mental_, Vol I, p. 140; Vol. II, pp. 14, 72, -165. - -[33] _Ibid._ Vol. I, pp. 218, 219; 158, 159. - -[34] The biographical chapters of Volume I give all the facts and -references alluded to in this paragraph. It would be easy to find -parallels for most of these peripheral disturbances and great central -normalities in St. Teresa’s life. - -[35] Prof. W. James has got some very sensible considerations on the -pace of a conversion (as distinct from its spiritual significance, -depth, persistence, and fruitfulness) being primarily a matter of -temperament: _Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, pp. 227-240. - -[36] By the term “visionless,” I do not mean to affirm anything as to -the presence or absence of ideas or mental images during the times so -described, but to register the simple fact, that, for her own memory -after the event, she was, at the time, without any one persistent, -external-seeming image.--Note how St. Ignatius Loyola in his -_Testament_, ed. London, 1900, pp. 91, 92, considered the profoundest -spiritual experience of his life to have been one unaccompanied or -expressed by any vision: “On his way” to a Church near Manresa, “he sat -down facing the stream, which was running deep. While he was sitting -there, the eyes of his mind were opened,” not so as to see any kind of -vision, but “so as to understand and comprehend spiritual things … with -such clearness that for him all these things were made new. If all the -enlightenment and help he had received from God in the whole course of -his life … were gathered together in one heap, these all would appear -less than he had been given at this one time.” - -[37] I would draw the reader’s attention to the very interesting -parallels to many of the above-mentioned peculiarities furnished both -by St. Teresa in her _Life_, _passim_, and by Battista Vernazza in the -Autobiographical statements which I have given here in Chapter VIII. - -[38] The omnipresence of neural conditions and consequences for all and -every mental and volitional activity has been admirably brought out by -Prof. W. James, in his _Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, Vol. -I, pp. 1-25. - -[39] H. Weinel’s _Die Wirkungen des Geistes und der Geister im -nachapostolischen Zeitalter, bis auf Irenäus_, 1899, contains an -admirably careful investigation of these things. - -[40] _Life_, written by herself, ed. cit. pp. 235, 423; 136. - -[41] _Ibid._ pp. 149, 420. - -[42] _Ibid._ pp. xxii, 28. - -[43] It is to Dr. Lightfoot’s fine _Excursus in St. Paul’s Epistle to -the Galatians_, ed. 1881, pp. 186-191, that I owe all the Pauline texts -and most of the considerations reproduced above. - -[44] Visions of Jahve’s glory: i, 1-28; iii, 22-27 xl, 1; xliv, 4. The -five other Ecstasies and Visions: viii, 1 foll.; xi, 1 foll.; xxiv, -1 foll.; xxxiii, 22; xxxvii, 1 foll. Second Sight: viii, 16; xi, 13; -xxiv, 1. Representative Actions: iv, 1-3, 7; iv, 4-6, 8; iv, 10; ix, -11-15; xii, 1-16; xii, 17-20; xxi, 11, 12; xxi, 23-32; xxiv, 1-14; -xxiv, 15-27; xxxiii, 22; xxxvii, 15-28. - -[45] The above translation and interpretation is based upon -Krätzschmar’s admirably psychological commentary, _Das Buch Ezechiel_, -Göttingen, 1900, pp. v, vi; 45, 49. But I think he is wrong in taking -that six months’ abnormal condition to have given rise, in Ezekiel’s -mind, to a belief in a previous divine order and to an interpretation -of this order. All the strictly analogical cases of religious ecstasy, -not hysteria, point to a strong mental impression, such as that order -and belief having preceded and occasioned the peculiar psycho-physical -state. - -[46] _Op. cit._ pp. 190_c_; 192_c_, 193_a_. - -[47] See Prof. W. James’s admirable account of these irruptions in his -_Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, pp. 231-237. - -[48] _Life_, written by Herself, pp. 190_b_; 196_b_; 224_c_; 295_c_; -413_b_. - -[49] _Vita_, passim; _Life_, ed. cit. pp. 40, 41; 408; 206. _Vita_, pp. -87_c_, 77_b_. - -[50] _Ascent of Mount Carmel_, ed. cit. pp. 159, 163; 264, 265, 102, -195; _Spiritual Canticle_, ed. cit. p. 238; _Ascent_, pp. 26, 27; -_Canticle_, pp. 206, 207. - -[51] Two Confessors of hers are mentioned by her, _Vita_, p. 352: -Fathers Henry of Mühlhausen, and Eberhard of the Friars Preachers. - -[52] _Analecta_, _loc. cit._ p. 310. - -[53] _Analecta_, pp. 311-313. - -[54] _Analecta_, pp. 314, 315. - -[55] _Vita_, _loc. cit._ pp. 317, 319. - -[56] _Vita_, pp. 319, 320. - -[57] _Ibid._, _loc. cit._ pp. 327, 334, 352. - -[58] _The Life of Father Hecker_, by the Rev. Walter Elliott, New York, -1894, pp. 371, 372, 418. - -[59] Robert Browning, in _Rabbi Ben Ezra_, viii; Matthew Arnold, in -_Culture and Anarchy_, 21; Prof. James Seth, in _A Study of Ethical -Principles_, 1894, pp. 260-262; and Prof. Percy Gardner, in _Oxford at -the Cross Roads_, 1903, pp. 12-14, have all admirably insisted upon -this most important point. - -[60] I owe much clearness of conception as to the function of -auto-suggestion and mono-ideism to the very remarkable paper of Prof. -Emil Boutroux, “La Psychologie du Mysticisme,” in the _Bulletin de -l’Institut Psychologique International_, Paris, 1902, pp. 9-26: Engl. -tr. in the _International Journal of Ethics_, Philadelphia, Jan. 1908. -There are also many most useful facts and reflections in Prof. Henri -Joly’s _Psychology of the Saints_, Engl. tr., 1898, pp. 64-117. - -[61] In Chapter XII, § iv, I shall show reason for strongly suspecting -that Catherine possessed some knowledge, probably derived from -an intermediate Christian source, of certain passages in Plato’s -Dialogues. But the influence of these passages can, in any case, only -be traced in her Purgatorial doctrine, and had better be discussed -together with this doctrine itself. - -[62] My chief obligations are here to Prof. H. J. Holtzmann’s _Lehrbuch -der Neutestamentlichen Theologie_, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 1-225: “Der -Paulinismus”; but I have also learnt from Estius and Dr. Lightfoot, and -from my own direct studies in St. Paul, Philo, and Plato. - -[63] _Symposium_, 216_e_. - -[64] 1 Cor. xv, 35-53. - -[65] E. Grafe, “Verhältniss der paulinischen Schriften zur Sapientia -Salomonis,” in _Theol. Abhandlungen Carl von Weizsäcker Gewidmet_, -1892, pp. 274-276. - -[66] “The love of Christ,” Rom. viii, 35, is identical with “the love -of God which is in Christ Jesus,” Rom. viii, 39. “The Spirit of God -dwelleth in you,” Rom. viii, 9; 1 Cor. iii, 16. “I live, not I: but -Christ dwelleth in me,” Gal. ii, 20. - -[67] H. J. Holtzmann, _op. cit._ Vol. II, p. 145. - -[68] Holtzmann, _op. cit._ Vol. II, pp. 151, 152. - -[69] My chief obligations are here again to Dr. H. J. Holtzmann’s -_Neutestamentliche Theologie_, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 354-390; 394-396; -399-401; 426-430; 447-466; 466-521. - -[70] I am much indebted to the thorough and convincing monograph of -the Catholic Priest and Professor Dr. Hugo Koch, _Pseudo-Dionysius -Areopagita in seinen Beziehungen sum Neo-Platonismus und -Mysterienwesen_, Mainz, 1900, for a fuller understanding of the -relations between Dionysius, Proclus, and Plotinus. I have also -found much help in H. F. Müller’s admirable German translation of -Plotinus, a translation greatly superior to Thomas Taylor’s English -or to Bouillet’s French translation. And I have greatly benefited by -the admirable study of Plotinus in Dr. Edward Caird’s _Evolution of -Theology in the Greek Philosophers_, 1904, Vol. II, pp. 210-346. - -[71] _The Divine Names_, iii, I; ix, 4: English translation by Parker, -1897, pp. 49, 50; 106. - -[72] _Institutio Theologica_, c. 35; c. 31. - -[73] _Enneads_, vi, ch. ix, 9. - -[74] _Divine Names_, iii, 1; ix, 4: Parker, pp. 27, 104. - -[75] _Enneads_, vi, ch. ix, 4. - -[76] _Divine Names_, viii, 7: Parker, pp. 98, 99. - -[77] _Vita_, pp. 47_c_, 48_a_. - -[78] _Divine Names_, iii, 1: Parker, pp. 27, 28. - -[79] _In Platonis Alcibiadem_, ii, 78 _seq._ - -[80] _Divine Names_, iv, 1; iv, 5: Parker, pp. 32, 33; 38. - -[81] _In Parmenidem_, iv, 34. _In Cratylum_, pp. 103; 107. - -[82] _Republic_, VI, 508_c_. _Theaetetus_, 153_c_. - -[83] _Heavenly Hierarchy_, xv, 2: Parker, pp. 56, 57. - -[84] _Divine Names_, xi, 1; iv, 2: Parker, pp. 113, 34. _Ad Magnesios_, -viii, 2. - -[85] _Mystic Theology_, iii: Parker, p. 135. - -[86] _Platonic Theology_, III, p. 132. - -[87] _Enneads_, v, ch. v, 8; vi, ch. ix, 11. - -[88] _Divine Names_, iv, 8-10: Parker, pp. 42-45. _In Parmenidem_, vi, -52 (see Koch, p. 152). - -[89] _Divine Names_, i, 1; vii, 3; vii, 1; Mystic Theology, 1; _Divine -Names_, vii, 3: Parker, pp. 2; 91, 92; 87; 130; 91, 92. - -[90] _Divine Names_, iv, 13: Parker, p. 48. - -[91] _Enneads_ vi, ch. ix, 9. - -[92] _Ibid._ vi, ch. ix, 8; ch. vi, 11. - -[93] Parker, p. 142. - -[94] _Enneads_, vi, ch. vii, 36; v, ch. iii, 17; v, ch. v, 7. - -[95] _Symposium_, 210 E. See the admirable elucidations in Rhode’s -_Psyche_, ed. 1898, Vol. I, p. 298; Vol. II, pp. 279; 283, 284. - -[96] _Divine Names_, i, 5: Parker, p. 8. - -[97] _Divine Names_, iv, 6; _Mystic Theology_, i, iii: Parker, pp. 39, -132. - -[98] _In Alcibiadem_, ii, 302. - -[99] _Mystic Theology_, iv, v; _Divine Names_ i, 1: Parker, pp. 136, -137; 1; _In Alcibiadem_, ii, 302. - -[100] _Heavenly Hierarchy_, ch. xv, s. 3: Parker, p. 60. - -[101] _In Alcibiadem_, iii, 75. - -[102] _Divine Names_, iii, 1: Parker, pp. 27, 28. _In Parmenidem_, iv, -68. - -[103] _Divine Names_, i, 5; _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, i, 2; _Divine -Names_, ix, 5: Parker, pp. 8, 69, 104. - -[104] _Institutio Theologica_, c. 129. - -[105] _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, iii, 3, 7: Parker, p. 97. - -[106] _Divine Names_, i, 6; viii, 3; 5: Parker, pp. 10, 95, 96. - -[107] _In Parmenidem_, iv, 34; v. - -[108] _Divine Names_ viii, 2; iv, 4; iv, 20: Parker, pp. 95, 84, 57. - -[109] _Laude de lo contemplativo et extatico B. F. Jacopone de lo -Ordine de lo Seraphico S. Francesco.…_ In Firenze, per Ser Francesco -Bonaccorsi, MCCCCLXXXX. Only the sheets are numbered; and two Lode -have, by mistake, been both numbered LVIII: I have indicated them by -LVIII_a_ and LVIII_b_ respectively. I have much felt the absence of any -monograph on the sources and character of Jacopone’s doctrine. - -[110] _Enneads_, vi, ch. ix, II. - -[111] _Rabbi Ben Ezra_, XXXI. - -[112] E. Caird, “St. Paul and the Idea of Evolution,” _Hibbert -Journal_, Vol. II, 1904, pp. 1-19. W. Dilthey has shown this by -implication, in his studies of Erasmus, Luther, and Zwingli: _Archiv -für Geschichte der Philosophie_, Vol. V, 1892, especially, pp. 381-385. - -[113] Mark i, 13, and parallels; Matt. xix, 10-12. - -[114] Mark vi, 8; Matt. x, 26-38; viii, 19-22; xiii, 30-32; xxxiv, 42, -and parallels. - -[115] Matt. vii, 13, 14; xviii, 1-5; xvi, 24-28. - -[116] Mark xiv, 38, and parallels. - -[117] Rom. vii, 24, 18. - -[118] 2 Cor. v, 1-4 = Wisd. of Sol. ix, 15. - -[119] See Erwin Rhode’s _Psyche_, ed. 1898, Vol. II, p. 101, n. 2. - -[120] I owe much help towards acquiring this very important conception, -and all the above similes, to Prof. Ernst Troeltsch’s admirable -exposition in his “Grundprobleme der Ethik,” _Zeitschrift f. Theologie -und Kirche_, 1902, pp. 163-178. - -[121] _St. Augustine_, ed. Ben., Vol. X, 590_b_, 613_a_, 1973_c_, etc. -St. Thomas, _Summa Theol._, suppl., qu. 62, art. 2. - -[122] My chief authorities throughout this section have been Bossuet’s -_Instruction sur les Etats d’Oraison_ of 1687, with the important -documents prefixed and appended to it (_Œuvres de Bossuet_, ed. -Versailles, 1817, Vol. XXVII); Fénelon’s chief apologetic works, -especially his _Instruction Pastorale_, his _Letteres en Réponse à -Divers Ecrits ou Mémoires_, his _Lettre sur l’Etat Passif_, and his two -Latin Letters to Pope Clement XI (_Œuvres de Fénelon_, ed. Versailles, -1820, Vols. IV, VI, VIII, and IX); and Abbé Gosselin’s admirably clear, -impartial, cautious, and authoritative _Analyse de la Controverse du -Quiétisme_. I have studied these works, and the condemned propositions -of the Beguards, of Molinos, and of Fénelon, very carefully, and -believe myself to have, in my text, taken up a position identical with -M. Gosselin’s. - -[123] F. C. S. Schiller, Essay “Activity and Substance,” pp. -204-227,--an admirably thorough piece of work, in _Humanism_, 1903. See -his p. 208. - -[124] See Heinrich Heppe, _Geschichte der Quietistischen Mystik_, -Berlin, 1875, p. 521. The obviously strong partisan bias of the author -against Rome,--of which more lower down,--does not destroy the great -value of the large collection of now, in many cases, most rare and -inaccessible documents given, often _in extenso_, in this interesting -book. - -[125] Heppe, _op. cit._ pp. 130-133. - -[126] There is a good article on Petrucci in the Catholic Freiburg -_Kirchenlexikon_, 2nd ed., 1895; and Heppe, in his _Geschichte_, -pp. 135-144, gives extracts from his chief book. Bossuet’s attack, -_Œuvres_, ed. 1817, Vol. XXIX. - -[127] Reusch, _Der Index der verbotenen Bücher_, 1885, Vol. II, pp. -611; 622, 623; 625. - -[128] Gosselin’s _Analyse, Œuvres de Fénelon_, ed. cit. Vol. IV, pp. -xci-xcv. - -[129] Fénelon, _Explication … des Propositions de Molinos_ (_Œuvres_, -Vol. IV, pp. 25-86). Gosselin, _Analyse_ (_ibid._ pp. ccxvi-ccxxiii). - -[130] _Œuvres de Fénelon_, Vol. VIII, pp. 6, 7. - -[131] Heppe, _op. cit._ p. 62. Reusch, _op. cit._ Vol. II, pp. 619, 620. - -[132] I write with these approbations before me, as reprinted in the -_Recueil de Diverses Pièces concernant le Quiétisme_, Amsterdam, 1688. - -[133] _Œuvres de Bossuet_, ed. 1817, Vol. XXVII, pp. 497-502. Heppe, -_op. cit._ pp. 27_g_ n.; 273-281. Denzinger, _Encheiridion_, ed. 1888, -pp. 266-274. - -[134] Reusch, _op. cit._ Vol. II, p. 618 _n._ 1. - -[135] See Heppe, p. 264, n. - -[136] _Recueil de Diverses Pièces_, pp. 61, 62. - -[137] _Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, pp. 209, 211. - -[138] _De Beatitudine_, c. 3, 3. - -[139] I have been much helped in my own direct studies of the sources -by W. Bousset’s _Die Religion des Judenthums im Neutestamentlichen -Zeitalter_, 1903; by H. J. Holtzmann’s _Neutestamentliche Theologie_, -1897; and A. Jülicher’s _Gleichnissreden Jesu_, Theil 2, 1899. - -[140] Bousset, pp. 395, 396. - -[141] Ch. xii, 8, 9; see too ch. ii, 2, 7. - -[142] Pirke Aboth, v, 23. - -[143] Matt. v, 12; vi, 4, 6, 18, 20; Mark x, 21; ix, 41; Luke x, 7. - -[144] Matt. v, 7; vi, 14; xviii, 32. - -[145] Matt. v, 5; Luke xiv, 8-11; Matt. x, 39. - -[146] Matt. v, 8. - -[147] Matt. x, 41, 42. - -[148] Matt. xix, 29; Mark x, 23; Luke vi, 38; Matt, xxii, 12; xxv, 21; -xxiv, 47; Luke xii, 37. - -[149] Interesting reasons and parallels for holding the Wedding Garment -to have been the gift of the King, in Bugge’s _Die Haupt-Parabeln -Jesu_, 1900, pp. 316, 317. - -[150] Jülicher, _op. cit._ p. 467. Bugge, _op. cit._ p. 277. - -[151] Matt. vi, 1, 2, 5, 16. - -[152] Matt. vi, 11; xx, 14; Luke xvii, 10; Matt. vi, 33; v, 48, 44, 45; -Luke vii, 47. It seems plain that the Parable of the Two Debtors, which -appears in this last passage, declares how pardon awakens love; and -that the sinful woman’s act and Our Lord’s direct comment on it, which -are now made to serve as that Parable’s frame, demonstrate how love -produces pardon. In my text I have been busy only with the second of -these twin truths. - -[153] Luke vi, 33, 34. - -[154] Rom. ii, 6; 2 Cor. v, 10. - -[155] 1 Cor. xv, 19, 32. - -[156] Gal. iii, 19; 2 Cor. iv, 16; xii, 9; Rom. viii, 31, 35, 37-39; -xiv, 8. - -[157] Ps. lxxiii (lxii), v. 25. I follow Duhm’s restoration of the text. - -[158] 1 Cor. xiii, 13; 8, 7. - -[159] _Œuvres_, ed. Versailles, 1820, Vols. IV to IX. - -[160] _Réponse: Œuvres_, Vol. IV, pp. 119-132; _Instruction: ibid._ pp. -181-308: _Lettre sur l’Oraison_, Vol. VIII, pp. 3-82; _Lettre sur la -Charité_, Vol IX, pp. 3-56; _Epistola II, ibid._ pp. 617-677. - -[161] _The Spiritual Letters of Fénelon_, London, 1892, Vol. I, pp. xi, -xii. - -[162] _Œuvres de Fénelon_, ed. 1820, Vol. IV, pp. lxxix-ccxxxiv. - -[163] _Summa Theologica_, II, ii, qu. 17, art. 8, in corp. - -[164] Comment in II, ii, qu. 23, art. 1. - -[165] _Summa_, II, ii, qu. 23, art. 6, concl., et in corp.; I, ii, qu. -28, art. 1, in corp., et ad 2. See also II, ii, qu. 17, art. 6, in -corp.; qu. 28, art. 1 ad 3; I, ii, qu. 28, art. 1, in corp., et ad 2. - -[166] In Libr. sent. II, dist. 30, qu. 1 ad 2. - -[167] _Summa Theol._, III, qu. 85, art. 2 ad 1; I, ii, qu. 114, art. 4, -in corp. In Libr. sent. III, dist. 30, art. 5. - -[168] Some of the finest descriptions of these profoundly organized -states common, in some degrees and forms, to all mankind, are to be -found in the tenth and eleventh books of St. Augustine’s _Confessions_, -A.D. 397, and in Henri Bergson’s _Essai sur les Données Immédiates de -la Conscience_, 1898. - -[169] _Stromata_, Book IV, ch. vi, 30, 1; ch. iv, 15, 6. - -[170] Proemium in _Reg. Fus. Tract._ n. 3, Vol. II, pp. 329, 330. - -[171] _Summa Theol._, II, ii, qu. 27, art. 3. - -[172] The obligation for all of acts of Pure Love is clearly taught -by the condemnations, passed by Popes Alexander VII and Innocent XI, -upon the opposite contention, in 1665 and 1679: “Homo nullo unquam -vitae suae tempore tenetur elicere actum Fidei, Spei et Charitatis, -ex vi praeceptorum divinorum ad eas virtutes pertinentium.” Note here -how “Charitas” necessarily means Pure Love, since Imperfect Love has -already been mentioned in “Spes.”--“Probabile est, ne singulis quidem -rigorose quinquenniis per se obligare praeceptum charitatis erga Deum. -Tune solum obligat, quando tenemur justificari et non habemus aliam -viam qua justificari possumus.” Here Pure Love is undoubtedly meant -by “Charitas,” since, outside of the use of the sacraments, Pure Love -alone justifies. - -[173] _The Problem of Conduct_, 1901, p. 329, n. - -[174] _Life, written by Herself_, ch. XXII, tr. by David Lewis, ed. -1888, pp. 162-174. - -[175] Deharbe, _op. cit._ pp. 139-179, has an admirable exposition and -proof of this point, backed up by conclusive experiences and analyses -of Saints and Schoolmen. - -[176] See Deharbe’s excellent remarks, _op. cit._ pp. 109, 110, n. - -[177] _Analyse_, _loc. cit._ pp. cxxii, cxxiii, _Lettre sur l’Oraison -Passive_, _Œuvres_, Vol. VIII, p. 47. - -[178] _Analyse_, p. cxxiii. - -[179] _Lettre sur l’Oraison Passive_, _Œuvres_, Vol. VIII, pp. 10; 18, -11, 12; 14, 15; 74. - -[180] _Tractatus Theologico-Politicus_, c. iv, opening of par. 4, -ed. Van Vloten et Land, 1895, Vol. II, p. 4; _ibid._ middle of par. -3, p. 3; _Ethica_, p. v, prop. xli, _ibid._ Vol. I, p. 264; _ibid._ -_Scholion_, p. 265; _ibid._ prop. xix, p. 251; _ibid._ prop. xx, p. -251; _ibid._ prop. xlii, p. 265; _ibid._ prop. xxxvi, p. 261. - -[181] _Die Philosophischen Schriften von Leibniz_, ed. Gebhardt, Vol. -VI, 1885, pp. 605, 606; and quotation in Gosselin’s _Analyse, Œuvres de -Fénelon_, 1820, Vol. IV, pp. clxxviii, clxxvii. - -[182] It is to Schweizer’s admirable monograph, _Die -Religions-Philosophie Kant’s_, 1899, pp. 4-70, that I owe my clear -apprehension of this very interesting doubleness in Kant’s outlook. - -[183] _Loc. cit._ pp. 611, 614, 615, 616. - -[184] Kant’s _Werke_, ed. Berlin Academy, Vol. IV, 1903, pp. 393, 394; -396. - -[185] Kant, 1904, p. 131. - -[186] _The Problem of Conduct_, pp. 336, 337; 329. - -[187] _Ibid._ p. 327. - -[188] See James Seth, _A Study of Ethical Principles_, 1894, pp. -193-236, where this position, denominated there “Eudaemonism,” is -contrasted with “Hedonism,” uniquely or at least predominantly occupied -with the act’s sensational materials or concomitances, and “Rigorism,” -with its one-sided insistence upon the rational form and end of action. - -[189] Taylor, _op. cit._ p. 901. - -[190] _Seconde Lettre à Monsieur de Paris, Œuvres_, Vol. V, pp. 268, -269. _Lettres de M. de Cambrai à un de ses Amis, ibid._, Vol. IV, p. -168. - -[191] Chantepie de la Saussaye, _Lehrbuch der Religions-Geschichte_, -ed. 1905, Vol. I, pp. 69, 73-83. - -[192] Chantepie de la Saussaye, _Lehrbuch der Religions-Geschichte_, -ed. 1887, Vol. I, pp. 248, 249. - -[193] _Ibid._ pp. 358, 373. - -[194] Oldenberg, _Buddha_, ed. 1897, pp. 310-328; especially 313, 314; -316, 317; 327, 328. - -[195] My chief authority here has been that astonishingly living and -many-sided book, Erwin Rhode’s _Psyche_, ed. 1898, especially Vol. II, -pp. 263-295 (Plato); Vol. I, pp. 14-90 (Homer); 91-110 (Hesiod); pp. -146-199 (the Heroes); pp. 279-319, and Vol. II, pp. 1-136 (Eleusinian -Mysteries, Dionysian Religion, the Orphics). The culminating interest -of this great work lies in this last treble section and in the Plato -part. - -[196] _Psyche_, Vol. I, pp. 308, 312. _New Chapters in Greek History_, -1892, pp. 333, 334. - -[197] See also the important study of the Abbé Touzard, _Le -Développement de la Doctrine de l’Immortalité, Revue Biblique_, 1898, -pp. 207-241. - -[198] Charles, _op. cit._ pp. 52, 53; 58; 61; 84; 124, 125; 126-132; -68-77. - -[199] B. Stade, _Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments_, Vol. I, -1905, p. 184. - -[200] _L’Automatisme Psychologique_, ed. 1903, p. 5. - -[201] W. James, _The Principles of Psychology_, 1891, Vol. II, pp. -442-467. - -[202] See Prof. James Ward’s closely knit proof in his _Naturalism and -Agnosticism_, 2nd ed., 1905, and his striking address, “Mechanism and -Morals,” _Hibbert Journal_, October, 1905. - -[203] “The Desire for Immortality,” in _Humanism_ 1903, pp. 228-249. - -[204] _Op. cit._ Lib. XVIII, c. x, ed. 1559, fol. 3413. - -[205] Neither she nor her friends can have derived these doctrines -from Ficino’s _Theologia Platonica_, Florence, 1482, since precisely -the points in question are quite curiously absent from, or barely -recognizable in, that book. See its cc. x and xi, Book XVIII, on -“the State of the Impure Soul” and “the State of the Imperfect Soul” -respectively: ed. 1559, fol. 340, _v. seq._ See also foll. 318_r_, -319_v_. - -[206] _Phaedo_, 81_a_-82_a_. - -[207] _Laws_, X, 904_a-e_. - -[208] _Timaeus_, 41_d_, _e_; 42_b_, _d_, I have, for clearness’ sake, -turned Plato’s indirect sentences into direct ones; and have taken -the _Timaeus_ after the _Laws_, although it is chronologically prior -to them, because the full balance of his system, (which requires the -originally lofty “place” of each individual soul),--is, I think, -abandoned in the _Laws_: see 904_a_. - -[209] These four passages are all within pp. 110_b_-114_d_ of the -_Phaedo_. - -[210] _Gorgias_, pp. 525_b_, _c_; 526_c_, _d_. - -[211] _Ibid._ p. 523_b-e_. - -[212] 2 Cor. v, 2, 3.--_Vita_, pp. 109_b_, 66_a_, 171_a_. - -[213] _Republic_, X, pp. 617_e_, 619_e_, 920_e_. - -[214] _Phaedrus_, p. 249_b_. - -[215] _Enneads_, III, 4, 5. - -[216] Enarr. in Ps. xxxvi, § 1, n. 10, ed. Ben., col. 375_b_. See also -_Enchiridion_, CIX, _ibid._ col. 402_d_. - -[217] So in the _De Civitate Dei_, Lib. XXI, c. xxvi, n. 4, _ibid._ -col. 1037_d_. - -[218] _Confess._, Lib. I, c. 2, n. 1; X, c. 26; XIII, c. 7. - -[219] _De Genesi ad litt._, Lib. VIII, n. 39, ed. Ben. col. 387_b_; n. -43, col. 389_a_. - -[220] _Ibid._ Lib. XII, n. 32, col. 507_c_. He soon after attempts -to decide in favour of “incorporeal places,” as the other-world -destination of all classes of human souls. - -[221] Esra IV, iv, 35. See also iv, 41; vii, 32, 80, 95, 101. -Apocalypse of Baruch, xxx, 2. - -[222] _Summa Theol._ suppl., qu. 69, art. 1, in corp. et ad 3; art. 6, -in corp.; Appendix de Purgat., art. 2, in corp.; suppl., qu. 69, art 7 -concl. - -[223] _De gratia primi hominis_, XIV. - -[224] Clemens, _Stromata_, VII, 6. Origen, _De Princ._, II, 10, 4. St. -Greg. Nyss., _Orat._, XL, 36. St. Greg. Nazianz., _Poema de Seipso_, I, -546. St. Joann. Damasc., _De Fide Orthod._, cap. ult. - -[225] St. Ambros., _In Lucam_, VII, 205. St. Hieron., Ep. 124, 7; -_Apol. contra Ruf._, II; in Isa. lxv, 24. - -[226] _Liber de Fide_ (413 A.D.), 27, 29; ed. Ben., coll. 313_b_, -314_c_. _De octo Dulcit. quaestm_ (422 A.D.) 12, 13; _ibid._ coll. -219_d_, 220_a_. Repeated in _Enchiridion_ (423 A.D.?), LXIX; _ibid._ -col. 382_b_, _c_. - -[227] _De Purgatorio_, II, 11. - -[228] Denzinger, _Enchiridion_, ed. 1888, No. LXXIII. - -[229] _Theol. Dogm._, Vol. II, num. 206. - -[230] _Œuvres_, ed. Versailles, 1816, Vol. XI, p. 376. - -[231] _Le feu du Purgatoire est-il un feu corporel? op. cit._, 1902, -pp. 263-282; 270. I owe most of my references on this point to this -paper. - -[232] _Sixteen Revelations of Mother Juliana of Norwich_, 1373, ed. -1902, pp. 73, 74, 78. - -[233] _Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life_, 1899, pp. -63, 64. - -[234] _Divine Names_, ch. iv, secs, xxiii, xxiv: Parker, pp. 61-64. - -[235] _Vita_, pp. 173_b_; 33_b_. - -[236] _Summa Theol._, suppl., qu. 69, art. 7 ad 9. - -[237] Dionysius, _Divine Names_, ch. iv, sec. xxiii: Parker, p. 63. St. -Thomas, _Summa Theol._, suppl., qu. 98, art. 1, in corp. - -[238] _Enchiridion_, CX, ed. Ben., col. 403_c_; CXII, col. 404_c_. - -[239] The passages here referred to will be found carefully quoted and -discussed in Petavius’s great _Dogmata Theologica, De Angelis_, III, -viii, 16, 17, with Zaccaria’s important note (ed. Fournials, 1866, Vol. -IV, pp. 119-121). - -[240] _Dogmata Theologica_, Vol. IV, p. 120_b_. See also the -interesting note in the Benedictine Edition of _St. Augustine_, Vol. -VI, col. 403. - -[241] _Vie de M. Emery_, by M. Gosselin, Paris, 1862, Vol. II, pp. -322-324. - -[242] _Vita_ (_Trattato_), p. 173_b_. - -[243] So Atzberger, in Scheeben’s _Dogmatik_, Vol. IV (1903), p. 826. - -[244] _Enigmas of Life_, ed. 1892, p. 255. - -[245] _Divine Names_, ch. iv, secs. 23, 24: Parker, pp, 70, 71. - -[246] 2 Cor. iv, 16. - -[247] See H. J. Holtzmann, Richard Rothe’s _Speculatives System_, 1899, -pp. 110, 111; 123, 124;--Georg Class, _Phänomenologie und Ontologie des -Menschlichen Geistes_, 1896, pp. 220, 221;--and that strange mixture of -stimulating thought, deep earnestness, and fantastic prejudice, Edward -White’s _Life of Christ_, ed. 1876. - -[248] _Grammar of Assent_, 1870, p. 417. _Hard Sayings_, 1898, p. 113. - -[249] G. E. Lessing, “Leibniz von den Ewigen Strafen,” in Lessing’s -_Sämmtliche Werke_, ed. Lachmann-Muncker, 1895, Vol. XI, p. 486. D. F. -Strauss, _Die christliche Glaubenslehre_, 1841, Vol. II, pp. 684, 685. -Carl von Hase, _Handbuch der protestantischen Polemik_, ed. 1864, p. -422. G. T. Fechner, _Die drei Gründe und Motive des Glaubens_, 1863, -pp. 146, 147, 177. G. Anrich, “Clemens und Origenes, als Begründer -der Lehre vom Fegfeuer,” in _Theologische Abhandlungen für H. J. -Holtzmann_, 1902, p. 120. - -[250] W. R. Greg, _Enigmas of Life_, ed. 1892, pp. 256, 257, 259. J. S. -Mill, _Three Essays on Religion_, ed. 1874, p. 211. - -[251] Sess. XXV, Decret. de Purgatorio, med. - -[252] N. Paulus, _Johann Tetzel_ 1899. Brieger’s review, _Theologische -Literatur-Zeitung_, 1900, coll. 117, 118. - -[253] 1 Cor. xv, 29. - -[254] _De Corona_, III, IV. See M. Salomon Reinach’s interesting -paper, “l’Origine des Prières pour les Morts,” in _Cultes, Mythes, et -Religions_, 1905, pp. 316-331. - -[255] W. Bacher, _Die Agada der palästinensischen Amoräer_, Vol. I, -1892, p. 331. - -[256] _Strom._, VII, 26 (Migne, _Ser. Graec_, Vol. IX, col. 541); I, 26 -(_ibid._ Vol. VIII, col. 916); VII, 26 (_ibid._ Vol. IX, col. 540). - -[257] _De Princ._, II, 10, 6. _De Orat._, XXIX, p. 263. - -[258] _Paedag._, I, 8, p. 51; and Plato, _Gorgias_, p. 477_a_. - -[259] I owe here almost everything to the truly classical account in -Rhode’s _Psyche_, ed. 1898, Vol. II, pp. 1-136. - -[260] _Republic_ II, p. 364_b_, _c_, _e_. - -[261] I take these passages from Anrich’s _Clemens und Origenes, op. -cit._ p. 102, n. 5. - -[262] Clemens, _Strom._, V, 3, p. 236. Origen, _Contra Cels._, VII, 13. -Clemens, _Strom._, IV, 24. Origen, _Contra Cels._, IV, 13. - -[263] Dionysius, _Divine Names_, ch. iv, sec. 24: Parker, p. 64. St. -Thomas, _Summa Theol._ I, ii, qu. 86, art. 1 ad 3 et concl. - -[264] _Treatise on Purgatory_, by St. Catherine of Genoa, ed. 1880, p. -31. - -[265] Plato, _Cratylus_, p. 400_c_. _Republic_, II, p. 364_e_. -Euripides, _Orestes_ XXX, _seq._, with Schol. Rhode, _op. cit._ Vol. -II, p. 101, n. 2. - -[266] _Natur. quaest._ III, 28, 7; 30, 7, 8. - -[267] Disp. XI, Sec. iv, art. 2, §§ 13, 10; Disp. XLVII, Sec. i, art 6. - -[268] Scheeben’s _Dogmatik_ Vol. IV, 1903, pp. 856 (No. 93), 723. - -[269] See Abbé Boudhinon’s careful article, “Sur l’Histoire des -Indulgences,” _Revue d’Histoire et de Littérature Religieuses_, 1898, -pp. 435-455, for a vivid illustration of the necessity of explaining -the details of this doctrine and practice by history of the most -patient kind. - -[270] Denzinger, _Enchiridion_, ed. 1888, Nos. 387, 588, 859. - -[271] Denzinger, _ibid._, Hurter, _op. cit._ ed. 1893, Vol. III, p. 591. - -[272] Denzinger, Nos. 778, 951. - -[273] Cardinal Manning in _Treatise_, ed. cit. p. 31. - -[274] _Op. cit._ pp. 119, 120: “The Purgatory of the Catholic Church, -in strictness, bears its name without warrant.” - -[275] _Cat._, cc. viii, 35. - -[276] _De octo Dulcitii quaest._ 12, 13. - -[277] _Summa Theol._, app., qu. 2, art. 4, in corp. et ad 4. - -[278] _Divina Commedia_, Purg. II, 40-42. See Faber, _All for Jesus_, -ed. 1889, p. 361. - -[279] _De Purgatorio_, Lib. I, c. iv, 6; c. xiv, 22. - -[280] _Les Controverses_, Pt. III, ch. ii, art. 1 (end); _Œuvres_, -Annecy, 1892 _seq._, Vol. I, p. 365. - -[281] Faber’s _All for Jesus_, 1853, ch. ix, sec. 4; Cardinal Manning’s -Appendix (B) to Engl. tr. of St. Catherine’s _Treatise on Purgatory_, -1858; Cardinal Newman’s _Dream of Gerontius_, 1865. - -[282] _In Rom._, Tom. II, i, p. 477. - -[283] _Richard Rothe’s Spekulatives System_, 1899, pp. 123, 124. - -[284] _Richard Rothe’s Spekulatives System_, 1899, pp. 69; 74, 75. - -[285] St. Augustine, _Confessions_, Lib. XI, ch. xxvii, 3; ch. xx; ch. -xi. _De Trinit._, Lib. XV, ch. 16, ed. Ben., col. 1492 D.--St. Thomas, -_Summa Theol._, I, qu. 12, art. 10, in corp. - -[286] I am here but giving an abstract of Mr. F. C. S. Schiller’s -admirable essay, “Activity and Substance,” pp. 204-227 of his -_Humanism_, 1903, where all the Aristotelian passages are carefully -quoted and discussed. He is surely right in translating ἠρεμία by -“constancy,” not by “rest.” - -[287] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 4, art. 1, concl. qu. 25, art. 1 ad 2 et -concl. - -[288] Matt. xxii, 32. - -[289] _Metaphysic_, xii, 1072_b_, 1074_b_. - -[290] E. Caird, _Evolution of Theology in the Greek Philosophers_, 1904 -Vol. II, pp. 12, 16. See here, too, the fine discussion of the other, -rightly immanental as well as transcendental, teaching of Aristotle, -pp. 15, 21. - -[291] _Summa Theol._, I, ii, qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4; art. 4, concl. - -[292] _Ibid._ I, qu. 14, art. 4, in corp.; qu. 19, art. I, concl.; qu. -20, art. I, concl. - -[293] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 14, art. 11, 3; qu. 14, art. 2, ad 2; I, -ii, qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4. - -[294] _Ibid._ I, qu. 12, art. 8 ad 4; I, ii, qu. 4, art. 8 ad 3. - -[295] _Ibid._ I, qu. 14, art. 8, in corp.; art. 11, contra et concl.; -art. 8, concl.; art. 11, concl.--_Contra Gent._, Lib. III, c. xxi, in -fine. - -[296] _Summa Theol._, II, ii, qu. 3, art. 4, 4; I, qu. 19, art. 2, in -corp.; qu. 20, art. 1 ad 1; ad 3; art. 2 ad 1. - -[297] Mark xii, 28-34 and parallels; Matt, x, 29; Luke xii, 6; Matt, -xxv, 10; Mark xiv, 25 and parallels, and elsewhere; Apoc. vii, 9. - -[298] Matt. xviii, 12-14; Luke xv, 1-10; John x, 11-16 (Ezekiel xxxiv, -12-19). - -[299] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 47, art. 1, in corp. - -[300] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 29, art. 3 ad 4; ad 2; in corp. _Contra -Gent._, Lib. II, c. xciv, init.; c. xciii. - -[301] _Excitationum_, Lib. VIII, 604. - -[302] _The World and the Individual_, Vol. II, p. 430. - -[303] G. E. Lessing: _Leibniz von den Ewigen Strafen, Werke_, ed. -Lachmann-Muncker, Vol. XI, 1895, p. 482. E. Troeltsch, _Theologische -Rundschau_, 1893, p. 72. - -[304] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 12, art. 1, in corp.; art. 7, in corp.; -art. 6 ad 1. - -[305] “A Spiritual Canticle,” stanza vii, 10, in _Works_, transl. by D. -Lewis, ed. 1891, pp. 206, 207. - -[306] _Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft_, Werke, ed. -Hartenstein, 1868, Vol. VI, pp. 252, 274. - -[307] _Kant_, 1904, pp. 129-132. - -[308] _Das Historische in Kant’s Religions-philosophie, Kant-Studien_, -1904, pp. 43, 44. - -[309] “Das Heilige,” in _Präludien_, 1903, pp. 356, 357. - -[310] _Elements of the Science of Religion_, 1897, Vol. I, pp. 274, -275; Vol. II, p. 23. - -[311] _Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott_, ed. 1892, p. 281. - -[312] _Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott_, ed. 1892, pp. 27, 28; 230, -231; 262; 23. - -[313] E. Caird, _Development of Theology in the Greek Philosophers_, -Vol. I, pp, 367, 362. The whole chapter, “Does the Primacy belong to -Reason or to Will?” pp. 350-382, is admirable in its richness and -balance. - -[314] _Verkehr des Christen_, pp. 15, 16. - -[315] I. Kant, “Anthropologie,” in _Werke_, ed. Berlin Academy, -Vol. VII, 1907, pp. 135, 136. G. W. Leibniz, “Nouveaux Essais sur -l’Entendement,” in _Die philosophischen Schriften von G. W. L._,” ed. -Gerhardt, Vol. V, 1882, pp. 8, 10; 45, 69, 100, 121, 122. - -[316] All this first clearly formulated by Leibniz, _op. cit._ pp. 121, -122. - -[317] See his _Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, pp. 209-211; -242, 243; and elsewhere. - -[318] _The Prophets of Israel_, 1882, pp. 11, 12; 10, 11. - -[319] _Lex Orandi_, 1903, pp. xxix, xxxi. - -[320] M. Jastrow, _The Study of Religion_, 1901, pp. 279-286. C. P. -Tiele, _Elements of the Science of Religion_, 1897, Vol. II, pp. -227-234; L. W. E. Rauwenhoff, _Religions-philosophie_, Germ. tr., ed. -1894, pp. 109-124. R. Eucken, _Der Wahrheitsgehalt der Religion_, 1901, -pp. 59-238; 303-399. There are important points in pp. 425-438, which I -do not accept. - -[321] _Rothe’s Spekulatives System_, 1899, pp. 25, 26. - -[322] _Elements of the Science of Religion_, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 61, 62. - -[323] _Der Kampf um einen geistigen Lebensinhalt_, 1896, p. 309. - -[324] _The Evolution of Religion_, 1893, Vol. II, p. 313. - -[325] “Grundprobleme der Ethik,” in _Zeitschrift für Theologie und -Kirche_, 1902, pp. 164; 166, 167; 172. - -[326] _Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung_, I, Anhang, p. 653. - -[327] A. E. Taylor’s _The Problem of Conduct_, 1901, contains, pp. -469-487, a very vigorous and suggestive study of the similarities and -differences between Morality and Religion, marred though it is by -paradox and impatience. - -[328] J. Volkelt, _Immanuel Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie_, 1879, pp. 258, -259. - -[329] _Ibid._ pp. 206, 208, 209. - -[330] J. Volkelt, _Immanuel Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie_, 1879, p. 244. - -[331] James Ward, “Present Problems of Psychology,” in (American) -_Philosophical Review_, 1904, p. 607. J. Volkelt, _Kant’s -Erkenntnisstheorie_, p. 241. - -[332] In a Letter of 1772, _Briefe_, ed. Berlin Academy, Vol. I, 1900, -p. 126. - -[333] H. Jones, _A Critical Account of the Philosophy of Lotze_, 1895, -pp. 102-104; 106, 107; 108, 111. - -[334] _The Present Problems_, pp. 606, 607. - -[335] J. Volkelt, _Erfahrung und Denken_, 1886, p. 485. - -[336] James Ward, “On the Definition of Psychology,” in _Journal of -Psychology_, Vol. I, 1904, p. 25. - -[337] There is a good description of this doctrine in H. Höffding’s -_Sören Kierkegaard_, Stuttgart, 1896, pp. 100-104. - -[338] Höffding’s _Kierkegaard_, pp. 119, 120. - -[339] _Ibid._ p. 123. - -[340] See _Works_, ed. London, 1898, Vol. II, pp. 299-306. - -[341] _Quaestio Mystica_, at the end of the notes to Chapter V of -Dionysius’s _Mystical Theology_, ed. Migne, 1889, Vol. I, pp. 1050-1058. - -[342] _In Librum Boetii de Trinitate_, in D. Thomae Aquinatis _Opera_, -ed. altera Veneta, Vol. VIII, 1776, pp. 341_b_, 342_a_; 291_a_. - -[343] _Mystical Theology_, Dr. Parker, pp. 135, 136. I have somewhat -modified Parker’s rendering. - -[344] _Religions-philosophie_, German tr. ed. 1894, p. 116. His scheme -finds three psychological forms and constituents in all religion, -Intellectualism, Mysticism, Moralism, each with its own advantages and -dangers. - -[345] _Confessions_: “Evil, Negative,” VII, 12, etc. “Evil, Positive,” -VI, 15; VIII, 5, 11, etc. - -[346] _Opus Imperfectum_, III, 56, ed. Ben., Vol. X, col. 1750_b_. -_De Nuptiis et Concupiscentia_, I, 23, _ibid._ col. 625_a_.--M. L. -Grandgeorge, in his memoir _St. Augustin et le Neo-Platonisme_, -1896, gives an interesting collection of such Negative and Positive -declarations, and traces the former to their precise sources in -Plotinus, pp. 126, 127; 130, 131. - -[347] _Divine Names_, ch. iv, sec. xxiv. - -[348] _Summa Theol._, I, ii, qu. 86, art. 1 ad 3. - -[349] _Vita_, pp. 39_b_, 116_b_. - -[350] _Sixteen Revelations_, ed. 1902, pp. 69, 70. - -[351] Meister Ekhart’s “Lateinische Schriften,” published by Denifle, -_Archiv f. Litteratur u. Kirchengeschichte des M. A._, 1886, p. 662. - -[352] _Ethica_, II, def. vi; IV, prop. lxiv et coroll.; ed. Van Vloten -et Land, 1895, Vol. I, pp. 73, 225. - -[353] _Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten_, 1785, _Werke_, ed. -Berlin Academy, Vol. IV, 1903, p. 393. _Religion innerhalb der Grenzen -der reinen Vernunft_, 1793, _Werke_, ed. Hartenstein, Vol. VI, 1868, -pp. 127, 128. - -[354] _The Origin and Propagation of Sin_, 1902, p. 125. - -[355] _Wahrheitsgehalt der Religion_, 1901, pp. 271, 272. - -[356] Prof. Höffding, in his _Sören Kierkegaard_, pp. 130, 131. - -[357] “Le Dogme du Pêché Originel dans S. Augustin,” _Revue d’Histoire -et de Littérature Religieuses_, 1901, 1902. See too F. R. Tennant, _The -Sources of the Doctrine of the Fall and Original Sin_, 1903, which, -however, descends only to St. Ambrose inclusively. - -[358] So F. R. Tennant, _The Origin and Propagation of Sin_, 1902, pp. -131, 110. - -[359] F. R. Tennant, _The Origin and Propagation of Sin_, 1902, pp. 82, -95; 107, 108; 115. - -[360] _Ibid._ p. 83. - -[361] _Ibid._ p. 153. - -[362] _Summa Theol._, II, ii, qu. 24, art. 7, in corp. - -[363] _Psychology and Life_, 1899, pp. 267, 268. _Grundzüge der -Psychologie_, Vol. I, 1900, pp. 170, 171. - -[364] Mr. W. R. Inge, in his useful _Christian Mysticism_, 1899, has -some sharp expressions of disgust against these long-lived survivals -within the Catholic Church. And though his own tone towards Rome in -general belongs also, surely, to a more or less barbaric past, he has -done good service in drawing forcible attention to the matter. - -[365] _Sixteen Revelations_, ed. 1902, pp. 23, 84, 101. - -[366] _Ascent of Mount Carmel_, tr. Lewis, 1891, pp. 159; 26, 27; 195, -265. - -[367] _Confessions_, Bk. XI, ch. xxiii, 1. Tract in Joann. Ev., VIII, -1; XXIV, 1: ed. Ben., Vol. III, 2, coll. 1770 _b_, 1958 _d_. - -[368] _Sixteen Revelations_, ed. cit. p. 210. - -[369] J. N. Grou, _Méditations sur l’Amour de Dieu_, Nouvelle ed. -Perisse, pp. 268, 271. - -[370] L. Laberthonnière, _Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne_, 1905, -1906. G. Tyrrell, _Hard Sayings_, 1898; _External Religion_, 1902. A. -Sandreau, _La Vie d’Union à Dieu_, 1900; _L’Etat Mystique_, 1903. - -[371] M. D. Petre, _The Soul’s Orbit_, 1904, p. 113. - -[372] _Göttinger Gelehrte Anzeigen_, 1901, p. 757. - -[373] Zeller, _Philosophie der Griechen_, II, 2, ed. 1879, pp. 309, 312. - -[374] _Ibid._ p. 348. - -[375] Republic, VI, 508_e_; VII, 517_b_; and Zeller, _ibid._ II, 1, ed. -1889, pp. 707-710. - -[376] _Philebus_, 22_c_; _Timaeus_, 28_a_, _c_; 29_e_, 92_c_ (with the -reading ὅδε ὁ κόσμος … εἰκὼν τοῦ ποιητοῦ). - -[377] _Timaeus_, 29_e_. - -[378] _Enneads_, I, vii, 1, 61_d_; I, viii, 2, 72_e_; VI, viii, 16, -end. See, for all this, Zeller, _Philosophie der Griechen_, III, ii, -ed. 1881, pp. 476-480; 483; 510-414. - -[379] _Enneads_, VIII. ix, 350_b_; VI, 2317, 610_d_; III, ix, 3, 358_a, -b_. - -[380] Zeller, _op. cit._ III, ii, pp. 787-789. - -[381] _Divine Names_, ch. v, sec. 1: tr. Parker, pp. 73-75. - -[382] _Mystical Theology_, ch. iii: Parker, pp. 135, 136. - -[383] _Mystical Theology_, ch. iv, sec. 2: Parker, pp. 136, 137. - -[384] _De Divisione Naturae_, III, 17; I, 78. Ueberweg-Heinze, -_Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie_, Vol. II, ed. 1898, p. 159. - -[385] Secs. 2, 4, ed. Bardenhewer, 1882, pp. 163-166. - -[386] Commentarius, in _Aristotelis Metaphysica_, Tract. VIII, cap. 6, -quoted by Denifle, _Archiv f. Litteratur-u-Kirchengeschichte_, 1886, p. -520. - -[387] Ibn Gebirol, _Fons Vitae_, ed. Bäumker, 1895: IV, 6, pp. 225, -224; V, 22, p. 298; II, 20, pp. 60-61; V, 24, p. 301. - -[388] _De Ente et Essentia_, c. vi. _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 3, art. 4 ad -1; and elsewhere. - -[389] _De Ente et Essentia_, c. ii. - -[390] See Ueberweg-Heinze, _op. cit._ pp. 280, 281. - -[391] _De rerum Principio_, qu. viii. Ueberweg-Heinze, _op. cit._ pp. -295, 296. - -[392] H. S. Denifle, _Meister Eckhart’s Lateinische Schriften_, _loc. -cit._ pp. 489, 490; 540, n. 6. - -[393] _Ibid._ p. 519. - -[394] _Meister Eckhart_, ed. Pfeiffer, 1857, pp. 158, 1; 99, 8; 180, -15; 532, 30; 320, 27; 288, 26; 207, 27. - -[395] Denzinger, _Enchiridion Symbolorum_, ed. 1888, Nos. 437, 455. - -[396] _Hegelianism and Personality_, ed. 1893, pp. 230, 231, and note. - -[397] _Phaedrus_, 245 d; Zeller, _op. cit._ II, 1, ed. 1889, p. 830. - -[398] _Ibid._ pp. 843, 844; 849, 850. - -[399] Pre-existence of the Noûs: _Gen. Anim._, II, 3, 736_b_; _de -Anima_, III, 5, 430_a_; Zeller, _op. cit._ II, 2, ed. 1879, pp. 593, -595. The Supreme Noûs, purely transcendent: _Metaph._, XII, 7-10. But -see Dr. Edward Caird’s admirable pp. 1-30, Vol. II, of his _Evolution -of Theology in the Greek Philosophers_, 1904. - -[400] Rom. viii, 11. See too Rom. viii, 9, 14; 1 Cor. iii, 16; vi, 11; -vii, 40; xii, 3. - -[401] H. J. Holtzmann, _Lehrbuch der N. T. Theology_, 1897, Vol. II, -pp. 9-12; 15-18. - -[402] H. J. Holtzmann, _op. cit._ Vol. II, pp. 79, 80. Johannes Weiss, -_Dic Nachfolge Christi_, 1895, p. 95. - -[403] Col. iii, 4; Phil. i, 21; Gal. ii, 20. - -[404] _Enneads_, V, book 1, cc. 3 and 6. - -[405] _Ibid._ VI, book 9, 9 and 11. - -[406] _Eckhart_, ed. Pfeiffer, pp. 113, 33; 469, 40, 36. - -[407] Denzinger, _op. cit._ No. 454. - -[408] _Vier Schriften von Johannes Ruysbroek_, ed. Ullmann, 1848, pp. -106, 107. - -[409] _Life, written by Herself_, tr. D. Lewis, ed. 1888, pp. 124, 421, -146. - -[410] _Life, written by Herself_, tr. D. Lewis, ed. 1888, pp. 355, 130, -430; 174. - -[411] J. B. Schwab, _Johannes Gerson_, 1858, pp. 361, 362. - -[412] I can find but one, secondary Ecclesiastical Censure of the -doctrine of God’s substantial presence in the soul,--the censure passed -by the Paris Sorbonne on Peter Lombard. The same Sorbonne repeatedly -censured St. Thomas on other points. - -[413] Vol. II, pp. 210, 211. - -[414] _Ibid._ pp. 230, 231. - -[415] _Ibid._ p. 231. - -[416] _Ibid._ pp. 253-257. _Enneads_, V, book ii, i. - -[417] Vol. II, pp. 232, 233. - -[418] “Religions-philosophie,” in _Die Philosophie im Beginn des -zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts_, 1904, Vol. I, pp. 115, 117. - -[419] _Religions-philosophie_, Germ. tr., ed. 1894, p. 140. - -[420] “Martineau’s Philosophy,” _Hibbert Journal_, Vol. I, 1902, pp. -458, 457. - -[421] _Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott_, ed. 1892, pp. 27, 15, 28, -231. - -[422] _Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott_, ed. 1892, pp. 20; 19-25. - -[423] _Timaeus_, 29_e_, _seq._ - -[424] _Metaph._, VII, 1072_b_; IX, 1074_b_. - -[425] See Caird, _op. cit._ II, p. 337. - -[426] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 13, art. 5, concl. et in corp. (See the -interesting note, “The Meaning of Analogy,” in Fr. Tyrrell’s _Lex -Orandi_, 1903, pp. 80-83.) _In Librum Boetii de Trinitate_: D. Thomae -Aquinatis _Opera_, ed. Veneta Altera, 1776, p. 341_b_, 342_a_. - -[427] _Summa Theol._, I, qu. 8, art. 2; qu. 12, art. 1, in corp. - -[428] For Leibniz, see especially his _Nouveaux Essais_, written in -1701-1709, but not published till 1765: _Die Philosophischen Schriften -van G. W. Leibniz_, ed. Gebhardt, Vol. V, 1882, especially pp. 45; 67; -69; 121, 122. For the date 1888, see W. James’s _Varieties of Religious -Experience_, 1902, p. 233. - -[429] _Autobiography_, ed. 1875, pp. 133, 134. - -[430] “Die Selbständigkeit der Religion”: _Zeitschrift f. Theologie u. -Kirche_, 1895, pp. 404, 405. - -[431] _Elements of the Science of Religion_, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 227-231. - -[432] _Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung_, ed. Griesbach, Vol. II, pp. -725, 734, 736. - -[433] _The Varieties of Religious Experience_, 1902, pp. 362, 364. - -[434] _Ascent of Mount Carmel_, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1889, pp. 94, 95, -97. - -[435] _Ascent_, pp. 94; 350. - -[436] _Ascent_, p. 353. - -[437] _Sören Kierkegaard_, von Harald Höffding, Germ. tr. 1896, pp. -116, 118, 120. - -[438] _Ibid._ pp. 122; 130, 131. - -[439] _Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte_, ed. 1888, Vol. II, pp. 413, 414; -417. - -[440] _Das Wesen des Christenthums_, ed. 1902, pp. 180, 181. - -[441] Höffding’s _Kierkegaard_, p. 119. - -[442] _The Faith of the Million_, 1901, Vol. II, pp. 49, 50; 52, 53. - -[443] _Works_, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1889, 1891, Vol. I, p. 308; Vol. -II, p. 541. - -[444] _Op. cit._ p. 53. - -[445] _Ibid._ pp. 55, 56. - -[446] _Psyche_, ed. 1898, Vol. II, pp. 292, 293. - -[447] “Grundprobleme der Ethik”: _Zeitschrift für Theologie und -Kirche_, 1902, pp. 164, 167. - -[448] “Was heisst Wesen des Christenthums?” _Christliche Welt_, -1903, I, coll. 583, 584. The Abbé Loisy has also dwelt, with rare -impressiveness, upon the intensely Other-Worldly character of the first -Christian teaching. - -[449] _Deutsche Mystiker des Mittelalters_, ed. Pfeiffer, Vol. I, -1845, pp. xli, xlii. Any Life of St. Jane F. de Chantal. A. Cadrès, -_Le P. Jean N. Grou_, 1866, pp. 13, 14. St. Teresa’s _Life, written by -Herself_, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1888, pp. 176, 177; 186. _Revelations of -Divine Love, showed to Mother Juliana of Norwich_, ed. 1902, p. 4. - -[450] A. Gardner, “Confession and Direction,” in _The Conflict of -Duties_, 1903, pp. 223-229. P. Gardner, in _The Liberal Churchman_, -1905, p. 266. - -[451] _Psyche_, ed. 1898, Vol. II, p. 289. - -[452] “Christianity and Physical Science” (1855), in _Idea of a -University_, ed. 1873, pp. 432, 433. “University Teaching” (1852), -_ibid._ p. 222. See Mr. R. E. Froude’s interesting paper, “Scientific -Speculation and the Unity of Truth,” _Dublin Review_, Oct. 1900, pp. -353-368. - -[453] W. Windelband, _Geschichte und Naturwissenschaft_, 1894. H. -Rickert, _Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft_, 1899. And, -above all, H. Rickert, _Die Grenzen der Naturwissenschaftlichen -Begriffsbildung_, 1902. - -[454] _Schopenhauer_, 1900, pp. 344, 345. - -[455] _Wie ist der Kampf um die Bedeutung … Jesu zu beendigen?_ 1901, -p. 9. - -[456] _Wie ist der Kampf um die Bedeutung … Jesu zu beendigen?_ 1901, -p. 10. - -[457] _Ibid._ pp. 10, 11. - -[458] _Ibid._ pp. 26, 27. - -[459] “Ueber den letzten Unterschied der philosophischen Systeme,” -1847, in _Beiträge zur Philosophie_, 1855, Vol. II, p. 10. - -[460] See the admirably lucid analysis in Prof. Troeltsch’s -“Religions-philosophie,” in _Die Philosophie im Beginn des zwanzigsten -Jahrhunderts_, 1904, Vol. I, p. 116, already referred to further back. - -[461] _Richard Rothe’s Spekulatives System_, 1899, pp. 205, 206. - - -_Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, London and Bungay._ - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Mystical Element of Religion, as -studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa , by Baron Friedrich von Hügel - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION, VOL 2 *** - -***** This file should be named 50206-0.txt or 50206-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/2/0/50206/ - -Produced by Julie Barkley and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/50206-0.zip b/old/50206-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 734bcc6..0000000 --- a/old/50206-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/50206-h.zip b/old/50206-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 61f68f4..0000000 --- a/old/50206-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/50206-h/50206-h.htm b/old/50206-h/50206-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index f367d8d..0000000 --- a/old/50206-h/50206-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,23693 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Mystical Element Of Religion as Studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa and her Friends, Volume II, by Baron Friedrich Von Hügel. - </title> - - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - -<style type="text/css"> - -a { - text-decoration: none; -} - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -h1,h2,h3,h4 { - text-align: center; - clear: both; -} - -h5,h6 { - margin-top: 0.5em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: 0.5em; - text-indent: 1em; - font-weight: normal; - font-size: 100%; - clear: both; -} - -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-left: 33.5%; - margin-right: 33.5%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb { - width: 45%; - margin-left: 27.5%; - margin-right: 27.5%; -} - -hr.chap { - width: 65%; - margin-left: 17.5%; - margin-right: 17.5%; -} - -p { - margin-top: 0.5em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: 0.5em; - text-indent: 1em; -} - -table { - width: 90%; - margin-left: 5%; - margin-right: 5%; - max-width: 100%; -} - -ul { - list-style-type: none; -} - -li.ifrst { - margin-top: 2em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.indx { - margin-top: .5em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.isub1 { - padding-left: 3em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.isub2 { - padding-left: 6em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.isub3 { - padding-left: 9em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.isub4 { - padding-left: 12em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.blockquote { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -.caption { - text-align: center; - margin-bottom: 1em; - font-size: 90%; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.center { - text-align: center; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - -.footnote { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; - font-size: 0.9em; -} - -.footnote .label { - position: absolute; - right: 84%; - text-align: right; -} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: none; -} - -.noindent { - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.larger { - font-size: 150%; -} - -.pagenum { - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; -} - -.red { - color: red; -} - -.right { - text-align: right; -} - -.smaller { - font-size: 80%; -} - -.smcap { - font-variant: small-caps; -} - -.smcapuc { - font-variant: small-caps; - text-transform: lowercase; -} - -td { - padding-left: 0.5em; - padding-right: 0.5em; - vertical-align: top; - text-align: justify; -} - -.tdhanging { - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.tdr { - text-align: right; -} - -.tdc { - text-align: center; - padding-top: 1.5em; -} - -.tdpad { - padding-top: 0.5em; -} - -.titlepage { - text-align: center; - margin-top: 3em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.transnote { - background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - text-align: center; - font-size: smaller; - padding: 0.5em; - margin-bottom: 5em; -} - -@media handheld { - -img { - max-width: 100%; - width: auto; - height: auto; -} - -.blockquote { - margin-left: 5%; - margin-right: 5%; -} -} - </style> - - </head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Mystical Element of Religion, as -studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa , by Baron Friedrich von Hügel - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: The Mystical Element of Religion, as studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa and her friends, Volume 2 (of 2) - -Author: Baron Friedrich von Hügel - -Release Date: October 14, 2015 [EBook #50206] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION, VOL 2 *** - - - - -Produced by Julie Barkley and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - -</pre> - - -<p class="transnote">TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE: In the Index, only the references within this volume are hyperlinked. -Volume I is available as Project Gutenberg ebook number 50205.</p> - -<p class="titlepage larger">THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT<br /> -OF RELIGION</p> - -<p class="titlepage"><i>All rights reserved.</i></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_i" id="Page_i">[i]</a><br /> -<a name="Page_ii" id="Page_ii">[ii]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 464px;"> - -<img src="images/frontispiece.jpg" width="464" height="700" alt="" /> - -<p class="caption"><i>The Venerable Battista Vernazza<br /> -(Tommasina Vernazza)<br /> -1497-1587.</i></p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iii" id="Page_iii">[iii]</a></span></p> - -<p class="titlepage larger"><span class="red">THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT<br /> -OF RELIGION</span> AS STUDIED<br /> -IN SAINT CATHERINE OF<br /> -GENOA AND HER FRIENDS</p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="smcap">By BARON FRIEDRICH von HÜGEL</span><br /> -MEMBER OF THE CAMBRIDGE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY</p> - -<div class="figcenter titlepage" style="width: 184px;"> - -<img src="images/titlepage.jpg" width="184" height="300" alt="Shadows we are and like shadows depart" /> - -</div> - -<p class="titlepage">VOLUME SECOND<br /> -CRITICAL STUDIES</p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="red">LONDON: J. M. DENT & CO.</span><br /> -NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO.<br /> -MCMVIII</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iv" id="Page_iv">[iv]</a></span></p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="smcap">Richard Clay & Sons, Limited,</span><br /> -BREAD STREET HILL, E.C., AND<br /> -BUNGAY, SUFFOLK.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span></p> - -<h2>CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME</h2> - -<p>The frontispiece consists of a reduced facsimile, in photogravure, of -a lithograph by F. Scotto, entitled “Ven. Batt<sup>a</sup>. Vernazza,” which was -printed and owned by the firm of Gervasoni, and which appeared in the -large 4to volume, <i>Ritratti, ed Elogi di Liguri Illustri</i>, with the text -printed by Ponthenier, all in Genoa. This book was published there, in -monthly parts, from 1823 to 1830. Scotto’s highly characteristic lithograph -no doubt reproduces an authentic likeness; and probably the original -portrait was, in the first instance, owned by the Canonesses of S. Maria -delle Grazie, Battista’s own convent in Genoa. The picture now in the -possession of the Nuns of S. Maria in Passione, the successors of those -Canonesses, is of a quite conventional, secondary type.</p> - -<table summary="Contents"> - <tr> - <td></td><td></td><td class="tdr smaller">PAGE</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="3"><a href="#PART_III"><span class="smcap">Part III.</span>—CRITICAL</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_IX"><span class="smcap">Chapter IX.—Psycho-physical and Temperamental -Questions</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_3">3-61</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"></td><td class="tdhanging">Introductory</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_3">3-9</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">Catherine’s Third Period, 1497-1510</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_9">9-13</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">Conclusions concerning Catherine’s Psycho-physical -Condition during this Last Period</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_14">14-21</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">Catherine’s Psycho-physical Condition, its Likeness and -Unlikeness to Hysteria</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_22">22-27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td><td class="tdhanging">First Period of Catherine’s Life, 1447-1477, in its Three -Stages</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_28">28-32</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">V.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Second, Great Middle Period of Catherine’s Life, -1477-1499</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_32">32-40</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">VI.</td><td class="tdhanging">Three Rules which seem to govern the Relations between -Psycho-physical Peculiarities and Sanctity in -general</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_40">40-47</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">VII.</td><td class="tdhanging">Perennial Freshness of the Great Mystics’ Main Spiritual -Test, in Contradistinction to their Secondary, Psychological -Contention. Two Special Difficulties</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_47">47-61</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_X"><span class="smcap">Chapter X.—The Main Literary Sources of Catherine’s -Conceptions</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_62">62-110</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad">Introductory</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_62">62, 63</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Pauline Writings: the Two Sources of their Pre-Conversion -Assumptions; Catherine’s Preponderant -Attitude towards each Position</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_63">63-79</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Joannine Writings</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_79">79-90</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Areopagite Writings</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_90">90-101</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td><td class="tdhanging">Jacopone da Todi’s “Lode”</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_102">102-110</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">V.</td><td class="tdhanging">Points common to all Five Minds; and Catherine’s Main -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[vi]</a></span>Difference from her Four Predecessors</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_110">110</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_XI"><span class="smcap">Chapter XI.—Catherine’s Less Ultimate This-World -Doctrines</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_111">111-181</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad">Introductory</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_111">111, 112</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">Interpretative Religion</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_112">112-121</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">Dualistic Attitude towards the Body</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_121">121-129</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">Quietude and Passivity. Points in this Tendency to be -considered here</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_129">129-152</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td><td class="tdhanging">Pure Love, or Disinterested Religion: its Distinction -from Quietism</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_152">152-181</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_XII"><span class="smcap">Chapter XII.—The After-Life Problems and Doctrines</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_182">182-258</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Chief Present-day Problems, Perplexities, and Requirements -with Regard to the After-Life in General</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_182">182-199</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">Catherine’s General After-Life Conceptions</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_199">199-218</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">Catherine and Eternal Punishment</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_218">218-230</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td><td class="tdhanging">Catherine and Purgatory</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_230">230-246</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">V.</td><td class="tdhanging">Catherine and Heaven—Three Perplexities to be considered</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_246">246-258</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIII"><span class="smcap">Chapter XIII.—The First Three Ultimate Questions</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_259">259-308</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Relations between Morality and Mysticism, Philosophy -and Religion</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_259">259-275</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">Mysticism and the Limits of Human Knowledge and -Experience</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_275">275-290</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">Mysticism and the Question of Evil</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_290">290-308</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIV"><span class="smcap">Chapter XIV.—The Two Final Problems: Mysticism -And Pantheism, the Immanence of God, And -Spiritual Personality, Human and Divine</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_309">309-340</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr"></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad">Introductory</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_309">309, 310</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">Relations between the General and the Particular, God -and Individual Things, according to Aristotle, the -Neo-Platonists, and the Medieval Strict Realists</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_310">310-319</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">Relations between God and the Human Soul</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_319">319-325</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">Mysticism and Pantheism: their Differences and Points -of Likeness</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_325">325-335</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Divine Immanence; Spiritual Personality</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_336">336-340</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#CHAPTER_XV"><span class="smcap">Chapter XV.—Summing-up of the Whole Book. Back -Through Asceticism, Social Religion, and the -Scientific Habit of Mind, to the Mystical -Element of Religion</span></a></td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_341">341-396</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">I.</td><td class="tdhanging">Asceticism and Mysticism</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_341">341-351</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">II.</td><td class="tdhanging">Social Religion and Mysticism</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_351">351-366</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">III.</td><td class="tdhanging">The Scientific Habit and Mysticism</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_367">367-386</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td><td class="tdhanging">Final Summary and Return to the Starting-point of the -Whole Inquiry: the Necessity, and yet the Almost -Inevitable Mutual Hostility, of the Three Great Forces -of the Soul and of the Three Corresponding Elements -of Religion</td><td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_387">387-396</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td><td class="tdhanging tdpad"><a href="#INDEX"><span class="smcap">Index</span></a></td><td class="tdr">397</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> - -<h1>THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT -OF RELIGION</h1> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="PART_III" id="PART_III"></a>PART III<br /> -<span class="smaller">CRITICAL</span></h2> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span></p> - -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_IX" id="CHAPTER_IX"></a>CHAPTER IX<br /> -<span class="smaller">PSYCHO-PHYSICAL AND TEMPERAMENTAL QUESTIONS</span></h3> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Introductory.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Plan of Part Three.</i></h5> - -<p>The picture of Catherine’s life and teaching which was -attempted in the previous volume will, I hope, have been -sufficiently vivid to stimulate in the reader a desire to try and -go deeper, and to get as near as may be to the driving forces, -the metaphysical depths of her life. And yet it is obvious -that, if we would understand something of these, we must proceed -slowly and thoroughly, and must begin with comparatively -superficial questions. Or rather, we must begin by studying -her temperamental and psycho-physical endowment and condition, -and then the literary influences that stimulated and -helped to mould these things, as though all this were not -secondary and but the material and occasion of the forces and -self-determinations to be considered later on.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Defects of ancient psycho-physical theory.</i></h5> - -<p>Now as to those temperamental and neural matters, to -which this chapter shall be devoted, the reader will, no doubt -long ago, have discovered that it is precisely here that not a -little of the <i>Vita e Dottrina</i> is faded and withered beyond -recall, or has even become positively repulsive to us. The -constant assumption, and frequent explicit insistence, on the -part of more or less all the contributors, upon the immediate -and separate significance, indeed the directly miraculous -character, of certain psycho-physical states—states which, -taken thus separately, would now be inevitably classed as -most explicable neural abnormalities,—all this atmosphere of -nervous high-pitch and tremulousness has now become a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span> -matter demanding a difficult historical imagination and -magnanimity, if we would be just to those who held such -views, and would thus benefit to the full from these past -positions and misconceptions.</p> - -<p>Thus when we read the views of perhaps all her educated -attendants: “this condition, in which her body remained -alive without food or medicine, was a supernatural thing”; -“her state was clearly understood to be supernatural when, -in so short a time, so great a change was seen”; and “she -became yellow all over,—a manifest sign that her humanity -was being entirely consumed in the fire of divine love”:<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -we feel indeed that we can no more follow. And when we -read, as part of one of the late additions, the worthless legends -gathered from, or occasioned by, the uneducated Argentina: -“in proof that she bore the stigmata within her,—on putting -her hands in a cup of cold water, the latter became so boiling -hot that it greatly heated the very saucer beneath it”:<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> we -are necessarily disgusted. And when, worst of all, she is -made, by a demonstrable, probably double misinterpretation -of an externally similar action, to burn her bare arm with a -live charcoal or lighted candle, with intent to see which fire, -this external one or that interior one of the divine love, were -the greater:<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> we can, even if we have the good fortune of -being able, by means of the critical analysis of the sources, to -put this absurd story to the discredit of her eulogists, but feel -the pathos of such well-meant perversity, which took so sure a -way for rendering ridiculous one who, take her all in all, is so -truly great.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Slow growth of Neurology.</i></h5> - -<p>We should, of course, be very patient in such matters: for -psycho-physical knowledge was, as yet, in its very infancy, -witness the all-important fact that the nerves were, in our -modern sense of the term, still as unknown as they were to -the whole of Graeco-Roman antiquity, with which “neuron” -and “nervus” ever meant “muscle” or “ligament” and, derivatively,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span> -“energy,” but never consciously what they now mean -in the strict medical sense. Thus the <i>Vita</i> (1551) writes: -“There remained no member or muscle (nervo) of her body -that was not tormented by fire within it”; “one rib was -separated from the others, with great pains in the ligaments -(<i>nervi</i>) and bones”; and “all her body was excruciated and -her muscles (<i>nervi</i>) were tormented”:<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> where, in the first and -last case, visible muscular convulsive movements are clearly -meant. St. Teresa, in her own <i>Life</i> (1561 or 1562), writes: -“Nervous pains, according to the physicians, are intolerable; -and all my nerves were shrunk”; and “if the rapture lasts, -all the nerves are made to feel it.”<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> Even Fénelon (died 1715) -can still write of the human body: “The bones sustain the -flesh which envelops them; the nerves” (ligaments, minor -muscles) “which are stretched along them, constitute all their -strength; and the muscles, by inflation and elongation at the -points where the nerves are intertwined with them, produce -the most precise and regular movements.”<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> Here the soul -acts directly upon the muscles, and, through these and their -dependent ligaments, upon the bones and the flesh.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Permanent values of the ancient theory.</i></h5> - -<p>And yet that old position with regard to the rarer psycho-physical -states has a right to our respectful and sympathetic -study.</p> - -<p>For one thing, we are now coming again to recognize, more -and more, how real and remarkable are certain psycho-physical -states and facts, whether simply morbid or fruitfully -utilized states, so long derided, by the bulk of Scientists, as -mere childish legend or deliberate imposture; and to see how -natural, indeed inevitable it was, that these, at that time quite -inexplicable, things should have been attributed to a direct -and discontinuous kind of Divine intervention. We, on our -part, have then to guard against the Philistinism both of the -Rationalists and of the older Supernaturalists, and will neither -measure our assent to facts by our ability to explain them, -nor postulate the unmediated action of God wherever our -powers of explanation fail us. On this point we have admirable -models of sympathetic docility towards facts, in the -works of Prof. Pierre Janet, in his medico-psychological<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span> -investigations of present-day morbid cases; of Hermann -Gunkel and Heinrich Weinel, in their examination of mostly -healthy psycho-physical phenomena in early Christian times -and writings; and of William James, in his study of instances -of various kinds, both past and present.<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a></p> - -<p>And next, these (at first sight physical) phenomena are -turning out, more and more, to be the direct or indirect consequence -of the action of mind: no doubt, in the first instance, -of the human mind, but still of mind, both free-willing and -automatically operative. And at the same time this action -is, more and more, seen to be limited and variously occasioned -by the physical organism, and to be accompanied or followed, -in a determinist fashion, by certain changes in that organism. -Yet if we have now immeasurably more knowledge than men -had, even fifty years ago, of this latter ceaselessly active, -limiting, occasioning influence of the body upon the mind, we -have also immeasurably more precise and numerous facts -and knowledge in testimony of the all but boundless effect of -mind over body. Here, again, Prof. Janet’s writings, those -of Alfred Binet, and the Dominican Père Coconnier’s very -sensible book register a mass of material, although of the -morbid type.<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></p> - -<p>And further, such remarkable peripheral states and -phenomena are getting again to be rightly looked for in at -least some types of unusual spiritual insight and power -(although such states are found to be indicative, in exact -proportion to the spiritual greatness of their subject, of a -substantially different mental and moral condition of soul). -Witness again the Unitarian Prof. James’s <i>Varieties</i>, and the -Church-Historical works of the Broad Lutheran German -scholars Weinel, Bernoulli, and Duhm.<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<p>And lastly, the very closeness with which modern experimental -and analytical psychology is exploring the phenomena<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span> -of our consciousness is once more bringing into ever-clearer -relief the irrepressible metaphysical apprehensions and -affirmations involved and implied by the experience of every -human mind, from its first dim apprehension in infancy of -a “something,” as yet undifferentiated by it into subjective -and objective, up to its mature and reflective affirmation of -the trans-subjective validity of its “positions,” or at least of -its negations—pure scepticism turning out to be practically -impossible. Here we have, with respect to that apprehension, -such admirable workers as Henri Bergson in France, and -Professors Henry Jones and James Ward in England; and, -for this affirmation, such striking thinkers as the French -Maurice Blondel, and the Germans Johannes Volkelt and -Hugo Münsterberg. And Mgr. Mercier of Louvain, now -Cardinal Mercier, has contributed some valuable criticism of -certain points in these positions.<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p> - -<h5>5. <i>Difficulties of this inquiry.</i></h5> - -<p>Now here I am met at once by two special difficulties, the -one personal to myself and to Catherine, and the other one of -method. For, with regard to those three first sets of recent -explorations of a psycho-physical kind, I am no physician at -all, and not primarily a psychologist. And again, in Catherine’s -instance, the evidence as to her psycho-physical states is -not, as with St. Teresa and some few other cases, furnished -by writings from the pen of the very person who experienced -them, and it is at all copious and precise only for the period -when she was admittedly ill and physically incapacitated.—And -yet these last thirteen years of her life occupy a most -prominent place in her biography; it is during, and on -occasion of, those psycho-physical states, and largely with -the materials furnished by them, that, precisely in those -years, she built up her noblest legacy, her great Purgatorial -teaching; the illness was (quite evidently) of a predominantly -psychical type, and concerns more the psychologist than -the physician, being closely connected with her particular -temperament and type of spirituality, a temperament and -type to be found again and again among the Saints. All this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span> -and more makes it simply impossible for me to shrink from -some study of the matter, and permits me to hope for some -success in attempting, slowly and cautiously, to arrive at -certain general conclusions of a spiritually important kind.</p> - -<p>But then there is also the difficulty of method. For if we -begin the study of these psycho-physical peculiarities and -states by judging them from the temperamental and psychological -standpoint, we can hardly escape from treating them, -at least for the moment, as self-explanatory, and hence from -using these our preliminary conclusions about such neural -phenomena as the measure, type, and explanation of and for -all such other facts and apprehensions as our further study of -the religious mind and experience may bring before us. In -this wise, these our psychological conclusions would furnish -not only a negative test and positive material, but also the -exclusive standard for all further study. And such a procedure, -until and unless it were justified in its method, would -evidently be nothing but a surreptitious begging of the -question.—Yet to begin with the fullest analysis of the -elementary and normal phenomena of consciousness and of -its implications and inviolable prerequisites, would too readily -land us in metaphysics which have themselves to operate in -and with those immediate and continuous experiences; and -hence these latter experiences, whether normal and healthy, -or, as here, unusual and in part <i>maladif</i>, must be carefully -studied first. We have, however, to guard most cautiously -against our allowing this, our preliminary, analysis and description -of psycho-physical states from imperceptibly blocking -the way to, or occupying the ground of, our ultimate analysis -and metaphysical synthesis and explanation. Only this -latter will be able, by a final movement from within-outwards, -to show the true place and worth of the more or less phenomenal -series, passed by us in review on our previous movement -from outside-inwards.</p> - -<h5>6. <i>Threefold division.</i></h5> - -<p>I propose, then, in this chapter, to take, as separately as is -compatible with such a method, the temperamental, psycho-physical -side of Catherine’s life. I shall first take those last -thirteen years of admitted illness, as those which are alone at -all fully known to us by contemporary evidence.—I shall then -make a jump back to her first period,—to the first sixteen -years up to her marriage, with the next ten years of relaxation, -and the following four years of her conversion and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span> -active penitence. I take these next, because, of these thirty -years, we have her own late memories, as registered for us -by her disciples, at the time of her narration of the facts -concerned.—And only then, with these materials and instruments -thus gathered from after and before, shall I try to -master the (for us very obscure) middle period, and to arrive -at some estimate of her temperamental peripheral condition -during these twenty years of her fullest expansion.—I shall -conclude the chapter by taking Catherine in her general, lifelong -temperament, and by comparing and contrasting this -type and modality of spiritual character and apprehension -with the other rival forms of, and approaches to, religious -truth and goodness as these are furnished for us by history.</p> - -<p>The ultimate metaphysical questions and valuation are -reserved for the penultimate chapter of my book.</p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">Catherine’s Third Period, 1497 to 1510.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Increasing illness of Catherine’s last years.</i></h5> - -<p>Beginning with her third and last period (1497-1510), there -can be no doubt that throughout it she was ill and increasingly -so. Her closest friends and observers attest it. It is presumably -Ettore Vernazza who tells us, for 1497, “when she -was about fifty years of age, she ceased to be able to attend -either to the Hospital or to her own house, owing to her great -bodily weakness. Even on Fast-days she was obliged, after -Holy Communion, to take some food to sustain her strength.” -Probably Marabotto it is who tells us that, in 1499, “after -twenty-five years she could no further bear her spiritual -loneliness, either because of old age or because of her great -bodily weakness.” We hear from a later Redactor that, -“about nine years before her death (<i>i.e.</i> about 1501), there -came to her an infirmity.” And then, especially from November -1509, May 1510, and August 1510 onwards, she is declared -and described as more and more ill.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> Indeed she herself, both -by her acts and by her words, emphatically admits her -incapacitation. For it is clearly ill-health which drives her to -abandon the Matronship and even all minor continuous work -for the Hospital. In her Wills we find indeed that, as late as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span> -May 21, 1506, she was able to get to the neighbouring -Hospital for Incurables; and that even on November 27, -1508 she was “healthy in mind and body.” But her Codicil -of January 5, 1503, was drawn up in the presence of nine -witnesses at midnight,—a sure sign of some acute ill-health. -Indeed already on July 23, 1484, she is lying “infirm in bed, -in her room in the Women’s quarter of the Hospital, oppressed -with bodily infirmity.”<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>Abnormal sensations, impressions and moods.</i></h5> - -<p>Her attendants are all puzzled by the multitude and -intensity, the mobility and the self-contradictory character -of the psycho-physical manifestations. Perhaps already before -1497 “she would press thorny rose-twigs in both her hands, -and this without any pain”; and so late as about three weeks -before her death “she remained paralyzed (<i>manca</i>),” and no -doubt anaesthetic “in one (the right) hand and in one finger of -the other hand.”—Probably again before 1497 “her body could -not,” at times, “be moved from the sitting posture without the -application of force.” In February or March 1510 “she could -not move out of her bed”; in August, “on some occasions -she could not move the lips or the tongue, or the arms or legs, -unless helped to do so,—especially on the left side,—and this -would, at times, last three or four hours.”—In December 1509 -“she suffered from great cold,” as part of her peculiar condition; -on September 4, 1510, “she suffered from great cold -in the right arm.”<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<p>On other occasions she is, on the contrary, intensely hyper-aesthetic. -Some time in February or March 1510, “for a day -and a night, her flesh could not be touched, because of the -great pain that such touching caused her.” At the end of -August “she was so sensitive, that it was impossible to touch -her very bedclothes or the bedstead, or a single hair on her -head, because in such case she would cry out as though she -had been grievously wounded.”—These states seem to have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span> -been usually accompanied by sensations of great heat: for -on the former occasion “she seemed like a creature placed -in a great flame of fire”; whilst on the latter “she had her -tongue and lips so inflamed, that they seemed as though -actual fire.”</p> - -<p>And movement appears to have been more often increased -than diminished. In the last case indeed “she did not move -nor speak nor see; but, when thus immovable, she suffered -more than when she could cry out and turn about in her bed.” -But in the former instance “she could not be kept in bed”; -and in April 1510 “she cried aloud, and could not keep -herself from moving about, on her bed, on hands and feet.”—There -are curious localizations of apparently automatic movements. -During an attack somewhere in March 1510 “her flesh -was all in a tremble, particularly the right shoulder”; on later -occasions “an arm, a leg, a hand would tremble, and she -would seem to have a spasm within her, with all-but-unbroken -acute pains in the flanks, the shoulders, the abdomen, the -feet and the brain.” On an earlier occasion “her body -writhed in great distress.” On another day “she seemed all -on fire and lost her power of speech, and made signs with her -head and hands.” On one day in February or March 1510 -“she lost both speech and sight, though not her intelligence”; -and on September 12 “her sight was so weak, that she could -hardly any further distinguish or recognize her attendants.”—The -heat is liable to be curiously localized. Early in -September 1510 “she had a great heat situated in and on -her left ear, which lasted for three hours; the ear was red and -felt very hot to the touch of others.”</p> - -<p>Various kinds of haemorrhage are not uncommon. On the -last-mentioned occasion bloody urine is passed; bleeding of -the nose, with loss of bile, occurs in December 1509; very -black blood is lost by the mouth, whilst black spots appear all -over her person, on September 12, 1510; and more blood is -evacuated on the following day. In February or March 1510 -“there were in her flesh certain places which had become -concave, like as paste looks where a finger has been put into -it.” At the end of August 1510 “her skin became saffron-yellow -all over.”</p> - -<p>Troubles of breathing and of heart-action are frequently -acute. Somewhere about March 1510<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span> “she had such a spasm -in her throat and mouth as to be unable, for about an hour, to -speak or to open her eyes, and that she could hardly regain -her breath.” “Cupping-glasses were applied to her side, to -ease her heart, and lung-action, but with little effect.” On -one occasion “she made signs indicative of feeling as though -burning pincers were seizing her heart”; and on a day soon -after “she felt like a hard nail at her heart.”<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<p>Disturbances of the power of swallowing and of nutrition -are often grave and sudden, and in curious contradiction to -her abnormally acute and shifting longing for and revulsion -from certain specific kinds of food. On August 22, 1510, -“she was so thirsty that she felt as though she could drink -up the very ocean”; “yet she could not,” in fact, “manage to -swallow even one little drop of water.” On September 10 -“her attendants continuously gave her drinking water; but -she would straightway return it from her mouth.” And on -September 12, “whilst her mouth was being bathed, she -exclaimed, ‘I am suffocating,’—and this because a drop of -water had trickled down her throat—a drop which she was -unable to gulp down.” And on a day in August “she saw a -melon and had a great desire to eat it; but hardly did she -have some of it in her mouth, when she rejected it with -intense disgust.” So too with odours. A little later, “on -one day the smell of wine would please her, and she would -bathe her hands and face in it with great relish; and next -day she would so much dislike it, that she could not bear to -see or smell it in her room.”—And so too with colours. On -September 2 “a physician-friend came to visit her in his -scarlet robes; and she bore the sight a little, so as not to pain -him.” But she then declared that she could no longer bear -it; and he went, and returned to her in his ordinary black<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span> -habit. And yet we have seen, from the Inventory of her -effects, that she loved to have vermilion colour upon her bed -and person.<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a></p> - -<p>And her emotional moods are analogously intense and -rapidly shifting. In the spring of 1510 “she cried aloud -because of the great pain: this attack lasted a day and a -night”; in the night of August 10 “she tossed about with -many exclamations”; and at the beginning of September -“she cried out with a loud voice.” At other times, she -laughs for joy. So at the end of April “she would laugh -without speaking”; on August 11 “she fixed her eyes -steadily on the ceiling; and for about an hour she abode all -but immovable, and spoke not, but kept laughing in a very -joyous fashion”; on August 17 great interior jubilation -“expressed itself in merry laughter”; and on the evening of -September 7 “her joy appeared exteriorly in laughter which -lasted, with but small interruptions, for some two hours.”—And -her entire apparent condition would shift from one such -extreme to the other with extraordinary swiftness. In the -autumn of 1509 “she many times remained as though dead; -and at other times she would appear as healthy,—as though -she had never had anything the matter with her.” Already in -December 1509 she herself, after much vomiting and loss of -blood, had sent for her Confessor and had declared that “she -felt as though she must die in consequence of these many -accidents.” Yet even on September 10, 1510, “when she was -not being oppressed and tormented by her accidents (attacks), -she seemed to be in good health; but when she was being -suffocated by them, she seemed as one dead.”<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span></p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">Conclusions Concerning Catherine’s Psycho-physical -Condition During This Last Period.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Her illness not primarily physical. Her self-diagnosis.</i></h5> - -<p>Now we saw, at the beginning of this chapter, how readily -her attendants concluded, from all these extreme, multiple, -swift-changing and self-contradictory states, to their directly -and separately supernatural origin.—And indeed the diagnosis -and treatment of her case showed clearly that it was not -primarily physical. So in the case, probably in November -1509, of the cupping-glasses, when “she got medically treated -for a bodily infirmity, whilst her real trouble was fire of the -spirit”; so with a medicine given to her by the resident -Hospital physician, some time in April 1510, “from taking -which she nearly died”; so with Giovanni Boerio’s three-weeks’ -treatment of her, in May 1510, a treatment which led -to no other results than momentary additional distress; and -so with the declaration of the ten Physicians who, even on -September 10, four days before her death, “could find no -trace of disease in her pulse, secretions, or any other symptom,” -and who consequently abstained from prescribing anything. -And hence, more or less throughout her last nine years, “there -was confusion in the management of her, not on her own part, -but on that of those who served her.”<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p> - -<p>For—and these two further points are of primary importance—the -tending of her, as distinct from physic, was -throughout held by herself to be of great importance; and -yet this care was declared by her to be often useless or -harmful, owing to the powers of discrimination possessed by -her attendants being as much below their good-will, as her -own knowledge as to the differences between her healthy and -<i>maladif</i> states exceeded her power of herself acting upon this -knowledge against these sickly conditions.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span> “She would often -appear to be asleep; and would awake from such a state, at -one time, quite refreshed, and, at another time, so limp and -broken down as to be unable to move. Those that served -her knew not how to distinguish one state from the other; -and on recovering from an attack of the latter sort, she would -say to them: ‘Why did you let me continue in that state of -quiet, from which I have all but died?’” So, on September 5, -“she cried aloud on waking from a state of quiet, which had -appeared to be (healthy) quietude, but had not been so.” -And indeed, already on January 10 previous, she had shut -herself off from her Confessor, “because it seemed to her that -he bore with her too much in her sayings and doings.”</p> - -<p>Yet, at least after this time, Marabotto does oppose her sometimes. -Thus on two, somewhat later, occasions she respectively -makes signs, and asks, that Extreme Unction be given her; -but only some four months later did she actually receive it. -In these cases, then, she either had not, even at bottom, a -correct physical self-knowledge; or her requests had been -prompted, at the time, by her secondary, <i>maladif</i> consciousness -alone.—When first visited by Boerio, she takes pleasure in -the thought of getting possibly cured by him; but “in the -following night, when great pain came upon her, she reproved -herself, saying, ‘You are suffering this, because you allowed -yourself to rejoice without cause.’” But this declaration distinctly -falls short of any necessary implication of a directly -supernatural origin of her malady, as the <i>Vita</i> here will have -it, and but refers, either to the continuance of earthly existence -not deserving such joy, or to her persistent fundamental -consciousness that the phenomena were partly the fruitful, -profitable occasions, and partly the price paid, for the mind’s -close intercourse with things divine.</p> - -<p>Indeed her (otherwise unbroken) attitude is one, both of -quiet conviction that physic cannot help her, and of gentle -readiness to let the physicians try whatever they may think -worth the trying: so with the cupping-glasses, and the various -examinations and physickings. Especially is this disposition -clear in her short dialogue with Boerio, where, in answer to his -assertion that she ought to beware of giving scandal to all the -world by saying that her infirmity had no need of remedies, -and that she ought to look upon such an attitude as “a kind -of hypocrisy,” she declares: “I am sorry if any one is scandalized -because of me; and I am ready to use any remedy for -infirmity, supposing that it can be found.”<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span></p> - -<h5>2. <i>Her preoccupation with the spiritual suggestions afforded -by the phenomena.</i></h5> - -<p>It would, indeed, be a grave misreading of her whole -character and habits of mind to think of her as at all -engrossed in her psycho-physical states as such, and as having -ever formally considered and decided that they must either -come directly from God or be amenable to medicine. On the -contrary, she is too habitually absorbed in the consideration -and contemplation of certain great spiritual doctrines and -realities, to have the leisure or inclination for any such -questions.—Indeed it is this very absorption in those spiritual -realities which has ended by suggesting, with an extraordinary -readiness, frequency and vividness, through her mind -to her senses, and by these back to her mind, certain psycho-physical -images and illustrations for those very doctrines, -until her whole psycho-physical organism has been, all but -entirely, modified and moulded into an apt instrument and -manifestation for and of that world unseen.</p> - -<p>Thus, after her greatest psycho-physical and spiritual -experience in November 1509, she declares to Vernazza, when -he urges her to let him write down the graces she has received -from God, that “it would, strictly speaking, be impossible to -narrate those interior things; whilst, of exterior ones, few or -none have happened to me.” And she never entirely loses -her mental consciousness in any state not recognized by herself -as <i>maladif</i>. So, on a day of great psycho-physical trouble -in February or March 1510, “they thought she must expire; -but, though she lost both sight and speech, she never lost her -intelligence.” And even on September 11 and 12, amidst -foodlessness and suffocations, her intelligence still persists.—In -the March previous “her mind appeared to grow daily -in contentment.” Some days later, her attendants “saw -how, after an hour of spasm and breathlessness, and then a -great restriction of all her being, she returned to her normal -condition, and addressed many beautiful words to them.” -And later on, “her attendants were amazed at seeing a body, -which seemed to be healthy, in such a tormented condition.” -But “soon after she laughed and spoke as one in health, and -told them not to distress themselves about her, since she was -very contented; but that they should see to it that they did -much good, since the way of God is very narrow.”<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Interaction and mutual suggestion of her spiritual and -physical states.</i></h5> - -<p>As to the extraordinary closeness and readiness for mutual -response between her sensible impressions and her thoughts -and emotions—her sensations turning, all but automatically, -into religious emotions, and her thoughts and feelings translating -themselves into appropriate psycho-physical states—we -have a mass of interesting evidence.</p> - -<p>Thus when, about the end of November 1509, in response -to her seeing, on some wall of the Hospital, a picture of Our -Lord at the Well of Samaria, and to her asking Him for one -drop of that Divine water, “instantly a drop was given to her -which refreshed her within and without.” The spiritual idea -and emotion is here accompanied and further stimulated -by the keenest psycho-physical impression of drinking. And -such an impression can even become painful through its excessive -suggestiveness. Thus she herself explains to Maestro -Boerio, on September 2, 1510, that she cannot long bear the -sight of his scarlet robe “because of what it suggests (represents) -to my memory,”—no doubt the fire of divine love. -Three days later, on the contrary, “she mentally saw herself -lying upon a bier, surrounded by many Religious robed in -black,” and greatly rejoiced at the sight. Here the very impression -of black, the colour of death, will have conveyed, -during this special mood of hers, a downright psycho-physical -pleasure, somewhat as Boerio’s reappearance, on the former -occasion, in a black gown, had been a sensible relief to her.</p> - -<p>So also with scents. When, certainly after 1499, “she -perceived, on the (right) hand of her Confessor, an odour which -penetrated her very heart,” and “which abode with her and -restored both mind and body for many days,” we have again -a primarily mental act and state which she herself knows well -to be untransferable, even to Don Marabotto himself. Here -the association of ideas was, no doubt, the right hand of the -Priest and her daily reception, by means of it, of the Holy -Eucharist. For the latter,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span> “the Bread from heaven, having -within it all manner of delight,” is already connected in her -mind with an impression of sweet odour. “One day, on -receiving Communion, so much odour and sweetness came to -her, that she seemed to herself to be in Paradise.” Probably -the love for, and then the disgust at, the smell of wine, was -also connected with her Eucharistic experiences. Certainly -“one day, having received Holy Communion, she was granted -so great a consolation as to fall into an ecstasy, so that when -the Priest wanted to give her to drink from the Chalice (with -unconsecrated wine) she had to be brought back by force to -her ordinary consciousness.” Vivid memories of both sets -of psycho-physical impressions are, I think, at work when -she says: “If a consecrated Host were to be given to me -amongst unconsecrated ones, I should be able to distinguish -it by the very taste, as I do wine from water.” And as the -sight of red rapidly became painful from the very excess of -its mental suggestiveness, so will the smell of wine have been -both specially dear and specially painful to her.<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p> - -<p>Indeed her psycho-physical troubles possess, for the most -part, a still traceable, most delicate selectiveness as to date, -range, form, combination, and other peculiarities. Thus some -of the most acute attacks coincide, in their date of occurrence -and general character, as the biographers point out, with -special saint’s and holy days: so in the night leading into -St. Lawrence’s day, August 9 and 10, 1510; so on the Vigil -of St. Bartholomew’s day, August 24; and so in the night -previous to and on the Feast (August 28) of St. Augustine, -special Patron of her only sister’s Order and of the Convent in -which her own Conversion had taken place thirty-seven years -before. Yet we have also seen how that these synchronisms -did not rise to the heights which were soon desired by her -biographers, for we know that she died, not (as they would<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span> -have it) on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, -September 14, but early on the day following.</p> - -<p>Thus too as to her incapacity to swallow and retain food, -we find that, up to the end, with the rarest exceptions of a -directly physical kind, she retained the most complete facility -in receiving Holy Communion: so on September 2, 1510, -when “all ordinary food was returned, but the Holy Eucharist -she retained without any difficulty”; and so too on September 4, -when, after “lying for close upon twelve hours with closed -eyes, speechless and all but immovable,” Marabotto himself -feared to communicate her, but “she made a sign to him, with -a joyous countenance, to have no fear, and she communicated -with ease, and soon after began to speak, owing to the vigour -given to her by the Sacrament.” Yet here too the abnormality -is not complete: some ordinary food is retained, now and -then; so, minced chicken, specially mentioned for December -1509, and on September 3, 1510.</p> - -<p>As to her heat-attacks and the corresponding extreme—the -sense of intense cold,—it is clear how close is their connection -with her profound concentration upon the conception of God -as Love, and upon the image of Love as fire. It is these -sudden and intense psycho-physical, spiritually suggestive -because spiritually suggested, heat-attacks which are, I think, -always meant by the terms “assault” (<i>assalto</i>), “stroke” -(<i>ferita</i>), and “arrow” (<i>saetta</i>): terms which already indicate -the mental quality of these attacks. And these heats are -mostly localized in a doctrinally suggestive manner: they -centre in and around the heart, or on the tongue and lips, or -they envelop the whole person “as though it were placed in -a great flame of fire,” or “in a glowing furnace.” Indeed these -heats are often so described, by her attendants or herself, as to -imply their predominantly psycho-physical nature: “it was -necessary, with a view to prolonging her life, to use many -means for lightening the strain of that interior fire upon her -mind”; and “I feel,” she says herself, on occasion of such an -attack, “so great a contentment on the part of the spirit, as to -be unutterable; whilst, on the part of my humanity, all the -pains are, so to say, no pains.”</p> - -<p>As to her boundless thirst, her inability to drink, and her -sense of strangulation, their doctrinal suggestions are largely -clear. Thus when “she was so thirsty as to feel able to drink -up all the waters of the sea,” and when she calls out “I am -suffocating” (drowning, <i>io affogo</i>), we are at once reminded<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span> -of her great saying: “If the sea were all so much love, there -would not live man or woman who would not go to drown -himself in it (<i>si affogasse</i>).” And when, at the end of August -1510, unable to drink, she herself declares “all the water that -is on earth could not give me the least refreshment,” there is, -perhaps, an implied contrast to that “little drop of divine -water” which had so much refreshed her a year before.</p> - -<p>And finally, the various paralyses and death-like swoons -seem, at least in part, to follow from, and to represent, the -death of the spirit to the life of the senses, and to mirror the -intensity with which perfection has been conceived and -practised as “Love going forth out of self, and abiding all in -God and separated from man.” Thus when, on August 22, -1510, “she had a day of great heat, and abode paralyzed in -one hand and in one finger of the other hand for about -sixteen hours, and she was so greatly occupied (absorbed), -that she neither spoke, nor opened her eyes, nor could take -any food.”<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p> - -<h5>4. <i>Only two cases of spiritually unsuggestive impressions.</i></h5> - -<p>It is indeed profoundly instructive to note how that, in -exact proportion as a human-mental mediation and suggestion -of a religious kind is directly traceable or at least probable in -any or all of these things, is that thing also worthy of being -considered as having ultimately the Divine Spirit Itself for its -first cause as well as last end; and that, in exact proportion as -this kind of human mediation and suggestion is impossible -or unlikely, the thing turns out to be unworthy of being -attributed, in any special sense, to the spirit of God Himself.</p> - -<p>Of such spiritually opaque, religiously unused and apparently -unuseable, hysteriform impressions, I can, even during -the last days of these nine years of admitted infirmity, -find but two clear instances,—instances which, by their very<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span> -unlikeness to the mass of her spiritually transparent, readily -used impressions, strongly confirm our high estimate of the -all but totality of her psycho-physical states, as experienced -and understood and used by herself. On September 7, 1510, -after having seen and wisely utilized the spiritually suggestive -image of “a great ladder of fire,” she ends by having so vivid -an hallucination of the whole world being on fire “that she -asked whether it were not so, and caused her windows to be -opened that the facts might be ascertained;” and “she abode -the whole night, possessed by that imagination,” as the <i>Vita</i> -itself calls this impression. At night, on September 11, she -complained of a very great heat, and cast forth from her -mouth very black blood; and black spots came out all over her -body. And on the 13th, “she was seen with her eyes fixed -upon the ceiling, and with much movement of the lips and -hands; and she answered her attendants’ queries as to what -she was seeing with ‘Drive away that beast.…’ the -remaining words being inaudible.”<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> - -<p>Here we have, I think, the only two merely factual, unsuggestive, -and hence simply delusive, impressions really -experienced by herself and recorded in the <i>Vita</i>, a book whose -very eagerness to discover things of this kind and readiness -to take them as directly supernatural is a guarantee that -no other marked instances of the kind have been omitted -or suppressed. And these two impressions both take place -within a week of her death, and respectively four days before, -and two days after, the first clear case of organic disease or -lesion to be found anywhere in the life.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span></p> - -<h4>III. <span class="smcap">Catherine’s Psycho-physical Condition, its -Likeness and Unlikeness To Hysteria.</span></h4> - -<p>Only by a quite unfair magnifying or multiplying of the -two incidents just described could we come to hold, with Mr. -Baring-Gould, that Catherine was simply a sufferer from -hysteria, and that the Roman Church did well to canonize her -on the ground of her having, in spite of this malady, managed -to achieve much useful work amongst the sick and poor.<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> -Here we shall do well to consider three groups of facts.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Misapprehensions as to hysteria.</i></h5> - -<p>The first group gives the reasons why we should try and get -rid of the terror and horror still so often felt in connection -with the very name of this malady. This now quite demonstrably -excessive, indeed largely mythical, connotation of the -term springs from four causes.</p> - -<p>First, the very name still tends to suggest, as the causes or -conditions of the malady, things fit only for discussion in -medical reviews. But then, ever since 1855, all limitation to, -or special connection with, anything peculiarly female, or -indeed generally sexual, has been increasingly shown to be -false, until now no serious authority on the matter can be -found to espouse the old view. The malady is now well -known to attack men as well as women, and to have no -special relation to things of sex at all.<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -<p>Next, probably as a consequence from the initial error, -this disorder was supposed to predominantly come from, or to -lead to, moral impurity, or at least to be ordinarily accompanied -by strong erotic propensions. But here the now carefully -observed facts are imperatively hostile: of the 120 living -cases most carefully studied by Prof. Janet, only four showed -the predominance of any such tendencies, a proportion -undoubtedly not above the percentage to be found amongst -non-hysterical persons.<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -<p>And again, the term was long synonymous with untruthfulness -and deceit. But here again Prof. Janet shows how -unfounded is this prejudice, since it but springs from the misplaced<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span> -promptitude with which the earlier observers refused -to believe what they had not as yet sufficiently examined -and could not at all explain, and from the malady being itself -equivalent to a more or less extensive breaking-up of the -normal inter-connection between the several, successive or -simultaneous states, and, as it were, layers of the one personality. -He is convinced that real untruthfulness is no commoner -among such patients than it is among healthy -persons.<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a></p> - -<p>And, finally, it is no doubt felt that, apart from all such -specifically moral suspicions, the malady involves all kinds of -fancies and inaccuracies of feeling and of perception, and that -it frequently passes into downright insanity. And this is no -doubt the one objection which does retain some of its old -cogency. Still, it is well to note that, as has now been fully -established, the elements of the human mind are and remain -the same throughout the whole range of its conditions, from -the sanest to the maddest, whilst only their proportion and -admixture, and the presence or absence and the kind of -synthesis necessary to hold them together differentiate these -various states of mind. In true insanity there is no such -synthesis; in hysteria the synthesis, however slight and -peculiar, is always still traceable throughout the widespread -disgregation of the elements and states.<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> And it is this -very persistence of the fundamental unity, together with -the strikingly different combination and considerable disaggregation -of its elements, that makes the study of hysteria -so fruitful for the knowledge of the fully healthy mind and of -its unity; whilst the continuance of all the elements of the -normal intelligence, even in insanity, readily explains why it -is apparently so easy to see insanity everywhere, and to treat -genius and sanctity as but so much degeneracy.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Hysteriform phenomena observable in Catherine’s case.</i></h5> - -<p>The second group of facts consists in the phenomena which, -in Catherine’s case, are like or identical to what is observable -in cases of hysteria.</p> - -<p>There is, perhaps above all else, the anaesthetic condition, -which was presumably co-extensive with her paralytic states. -“Anaesthesia,” says Prof. Janet,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span> “can be considered as the -type of the other symptoms of hysteria; it exists in the great -majority of cases, it is thoroughly characteristic of the malady. -In its most frequent localization (semi-anaesthesia) it affects -one of the lateral halves of the body, and this half is usually -the left side.” Or, “a finger or hand will be affected.” Such -“insensibility can be very frequent and very profound”; but -“it disappears suddenly” and even “varies from one moment -to another.”<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></p> - -<p>Then there is the corresponding counter-phenomenon of -hyper-aesthesia. “The slightest contact provokes great pains, -exclamations, and spasms. The painful zones have their seat -mostly on the abdomen or on the hips.” And “sensation in -these states is not painful in itself, by its own intensity, but by -its quality, its characteristics; it has become the signal, by -association of ideas, for the production of a set of extremely -painful phenomena.” So, with the colour-sense: “one patient -adores the colour red, and sees in its dullest shade ‘sparkling -rays which penetrate to her very heart and warm her through -and through.’” But “another one finds this ‘a repulsive -colour and one capable of producing nausea.’” And similarly -with the senses of taste and odour.<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<p>Then, too, the inability to stand or walk, with the conservation, -at times, of the power to crawl; the acceptance, followed -by the rejection, of food, because of certain spasms in the -throat or stomach, and the curious, mentally explicable, -exceptions to this incapacity; the sense, even at other times, -of strangulation; heart palpitations, fever heats, strange -haemorrhages from the stomach or even from the lung; red -patches on the skin and emotional jaundice all over it, and -one or two other peculiarities.<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p> - -<p>Then, as to a particular kind of quietude, from which -Catherine warns her attendants to rouse her, we find a -patient who “ceases her reading, without showing any sign -of doing so. She gets taken to be profoundly attentive; it is, -however, but one of her attacks of ‘fixity.’ And she has -promptly to be shaken out of this state, or, in a few minutes, -there will be no getting her out of it.”</p> - -<p>As to Catherine’s consciousness of possessing an extraordinary -fineness of discrimination between sensibly identical<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span> -objects, we see that “if one points out, to some of these -patients, an imaginary portrait upon a plain white card, and -mixes this card with other similar ones, they will almost -always find again the portrait on the same card.” And -similarly as to her attaching a particular quasi-sensible -perception to Marabotto’s hand alone, we find that, if M. -Janet touches Léonie’s hand, he having suggested a nosegay -to her, she will henceforth, when he touches the hand, see that -nosegay; whereas, if another person touches that same hand, -Léonie will see nothing special.</p> - -<p>As to Catherine’s feelings of criminality and of being -already dead, M. Janet quotes M., who says, “I am like a -criminal about to be punished”; and R., who declares, “It -seems to me that I am dead.” As to the hallucination of a -Beast, Marcelle suffers from the same impression.<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p> - -<p>And,—perhaps the most important of all these surface-resemblances,—there -is Catherine’s apparent freedom from all -emotion at the deaths of her brothers and sister, and her -extraordinary dependence upon, and claimfulness towards, -her Confessor alone. “These patients rapidly lose the social -feelings: Berthe, who for some time preserved some affection -for her brother, ends by losing all interest in him; Marcelle, -at the very beginning of her illness, separates herself from -every one.” “It is always their own personality which dominates -their thoughts.” Yet these patients have “an extraordinary -attachment to their physician. For him they are -resolved to do all things. In return, they are extremely -exacting,—he is to occupy himself entirely with each one -alone. Only a very superficial observer would ascribe this -feeling to a vulgar source.”<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Catherine’s personality not disintegrated.</i></h5> - -<p>But a third group of facts clearly differentiates Catherine’s -case, even in these years of avowed ill-health, from such -patients; and these facts become clearer and more numerous -in precise proportion as we move away from peripheral, -psycho-physical phenomena and mechanisms, and dwell upon -her practically unbroken mental and moral characteristics, -and upon the use and meaning, the place and context of -these things within her ample life.</p> - -<p>For as to her relations with her attendants, even now it -is still she who leads, who suggests, who influences; a strong<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span> -and self-consistent will shows itself still, under all this shifting -psycho-physical surface. Thus Don Marabotto now administers, -it is true, all her money and charitable affairs for her. -But it is she who insists, alone and unaided, upon the true -spiritual function of that impression of odour on his hand.—Vernazza, -no doubt, has now to help her in the fight against -subtle scruples, on occasion of her deepest depressions. But -her far more frequent times of light and joy are in nowise -occasions of a simply subjective self-engrossment or of a -purely psycho-physical interest, for her mind is absorbed if -in but a few, yet in inexhaustibly fruitful and universally -applicable ideas and experiences of a spiritual kind, such -as helped to urge this friend on to his world-renewing -impulses and determinations.—Her closest relations and -friends, one must admit, succeed by their action, taken -eighteen months and then again two days before her death, -in getting her to desist from ordering her burial by the side -of her husband. But we have seen, in the one case, how -indirectly, and, in the other case, how suddenly and even then -quite informally, they had to gain their point.—Her attendants -in general, and Marabotto in particular, certainly paid -her an engrossed attention, and the all but endlessness of her -superficial fancies and requirements have been chronicled by -them with a naïve and wearisome fulness. But then she -herself is well aware that, had they but the requisite knowledge -as to how and when to apply them, some sturdy -opposition and a greater roughness of handling would, on -their part, be of the greatest use to her, in this her psychical -infirmity; indeed her shutting herself away from Marabotto, -as late as January 1510, is directly caused by her sense and -fear of being spoilt by him.</p> - -<p>It is true again that, already in 1502, we hear, in a probably -exaggerated but still possibly semi-authentic account, of her -indifference of feeling with regard to the deaths of two -brothers and of her only sister; and that, from January 1510 -onwards, she gradually excludes all her attendants from her -sick-room, with, eventually, the sole exceptions of Marabotto -or Carenzio and Argentina. But her Wills show conclusively -how persistent were her detailed interest in, and dispositions -for, the requirements of her surviving brother, nephews, and -nieces; of poor Thobia and the girl’s hidden mother; of her -priest-attendants, and of each and all of her humblest -domestics; of the natives in the far-away Greek Island of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span> -Scios; and, above all, of the Hospital and its great work -which she had ever loved so well.</p> - -<p>We have indeed found two cases, both from within the last -week of her life, of mentally opaque and spiritually unsuggestive -and unutilized impressions which are truly -analogous to those characteristic of hysteria. But we have -also seen how forcibly these two solitary cases bring out, by -contrast, the spiritual transparency and fruitfulness of her -usual, finely reflective picturings of these last years. For -here it is her own deliberate and spiritual mind which joyously -greets, and straightway utilizes and transcends, the psycho-physical -occurrences; and it does so, not because these -occurrences are, or are taken to be, the causes or requisites -or objects of her faith and spiritual insight, but because, on -the contrary, they meet and clothe an already exuberant faith -and insight—spiritual certainties derived from quite another -source.</p> - -<p>And finally, if the monotony and superficial pettiness of -the sick-room can easily pall upon us, especially when -presented with the credulities and hectic exaggerations which -disfigure so much of the <i>Vita’s</i> description of it; we must, in -justice, as I have attempted to do in my seventh and eighth -chapters, count in, as part of her biography, her deep affection -for and persistent influence with Ettore and Battista Vernazza, -and the exemplification of her doctrine by these virile souls, -makers of history in the wide, varied world of men.<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></p> - -<p>In a word, it is plain at once that, given the necessarily -limited number of ways in which the psycho-physical -organism reacts under mental stimulations, certain neural -phenomena may, in any two cases, be, in themselves, perfectly -similar, although their respective mental causes or occasions -may be as different, each from the other, as the Moonlight -Sonata of Beethoven, or the working out of the Law of -Gravitation by Newton, or the elaboration of the implications -of the Categorical Imperative by Kant, are different from the -sudden jumping of a live mouse in the face of an hysterically-disposed -young woman, or as the various causes of tears and -laughter throughout the whole world.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span></p> - -<h4>IV. <span class="smcap">First Period of Catherine’s Life, 1447 to 1477, -in its Three Stages.</span></h4> - -<p>If we next go back to the first period of her life, in its -three stages of the sixteen years of her girlhood, 1447-1463, -the first ten years of her married life, 1463-1473, and the -four years of her Conversion and active Penitence, 1473-1477, -we shall find, I think, in the matter of temperament and -psycho-physical conditions, little or nothing but a rare degree -of spiritual sensitiveness, and an extraordinary close-knittedness -of body and mind.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>From her childhood to her conversion.</i></h5> - -<p>Thus, already in her early childhood, that picture of the -Pietà seems to have suggested religious ideas and feelings -with the suddenness and emotional solidity of a physical -seizure—an impression still undimmed when she herself -recounted it, some fifty years later, to her two intimates.—It -is true that during those first, deeply unhappy ten years of -marriage, we cannot readily find more than indications of a -most profound and brooding melancholy, the apparent result -of but two factors,—a naturally sad disposition and acutely -painful domestic circumstances. Yet it is clear, from the -sequel, that more and other things lay behind. It is indeed -evident that she possessed a congenitally melancholy temperament; -that nothing but the rarest combination of conditions -could have brought out, into something like elastic play and -varied exercise, her great but few and naturally excessive -qualities of mind and heart; that these conditions were not -only absent, but were replaced by circumstances of the -most painful kind; and that she will hardly, at this time, -have had even a moment’s clear consciousness of any -other sources than just those conditions for her deep, keen, -and ever-increasing dissatisfaction with all things, her own -self included: all peace and joy, the very capacity for either -seemed gone, and gone for ever. But it is only the third -stage, with its sudden-seeming conversion on March 20, -1473, and the then following four years of strenuously active -self-immolation and dedication to the humblest service of -others, which lets us see deep into those previous years of -sullen gloom and apparently hopeless drift and dreary -wastage.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span></p> - -<p>The two stages really belong to one another, and the depth -of the former gloom and dreariness stood in direct proportion -and relation to the capacities of that nature and to the height -of their satisfaction in the later light and vigour brought to -and assimilated by them. It was the sense, at that previous -time still inarticulate, but none the less mightily operative, of -the insufficiency of all things merely contingent, of all things -taken as such and inevitably found to be such, that had been -adding, and was now discovered to have added, a quite determining -weight and poignancy to the natural pressure of her -temperament and external lot. And this temperament and -lot, which had not alone produced that sadness, could still less -of themselves remove it, whatever might be its cause. Her -sense of emptiness and impotence could indeed add to her -sense of fulness and of power, once these latter had come; -but of themselves the former could no more give her the -latter, than hunger, which indeed makes bread to taste delicious, -can give us real bread and, with it, that delight.</p> - -<p>And it was such real bread of life and real power which -now came to her. For if the tests of reality in such things -are their persistence and large and rich spiritual applicability -and fruitfulness, then something profoundly real and -important took place in the soul of that sad and weary -woman of six-and-twenty, within that Convent-chapel, at that -Annunciation-tide. Her four years of heroic persistence; -her unbroken Hospital service of a quarter of a century; her -lofty magnanimity towards her husband, Thobia and Thobia’s -mother; her profound influence upon Vernazza, in urging -him on to his splendid labours throughout Italy, and to his -grand death in plague-stricken Genoa; her daringly original, -yet immensely persuasive, doctrine,—nearly all this dates back, -completely for her consciousness and very largely in reality, -to those few moments on that memorable day.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Her conversion not sudden nor visionary.</i></h5> - -<p>But two points, concerning the manner and form of this -experience, are, though of but secondary spiritual interest, far -more difficult to decide. There is, for one thing, the indubitable -impression, for her own mind and for ours, of complete -suddenness and newness in her change. Was this suddenness -and newness merely apparent, or real as well? And should -this suddenness, if real, be taken as in itself and directly -supernatural?</p> - -<p>Now it is certain that Catherine, up to ten years before,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span> -had been full of definitely religious acts and dispositions. -Had she not, already at thirteen, wanted to be a Nun, and, at -eight or so, been deeply moved by a picture of the dead -Christ in His Mother’s lap? Hence, ideas and feelings of -self-dedication and of the Christ-God’s hatred of sin and love -for her had, in earlier and during longer times than those of -her comparative carelessness, soaked into and formed her -mental and emotional bent, and will have in so far shaped -her will, as to make the later determination along those earlier -lines of its operation, comparatively easy, even after those -years of relaxation and deviation. Yet it is clear that there -was not here, as indeed there is nowhere, any mere repetition -of the past. New combinations and an indefinitely deeper -apprehension of the great religious ideas and facts of God’s -holiness and man’s weakness, of the necessity for the soul to -reach its own true depth or to suffer fruitlessly, and of God -having Himself to meet and feed this movement and hunger -which He has Himself implanted; new combinations and -depths of emotion, and an indefinite expansion and heroic -determination of the will: were all certainly here, and were -new as compared with even the most religious moments in -the past.</p> - -<p>As to the suddenness, we cannot but take it as, in large part, -simply apparent,—a dim apprehension of what then became -clear having been previously quite oppressively with her. -And, in any case, this suddenness seems to belong rather to -the temperamental peculiarities and necessary forms of her -particular experiences than to the essence and content of her -spiritual life. For, whatever she thinks, feels, says or does -throughout her life, she does and experiences with actual -suddenness, or at least with a sense of suddenness; and there -is clearly no more necessary connection between such suddenness -and grace and true self-renouncement, than there -is between gradualness and mere nature; both suddenness -and gradualness being but simple modes, more or less fixed -for each individual, yet differing from each to each, modes in -which God’s grace and man’s will interact and manifest -themselves in different souls.<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - -<p>And then there is the question as to whether or not this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span> -conversion-experience took the form of a vision. We have -seen, in the Appendix, how considerable are the difficulties -which beset the account of the Bleeding Christ Vision in the -Palace; and how the story of the previous visionless experience -in the Chapel is free from all such objections. But, -even supposing the two accounts to be equally reliable, it is -the first, the visionless experience, which was demonstrably -the more important and the more abidingly operative of the -two. More important, for it is during those visionless -moments that her conversion is first effected; and more -abiding, for, according to all the ancient accounts, the impression -of the Bleeding Christ Vision disappeared utterly at -the end of at longest four years, whereas the memory of -the visionless conversion moments remained with her, as an -operative force, up to the very last. Witness the free self-casting -of the soul into painful-joyous Purgation, into Love, -into God (without any picturing of the historic Christ), -which forms one of the two constituents of her great latter-day -teaching; and how entirely free from directly historic -elements all her recorded visions of the middle period turn -out to be.<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Peculiarities of her Active Penitence.</i></h5> - -<p>As to the four years of Active Penitence, we must beware -of losing the sense of the dependence, the simple, spontaneous -instrumentality, in which the negative and restrictive side of -of her action stood towards the positive and expansive one. An -immense affirmation, an anticipating, creative buoyancy and -resourcefulness, had come full flood into her life; and had -shifted her centre of deliberate interest and willing away from -the disordered, pleasure-seeking, sore and sulky lesser self in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span> -which her true personality had for so long been enmeshed. -Thus all this strenuous work of transforming and raising -her lower levels of inclinations and of habit to the likeness -and heights of her now deliberate loftiest standard was not -taking place for the sake of something which actually was, -or which even seemed to be, less than what she had possessed -or had, even dimly, sought before, nor with a view to her true -self’s contraction. But, on the contrary, the work was for the -end of that indefinite More, of that great pushing upwards -of her soul’s centre and widening out of its circumference, -which she could herself confirm and increase only by such -ever-renewed warfare against what she now recognized as her -false and crippling self.</p> - -<p>And it is noticeable how soon and how largely, even still -within this stage, her attitude became “passive.” She pretty -early came to do these numerous definite acts of penance -without any deliberate selection or full attention to them. -As in her third period her absorption in large spiritual ideas -spontaneously suggests certain corresponding psycho-physical -phenomena, which then, in return, stimulate anew the apprehensions -of the mind; so here, towards the end of the first -period, penitential love ends by quite spontaneously suggesting -divers external acts of penitence, which readily become so -much fresh stimulation for love.</p> - -<p>I take this time to have been as yet free from visions or -ecstasies—at least of the later lengthy and specific type. -For the Bleeding Christ experience, even if fully historical, -occurred within the first conversion-days, and only its vivid -memory prolonged itself throughout those penitential years; -whilst all such other visions, as have been handed down to us, -do not treat of conversion and penance, at least in any active -and personal sense. And only towards the end of these years -do the psycho-physical phenomena as to the abstention from -food begin to show themselves. The consideration of both -the Visions and the Fasts had, then, better be reserved for -the great central period.</p> - -<h4>V. <span class="smcap">The Second, Great Middle Period of Catherine’s -Life, 1477 to 1499.</span></h4> - -<p>It is most natural yet very regrettable that we should know -so little as to Catherine’s spiritual life, or even as to her<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span> -psycho-physical condition, during these central twenty-two -years of her life. It is natural, for she had, at this time, -neither Physician nor Confessor busy with her, and the very -richness and balanced fulness of this epoch of her life may -well have helped to produce but little that could have been -specially seized and registered by either. Yet it is regrettable, -since here we have what, at least for us human -observers, constitutes the culmination and the true measure -of her life, the first period looking but like the preparation, -and the third period, like the price paid for such a rich -expansion.—Yet we know something about three matters of -considerable psycho-physical and temperamental interest, -which are specially characteristic of this time: her attitude -towards food; her ecstasies and visions; and certain peculiarities -in her conception and practice of the spiritual warfare.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Her extraordinary fasts.</i></h5> - -<p>As to food, it is clear that, however much we may be able -or bound to deduct from the accounts, there remains a solid -nucleus of remarkable fact. During some twenty years she -evidently went, for a fairly equal number of days,—some thirty -in Advent and some forty in Lent, seventy in all annually,—with -all but no food; and was, during these fasts, at least as -vigorous and active as when her nutrition was normal. For -it is not fairly possible to make these great fasts end much -before 1496, when she ceased to be Matron of the Hospital; -and they cannot have begun much after 1475 or 1476: so -that practically the whole of her devoted service and administration -in and of that great institution fell within these -years, of which well-nigh one-fifth was covered by these all -but total abstentions from food. Yet here again we are -compelled to take these things, not separately, and as directly -supernatural, but in connection with everything else; and to -consider the resultant whole as the effect and evidence of -a strong mind and will operating upon and through an -immensely responsive psycho-physical organism.</p> - -<p>For here again we easily find a significant system and -delicate selectiveness both in the constant approximate -synchronisms—these incapacities occurring about Advent -and Lent; and in the foods exempted—since there is no -difficulty in connection with the daily Holy Eucharist, with -the unconsecrated wine given to her, as to all Communicants -in that age at Genoa, immediately after Communion, or with -water when seasoned penitentially with salt or vinegar. And<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span> -if the actual heightening of nervous energy and balance, -recorded as having generally accompanied these two fasts, is -indeed a striking testimony to the extraordinary powers of -her mind and will, we must not forget that these fruitful fasts -were accompanied, and no doubt rendered possible, by the -second great psychical peculiarity of these middle years, her -ecstasies.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Her ecstasies and visions.</i></h5> - -<p>It is indeed remarkable how these two conditions and -functions, her fasts and her ecstasies of a definite, lengthy -and strength-bringing kind, arise, persist and then fade out -of her life together. And since, in ecstasy, the respiration, the -circulation, and the other physical functions are all slackened -and simplified; the mind is occupied with fewer, simpler, -larger ideas, harmonious amongst themselves; and the -emotions and the will are, for the time, saved the conflict and -confusion, the stress and strain, of the fully waking moments; -and considering that Catherine was peculiarly sensitive to all -this flux and friction, and that she was now often in a more -or less ecstatic trance from two up to eight hours: it follows -that the amount of food required to heal the breach made by -life’s wear and tear would, by these ecstasies, be considerably -reduced. And indeed it will have been these contemplative -absorptions which directly mediated for her those accessions -of vigour: and that they did so, in such a soul and for the -uses to which she put this strength, is their fullest justification -as thoroughly wholesome, at least in their ultimate outcome, -in and for this particular life.</p> - -<p>And the visions recorded have these two characteristics, -that they all deal with metaphysical realities and relations—God -as source and end of all things, as Light and food of the -soul, and similar conceptions, and never directly with historical -persons, scenes, or institutions; and that, whereas the -non-ecstatic picturings of her last period are grandly original, -and demonstrably based upon her own spiritual experience, -these second-period ecstatic visions are readily traceable to -New Testament, Neo-Platonist, and Franciscan precursors, -and have little more originality than this special selection -from amongst other possible literary sources.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Special character of her spiritual warfare.</i></h5> - -<p>Catherine’s ecstasies lead us easily on to the special method -of her spiritual warfare, which can, I think, be summed up in -three maxims: “One thing, and only one at a time”;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span> “Ever -fight self, and you need not trouble about any other foe”; -and “Fight self by an heroic indirectness and by love, for -love,—through a continuous self-donation to Pure Love -alone.”</p> - -<p>Studying here these great convictions simply in their -temperamental occasions, colouring, and limitations, we can -readily discover how the “one thing at a time” maxim -springs from the same disposition as that which found such -refreshment in ecstasy. For here too, partly from a congenital -incapacity to take things lightly, partly from an -equally characteristic sensitiveness to the conflict and confusion -incident to the introduction of any fresh multiplicity -into the consciousness, she requires, even in her non-ecstatic -moments, to have her attention specially concentrated upon -one all-important idea, one point in the field of consciousness. -And, by a faithful wholeness of attention to the successive -spiritually significant circumstances and obligations, interior -impressions and lights, which her praying, thinking, suffering, -actively bring round to her notice, she manages, by such -single steps, gradually to go a very long way, and, by such -severe successiveness, to build up a rich simultaneity. For -each of these faithfully accepted and fully willed and utilized -acts and states, received into her one ever-growing and -deepening personality, leave memories and stimulations -behind them, and mingle, as subconscious elements, with the -conscious acts which follow later on.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Two remarkable consequences of this kind of warfare.</i></h5> - -<p>There were two specially remarkable consequences of this -constant watchful fixation of the one spiritually significant -point in each congeries of circumstances, and of the manner -in which (partly perhaps as the occasion, but probably in -great part as the effect of this attention) one interior condition -of apparent fixity would suddenly shift to another condition -of a different kind but of a similar apparent stability. There -was the manner in which, during these years, she appears to -have escaped the committing of any at all definite offences -against the better and best lights of that particular moment; -and there was the way in which she would realize the -faultiness and subtle self-seeking of any one state, only at -the moment of its disappearing to make room for another.</p> - -<p>I take the accounts of both these remarkable peculiarities -to be substantially accurate, since, if the first condition had -not obtained, we should have found her practising more or<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span> -less frequent Confession, as we find her doing in the first and -third, but not in this period; and if the second condition had -not existed, we should have had, for this period also, some -such vivid account of painful scruples arising from the -impression of actually present unfaithfulnesses, such as has -been preserved for her last years. And indeed, as soon as we -have vividly conceived a state in which a soul (by a wise -utilization of the quite exceptional successiveness and simplification -to which it has been, in great part, driven by its -temperamental requirements, and by a constant heroic watchfulness) -has managed to exclude from its life, during a long -series of years, all fully deliberate resistances to, or lapses -from, its contemporaneous better insight: one sees at once -that a consciousness of faultiness could come to her only at -those moments when, one state and level giving place to -another, she could, for the moment, see the former habits and -their implicit defects in the clear light of their contrast to her -new, deeper insights and dispositions.</p> - -<p>Now it is evident that here again we have in part (in the -curious quasi-fixity of each state, and then the sudden replacement -of it by another) something which, taken alone, is simply -psychically peculiar and spiritually indifferent. The persistent -sense of gradual or of rapid change in the midst of -a certain continuity and indeed abidingness, characteristic of -the average moments of the average soul, is, taken in itself, -more true to life and to the normal reaction of the human -mind, and not less capable of spiritual utilization, than is -Catherine’s peculiarity. Her heroic utilization of her special -psychic life for purposes of self-fighting, and the degree in -which, as we shall find in a later chapter, she succeeded in -moulding this life into a shape representative of certain great -spiritual truths: these things it is which constitute here the -spiritually significant element.</p> - -<p>And her second peculiarity of religious practice was her -great simplification and intensification of the spiritual combat. -Simplification: for she does not fight directly either the Devil -or the World; she directly fights the “Flesh” alone, and recognizes -but one immediate opponent, her own lower self. -Hence the references to the world are always simply as to an -extension or indefinite repetition of that same self, or of -similar lower selves; and those to the devil are, except where -she declares her own lower self “a very devil,” extraordinarily -rare, and, in their authentic forms, never directly and formally<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span> -connected with her own spiritual interests and struggles. And -Intensification: for she conceives this lower self, against which -all her fighting is turned, as capable of any enormity, as -actually cloaking itself successively in every kind of disguise, -and as more or less vitiating even the most spiritual-seeming -of her states and acts.</p> - -<p>And here again we can, I think, clearly trace the influence -of her special temperament and psycho-physical functioning, -yet in a direction opposite to that in which we would naturally -expect it. For it is not so much that this temperament led -her to exaggerate the badness of her false self, or to elaborate a -myth concerning its (all but completely separate) existence, as -that, owing in large part to that temperament and functioning, -her false self <i>was</i> both unusually distinct from her true self -and particularly clamorous and claimful. It would indeed be -well for hagiography if, in all cases, at least an attempt were -made to discover and present the precise and particular good -and bad selves, worked for and fought by the particular saint: -for it is just this double particularization of the common -warfare in every individual soul that gives the poignant interest -and instructiveness, and a bracing sense of reality to these -lonely yet typical, unique yet universal struggles, defeats, and -victories.</p> - -<p>And in Catherine’s case her special temperament; her particular -attitude during the ten years’ laxity, and again during -the last years’ times of obscurity and scruple; even some of -her sayings probably still belonging to this middle period; -but above all the precise point and edge of her counter-ideal -and <i>attrait</i>: all indicate clearly enough what was her congenital -defect. A great self-engrossment of a downrightly -selfish kind; a grouping of all things round such a self-adoring -<i>Ego</i>; a noiseless but determined elimination from her life and -memory of all that would not or could not, then and there, be -drawn and woven into the organism and functioning of this -immensely self-seeking, infinitely woundable and wounded, -endlessly self-doctoring “I” and “Me”: a self intensely, -although not sexually, jealous, envious and exacting, incapable -of easy accommodation, of pleasure in half successes, -of humour and brightness, of joyous “once-born” creatureliness: -all this was certainly to be found, in strong tendency -at least, in the untrained parts and periods of her character -and life.</p> - -<p>And then the same peculiarity and sensitiveness of her<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span> -psycho-physical organism which, in her last period, ended by -mirroring her mental spiritual apprehensions and picturings -in her very body, and which, even at this time, has been -traced by us in the curious long fixities and rapid changes of -her fields of consciousness, clearly operates also and already -here, in separating off this false self from the good one and in -heightening the apprehension of that false self to almost a -perception in space, or to an all but physical sensation.</p> - -<p>We thus get something of which the interesting cases of -“doubleness of personality,” so much studied of late years, -are, as it were, purely psychical, definitely <i>maladif</i> caricatures; -the great difference consisting in Catherine herself possessing, -at all times, the consciousness and memory of both sides, -of both “selves,” and of each as both actual and potential, -within the range of her one great personality. Indeed it is -this very multiplicity thus englobed and utilized by that -higher unity, which gives depth to her sanity and sanctity.<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></p> - -<h5>5. <i>Precise object and end of her striving.</i></h5> - -<p>And all this is confirmed and completed, as already hinted, -by the precise object of her ideal, the particular means and -special end of the struggle. Here, at the very culmination of -her inner life and aim, we find the deepest traces of her -temperamental requirements; and here, in what she seeks, -there is again an immense concentration and a significant -choice. The distinctions between obligation and supererogation, -between merit and grace, are not utilized but transcended; -the conception of God having anger as well as love -arouses as keen a sense of intolerableness as that of God’s -envy aroused in Plato, and God appears to her as, in Himself, -continuously loving.</p> - -<p>This love of God, again, is seen to be present everywhere, -and, of Itself, everywhere to effect happiness. The dispositions -of souls are indeed held to vary within each soul and -between soul and soul, and to determine the differences in -their reception, and consequently in the effect upon them, of -God’s one universal love: but the soul’s reward and punishment -are not something distinct from its state, they are but -that very state prolonged and articulated, since man can -indeed go against his deepest requirements but can never<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span> -finally suppress them. Heaven, Purgatory, Hell are thus not -places as well as states, nor do they begin only in the beyond: -they are states alone, and begin already here. And Grace -and Love, and Love and Christ, and Christ and Spirit, and -hence Grace and Love and Christ and Spirit are, at bottom, -one, and this One is God. Hence God, loving Himself in and -through us, is alone our full true self. Here, in this constant -stretching out and forward of her whole being into and -towards the ocean of light and love, of God the All in All, -it is not hard to recognize a soul which finds happiness only -when looking out and away from self, and turning, in more -or less ecstatic contemplation and action, towards that Infinite -Country, that great Over-Againstness, God.</p> - -<p>And, in her sensitive shrinking from the idea of an angry -God, we find the instinctive reaction of a nature too naturally -prone itself to angry claimfulness, and which had been too -much driven out of its self-occupation by the painful sense -of interior self-division consequent upon that jealousy, not to -find it intolerable to get out of that little Scylla of her own -hungry self only to fall into a great Charybdis, an apparent -mere enlargement and canonization of that same self, in the -angry God Himself.</p> - -<p>And if her second peculiarity, the concentration of the -fight upon an unusually isolated and intense false self, had -introduced an element of at least relative Rigorism and contraction -into her spirituality, this third peculiarity brings a -compensating movement of quasi-Pantheism, of immense -expansion. Here the crushed plant expands in boundless air, -light and warmth; the parched seaweed floats and unfolds -itself in an immense ocean of pure waters—the soul, as it -were, breathes and bathes in God’s peace and love. And it is -evident that the great super-sensible realities and relations -adumbrated by such figures, did not, with her, lead to mere -dry or vague apprehensions. Even in this period, although -here with a peaceful, bracing orderliness and harmony, the -reality thus long and closely dwelt on and lived with was, as -it were, physically seen and felt in these its images by a ready -response of her immensely docile psycho-physical organism.</p> - -<h5>6. <i>Catherine possessed two out of the three conditions -apparently necessary for stigmatization.</i></h5> - -<p>And in this connection we should note how largely reasonable -was the expectation of some of her disciples of finding -some permanent physical effects upon her body; and yet why<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span> -she not only had not the stigmata of the Passion, but why she -could not have them. For, of the three apparently necessary -conditions for such stigmatization, she had indeed two—a -long and intense absorption in religious ideas, and a specially -sensitive psycho-physical temperament and organization of the -ecstatic type; but the third condition, the concentration of that -absorption upon Our Lord’s Passion and wounds, was wholly -wanting—at least after those four actively penitential and -during those twenty-two ecstatic years. We can, however, say -most truly that although, since at all events 1477, her visions -and contemplations were all concerning purely metaphysical, -eternal realities, or certain ceaselessly repeated experiences of -the human soul, or laws and types derived from the greatest -of Christian institutions, her daily solace, the Holy Eucharist: -yet that these verities ended by producing definite images in -her senses, and certain observable though passing impressions -upon her body, so that we can here talk of sensible shadows -or “stigmata” of things purely spiritual and eternal.</p> - -<p>And if, in the cases of some ecstatic saints, mental pathologists -of a more or less materialistic type have, at times, -shown excessive suspicion as to some of the causes and effects -of these saints’ devotion to Our Lord’s Humanity under the -imagery and categories of the Canticle of Canticles—all such -suspicions, fair or unfair, have absolutely no foothold in -Catherine’s life, since not only is there here no devotion to -God or to Our Lord as Bridegroom of the Bridal soul: there -is no direct contemplative occupation with the historic Christ -and no figuring of Him or of God under human attributes or -relations at all. I think that her temperament and health -had something to do with her habitual dwelling upon Thing-symbols -of God: Ocean—Air—Fire—picturings which, conceived -with her psycho-physical vividness, must, in their -expanse, have rested and purified her in a way that historical -contingencies and details would not have done. The doctrinal -and metaphysical side of the matter will be considered later on.</p> - -<h4>VI. <span class="smcap">Three Rules which seem to govern the Relations -between Psycho-physical Peculiarities -and Sanctity in general.</span></h4> - -<p>If we next inquire how matters stand historically with -regard to the relations between ecstatic states and psycho-physical<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span> -peculiarities on the one hand, and sanctity in general -on the other hand, we shall find, I think, that the following -three rules or laws really cover, in a necessarily general, somewhat -schematic way, all the chief points, at all certain or -practically important, in this complex and delicate matter.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Intense spiritual energising is accompanied by auto-suggestion -and mono-ideism.</i></h5> - -<p>It is clear, for one thing, that as simply all and every -mental, emotional, and volitional energizing is necessarily and -always accompanied by corresponding nerve-states, and that -if we had not some neural sensitiveness and neural adaptability, -we could not—whilst living our earthly life—think, -or feel, or will in regard to anything whatsoever: a certain -special degree of at least potential psycho-physical sensitiveness -and adaptability must be taken to be, not the -productive cause, but a necessary condition for the exercise, -of any considerable range and depth of mind and will, and -hence of sanctity in general; and that the actual aiming at, -and gradual achievement of, sanctity in these, thus merely -possible cases, spiritualizes and further defines this sensitiveness, -as the instrument, material, and expression of the soul’s -work.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> And this work of the heroic soul will necessarily -consist, in great part, in attending to, calling up, and, as far as -may be, both fixing and ever renovating certain few great -dominant ideas, and in attempting by every means to saturate -the imagination with images and figures, historical and symbolic, -as so many incarnations of these great verities.</p> - -<p>We get thus what, taken simply phenomenally and without -as yet any inquiry as to an ultimate reality pressing in upon -the soul,—a divine stimulation underlying all its sincere and -fruitful action,—is a spiritual mono-ideism and auto-suggestion, -of a more or less general kind. But, at this stage, -these activities and their psycho-physical concomitants and -results will, though different in kind, be no more abnormal -than is the mono-ideism and auto-suggestion of the mathematician, -the tactician, and the constructive statesman. Newton, -Napoleon, and Richelieu: they were all dominated by some -great central idea, and they all for long years dwelt upon it -and worked for it within themselves, till it became alive and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span> -aflame in their imaginations and their outward-moving wills, -before, yet as the means of, its taking external and visible -shape. And, in all the cases that we can test in detail, the -psycho-physical accompaniments of all this profound mental-volitional -energy were most marked. In the cases of Newton -and Napoleon, for instance, a classification of their energizings -solely according to their neural accompaniments would force -us to class these great discoverers and organizers amongst -psycho-physical eccentrics. Yet the truth and value of their -work and character has, of course, to be measured, not by -this its neural fringe and cost, but by its central spiritual truth -and fruitfulness.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Such mechanisms specially marked in Philosophers, Musicians, -Poets, and Mystical Religionists.</i></h5> - -<p>The mystical and contemplative element in the religious -life, and the group of saints amongst whom this element is -predominant, no doubt give us a still larger amount of what, -again taking the matter phenomenally and not ultimately, is -once more mono-ideism and auto-suggestion, and entails a -correspondingly larger amount of psycho-physical impressionableness -and reaction utilized by the mind. But here also, -from the simplest forms of the “prayer of quiet” to absorptions -of an approximately ecstatic type, we have something -which, though different in kind and value, is yet no more -abnormal than are the highest flights and absorptions of the -Philosopher, the Musician, and the Poet. And yet, in such -cases as Kant and Beethoven, a classifier of humanity according -to its psycho-physical phenomena alone would put these -great discoverers and creators, without hesitation, amongst -hopeless and useless hypochondriacs. Yet here again the -truth of their ideas and the work of their lives have to be -measured by quite other things than by this their neural -concomitance and cost.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Ecstatics possess a peculiar psycho-physical organization.</i></h5> - -<p>The downright ecstatics and hearers of voices and seers of -visions have all, wherever we are able to trace their temperamental -and neural constitution and history, possessed and -developed a definitely peculiar psycho-physical organization. -We have traced it in Catherine and indicated it in St. Teresa. -We find it again in St. Maria Magdalena dei Pazzi and in -St. Marguerite Marie Alacocque, in modern times, and in St. -Catherine of Siena and St. Francis of Assisi in mediaeval -times. For early Christian times we are too ignorant as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span> -regards the psycho-physical organization of St. Ignatius of -Antioch, Hermas, and St. Cyprian, to be able to establish a -connection between their temperamental endowments and -their hearing of voices and seeing of visions—in the last two -cases we get much that looks like more or less of a mere -conventional literary device.<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -<p>We are, however, in a fair position for judging, in the typical -and thoroughly original case of St. Paul. In 2 Cor. xiii, 7, 8, -after speaking of the abundant revelations accorded to him, -he adds that “lest I be lifted up, a thorn” (literally, a stake) -“in the flesh was given to me, an Angel of Satan to buffet me.” -And though “I thrice besought the Lord that it might depart -from me, the Lord answered me, ‘My grace is sufficient for -thee; for grace is perfected in infirmity.’” And he was consequently -determined “rather” to “glory in his infirmities, so -that the power of Christ may dwell within” him. And in -Gal. iv, 14, 15, written about the same time, he reminds his -readers how he had “preached to them through the infirmity -of the flesh,” commending them because they “did not despise -nor loathe their temptation in his flesh” (this is no doubt the -correct reading), “but had received him as an Angel of God, -as Christ Jesus.”</p> - -<p>Now the most ancient interpretation of this “thorn” or -“stake” is some kind of bodily complaint,—violent headache -or earache is mentioned by Tertullian de Pudicitia, 13, and -by St. Jerome, Comm. in Gal. <i>loc. cit.</i> Indeed St. Paul’s own -description of his “bodily presence” as “weak,” and his -“spoken word” as “contemptible” (2 Cor. x, 10), points this -way. It seems plain that it cannot have been carnal temptations -(only in the sixth century did this interpretation become -firmly established), for he could not have gloried in these, nor -could they, hidden as they would be within his heart, have -exposed him to the contempt of others. Indeed he expressly -excludes such troubles from his life, where, in advising those -who were thus oppressed to marry, he gives the preference to -the single life, and declares, “I would that all men were even -as myself” (1 Cor. vii, 7).</p> - -<p>The attacks of this trouble were evidently acutely painful: -note the metaphor of a stake driven into the live flesh and -the Angel of Satan who buffeted him. (And compare St.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span> -Teresa’s account: “An Angel of God appeared to me to be -thrusting at times a long spear into my heart and to pierce -my very entrails”; “the pain was so great that it made me -moan”; “it really seems to the soul as if an arrow were thrust -through the heart or through itself; the suffering is not one -of sense, neither is the wound physical”; and how, on another -occasion, she heard Our Lord answer her: “Serve thou Me, -and meddle not with this.”)<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> - -<p>These attacks would come suddenly, even in the course of -his public ministry, rendering him, in so far, an object of -derision and of loathing. (Compare here St. Teresa’s declaration: -“During the rapture, the body is very often perfectly -powerless; it continues in the position it was in when the -rapture came upon it: if sitting, sitting; if the hands were -open, or if they were shut, they will remain open or shut”; -“if the body” was “standing or kneeling, it remains so.”)<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p> - -<p>Yet these attacks were evidently somehow connected, both -in fact and in his consciousness, with his Visions; and they were -recurrent. The vision of the Third Heaven and his apparently -first attack seem to have been practically coincident,—about -<span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 44. We find a second attack hanging about him for -some time, on his first preaching in Galatia, about <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 51 -or 52 (see 1 Thess. ii, 18; 1 Cor. ii, 3). And a third attack -appears to have come in <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 57 or 58, when the Second -Epistle to the Corinthians and that to the Galatians were -written; note the words (2 Cor. i, 9), “But” (in addition to -his share in the public persecution) “we ourselves had the -sentence of death within ourselves, in order that we might -not trust in ourselves but in God who raiseth the dead to life.” -(And compare here St. Teresa: in July 1547 “for about four -days I remained insensible. They must have regarded me -as dead more than once. For a day and a half the grave was -open in my monastery, waiting for my body. But it pleased -Our Lord I should come to myself.”)<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> Dr. Lightfoot gives as -a parallel the epileptiform seizures of King Alfred, which, -sudden, acutely painful, at times death-like, and protracted, -tended to render the royal power despicable in the eyes of -the world.<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> Yet, except for the difference of sex and of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span> -relative privacy, St. Teresa’s states, which I have given here, -are more closely similar, in so much as they are intimately -connected with religious visions and voices.</p> - -<p>And, amongst Old Testament figures, we can find a similar -connection, on a still larger scale, in the case of Ezekiel, the -most definitely ecstatic, though (upon the whole) the least -original, of the literary Prophets. For, as to the visionary -element, we have his own records of three visions of the glory -of Jahve; of five other ecstasies, three of which are accompanied -by remarkable telepathic, second-sight activities; and -of twelve symbolic (better: representative) prophetic actions, -which are now all rightly coming to be considered as having -been externally carried out by him.<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> And we get psycho-physical -states, as marked as in any other ecstatic saint. -For we hear how Jahve on one occasion says to him: “But -thou, son of man, lay thyself on thy left side” (<i>i.e.</i> according -to Jewish orientation, towards the North) “and I shall lay the -guilt of the house of Israel” (the Northern Kingdom) “upon -thee; the number of days that thou shalt lie upon it, shalt -thou bear their guilt. But I appoint unto thee the years of -their guilt, as a (corresponding) number of days, (namely) one -hundred and fifty days.… And, when thou hast done with -them, thou shalt lay thyself on thy right side” (<i>i.e.</i> towards the -South), “and thou shalt bear the guilt of the house of Judah” -(the Southern Kingdom); “one day for each year shall I -appoint unto thee. And behold I shall lay cords upon thee, -that thou shalt be unable to turn from one side to the other, -till thou hast ended the days of thy boundness” (iv, 4-8). -Krätzschmar, no doubt rightly, finds here a case of hemiplegia -and anaesthesia, functional cataleptic paralysis lasting -during five months on the left side, and then shifting for -about six weeks to the right side. And the <i>alalia</i> (speechlessness), -which no doubt accompanied this state, is referred to -on three other occasions: xxiv, 27; xxix, 31; xxxiii, 22. -And note how Jahve’s address to Ezekiel, “son of man,” -which occurs in this book over ninety times, and but once in -the whole of the rest of the Old Testament (Dan. viii,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span> -17), evidently stands here for the sense of his creaturely -nothingness, so characteristic of the true ecstatic.<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></p> - -<p>Now, at this last stage, the analogy of the other non-religious -activities of the healthy mind and of their psycho-physical -conditions and effects forsakes us; but not the -principle which has guided us all along. For here, as from -the very first, some such conditions and effects are inevitable; -and the simple fact of this occurrence, apart from the question -of their particular character, is something thoroughly normal. -And here again, and more than ever, the emphasis and decision -have to lie with, and to depend upon, the mental and -volitional work and the spiritual truth and reality achieved -in and for the recipient, and, through him, in and for others.</p> - -<p>Even at the earlier stages, to cling to the form, as distinct -from the content and end, of these things was to be thoroughly -unfair to this their content and end, within the spacious -economy of the spirit’s life; at this stage such clinging -becomes destructive of all true religion. For if the mere -psycho-physical forms and phenomena of ecstasy, of vision, of -hearing of voices is, in proportion to their psycho-physical -intensity and seeming automatism and quasi-physical objectivity, -to be taken as necessarily a means and mark of sanctity -or of insight, or, at least, as something presumably sent direct -by God or else as diabolical, something necessarily super- or -preter-natural: then the lunatic asylums contain more -miracles, saints, and sages, or their direct, strangely similar -antipodes, than all the most fervent or perverted churches, -monasteries, and families upon God’s earth. For in asylums -we find ecstasies, visions, voices, all more, not less marked, all -more, not less irresistibly objective-seeming to the recipient, -than anything to be found outside.</p> - -<p>Yet apply impartially to both sets the test, not of form, -but of content, of spiritual fruitfulness and of many-sided -applicability—and this surface-similarity yields at once to -a fundamental difference. Indeed all the great mystics, and -this in precise proportion to their greatness, have ever taught<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span> -that, the mystical capacities and habits being but means and -not ends, only such ecstasies are valuable as leave the soul, -and the very body as its instrument, strengthened and -improved; and that visions and voices are to be accepted -by the mind only in proportion as they convey some spiritual -truth of importance to it or to others, and as they actually -help it to become more humble, true, and loving.</p> - -<p>And there can be no doubt that these things worked thus -with such great ecstatic mystics as Ezekiel, the man of the -great prophetic schemes and the permanently fruitful picturing -of the Good Shepherd; as St. Paul, the greatest missionary -and organizer ever given to the Christian Church; as St. -Francis of Assisi, the salt and leaven and light of the Church -and of society, in his day and more or less ever since; as St. -Catherine of Siena, the free-spoken, docile reinspirer of the -Papacy; as Jeanne d’Arc, the maiden deliverer of a Nation; -as St. Teresa, reformer of a great Order. All these, and -countless others, would, quite evidently, have achieved less, -not more, of interior light and of far-reaching helpfulness of a -kind readily recognized by all specifically religious souls, had -they been without the rest, the bracing, the experience -furnished to them by their ecstasies and allied states and -apprehensions.</p> - -<h4>VII. <span class="smcap">Perennial Freshness of the Great Mystics’ -Main Spiritual Test, in Contradistinction To -Their Secondary, Psychological Contention. -Two Special Difficulties.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>A false and a true test of mystical experience.</i></h5> - -<p>Now it is deeply interesting to note how entirely unweakened, -indeed how impressively strengthened, by the -intervening severe test of whole centuries of further experience -and of thought, has remained the main and direct, the -spiritual test of the great Mystics, in contradistinction to their -secondary psychological contention with respect to such experiences. -The secondary, psychological contention is well -reproduced by St. Teresa where she says: “When I speak, -I go on with my understanding arranging what I am saying; -but, if I am spoken to by others, I do nothing else but listen -without any labour.” In the former case, “the soul,” if it be -in good faith,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span> “cannot possibly fail to see clearly that itself -arranges the words and utters them to itself. How then can the -understanding have time enough to arrange these locutions? -They require time.”<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> Now this particular argument for their -supernaturalness derived from the psychological form—from -the suddenness, clearness, and apparent automatism of these -locutions—has ceased to carry weight, owing to our present, -curiously recent, knowledge concerning the subconscious -region of the mind, and the occasionally sudden irruption of -that region’s contents into the field of that same mind’s -ordinary, full consciousness. In the Ven. Battista Vernazza’s -case we have a particularly clear instance of such a long -accumulation,—by means of much, in great part full, attention -to certain spiritual ideas, words, and images,—in the -subconscious regions of a particularly strong and deeply -sincere and saintly mind; and the sudden irruption from -those regions of certain clear and apparently quite spontaneous -words and images into the field of her mind’s full -consciousness.<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a></p> - -<p>But the reference to the great Mystics’ chief and direct -test, upon which they dwell with an assurance and self-consistency -far surpassing that which accompanies their psychological -argument,—the spiritual content and effects of such -experiences,—this, retains all its cogency. St. Teresa tells us: -“When Our Lord speaks, it is both word and work: His -words are deeds.” “I found myself, through these words -alone, tranquil and strong, courageous and confident, at rest -and enlightened: I felt I could maintain against all the world -that my prayer was the work of God.” “I could not believe -that Satan, if he wished to deceive me, could have recourse to -means so adverse to his purpose as this, of rooting out my -faults, and implanting virtues and spiritual strength: for I saw -clearly that I had become another person, by means of these -visions.” “So efficacious was the vision, and such was the -nature of the words spoken to me, that I could not possibly -doubt that they came from Him.” “I was in a trance; and -the effects of it were such, that I could have no doubt it -came from God.” On another occasion she writes less positively -even of the great test:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span> “She never undertook anything -merely because it came to her in prayer. For all -that her Confessors told her that these things came from -God, she never so thoroughly believed them that she could -swear to it herself, though it did seem to her that they were -spiritually safe, because of the effects thereof.”<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> This doctrine -is still the last word of wisdom in these matters.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>First special difficulty in testing ecstasies.</i></h5> - -<p>Yet it is only at this last stage that two special difficulties -occur, the one philosophical, the other moral. The philosophical -difficulty is as follows. As long as the earlier stages -are in progress, it is not difficult to understand that the soul -may be gradually building up for herself a world of spiritual -apprehensions, and a corresponding spiritual and moral character, -by a process which, looked at merely phenomenally -and separately, appears as a simple case of mono-ideism and -auto-suggestion, but which can and should be conceived, -when studied in its ultimate cause and end, as due to the -pressure and influence of God’s spirit working in and -through the spirit of man,—the Creator causing His own -little human creature freely to create for itself some copy -of and approach to its own eternally subsisting, substantial -Cause and Crown. There the operation of such an underlying -Supreme Cause, and a consequent relation between -the world thus conceived and built up by the human soul -and the real world of the Divine Spirit, appears possible, -because the things which the soul is thus made to suggest -to itself are ideas, and because even these ideas are clearly -recognized by the soul as only instruments and approaches -to the realities for which they stand. But here, in -this last stage, we get the suggestion, not of ideas, but of -psycho-physical impressions, and these impressions are, apparently, -not taken as but distantly illustrative, but as somehow -one with the spiritual realities for which they stand. Is -not, <i>e.g.</i>, Catherine’s joy at this stage centred precisely in the -downright feeling, smelling, seeing, of ocean waters, penetrating -odours, all-enveloping light; and in the identification of -those waters, odours, lights, with God Himself, so that God -becomes at last an object of direct, passive, sensible perception? -Have we not then here at last reached pure -delusion?</p> - -<p>Not so, in proportion as the mystic is great and spiritual, -and as he here still clings to the principles common to all -true religion. For, in proportion as he is and does this, will -he find and regard the mind as deeper and more operative<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span> -than sense, and God’s Spirit as penetrating and transcending -both the one and the other. And hence he will (at least -implicitly) regard those psycho-physical impressions as but -sense-like and really mental; and he will consider this -mental impression and projection as indeed produced by the -presence and action of the Spirit within his mind or of the -pressure of spiritual realities upon it, but will hold that this whole -mental process, with these its spacial- and temporal-seeming -embodiments, these sights and sounds, has only a relation -and analogical likeness to, and is not and cannot be identical -with, those realities of an intrinsically super-spacial, super-temporal -order.—And thus here as everywhere, although here -necessarily more than ever, we find again the conception of -the Transcendent yet also Immanent Spirit, effecting in the -human spirit the ever-increasing apprehension of Himself, -accompanied in this spirit by an ever keener sense of His -incomprehensibility for all but Himself. And here again the -truth, and more especially the divine origin of these apprehensions, -is tested and guaranteed on and on by the consequent -deepening of that spiritual and ethical fruitfulness and -death to self, which are the common aspirations of every -deepest moment and every sincerest movement within the -universal heart of man.</p> - -<p>Thus, as regards the mentality of these experiences, Catherine -constantly speaks of seeing “as though with the eyes of -the body.” And St. Teresa tells us of her visions with “the -eyes of the soul”; of how at first she “did not know that it -was possible to see anything otherwise than with the eyes of -the body”; of how, in reality “she never,” in her true visions -and locutions, “saw anything with her bodily eyes, nor heard -anything with her bodily ears”; and of how indeed she later -on, on one occasion, “saw nothing with the eyes of the body, -nothing with the eyes of the soul,”—she “simply felt Christ -close by her,”—evidently again with the soul. Thus, too, -Catherine tells us, that “as the intellect exceeds language, -so does love exceed intellection”; and how vividly she feels -that “all that can be said of God,” compared to the great -Reality, “is but tiny crumbs from the great Master’s table.”<a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a></p> - -<p>And, as to the inadequacy of these impressions, the classical -authority on such things, St. John of the Cross, declares:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span> -“He that will rely on the letter of the divine locutions or on -the intelligible form of the vision, will of necessity fall into -delusion; for he does not yield to the Spirit in detachment -from sense.” “He who shall give attention to these motes of -the Spirit alone will, in the end, have no spirituality at all.” -“All visions, revelations, and heavenly feelings, and whatever -is greater than these, are not worth the least act of humility, -bearing the fruits of that charity which neither values nor -seeks itself, which thinketh well not of self but of all others.” -Indeed “virtue does not consist in these apprehensions. Let -men then cease to regard, and labour to forget them, that -they may be free.” For “spiritual supernatural knowledge -is of two kinds, one distinct and special,” which comprises -“visions, revelations, locutions, and spiritual impressions”; -“the other confused, obscure, and general,” which “has but one -form, that of contemplation which is the work of faith. The -soul is to be led into this, by directing it thereto through all the -rest, beginning with the first, and detaching it from them.”</p> - -<p>Hence “many souls, to whom visions have never come, are -incomparably more advanced in the way of perfection than -others to whom many have been given”; and “they who are -already perfect, receive these visitations of the Spirit of God -in peace; ecstasies cease, for they were only graces to prepare -them for this greater grace.” Hence, too, “one desire only -doth God allow and suffer in His Presence: that of perfectly -observing His law and of carrying the Cross of Christ. In the -Ark of the Covenant there was but the Book of the Law, the -Rod of Aaron, and the Pot of Manna. Even so that soul, -which has no other aim than the perfect observance of the -Law of God and the carrying of the Cross of Christ, will be a -true Ark containing the true Manna, which is God.” And -this perfected soul’s intellectual apprehensions will, in their -very mixture of light and conscious obscurity, more and more -approach and forestall the eternal condition of the beatified -soul. “One of the greatest favours, bestowed transiently on -the soul in this life, is to enable it to see so distinctly and to feel -so profoundly, that it cannot comprehend Him at all. These -souls are herein, in some degree, like the Saints in Heaven, -where they who know Him most perfectly perceive most -clearly that He is infinitely incomprehensible; for those who -have the less clear vision do not perceive so distinctly as the -others how greatly He transcends their vision.”<a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Second special difficulty in testing ecstasies.</i></h5> - -<p>The second special difficulty is this. Have not at least -some of the saints of this definitely ecstatic type shown more -psycho-physical abnormality than spiritually fruitful origination -or utilization of such things, so that their whole life -seems penetrated by a fantastic spirit? And have not many -others, who, at their best, may not have been amenable to -this charge, ended with shattered nerve- and will-power, with -an organism apparently incapable of any further growth or -use, even if we restrict our survey exclusively to strength-bringing -ecstasy and to a contemplative prayer of some -traceable significance?</p> - -<p>(1) As a good instance of the apparent predominance of -psycho-physical and even spiritual strangeness, we can take the -Venerable Sister Lukardis, Cistercian Nun of Ober-Weimar, -born probably in 1276. Her life is published from a unique -Latin MS. by the Bollandists (<i>Analecta</i>, Vol. XVIII, pp. 305-367, -Bruxelles, 1899), and presents us with a mediaevally naïve -and strangely unanalytic, yet extraordinarily vivid picture of -things actually seen by the writer. “Although,” say the most -competent editors, “we know not the name nor profession of the -Author, whether he belonged to the Friars or to the Monks,<a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -it is certain that he was a contemporary of Lukardis, that he -knew her intimately, and that he learnt many details from her -fellow-nuns. And though we shall be slow to agree with -him when he ascribes all the strange things which she experienced -in her soul and body to divine influence, yet we -should beware of considering him to be in bad faith. For, -though he erred perchance in ascribing to a divine operation -things which are simply the work of nature, such a vice is -common amongst those who transmit such things.”<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> I take -the chief points in the order of their narration by the <i>Vita</i>.</p> - -<p>“Soon after Lukardis had, at twelve years of age, taken -the Cistercian habit, her mother died,” over twelve English -miles away, at Erfurt, yet Lukardis “saw the scene” in such -detail “in the spirit,” that, when her sister came to tell her, -she, Lukardis,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span> “anticipated her with an account of the day, -the place and hour of the death, of the clothes then being -worn by their mother, of the precise position of the bed and -of the hospital, and of the persons present at the time.”</p> - -<p>She soon suffered from “stone” in the bladder; “quartan, -tertian, and continuous fevers,” and from fainting fits; also -from contraction of the muscles (<i>nervi</i>) of the hands, so that -the latter were all but useless and could not even hold the -staff on which she had to lean in walking, till they had been -“tightly wrapped round in certain clothes.” Yet “she would, -at times, strike her hands so vehemently against each other, -that they resounded as though they had been wooden boards.” -“When lying in bed she would sometimes, as it were, plant -her feet beneath her, hang her head down” backwards, “and -raise her abdomen and chest, making thus, as it were, a highly -curved arch of her person.” Indeed sometimes “she would -for a long while stand upon her head and shoulders, with her -feet up in air, but with her garments adhering to her limbs, -as though they had been sewn on to them.” “Often, too, by -day or night, she was wont to run with a most impetuous -course;—she understood that, by this her course, she was -compensating Christ for His earthly course of thirty-three -years.”<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a></p> - -<p>“On one occasion she had a vision of Christ, in which He -said to her: ‘Join thy hands to My hands, and thy feet to My -feet, and thy breast to My breast, and thus shall I be aided -by thee to suffer less.’ And instantly she felt a most keen -pain of wounds,” in all three regions, “although wounds did -not as yet appear to sight.” But “as she bore the memory of -the hammering of the nails into Christ upon the Cross within -her heart, so did she exercise herself in outward deed. For -she was frequently wont, with the middle finger of one hand, -impetuously to wound the other in the place appropriate to -the stigmata; then to withdraw her finger to the distance of -a cubit, and straightway again impetuously to wound herself. -Those middle fingers felt hard like metal. And about the -sixth and ninth hour she would impetuously wound herself -with her finger in the breast, at the appropriate place for the -wound.”—After about two years “Christ appeared to her in -the night of Blessed Gregory, Pope” (St. Gregory VII, May -26?), “pressed her right hand firmly in His, and declared, -‘I desire thee to suffer with Me.’ On her consenting, a wound -instantly appeared in her right hand; about ten days later a -wound in the left hand; and thus successively the five wounds -were found in her body.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span> “The wounds of the scourging -were also found upon her, of a finger’s length, and having a -certain hard skin around them.”<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a></p> - -<p>“At whiles she would lie like one dead throughout the day; -yet her countenance was very attractive, owing to a wondrous -flushed look. And even if a needle was pressed into her -flesh, she felt no pain.”—“On one occasion she was carried -upon her couch by two sisters into the Lady Chapel, to the -very spot where her body now reposes. After having been -left there alone for about an hour, the Blessed Virgin appeared -to her, with her beloved Infant, Jesus, in her arms, and suckling -Him. And Lukardis, contrary to the law of her strength”—she -had, by now, been long confined to a reclining posture—“arose -from her couch and began to stand upright. And at -this juncture one of the Sisters opened the Chapel door a -little, and, on looking in, marvelled at Lukardis being able -to stand, but withdrew and forbade the other Sisters from -approaching thither, since she feared that, if they saw her -standing thus, they might declare her to be quite able, if she -but chose, to arise and stand at any time. Upon the Blessed -Virgin twice insisting upon being asked for some special -favour, and Lukardis declaring, ‘I desire that thou slake -my thirst with that same milk with which I now see thee -suckling thy beloved Son,’ the Blessed Virgin came up to -her, and gave her to drink of her milk.” And when later on -Lukardis was fetched by the Sisters, she was “found reclining -on her couch. And for three days and nights she took neither -food nor drink, and could not see the light of day. And as a -precaution, since her death was feared, Extreme Unction was -administered to her. And, later on, the Sister who had seen -her standing in the Chapel, gradually drew the whole story -from her.”<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span></p> -<p>“After she had lain, very weak, and, as it were, in a state -of contracture, for eleven years, it happened that, about the -ninth hour of one Good Friday, the natural bodily heat and -colour forsook her; she seemed nowise to breathe; her wounds -bled more than usual; she appeared to be dead. And her -fellow-Sisters wept greatly. Yet about Vesper-time she opened -her eyes and began to move; and her companions were -wondrously consoled. And then in the Easter night, about -the hour of Christ’s Resurrection, as, with the other sick Sisters, -she lay in her bed placed so as to be able to hear the Divine -Office, she felt all her limbs to be as it were suffused with a -most refreshing dew. And straightway she saw stretched -down to her from Heaven a hand, as it were of the Blessed -Virgin, which stroked her wounds and all the painful places, -the ligaments and joints of her members, gently and compassionately. -After which she straightway felt how that all -her members, which before had for so long been severely contracted, -and how the knots, formed by the ligaments (<i>nervi</i>), -were being efficaciously resolved and equally distended, so -that she considered herself freed from her hard bondage. She -arose unaided from her couch, proceeded to the near-by -entrance to the Choir, and prostrated herself there, in fervent -orison, with her arms outstretched in cross-form, for a very -long hour. And then, commanded by the Abbess to rise, -she readily arose without help, stood with pleasure, and walked -whithersoever she would.” “At all times she ever suffered -more from the cold than any of her companions.”<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p> - -<p>“As, during those eleven years that she lay like one -paralyzed, she was wont, on every Friday, to lie with her -arms expanded as though on the Cross, and her feet one on -the top of the other; so, after the Lord had so wonderfully -raised her on that Paschal day, she, on every Friday and -every Lenten day, would stand erect with her arms outstretched, -crosswise, and, without any support, on one foot -only, with the other foot planted upon its fellow, from the -hour of noon to that of Vespers.”—“Whilst she was still uncured, -and required some delicate refection which the Convent -could not afford, there came to her,” one day, “the most -loving Infant, bearing in His Hand the leg of a chicken, newly -roasted, and begging her to eat it for His sake.” She did so, -and was wonderfully strengthened. Apparently late on in -her life “they procured, with much labour and diligence, all -kinds of drinkables from different and even from distant places -for her. But she, having tasted any one of them, would -straightway shake her head, close her lips, and then declare -that she could not drink it up.” “However delicious in itself, -it seemed to be so much gall and wormwood when applied to -her mouth.”<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a></p> - -<p>And if we look, not at seemingly childish fantasticalness in -certain mystical lives, but at the later state of shattered health -and apparently weakened nerve- and will-power which appears<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span> -so frequently to be the price paid for the definitely ecstatic -type of religion, even where it has been spiritually fruitful, -our anxiety is readily renewed. Look at the nine, possibly -thirteen, last years of Catherine’s, or at the last period of St. -Margaret Mary’s life; note the similar cases of SS. Maria -Magdalena de Pazzi and Juliana Falconieri. And we have -a figure of all but pure suffering and passivity in St. -Lidwina of Schiedam (1380-1433), over which M. Huysmans -has managed to be so thoroughly morbid.</p> - -<p>(2) And if such lives strike us as too exceptional to be -taken, with whatever deductions, as a case in point, we can find -a thoroughly fair instance in the life of Father Isaac Hecker. -Here we have a man of extraordinary breadth, solidity, and -activity of mind and character, and whose mysticism is of the -most sober and harmonious kind. Yet his close companion -and most faithful chronicler, Father Walter Elliott, tells us: -“From severe colds, acute headaches, and weakness of the -digestive organs, Father Hecker was at all times a frequent -sufferer. But, towards the end of the year 1871, his headaches -became much more painful, his appetite forsook him, and -sleeplessness and excitability of the nervous system were -added to his other ailments. Remedies of every kind were -tried, but without permanent relief. By the summer of 1872 -he was wholly incapacitated.” “The physical sufferings of -those last sixteen” (out of the sixty-nine) “years of his life -were never such as to impair his mental soundness … -though his organs of speech were sometimes too slow for his -thoughts.” His digestion and nervous system had been impaired -by excessive abstinence in early manhood, and by -excessive work in later life, “till at last the body struck work -altogether. During the sixteen years of his illness every -symptom of bodily illness was aggravated by the least attention -to community affairs or business matters, and also by interior -trials,” although he still managed, by heroic efforts, at times -directly to serve his congregation and to write some remarkable -papers. Yet this state continued, practically unbroken, -up to the end, on December 22, 1888.<a name="FNanchor_58_58" id="FNanchor_58_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_58_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> And although the -various proximate causes, indicated by Father Elliott, had no -doubt been operative here, there can, in view of the numerous -similar cases, be no question that the most fundamental of -the reasons of this general condition of health was his strongly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span> -mystical type and habit of mind and his corresponding -psycho-physical organization.</p> - -<p>(3) In view of those fantasticalnesses and of these exhaustions, -we cannot but ask whether these things are not -a terrible price to pay for such states? whether such states -should not be disallowed by all solid morality, and should -not prompt men of sense to try and stamp them out? And, -above all, we seem placed once more, with added anxiety, -before the question whether what is liable to end in such -sad general incapacitation was not, from the first, directly -productive of, and indeed simply produced by, some -merely subjective, simply psycho-physical abnormality and -morbidness?</p> - -<p>(4) Three points here call for consideration. Let us, for -one thing, never forget that physical health is not the true -end of human life, but only one of its most important means -and conditions. The ideal man is not, primarily and directly, -a physical machine, perfect as such in its development and -function, to which would be tacked on, as a sort of concomitant -or means, the mental, moral, and spiritual life and character. -But the ideal man is precisely this latter life and character, -with the psycho-physical organism sustained and developed -in such, and only such, a degree, direction, and combination, -as may make it the best possible substratum, stimulus, instrument, -material, and expression for and of that spiritual -personality.<a name="FNanchor_59_59" id="FNanchor_59_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_59_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> Hence, the true question here is not whether -such a type of life as we are considering exacts a serious -physical tribute or not, but whether the specifically human -effects and fruits of that life are worth that cost.</p> - -<p>No one denies that mining, or warfare, or hospital work, -both spiritual and medical, involve grave risks to life, nor that -the preparation of many chemicals is directly and inevitably -injurious to health. Yet no one thinks of abolishing such -occupations or of blaming those who follow them, and -rightly so; for instant death may and should be risked, -the slow but certain undermining of the physical health -may be laudably embarked on, if only the mind and character -are not damaged, and if the end to be attained is found<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span> -to be necessary or seriously helpful, and unattainable by -other means.</p> - -<p>The simple fact, then, of frequent and subsequent, or even -of universal and concomitant ill-health in such mystical cases, -or even the proof of this ill-health being a direct consequence -or necessary condition of that mystical life, can but push back -the debate, and simply raises the question as to the serious -value of that habit and activity. Only a decision adverse to -that serious value would constitute those facts into a condemnation -of that activity itself.</p> - -<p>And, next, it must be plain to any one endowed with an -appreciable dose of the mystical sense, and with a sufficiently -large knowledge of human nature and of religious apprehension -in the past and present,—that, if it is doubtless possible quite -erroneously to treat all men as having a considerable element -of mysticism in them, and hence to strain and spoil souls -belonging to one of the other types: it is equally possible to -starve those that possess this element in an operative degree. -Atrophy is as truly a malady as plethora.</p> - -<p>And here the question is an individual one: would that -particular temperament and psycho-physical organism congenial -to Sister Lukardis, to Catherine Fiesca Adorna, to -Marguerite Marie Alacocque, and to Isaac Hecker, have—taking -the whole existence and output together—produced -more useful work, and have apprehended and presented more -of abiding truth, had their ecstatic states or tendencies been, -if possible, absent or suppressed? Does not this type of -apprehension, this, as it were, incubation, harmonization, and -vivifying of their otherwise painfully fragmentary and heavy -impressions, stand out,—in their central, creative periods,—as -the one thoroughly appropriate means and form of their true -self-development and self-expression, and of such an apprehension -and showing forth of spiritual truth as to them,—to -them and not to you and me,—was possible? And if we are -bound to admit that, even in such cases, ecstasy appears, -psycho-physically, as a kind of second state, and that these -personalities find or regain their fullest joy and deepest -strength only in and from such a state; yet we know too that -such ecstasy is not, as in the trances of hysteria and of other -functional disorders, simply discontinuous from the ordinary, -primary state of such souls; and that,—again contrary to -those <i>maladif</i> trances,—whenever the ecstasy answers to the -tests insisted upon by the great mystics, viz. a true and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span> -valuable ethico-spiritual content and effect, it also, in the long -run, leaves the very body strengthened and improved.</p> - -<p>And if, after this, their productive period, some of these -persons end by losing their psycho-physical health, it is far -from unreasonable to suppose that the actual alternative to -those ecstasies and this break-up, would, <i>for them</i>, have been -a lifelong dreary languor and melancholy self-absorption, -somewhat after the pattern of Catherine’s last ten pre-conversion -years. Thus for her, and doubtless for most of the -spiritually considerable ecstatics, life was, taken all in all, -indefinitely happier, richer, and more fruitful in religious truth -and holiness, with the help of those ecstatic states, than it -would have been if these states had been absent or could -have been suppressed.</p> - -<p>And thirdly, here again, even from the point of view of -psycho-physical health and its protection, it is precisely the -actual practice and, as interpreted by it, the deepest sayings -of the standard Christian mystics which are being most -powerfully confirmed,—although necessarily by largely new -reasons and with important modifications in the analysis and -application of their doctrine,—by all that we have gained, -during the last forty years, in definite knowledge of the -psycho-physical regions and functions of human nature, and, -during two centuries and more, in enlargement and precision -of our religious-historical outlook.</p> - -<p>If we consider the specific health-dangers of this way, we -shall find, I think, that their roots are ever two. These -dangers, and with them the probability of delusion or at least -of spiritual barrenness, always become actual, and often acute, -the minute that we allow ourselves to attach a primary and -independent importance to the psycho-physical form and -means of these things, as against their spiritual-ethical content, -suggestions, and end; or that we take the whole man, -or at least the whole of the religious man, to consist of the -specifically mystical habits and life alone. Now the first of -these dangers has been ceaselessly exposed and fought by -all the great ethical and Christian mystics of the past, <i>e.g.</i> -St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa; and the latter has -been ever enforced by the actual practice, as social religionists, -of these same mystics, even if and when some of their -sayings, or the logical drift of their speculative system, left -insufficient room or no intrinsic necessity and function for such -things.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span></p> - -<p>(5) And everything that has happened and is happening in -the world of psychological and philosophical research, in the -world of historico-critical investigation into the past history -and modalities of religion, and in the world of our own present -religious experience and requirements, has but brought to -light fresh facts, forces, and connections, in proof both of the -right and irreplaceableness of the Mystical element in life and -religion, and of the reality and constant presence of these its -two dangers. For, as to these dangers, we now know, with -extraordinary clearness and certainty, how necessary, constant -and far-reaching is, on its phenomenal surface, the auto-suggestive, -mono-ideistic power and mechanism of the mind; yet -how easily, in some states, too much can be made of such -vivid apprehensions and quasi-sensible imagings of invisible -reality,—things admirable as means, ruinous as ends. And -we also know, with an astonishing universality of application, -how great a multiplicity in unity is necessarily presented by -every concrete object and by every mental act and emotional -state of every sane human being throughout every moment of -his waking life; and how this unity is actually constituted -and measured by the multiplicity of the materials and by the -degree of their harmonization.—Hence, not the absence of -the Mystical element, but the presence both of it and of the -other constituents of religion, will turn out to be the safeguard -of our deepest life and of its sanity, a sanity which demands -a balanced fulness of the soul’s three fundamental pairs of -activities: sensible perception and picturing memory; reflection, -speculative and analytic; and emotion and volition, -all issuing in interior and exterior acts, and these latter, again, -providing so much fresh material and occasions for renewed -action and for a growing unification in an increasing variety, -on and on.</p> - -<p>The metaphysical and faith questions, necessarily raised by -the phenomenal facts and mechanisms here considered, but -which cannot be answered at this level, will be discussed in a -later chapter. Here we can but once more point out, in conclusion, -that no amount of admitted or demonstrated auto-suggestion -or mono-ideism in the phenomenal reaches and -mechanism of the mind decides, of itself, anything whatsoever -about, and still less against, the objective truth and spiritual -value of the ultimate causes, dominant ideas, and final results -of the process; nor as to whether and how far the whole -great movement is, at bottom, occasioned and directed by the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span> -Supreme Spirit, God, working, in and through man, towards -man’s apprehension and manifestation of Himself.<a name="FNanchor_60_60" id="FNanchor_60_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_60_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a></p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span></p> - -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_X" id="CHAPTER_X"></a>CHAPTER X<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE MAIN LITERARY SOURCES OF CATHERINE’S -CONCEPTIONS</span></h3> - -<h4>INTRODUCTORY.</h4> - -<h5>1. <i>The main literary sources of Catherine’s teaching are four.</i></h5> - -<p>The main literary sources of Catherine’s conceptions can be -grouped under four heads: the New Testament, Pauline and -Joannine writings; the Christian Neo-Platonist, Areopagite -books; and the Franciscan, Jacopone da Todi’s teachings. -And here, as in all cases of such partial dependence, we have -to distinguish between the apparently accidental occasions -(her seemingly fortuitous acquaintance with these particular -writings), and the certainly necessary causes (the intrinsic -requirements of her own mind and soul, and its special -reactions under, and transformations of, these materials and -stimulations). And during this latter process this mind’s -original trend itself undergoes, in its turn, not only much -development, but even some modification. She would no -doubt owe her close knowledge of the first two sets of writings -to the Augustinian Canonesses, (her sister Limbania -amongst them,) and to their Augustinian-Pauline tradition; -her acquaintance with the third set, to her Dominican cousin; -and her intimacy with the fourth, to the Franciscans of the -Hospital. Yet only her own spiritual affinity for similar -religious states and ideals, and her already at least partial -experience of them, could ever have made these writings to -her what they actually became: direct stimulations, indeed -considerable elements and often curiously vivid expressions, -of her own immediate interior life.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Plan of the following study of these sources.</i></h5> - -<p>I shall, in this chapter, first try to draw out those characteristics -of each group, which were either specially accepted or -transformed, neglected or supplanted by her, and carefully to -note the particular nature of these her reactions and refashionings.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span> -And I shall end up by a short account of what she -and all four sets have got in common, and of what she has -brought, as a gift of her own, to that common stock which had -given her so much. And since her distinct and direct use of -the Pauline and Joannine writings is quite certain, whereas all -her knowledge of Neo-Platonism seems to have been mediated -by pseudo-Dionysius alone, and all her Franciscanism appears, -as far as literary sources go, to take its rise from Jacopone, I -shall give four divisions to her chief literary sources, and a -fifth section to the stream common to them all.<a name="FNanchor_61_61" id="FNanchor_61_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_61_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a></p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">The Pauline Writings: the Two Sources of -their Pre-Conversion Assumptions; Catherine’s -Preponderant Attitude towards each Position.</span></h4> - -<p>It is well that the chronological order requires us to begin -with St. Paul, for he is probably, if not the most extensive, -yet the most intense of all these influences upon Catherine’s -mind. I here take the points of his experience and teaching -which thus concern us in the probable order of their development -in the Apostle’s own consciousness,—his pre-conversion -assumptions and positions, first and the convictions gained -at and after his conversion or clarified last;<a name="FNanchor_62_62" id="FNanchor_62_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_62_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> and under each -heading I shall group together, once for all, the chief reactions -of Catherine’s religious consciousness.</p> - -<p>Now those Pauline pre-conversion assumptions and positions -come from two chief sources—Palestinian, Rabbinical Judaism, -(for he was the disciple of the Pharisee, Gamaliel, at Jerusalem), -and a Hellenistic religiousness closely akin to, though not -derived from, Philo, (for he had been born in the intensely -Hellenistic Cilician city Tarsus, at that time a most important -seat of Greek learning in general and of the Stoic -philosophy in particular). And we shall find that Catherine<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span> -appropriates especially this, his Hellenistic element; indeed, -that at times she sympathizes rather with the still more -intensely Hellenistic attitude exemplified by Philo, than -with the limitations introduced by St. Paul.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>St. Paul’s Anthropology in general.</i></h5> - -<p>If we take the Pauline Anthropology first, we at once -come upon a profoundly dualistic attitude.</p> - -<p>(1) There is, in general, “the outer” and “the inner” man, -2 Cor. iv, 16; and the latter is not the exclusive privilege -of the redeemed,—the contrast is that between the merely -natural individual and the moral personality. And this contrast, -foreign to the ancient Hebrews, is first worked out, with -clear consciousness, by Plato, who, <i>e.g.</i>, in his <i>Banquet</i>, causes -one of the characters to say: “Socrates has thrown this -Silenus-like form around himself externally, as in the case of -those Silenus-statues which enclose a statuette of Apollo; but, -when he is opened, how full is he found to be of temperance -within”; and who treats this contrast as typical of the dualism -inherent to all human life here on earth.<a name="FNanchor_63_63" id="FNanchor_63_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_63_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a>—This contrast -exists throughout Catherine’s teaching as regards the thing -itself, although her terms are different. She has, for reasons -which will appear presently, no one constant term for “the -inner man,” but “the outer man” is continuously styled “la -umanità.”</p> - -<p>(2) The “outer man” consists for St. Paul of the body’s earthly -material, “the flesh”; and of the animating principle of the -flesh, “the psyche,” which is inseparably connected with that -flesh, and which dies for good and all at the death of the -latter; whereas the form of “the body” is capable of resuscitation, -and is then filled out by a finer material, “glory.”<a name="FNanchor_64_64" id="FNanchor_64_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_64_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a>—Here -Catherine has no precise or constant word for the -“psyche”; her “umanità” generally stands for the “psyche” -<i>plus</i> body and flesh, all in one; and her “anima” practically -always means part or the whole of “the inner man,” and -mostly stands for “mind.” And there is no occasion for her -to reflect upon any distinction between the form and the -matter of the body, since she nowhere directly busies herself -with the resurrection.</p> - -<p>The “inner man” consists for St. Paul in the Mind, the -Heart, and the Conscience. The Mind (<i>noûs</i>), corresponding -roughly to our theoretical and practical Reason, has a certain -tendency towards God:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span> “The invisible things of God are -seen by the mind in the works of creation,” Rom. i, 20; and -there is “a law of the mind” which is fought by “the law of -sin,” Rom. vii, 23; and this, although there is also a “mind -of the flesh,” Col. ii, 18; “a reprobate mind,” Rom. i, 28; -and a “renovation of the mind,” Rom. xii, 2.—Catherine -clings throughout most closely to the Pauline use of the term, -as far as that use is favourable: note how she perceives -invisible things “colla mente mia.”</p> - -<p>The Heart is even more accessible to the divine influence,—at -least, it is to it that God gives “the first fruits of the Spirit” -and “the Spirit of His Son, crying Abba, Father,” Gal. iv, 6; -2 Cor. i, 22. As an organ of immediate perception it is so -parallel to the Mind, that we can hear of “eyes of the heart”; -yet it is also the seat of feeling, of will, and of moral consciousness, -Eph. i, 18; 2 Cor. ii, 4; 1 Cor. iv, 5; Rom. ii, 15. It -can stand for the inner life generally; or, like the Mind, it -can become darkened and impenitent; whilst again, over the -heart God’s love is poured out, God’s peace keeps guard, and -we believe with the heart, 1 Cor. xiv, 25; Rom. i, 21; ii, 5; -v, 5; Phil. iv, 7; Rom. x, 9.—All this again, as far as it is -favourable, is closely followed by Catherine; indeed the persistence -with which she comes back to certain effects wrought -upon her heart by the Spirit, Christ,—effects which some of -her followers readily interpreted as so many physical miracles,—was -no doubt occasioned or stimulated by 2 Cor. iii, 3, “Be -ye an epistle of Christ, written by the Spirit of the living -God … upon the fleshly tables of the heart.”</p> - -<p>And Conscience, “Syneidēsis”—that late Greek word introduced -by St. Paul as a technical term into the Christian -vocabulary—includes our “conscience,” but is as comprehensive -as our “consciousness.”—Catherine practically never -uses the term: no doubt because, in the narrower of the two -senses which had become the ordinary one, it was too -predominantly ethical to satisfy her overwhelmingly religious -preoccupations.</p> - -<p>(3) Now, with regard to this whole dualism of the “outer” -and the “inner man,” its application to the resurrection of -the body in St. Paul and in St. Catherine shall occupy us in -connection with her Eschatology; here I would but indicate -the two Pauline moods or attitudes towards the earthly body, -and Catherine’s continuous reproduction of but one of these. -For his magnificent conception of the Christian society, -in which each person, by a different specific gift and duty,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span> -co-operates towards the production of an organic whole, a whole -which in return develops and dignifies those its constituents, -is worked out by means of the image of the human -earthly body, in which each member is a necessary part -and constituent of the complete organism, which is greater -than, and which gives full dignity to, each and all these its -factors (1 Cor. xii). And he thus, in his most deliberate and -systematic mood, shows very clearly how deeply he has -realized the dignity of the human body, as the instrument -both for the development of the soul itself and for the work -of that soul in and upon the visible world.</p> - -<p>But in his other mood, which remains secondary and -sporadic throughout his writings, his attitude is acutely -dualistic. His one direct expression of it occurs in 2 Cor. -v, 1-4: “For we know that, if our earthly house of this tent -be dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made -with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this also we groan, -desiring to be clothed upon with our habitation that is from -heaven. We who are in this tabernacle do groan, being -burthened.” Now this passage is undoubtedly modelled by -St. Paul upon the Book of Wisdom, ix, 15: “For the corruptible -body is a load upon the soul, and the earthly -habitation presseth down the mind that museth upon many -things.” And this latter saying again is as certainly formed -upon Plato (<i>Phaedo</i>, 81 <i>c</i>): “It behoves us to think of the -body as oppressive and heavy and earthlike and visible. And -hence the soul, being of such a nature as we have seen, when -possessing such a body, is both burthened and dragged down -again into the visible world.”<a name="FNanchor_65_65" id="FNanchor_65_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_65_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> And it is this conception of -the Hellenic Athenian Plato (about 380 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>) which, passing -through the Hellenistic Alexandrian Jewish Wisdom-writer -(80 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>?) and then through the Hellenistically tinctured ex-Rabbi, -Paul of Tarsus (52 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), still powerfully, indeed all but -continuously, influences the mind of the Genoese Christian -Catherine, especially during the years from <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 1496 to -1510.</p> - -<p>Catherine’s still more pessimistic figure of the body as a -prison-house and furnace of purification for the soul, is no -doubt the resultant of suggestions received, probably in part -through intermediary literature, from the following three<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span> -passages:—(1) Plato, in his <i>Cratylus</i> (400 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>), makes Socrates -say: “Some declare that the body (<i>sōma</i>) is the grave (<i>sēma</i>) -of the soul, as she finds herself at present. The Orphite -poets seem to have invented the appellation: they held that -the soul is thus paying the penalty of sin, and that the body -is an enclosure which may be likened to a prison, in which -the soul is enclosed until the penalty is paid.” (2) St. -Matt. v, 25, 26, gives Our Lord’s words: “Be thou reconciled -with thine adversary whilst he is still with thee on -the way … lest the Judge hand thee over to the prison-warder, -and thou be cast into prison.… Thou shalt not go -forth thence, until thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.” -And (3) St. Paul declares, 1 Cor. iii, 15: “Every man’s work -shall be tested by fire. If a man’s work be burnt, he shall -suffer loss; yet he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.” -These three passages combined will readily suggest, to a soul -thirsting for purification and possessed of an extremely sensitive -psycho-physical organization with its attendant liability -to fever heats, the picture of the body as a flame-full prison-house,—a -purgatory of the soul.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>St. Paul’s conception of “Spirit.”</i></h5> - -<p>A very difficult complication and varying element is -introduced into St. Paul’s Anthropology by the term into -which he has poured all that is most original, deepest, most -deliberate and abiding in his teaching,—the Spirit, “Pneuma.” -For somewhat as he uses the term “Sarx,” the flesh, both in its -loose popular signification of “mankind in general”; and in -a precise, technical sense of “the matter which composes the -earthly body”; so also he has, occasionally, a loose popular use -of the term “spirit,” when it figures as but a fourth parallel -to “mind,” “heart,” and “conscience”; and, usually, a very -strict and technical use of it, when it designates the Spirit, -God Himself.</p> - -<p>(1) Now it is precisely in the latter case that his doctrine -attains its fullest depth and its greatest difficulty. For here -the Spirit, the Pneuma, is, strictly speaking, only one—the -Spirit of God, God Himself, in His action either outside or -inside the human mind, Noûs. And in such passages of St. -Paul, where man seems to possess a distinct pneuma of his -own, by far the greater number only apparently contradict -this doctrine. For in some, so in 1 Cor. ii, the context is -dominated by a comparison between the divine and the -human consciousness, so that, in v. 11, man’s Noûs is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span> -designated Pneuma, and in v. 16, and Rom. xi, 34, the Lord’s -Pneuma is called His Noûs. And the “spirit of the world” -contrasted here, in v. 11, with the “Spirit of God,” is a still -further deliberate laxity of expression, similar to that of -Satan as “the God of this world,” 2 Cor. iv, 4. In other -passages,—so Rom. viii, 16; i, 9; viii, 10, and even in 1 Cor. -v, 5 (the “spirit” of the incestuous Corinthian which is to be -saved),—we seem to have “spirit” either as the mind in so far -as the object of the Spirit’s communications, or as the mind -transformed by the Spirit’s influence. And if we can hear of -a “defilement of the spirit,” 2 Cor. vii, 1, we are also told -that we can forget the fact of the body being the temple of -the holy Spirit, 1 Cor. vi, 19; and that this temple’s profanation -“grieves the holy Spirit,” Eph. iv, 30. Very few, sporadic, -and short passages remain in which “the spirit of man” -cannot clearly be shown to have a deliberately derivative -sense.</p> - -<p>Catherine, in this great matter, completely follows St. Paul. -For she too has loosely-knit moods and passages, in which -“spirito” appears as a natural endowment of her own, -parallel to, or identical with, the “mente.” But when -speaking strictly, and in her intense moods, she means by -“spirito,” the Spirit, Christ, Love, God, a Power which, though -in its nature profoundly distinct and different from her entire -self-seeking self, can and does come to dwell within, and to -supplant, this self. Indeed her highly characteristic saying, -“my Me is God,” with her own explanations of it, expresses, -if pressed, even more than this. In these moods, the term -“mente” is usually absent, just as in St. Paul.</p> - -<p>Now in his formally doctrinal <i>Loci</i>, St. Paul defines the -Divine Pneuma and the human sarx, not merely as ontologically -contrary substances, but as keenly conflicting, ethically -contradictory principles. An anti-spiritual power, lust, -possesses the flesh and the whole outer man, whilst, in an -indefinitely higher degree and manner, the Spirit, which finds -an echo in the mind, the inner man, is a spontaneous, counter-working -force; and these two energies fight out the battle in -man, and for his complete domination, Rom. vi, 12-14; vii, -22, 23; viii, 4-13. And this dualistic conception is in close -affinity to all that was noblest in the Hellenistic world of St. -Paul’s own day; but is in marked contrast to the pre-exilic, -specifically Jewish Old Testament view, where we have but -the contrast between the visible and transitory, and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span> -Invisible and Eternal; and the consciousness of the weakness -and fallibility of “flesh and blood.” And this latter is the -temper of mind that dominates the Synoptic Gospels: “The -spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak”; and “Father, -forgive them, for they know not what they do,” are here the -divinely serene and infinitely fruitful leading notes.—And -Catherine, on this point, is habitually on the Synoptist side: -man is, for her, far more weak and ignorant than forcibly and -deliberately wicked. Yet her detailed intensity towards the -successive cloaks of self-love is still, as it were, a shadow and -echo of the fierce, and far more massive, flesh-and-spirit -struggle in St. Paul.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>The Angry and the Loving God.</i></h5> - -<p>And, as against the intense wickedness of man, we find in -St. Paul an emphatic insistence—although this is directly -derived from the Old Testament and Rabbinical tradition—upon -the anger and indignation of God, Rom. ii, 8, and -frequently.—Here Catherine is in explicit contrast with him, -in so far as the anger would be held to stand for an emotion -not proceeding from love and not ameliorative in its aim and -operation. This attitude sprang no doubt, in part, from the -strong influence upon her of the Dionysian teaching concerning -the negative character of evil; possibly still more from her -continuous pondering of the text, “As a father hath compassion -upon his children, so hath the Lord compassion on -them that fear Him; for He knoweth our frame, He remembereth -that we are dust,” Ps. ciii, 13, 14,—where she dwells -upon the fact that we are all His children rather than upon -the fact that we do not all fear Him; but certainly, most of -all, from her habitual dwelling upon the other side of St. Paul’s -teaching, that concerning the Love of God.</p> - -<p>Now the depth and glow of Paul’s faith and love goes -clearly back to his conversion, an event which colours and -influences all his feeling and teaching for some thirty-four -years, up to the end. And similarly Catherine’s conversion-experience -has been found by us to determine the sequence -and all the chief points of her Purgatorial teaching, some -thirty-seven years after that supreme event.</p> - -<p>Already Philo had, under Platonic influence, believed in an -Ideal Man, a Heavenly Man; had identified him with the -Logos, the Word or Wisdom of God; and had held him to be -in some way ethereal and luminous,—never arriving at either -a definitely personal or a simply impersonal conception of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span> -this at one time intermediate Being, at another time this -supreme attribute of God. St. Paul, under the profound -impression of the Historic Christ and the great experience on -the road to Damascus, perceives the Risen, Heavenly Jesus as -possessed of a luminous, ethereal body, a body of “glory,” -Acts xxii, 11. And this Christ is, for St. Paul, identical with -“the Spirit”: “the Lord is the Spirit,” 2 Cor. iii, 17; and “to -be in Christ” and “Christ is in us” are parallel terms to those -of “to be in the Spirit” and “the Spirit is within us” respectively. -In all four cases we get Christ or the Spirit conceived -as an element, as it were an ocean of ethereal light, in which -souls are plunged and which penetrates them. In Catherine -we have, at her conversion, this same perception and conception -of Spirit as an ethereal light, and of Christ as Spirit; -and up to the end she more and more appears to herself to -bathe, to be submerged in, an ocean of light, which, at the -same time, fills her within and penetrates her through and -through.</p> - -<p>But again, and specially since his conversion, St. Paul -thinks of God as loving, as Love, and this conception henceforth -largely supplants the Old Testament conception of the -angry God. This loving God is chiefly manifested through -the loving Christ: indeed the love of Christ and the love of -God are the same thing. And this Christ-Love dwells within -us.<a name="FNanchor_66_66" id="FNanchor_66_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_66_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> And Catherine, since her mind has perceived Love to -be the central character of God, and has adopted fire as love’s -fullest image, cannot but hold,—God and Love and Christ -and Spirit being all one and the same thing,—that Christ-Spirit-Fire -is in her and she in It. The yellow light-image, -which all but alone typifies God’s friendliness in the Bible, is -thus turned into a red fire-image. And yet this latter in so -far retains with Catherine something of its older connotation -of anger, that the Fire and Heat appear in her teaching more -as symbols of the suffering caused by the opposition of man’s -at least partial impurity to the Spirit, Christ, Love, God, and -of the pain attendant upon that Spirit’s action, even where it -can still purify; whereas the Light and Illumination mostly -express the peaceful penetration of man’s spirit by God’s -Spirit, and the blissful gain accruing from such penetration.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span></p> - -<h5>4. <i>The Risen Christ and the Heavenly Adam.</i></h5> - -<p>St. Paul dwells continuously upon the post-earthly, the -Risen Christ, and upon Him in His identity with the pre-earthly, -the Heavenly Man: so that the historical Jesus tends -to become, all but for the final acts in the Supper-room and -upon the Cross, a transitory episode;—a super-earthly biography -all but supplants the earthly one, since His death and -resurrection and their immediate contexts are all but the -only two events dwelt upon, and form but the two constituents -of one inseparable whole.—Here Catherine is deeply Pauline -in her striking non-occupation with the details of the earthly -life (the scene with the Woman at the Well being the single -exception), and in her continuous insistence upon Christ as -the life-giving Spirit. Indeed, even the death is strangely -absent. There is but the one doubtful contrary instance, in -any case a quite early and sporadic one, of the Vision of the -Bleeding Christ. The fact is that, in her teaching, the self-donation -of God in general, in His mysterious love for each -individual soul, and of Christ in particular, in His Eucharistic -presence as our daily food, take all their special depth of -tenderness from her vivid realization of the whole teaching, -temper, life, and death of Jesus Christ; and that teaching -derives its profundity of feeling only from all this latter -complexus of facts and convictions.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Reconciliation, Justification, Sanctification.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) St. Paul has two lines of thought concerning Reconciliation. -In the objective, juridical, more Judaic conception, the -attention is concentrated on the one moment of Christ’s -death, and the consequences appear as though instantaneous -and automatic; in the other, the subjective, ethical, more -Hellenistic conception, the attention is spread over the whole -action of the Christ’s incarnational self-humiliation, and the -consequences are realized only if and when we strive to -imitate Him,—they are a voluntary and continuous process. -Catherine’s fundamental conversion-experience and all her -later teachings attach her Reconciliation to the entire act of -ceaseless Divine “ecstasy,” self-humiliation, and redemptive -immanence in Man, of which the whole earthly life and death -of Christ are the centre and culmination; but though the -human soul’s corresponding action is conceived as continuous, -once it has begun, she loves to dwell upon this whole action -as itself the gift of God and the consequence of His prevenient -act.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span></p> - -<p>(2) As to Justification, we have again, in St. Paul, a preponderatingly -Jewish juridical conception of adoption, in -which a purely vicarious justice and imputed righteousness -seem to be taught; and an ethical conception of immanent -justice, based on his own experience and expressed by means -of Hellenistic forms, according to which “the love of God is -poured out in our hearts,” Rom. v, 5. And he often insists -strenuously upon excluding every human merit from the -moment and act of justification, insisting upon its being a -“free gift” of God.—Catherine absorbs herself in the second, -ethical conception, and certainly understands this love of God -as primarily God’s, the Spirit’s, Christ’s love, as Love Itself -poured out in our hearts; and she often breaks out into angry -protests against the very suggestion of any act, or part of an -act, dear to God, proceeding from her natural or separate self, -indeed, if we press her expressions, from herself at all.</p> - -<p>(3) As to Sanctification, St. Paul has three couples of contrasted -conceptions. The first couple conceives the Spirit, -either Old Testament-wise, as manifesting and accrediting -Itself in extraordinary, sudden, sporadic, miraculous gifts -and doings—<i>e.g.</i> in ecstatic speaking with tongues; or,—and -this is the more frequent and the decisive conception,—as an -abiding, equable penetration and spiritual reformation of its -recipient. Here the faithful “live and walk in the spirit,” are -“driven by the spirit,” “serve God in the spirit,” are “temples -of the Spirit,” Gal. v, 25; Rom. viii, 14; vii, 6; 1 Cor. vi, 19: -the Spirit has become the creative source of a supernatural -character-building.<a name="FNanchor_67_67" id="FNanchor_67_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_67_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a>—Here Catherine, in contrast to most of -her friends, who are wedded to the first view, is strongly -attached to the second view, perhaps the deepest of St. Paul’s -conceptions.</p> - -<p>The second couple conceives Sanctification either juridically, -and moves dramatically from act to act,—the Sacrifice on the -Cross and the Resurrection of the Son of God, the sentence -of Justification and the Adoption as sons of God; or ethically, -and presupposes everywhere continuous processes,—beginning -with the reception of the Spirit, and ending with “the Lord -of the Spirit.”—Here Catherine has curiously little of the -dramatic and prominently personal conception: only in the -imperfect soul’s acutely painful moment, of standing before -and seeing God immediately after death, do we get one link<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span> -in this chain, in a somewhat modified form. For the rest, -the ethical and continuous conception is present practically -throughout her teaching, but in a curious, apparently paradoxical -form, to be noticed in a minute.</p> - -<p>And the third couple either treats Sanctification as, at each -moment of its actual presence, practically infallible and complete: -“We who have died to sin, how shall we further live -in it?” “Freed from sin, ye have become the servants of -Justice”; “now we are loosed from the law of death, so as to -serve in newness of spirit”; “those who are according to the -flesh, mind the things of the flesh; but they that are according -to the Spirit, mind the things of the Spirit,” Rom. vi, 2, 18; -vii, 6; viii, 5. Or it considers Sanctification as only approximately -complete, so long as man has to live here below, not -only in the Spirit, Rom. viii, 9, but also in the flesh, Gal. ii, 20. -The faithful have indeed crucified the flesh once for all, -Gal. v, 24: yet they have continually to mortify their members -anew, Col. iii, 5, and by the Spirit to destroy the works of the -flesh, Rom. viii, 13. The “fear of the Lord,” “of God,” does -not cease to be a motive for the sanctified, 2 Cor. v, 11; vii, 1. -To “walk in the Spirit,” “in the light,” has to be insisted on -(1 Thess. v, 4-8; Rom. xiii, 11-14; 2 Cor. vi, 14), as long as the -eternal day has not yet arisen for us. And even in Romans, -chapter vi, we find admonitions, vv. 12, 13, 19, which, if we press -the other conception, are quite superfluous.<a name="FNanchor_68_68" id="FNanchor_68_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_68_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a></p> - -<p>And here Catherine, in her intense sympathy with each of -these contrasted conceptions, offers us a combination of both -in a state of unstable equilibrium and delicate tension. I take -it that it is not her immensely impulsive and impatient -temperament, nor survivals of the Old Testament idea as to -instantaneousness being the special characteristic of divine -action, but her deep and noble sense of the givenness and -pure grace of religion, and of God’s omnipotence being, if -possible, exceeded only by His overflowing, self-communicative -love, which chiefly determine her curious presentation and -emotional experience of spiritual growth and life as a movement -composed of sudden shiftings upwards, with long, -apparently complete pauses in between. For here this form -(of so many instants, of which each is complete in itself) stands -for her as the least inadequate symbol, as a kind of shattered -mirror, not of time at all, but of eternity; whilst the succession -and difference between these instants indicates a growth in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span> -the apprehending soul, which has, in reality, been proceeding -also in between these instants and not only during them. -And this remarkable scheme presents her conviction that, -in principle, the work of the all-powerful, all-loving Spirit -cannot, of itself, be other than final and complete, and yet -that, as a matter of fact, it never is so, in weak, self-deceptive, -and variously resisting man, but ever turns out to require a -fresh and deeper application. And this succession of sudden -jerks onwards and upwards, after long, apparently complete -pauses between them, gives to her fundamentally ethical and -continuous conception something of the look of the forensic, -dramatic series, with its separate acts,—a series which would -otherwise be all but unrepresented in her picture of the soul’s -life on this side of death and of its life (immediately after its -vivid sight of God and itself, and its act of free-election) in -the Beyond.</p> - -<h5>6. <i>Pauline Social Ethics.</i></h5> - -<p>As to Social Ethics, St. Paul’s worldward movement is -strongly represented in Catherine’s teaching. Her great -sayings as to God being servable not only in the married -state, but in a camp of (mercenary) soldiers; and as to her -determination violently to appropriate the monk’s cowl, -should this his state be necessary to the attainment of the -highest love of God, are full of the tone of Rom. xiv, 14, -20, “nothing is common in itself, but to him who considereth -anything to be common, to him it is common,”—“all things -are clean”; and of 1 Cor. x, 26, 28, “the earth is the Lord’s, -and the fulness thereof.” And her sense of her soul’s positive -relation to nature, <i>e.g.</i> trees, was no doubt in part awakened -by that striking passage, Rom. viii, 19, “the expectation of -the creature awaiteth the revelation of the sons of God; for -the creature was made subject to vanity not willingly.”</p> - -<p>On the other hand, it would be impossible confidently to -identify her own attitude concerning marriage with that of -St. Paul, since, as we know, her peculiar health and her -unhappiness with Giuliano make it impossible to speak here -with any certainty of the mature woman’s deliberate judgment -concerning continence and marriage. Yet her impulsive -protestation, in the scene with the monk, against any idea of -being debarred by her state from as perfect a love of God as -his,—whilst, of course, not in contradiction with the Pauline -and generally Catholic positions in the matter, seems to -imply an emotional attitude somewhat different from that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span> -of some of the Apostle’s sayings. Indeed, in her whole -general and unconscious position as to how a woman should -hold herself in religious things it is interesting to note the -absence of all influence from those Pauline sayings which, -herein like Philo (and indeed the whole ancient world) treat -man alone as “the (direct) image and glory (reflex) of God,” -and the woman as but “the glory (reflex) of the man,” 1 Cor. -xi, 7. Everywhere she appears full, on the contrary, of St. -Paul’s other (more characteristic and deliberate) strain, according -to which, as there is “neither Jew nor Gentile, bond -nor free” before God, so “neither is the man without the -woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord,” 1 Cor. -xi, 11.—And in social matters generally, Catherine’s convert -life and practice shows, in the active mortifications of its first -penitential part, in her persistent great aloofness from all -things of sense as regards her own gratification, and in the -ecstasies and love of solitude which marked the zenith of her -power, a close sympathy with, and no doubt in part a direct -imitation of, St. Paul’s Arabian retirement, chastisement of -his body, and lonely concentration upon rapt communion -with God. Yet she as strongly exemplifies St. Paul’s other, -the outward movement, the love-impelled, whole-hearted -service of the poorest, world-forgotten, sick and sorrowing -brethren. And the whole resultant rhythmic life has got -such fine spontaneity, emotional and efficacious fulness, -and expansive joy about it, as to suggest at once those -unfading teachings of St. Paul which had so largely occasioned -it,—those hymns in praise of that love “which minds not high -things but consenteth to the humble,” Rom. xii, 16; “becomes -all things to all men,” 1 Cor. ix, 22; “weeps with those that -weep and rejoices with those that rejoice,” <i>ibid.</i> xii, 26; and -which, as the twin love of God and man, is not only the chief -member of the central ethical triad, but, already here below, -itself becomes the subject which exercises the other two -virtues, for it is “love” that “believeth all things, hopeth all -things,” even before that eternity in which love alone will -never vanish away, <i>ibid.</i> xiii, 7, 8. Here Catherine with Paul -triumphs completely over time: their actions and teaching -are as completely fresh now, after well-nigh nineteen and -four centuries, as when they first experienced, willed, and -uttered them.</p> - -<h5>7. <i>Sacramental Teachings.</i></h5> - -<p>In Sacramental matters it is interesting to note St. Pau<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span>l’s -close correlation of Baptism and the Holy Eucharist: “All -(our fathers) were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in -the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the -same spiritual drink,” 1 Cor. x, 3; “in one Spirit we have all -been baptized into one body, and we have all been made to -drink one Spirit,” Christ, His blood, <i>ibid.</i> xii, 13. And -Catherine is influenced by these passages, when she represents -the soul as hungering for, and drowning itself in, the ocean of -spiritual sustenance which is Love, Christ, God: but she -attaches the similes, which are distributed by St. Paul among -the two Rites, to the Holy Eucharist alone. Baptism had -been a grown man’s deliberate act in Paul’s case,—an act -immediately subsequent to, and directly expressive of, his -conversion, the culminating experience of his life; and, as -a great Church organizer, he could not but dwell with an -equal insistence upon the two chief Sacraments.</p> - -<p>Catherine had received baptism as an unconscious infant, -and the event lay far back in that pre-conversion time, which -was all but completely ousted from her memory by the great -experience of some twenty-five years later. And in the latter -experience it was (more or less from the first and soon -all but exclusively) the sense of a divine encirclement and -sustenance, of an addition of love, rather than a consciousness -of the subtraction of sins or of a divine purification, that -possessed her. In her late, though profoundly characteristic -Purgatorial teaching, the soul again plunges into an ocean; -but now, since the soul is rather defiled than hungry, and wills -rather to be purified than to be fed, this plunge is indeed a -kind of Baptism by Immersion. Yet we have no more the -symbol of water, for the long state and effects to which that -swift act leads, but we have, instead, fire and light, and, in -one place, once again bread and the hunger for bread. And -this is no doubt because, in these Purgatorial picturings, it is -her conversion-experience of love under the symbols of light -and of fire, and her forty years of daily hungering for the Holy -Eucharist and Love Incarnate, which furnish the emotional -colours and the intellectual outlines.</p> - -<h5>8. <i>Eschatological matters.</i></h5> - -<p>In Eschatological matters the main points of contact and -of contrast appear to be four; and three of the differences are -occasioned by St. Paul’s preoccupation with Christ’s Second -Coming, with the Resurrection of the body, and with the -General Judgment, mostly as three events in close temporal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span> -correlation, and likely to occur soon; whilst Catherine -abstracts entirely from all three.</p> - -<p>(1) Thus St. Paul is naturally busy with the question as to -the Time when he shall be with Christ. In 1 Thess. iv, 15, he -speaks of “we who are now living, who have been left for the -coming of the Lord,” <i>i.e.</i> he expects this event during his own -lifetime; whilst in Phil. i, 23, he “desires to be dissolved and -to be with Christ,” <i>i.e.</i> he has ceased confidently to expect this -coming before his own death. But Catherine dwells exclusively, -with this latter conception, upon the moment of death, -as that when the soul shall see, and be finally confirmed in its -union with, Love, Christ, God; for into her earthly lifetime -Love, Christ, God, can and do come, but invisibly, and she -may still lose full union with them for ever.</p> - -<p>(2) As to the Place, it is notoriously obscure whether St. -Paul thinks of it, as do the Old Testament and the -Apocalypse, as the renovated earth, or as the sky, or as the -intervening space. The risen faithful who “shall be caught -in the clouds to meet Christ,” 1 Thess. iv, 16, seem clearly -to be meeting Him, in mid-air, as He descends upon earth; -and “Jerusalem above,” Gal. iv, 26, may well, as in Apoc. iii, -12; xxi, 2, be conceived as destined to come down upon -earth. But Catherine, though she constantly talks of Heaven, -Purgatory, Hell as “places,” makes it plain that such “places” -are for her but vivid symbols for states of soul. God Himself -repeatedly appears in her sayings as “the soul’s place”; and -it is this “place,” the soul’s true spiritual birthplace and home, -which, ever identical and bliss-conferring in itself, is variously -experienced by the soul, in exact accordance with its dispositions,—as -that profoundly painful, or that joyfully distressing, -or that supremely blissful “place” which respectively we -call Hell, and Purgatory, and Heaven.</p> - -<p>(3) As to the Body, we have already noted St. Paul’s doctrine, -intermediate between the Palestinian and Alexandrian Jewish -teaching, that it will rise indeed, but composed henceforth of -“glory” and no more of “flesh.” It is this his requirement -of a body, however spiritual, which underlies his anxiety to -be “found clothed, not naked,” at and after death, 2 Cor. v, 3. -Indeed, in this whole passage, v, 1-4, “our earthly house of -this habitation,” and “a building of God not made with -hands,” no doubt mean, respectively, the present body of flesh -and the future body of glory; just as the various, highly complex, -conceptions of “clothed,” “unclothed,”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span> “clothed upon,” -refer to the different conditions of the soul with a body of -flesh, without a body at all, and with a body of glory.—Now -this passage, owing to its extreme complication and abstruseness -of doctrine, has come down to us in texts and versions of -every conceivable form; and this uncertainty has helped -Catherine towards her very free utilization of it. For she -not only, as ever, simply ignores all questions of a risen body, -and transfers the concept of a luminous ethereal substance -from the body to the soul itself, and refers the “nakedness,” -“unclothing,” “clothing,” and “clothing upon” to conditions -obtaining, not between the soul and the body, but between -the soul and God; but she also, in most cases, takes the -nakedness as the desirable state, since typical of the soul’s -faithful self-exposure to the all-purifying rays of God’s light -and fire, and interprets the “unclothing” as the penitential -stripping from off itself of those pretences and corrupt -incrustations which prevent God’s blissful action upon it.</p> - -<p>(4) And, finally, as to the Judgment, we have in St. Paul -a double current,—the inherited Judaistic conception of a -forensic retribution; Christ, the divine Judge, externally -applying such and such statutory rewards and punishments to -such and such good and evil deeds,—so in Rom. ii, 6-10; and -the experimental conception, helped on to articulation by Hellenistic -influences, of the bodily resurrection and man’s whole -final destiny as the necessary resultant and manifestation of -an internal process, the presence of the Spirit and of the -power of God,—so in the later parts of Romans, in Gal. vi, 8, -and in 1 Cor. vi, 14; 2 Cor. xiii, 4.—Among Catherine’s sayings -also we find some passages—but these the less characteristic -and mostly of doubtful authenticity,—where reward and -punishment, indeed the three “places” themselves, appear as -so many separate institutions of God, which get externally -applied to certain good and evil deeds. But these are completely -overshadowed in number, sure authenticity, emotional -intensity, and organic connection with her other teachings, by -sayings of the second type, where the soul’s fate is but the -necessary consequence of its own deliberate choice and gradually -formed dispositions, the result, inseparable since the first -from its self-identification with this or that of the various -possible will-attitudes towards God.</p> - -<p>(5) We can then sum up the main points of contact and of -difference between Paul and Catherine, by saying that, in -both cases, everything leads up to, or looks back upon, a great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span> -culminating, directly personal experience of shortest clock-time -duration, whence all their doctrine, wherever emphatic, is -but an attempt to articulate and universalize this original -experience; and that if in Paul there remains more of explicit -occupation with the last great events of the earthly life of -Jesus, yet in both there is the same insistence upon the life-giving -Spirit, the eternal Christ, manifesting His inexhaustible -power in the transformation of souls, on and on, here and -now, into the likeness of Himself.</p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">The Joannine Writings.</span></h4> - -<p>On moving now from the Pauline to the Joannine writings, -we shall find that Catherine’s obligations to these -latter are but rarely as deep, yet that they cover a wider reach -of ideas and images. I take this fresh source of influence -under the double heading of the general relations of the -Joannine teaching to other, previous or contemporary, conceptions; -and of this same teaching considered in itself.<a name="FNanchor_69_69" id="FNanchor_69_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_69_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a></p> - -<h5>1. <i>Joannine teaching contrasted with other systems.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) As to the general relations towards other positions, we -get here, towards Judaism and Paganism, an emphatic insistence -upon the novelty and independence of Christianity as -regards not only Paganism, but even the previous Judaism, -“The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by -Jesus Christ,” i, 17; and upon the Logos, Christ, as “the -Light that enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world,” -“unto his own,” <i>i.e.</i> men in general; for this Light “was in the -world, and the world was made by Him,” i, 9-11. There is -thus a divinely-implanted, innate tendency towards this light, -extant in man prior to the explicit act of faith, and operative -outside of the Christian body: “Every man who is from the -truth, heareth my voice,” xviii, 37: “he who doeth the truth, -cometh to the light,” in, 21: “begotten,” as he is, not of man -but “of God,” i, 13; 1 John iii, 9. And thus Samaritans, -Greeks, and Heathens act and speak in the best dispositions, -iv, 42; xii, 20-24; x, 16; whilst such terms and sayings as -“the Saviour of the World,” “God so loved the world,” iv, 42,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span> -iii, 16, are the most universalistic declarations to be found in -the New Testament.—And this current dominates the whole -of Catherine’s temper and teaching: this certainty as to the -innate affinity of every human soul to the Light, Love, Christ, -God, gives a tone of exultation to the musings of this otherwise -melancholy woman. Whereas the Joannine passages of -a contrasting exclusiveness and even fierceness of tone, such -as “all they that came before Me, were thieves and robbers,” -x, 8; “ye are from your father, the devil,” viii, 44; “ye shall -die in your sins,” viii, 21; “your sin remains,” ix, 41, are -without any parallel among Catherine’s sayings. Indeed it -is plain that Catherine, whilst as sure as the Evangelist that -all man’s goodness comes from God, nowhere, except in her -own case, finds man’s evil to be diabolic in character.</p> - -<p>(2) With regard to Paulinism, the Joannine writings give -us a continuation and extension of the representation of the -soul’s mystical union with Christ, as a local abiding in the -element Christ. Indeed it is in these writings that we find the -terms “to abide in” the light, 1 John ii, 10, in God, 1 John iv, -13, in Christ, 1 John ii, 6, 24, 27, iii, 6, 24, and in His love, -John xv, 9, 1 John iv, 16; the corresponding expressions, -“God abideth in us,” 1 John iv, 12, 16, “Christ abideth in -us,” 1 John iii, 24, and “love abideth in us,” 1 John iv, 16; -the two immanences coupled together, where the communicant -“abideth in Me and I in him,” vi, 56, and where -the members of His mystical body are bidden to “abide in -Me and I in you,” xv, 4; and the supreme pattern of all these -interpenetrations, “I am in the Father, and the Father is in -Me,” xiv, 10.—And it is from here that Catherine primarily -gets the literary suggestions for her images of the soul -plunged into, and filled by, an ocean of Light, Love, Christ, -God; and again from here, more than from St. Paul, she -gets her favourite term μένειν (It. <i>restare</i>), around which are -grouped, in her mind, most of the quietistic-sounding elements -of her teaching.</p> - -<p>(3) As to the points of contact between the Joannine -teaching and Alexandrianism, we find that three are vividly -renewed by Catherine.</p> - -<p>Philo had taught: “God ceases not from acting: as to -burn is the property of fire, so to act is the property of God,” -<i>Legg. Alleg.</i> I, 3. And in John we find: “God is a Spirit,” -and “My Father worketh ever and I work ever,” iv, 24; v, 17. -And God as pure Spiritual Energy, as the <i>Actus Purus</i>, is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span> -a truth and experience that penetrates the whole life of -Catherine.</p> - -<p>The work of Christ is not dwelt on in its earthly beginnings; -but it is traced up and back, in the form of a spiritual -“Genesis,” to His life and work as the Logos in Heaven, -where He abides “in the bosom of the Father,” and whence -He learns what He “hath declared” to us, i, 18; just as, in -his turn, the disciple whom Jesus loved “was reclining” at the -Last Supper “on the bosom of Jesus,” and later on “beareth -witness concerning the things” which he had learnt there, -xiii, 23; xxi, 24. So also Catherine transcends the early -earthly life of Christ altogether, and habitually dwells upon -Him as the Light and as Love, as God in His own Self-Manifestation; -and upon the ever-abiding sustenance afforded -by this Light and Life and Love to the faithful soul reclining -and resting upon it.</p> - -<p>And the contrast between the Spiritual and the Material, -the Abiding and the Transitory, is symbolized throughout -John, in exact accord with Philo, under the spacial categories -of upper and lower, and of extension: “Ye are from below, I -am from above,” viii, 23; “He that cometh from above, is -above all,” iv, 31; and “in my Father’s house,” that upper -world, “there are many mansions,” abiding-places, xiv, 2. -Hence all things divine here below have descended from -above: regeneration, iii, 3; the Spirit, i, 32; Angels, i, 51; -the Son of God Himself, iii, 13: and they mount once more -up above, so especially Christ Himself, iii, 13; vi, 62. And -the things of that upper world are the true things: “the true -light,” “ the true adorers,” “the true vine,” “the true bread -from Heaven,” i, ix; iv, 23; xv, 1; vi, 32: all this in contrast -to the shadowy semi-realities of the lower world.—Catherine -is here in fullest accord with the spacial imagery generally; -she even talks of God Himself, not only as in a place, but as -Himself a place, as the soul’s “loco.” But she has, for reasons -explained elsewhere, generally to abandon the upper-and-lower -category when picturing the soul’s self-dedication to -purification, since, for this act, she mostly figures a downward -plunge into suffering; and she gives us a number of striking -sayings, in which she explicitly re-translates all this quantitative -spacial imagery into its underlying meaning of qualitative -spiritual states.</p> - -<p>(4) As to the Joannine approximations and antagonisms to -Gnosticism, Catherine’s position is as follows. In the Synoptic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span> -accounts, Our Lord makes the acquisition of eternal life -depend upon the keeping of the two great commandments of -the love of God and of one’s neighbour, Luke x, 26-28, and -parallels. In John Our Lord says: “this is eternal life, that -they may know Thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ -whom Thou hast sent,” xvii, 3. To “know,” γινώσκειν, occurs -twenty-five times in 1 John alone. Here the final object of -every soul is to believe and to know: “they received and -knew truly and believed,” xvii, 8; “we have believed and have -known,” vi, 69; or “we have known and have believed,” 1 John -iv, 16. And Catherine also lays much stress upon faith ending, -even here below, in a certain vivid knowledge; but this -knowledge is, with her, less doctrinally articulated, no doubt -in part because there was no Gnosticism fronting her, to force -on such articulation.</p> - -<p>And the Joannine writings compare this higher mental -knowledge to the lower, sensible perception: “He who cometh -from heaven, witnesseth to what he hath seen and heard,” -iii, 31; “when He shall become manifest, we shall see Him as -He is,” 1 John iii, 2. And they have three special terms, in -common with Gnosticism, for the object of such knowledge: -Life, Light, and Fulness (<i>Plerōma</i>),—the latter, as a technical -term, appearing in the New Testament only in John i, 16, and -in the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians. Catherine, -also, is ever experiencing and conceiving the mental apprehensions -of faith, as so many quasi-sensible, ocular, perceptions; -and Life and Light are constantly mentioned, and -Fulness is, at least, implied in the psycho-physical concomitants -or consequences of her thinkings.</p> - -<p>On the other hand, she does not follow John in the intensely -dualistic elements of his teaching,—the sort of determinist, all -but innate, distinction between “the darkness,” “the men who -loved the darkness rather than the light,” and the Light itself -and those who loved it, i, 4, 5; iii, 19,—children of God and -children of the devil—the latter all but incapable of being -saved, viii, 38-47; x, 26; xi, 52; xiv, 17. Rather is she like -him in his all but complete silence as to “the anger of God,”—a -term which he uses once only, iii, 36, as against the twenty-two -instances of it in St. Paul.</p> - -<p>And she is full to overflowing of the great central, profoundly -un- and anti-Gnostic, sensitively Christian teachings -of St. John: as to the Light, the only-begotten Son, having -been given by God, because God so loved the world; as to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span> -Jesus having loved his own even to the end; as to the object -of Christ’s manifestation of His Father’s name to men, being -that God’s love for Christ, and indeed Christ Himself, might -be within them; and as to how, if they love Him, they will -keep His commandments,—His commandment to love each -other as He has loved them, iii, 21; iii, 16; xiii, 1; xvii, 26; -xiv, 15; xv, 17. In this last great declaration especially do we -find the very epitome of Catherine’s life and spirit, of her who -can never think of Him as Light and Knowledge only, but -ever insists on His being Fire and Love as well; and who -has but one commandment, that of Love-impelled, Love-seeking -loving.</p> - -<p>(5) And lastly, in relation to organized, Ecclesiastical -Christianity, the Joannine writings dwell, as regards the -more general principles, on points which, where positive, are -simply presupposed by Catherine; and, where negative, find -no echo within her.</p> - -<p>The Joannine writings insist continually upon the unity and -inter-communion of the faithful: “There shall be one fold, -one shepherd”; Christ’s death was in order “that He might -gather the scattered children of God into one”; He prays -to the Father that believers “may be one, as we are one”; -and He leaves as His legacy His seamless robe, x, 16; xi, 52; -xvii, 21; xix, 24. And these same writings have a painfully -absolute condemnation for all outside of this visible fold: -“The whole world lies in evil”; its “Prince is the Devil”; -“the blood of Jesus cleanseth us from all sin,” within the -community alone; false prophets, those who have gone forth -from the community, are not to be prayed for, are not even -to be saluted, 1 John, v, 19; John xii, 31; John i, 7; v, 16; -2 John, 10. For the great and necessary fight with Gnosticism -has already begun in these writings.</p> - -<p>But Catherine dies before the unity of Christendom is again -in jeopardy through the Protestant Reformation, and she -never dwells—this is doubtless a limit—upon the Christian -community, as such. And her enthusiastic sympathy with -the spiritual teachings of Jacopone da Todi, who, some two -centuries before, had, as one of the prophetic opposition, -vehemently attacked the intensely theocratic policy of Pope -Boniface VIII, and had suffered a long imprisonment at -his hands; her tender care for the schismatic population of -the far-away Greek island of Chios; and her intimacy with -Dre. Tommaso Moro, who, later on, became for a while a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span> -Calvinist; all indicate how free from all suspiciousness -towards individual Catholics, or of fierceness against other -religious bodies and persons, was her deeply filial attachment -to the Church.</p> - -<p>In the Synoptists Our Lord declares, as to the exorcist -who worked cures in His name, although not a follower of -His, that “he that is not against us, is for us,” and refuses to -accede to His disciples’ proposal to interfere with his activity, -Mark ix, 38-41; and He points, as to the means of inheriting -eternal life, to the keeping of the two great commandments, -as these are already formulated in the Old Testament, and -insists that this neighbour, whom here we are bidden to love, -is any and every man, Luke x, 25-37. The Joannine -writings insist strongly upon the strict necessity of full, -explicit adhesion: the commandment of love which Our Lord -gives is here “My commandment,” “a new commandment,” -one held “from the beginning”—in the Christian community; -and the command to “love one another” is here addressed to -the brethren in their relations to their fellow-believers only, -xiii, 34; xiii, 35; xv, 12, 17. Catherine’s feeling, in this -matter, is clearly with the Synoptists.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Joannine teaching considered in itself.</i></h5> - -<p>If we next take the Joannine teachings in themselves, we -shall find the following interesting points of contact or contrast -to exist between John and Catherine.</p> - -<p>(1) In matters of Theology proper, she is completely -penetrated by the great doctrine, more explicit in St. John even -than in St. Paul, that “God is Love,” 1 John iv, 8; and by -the conceptions of God and of Christ “working always” as -Life, Light, and Love.—But whereas, in the first Epistle of -John, God Himself is “eternal life” and “light,” v, 20; i, 5; -and, in the Gospel, it is Christ Who, in the first instance, -appears as Life and as Light, xi, 25; viii, 12: Catherine nowhere -distinguishes at all between Christ and God. And -similarly, whereas in St. John “God doth not give” unto -Christ “the Spirit by measure”; and Christ promises to the -disciples “another Paraclete,” <i>i.e.</i> the Holy Spirit, iii, 34; xiv, -16; and indeed the Son and the Spirit appear, throughout, as -distinct from one another as do the Son and the Father: in -Catherine we get, practically everywhere, an exclusive concentration -upon the fact, so often implied or declared by -St. Paul, of Love, Christ, being Himself Spirit.</p> - -<p>(2) The Joannine Soteriology has, I think, influenced<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span> -Catherine as follows. Christ’s redemptive work appears, in -the more original current of that teaching, under the symbols of -the Word, Light, Bread, as the self-revelation of God. For in -proportion that this Logos-Light and Bread enlightens and -nourishes, does He drive away darkness and weakness, and, -with them, sin, and this previously to any historic acts of -His earthly life. And, in this connection, there is but little -stress laid upon penance and the forgiveness of sins as -compared with the Synoptic accounts, and the term of turning -back, στρέφειν, is absent here.—But that same redemptive -work appears, in the more Pauline of the two Joannine -currents, as the direct result of so many vicarious, atoning -deeds, the historic Passion and Death of Our Lord. Here -there is indeed sin, a “sin of the world,” and specially for this -sin is Christ the propitiation: “God so loved the world, as to -give His only-begotten Son”—Him “the Lamb of God, that -taketh away the sins of the world,” i, 29; 1 John ii, 2; John -ii, 16; i, 29, 36.</p> - -<p>Catherine, with the probably incomplete exception of her -Conversion and Penance-period, concentrates her attention, -with a striking degree of exclusiveness, upon the former group -of conceptions. With her too the God-Christ is—all but -solely—conceived as Light which, in so far as it is not -hindered, operates the healing and the growth of souls. And -in her great picture of all souls inevitably hungering for the -sight of the One Bread, God, she has operated a fusion -between two of the Joannine images, the Light which is seen -and the Bread which is eaten: here the bare sight (in reality, -a satiating sight) of the Bread suffices. If, for the self-manifesting -God-Christ, she has, besides the Joannine Light-image, -a Fire-symbol, which has its literary antecedents rather -in the Old Testament than in the New, this comes from the -fact that she is largely occupied with the pain of the impressions -and processes undergone by already God-loving yet still -imperfectly pure souls, and that fierce fire is as appropriate a -symbol for such pain as is peaceful light for joy.</p> - -<p>Now this painfulness is, in Catherine’s teaching, the direct -result of whatever may be incomplete and piecemeal in the -soul’s state and process of purification. And this her conception, -of Perfect Love being mostly attained only through -a series of apparently sudden shifts, each seemingly final, is -no doubt in part moulded upon the practically identical -Joannine teaching as to Faith.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span></p> - -<p>True, we have already seen that her conception of the -nature of God’s action upon the soul, and of the soul’s reaction -under this His touch, is more akin to the rich Synoptic idea -of a disposition and determination of the soul’s whole being, -(a cordial trust at least as much as an intellectual apprehension -and clear assent), than to the Joannine view, which lays a -predominant stress upon mental apprehension and assent. -And again, she nowhere presents anything analogous to the -Joannine, already scholastic, formulations of the object of this -Faith and Trust,—all of them explicitly concerned with the -nature of Christ.</p> - -<p>But, everywhere in the Joannine writings, the living Person -and Spirit aimed at by these definitions is considered as -experienced by the soul in a succession of ever-deepening -intuitions and acts of Faith. Already at the Jordan, Andrew -and Nathaniel have declared Jesus to be the Christ, the Son -of God, i, 41, 49; yet they, His disciples, are said to have -believed in Him at Cana, in consequence of His miracle there, -ii, 11. Already at Capernaum Peter asserts for the twelve, -“We have believed and known that Thou art the Holy One -of God,” vi, 69; yet still, at the Last Supper, Christ exhorts -them to believe in Him, xiv, 10, 11, and predicts future events -to them, in order that, when these predictions come true, their -faith may still further increase, xiii, 19; xiv, 29. And, as far -on as after the Resurrection we hear that the Beloved Disciple -“saw” (the empty tomb) “and believed,” xx, 8, 29. We thus -get in John precisely the same logically paradoxical, but -psychologically and spiritually most accurate and profound, -combination of an apparent completeness of Faith at each -point of special illumination, with a sudden re-beginning and -impulsive upward shifting of the soul’s Light and Believing, -which is so characteristic of Catherine’s experience and -teaching as to the successive levels of the soul’s Fire, Light -and Love. And the opposite movement—of the fading away -of the Light and the Faith—can be traced in John, as the -corresponding doctrine of the going out of the Fire, Light and -Love within the Soul can be found in Catherine.</p> - -<p>Again, both John and Catherine are penetrated with the -sense that this Faith and Love is somehow waked up in souls -by a true touch of God, a touch to which they spontaneously -respond, because they already possess a substantial affinity to -Him. “His,” the Good Shepherd’s, “sheep hear His voice,” -x, 16; they hear it, because they are already His: the Light<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span> -solicits and is accepted by the soul, because the soul itself -is light-like and light-requiring, and because it proceeds -originally from this very Light which would now reinforce -the soul’s own deepest requirements. This great truth -appears also in those profound Joannine passages: “No man -can come to Me, unless the Father Who sent Me draw him”; -and “I have manifested Thy name, to those men whom Thou -didst give Me from out of the world,” vi, 44; xvii, 6.</p> - -<p>And this attractive force is also a faculty of Christ: “I shall -draw all men unto Myself,” xii, 32. And note how Catherine, -ever completely identifying God, Christ, Light, Love, and, -where these work in imperfectly pure souls, Fire, is stimulated -by the last-quoted text to extend God’s, Christ’s, Love’s -drawing, attraction, to all men; to limit only, in various -degrees, these various men’s response to it; and to realize so -intensely that a generous yielding to this our ineradicable -deepest <i>attrait</i> is our fullest joy, and the resisting it is our -one final misery, as to picture the soul, penitent for this its -mad resistance, plunging itself, now eagerly responsive to that -intense attraction, into God and a growing conformity with -Him.</p> - -<p>(3) As to points concerning the Sacraments where Catherine -is influenced by John, we find that here again Baptismal -conceptions are passed over by her. She does not allude to -the water in the discourse to Nicodemus, iii, 5, although she is -full of other ideas suggested there; but she dwells upon the -water in the address to the Woman at the Well, iv, 10-15, that -“living water,” which is, for her, the spirit’s spiritual sustenance, -Love, Christ, God, and insensibly glides over into the images -and experiences attaching, for her, to the Holy Eucharist.</p> - -<p>But, as to this the greatest of the Sacraments and the all-absorbing -devotion of her life, her symbols and concepts are -all suggested by the Fourth Gospel, in contrast to the -Synoptists and St. Paul. For the Holy Eucharist is, with her, -ever detached from any direct memory of the Last Supper, -Passion, and Death, the original, historical, unique occasions -which still form its setting in the pre-Joannine writings, -although those greatest proofs of a divinely boundless self-immolation -undoubtedly give to her devotion to the Blessed -Sacrament its beautiful enthusiasm and tenderness. The -Holy Eucharist ever appears with her, as with St. John, -attached to the scene of the multiplication of the breads,—a -feast of joy and of life, with Christ at the zenith of His earthly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span> -hope and power. For not “a shewing of the death” in “the -eating of this bread,” 1 Cor. xi, 26, is dwelt on by John; -but we have: “I am the Bread of Life; he that eateth this -bread, shall live for ever,” John vi, 51, 52.</p> - -<p>And Catherine follows John in thinking predominantly of -the single soul, when dwelling upon the Holy Eucharist. For -if John presents a great open-air Love-Feast in lieu of Paul’s -Upper Chamber and Supper with the twelve, he, as over against -Paul’s profoundly social standpoint, has, throughout this his -Eucharistic chapter, but three indications of the plural as -against some fourteen singulars.</p> - -<p>And, finally, John’s change from the future tense, with its -reference to a coming historic institution, “the food which … -the Son of Man will give you,” vi, 27, to the present tense, -with its declaration of an eternal fact and relation, “I am” -(now and always) “the living bread which hath come down -from heaven,” vi, 51, will have helped Catherine towards the -conception of the eternal Christ-God offering Himself as their -ceaseless spiritual food to His creatures, possessed as they are -by an indestructible spiritual hunger for Himself. For if the -Eucharistic food, Bread, Body, has already been declared by -St. Paul to be “spiritual,” 2 Cor. iii, 17, in St. John also -it has to be spiritual, for it is here “the true bread from -heaven” and “the bread of life”; and Christ declares here -“it is the Spirit that giveth life, the flesh (alone) profiteth -nothing,” vi, 61, 69. Hence Catherine is, again through the -Holy Eucharist and St. John, brought back to her favourite -Pauline conception of the Lord as Himself “Spirit,” “the -Life-giving Spirit,” 2 Cor. iii, 17; 1 Cor. xv, 45.</p> - -<p>(4) And if we conclude with the Joannine Eschatology, we -shall find that Catherine has penetrated deep into the following -conceptions, which undoubtedly, even in their union, -present us with a less rich outlook than that furnished by the -Synoptists, but which may be said to constitute the central -spirit of Our Lord’s teaching.</p> - -<p>Like John, who has but two mentions of “the Kingdom of -God,” iii, 3, 5, and who elsewhere ever speaks of “Life,” -Catherine has nowhere “the Kingdom,” but everywhere -“Life.” Like him she conceives the process of Conversion as -a “making alive” of the moribund, darkened, cold soul, by -the Light, Love, Christ, God, v, 21-29, when He, Who is -Himself “the Life,” xi, 25, and “the Spirit,” iv, 24, speaks to -the soul “words” that are “spirit and life,” vi, 63; for then<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span> -the soul that gives ear to His words “hath eternal life,” -v, 24.</p> - -<p>Again Catherine, for the most part, appropriates and -develops that one out of the two Joannine currents of doctrine -concerning the Judgment, which treats the latter as already -determined and forestalled by Man’s present personal attitude -towards the Light. The judgment is thus simply a discrimination, -according to the original meaning of the noun κρίσις—like -when God in the beginning “discriminated the light from the -darkness,” Gen. i, 5; a discrimination substantially effected -already here and now, “he that believeth in Him, is not -judged; he that believeth not, is already judged,” iii, 18. But -the other current of doctrine, so prominent in the Synoptists, -is not absent from St. John,—the teaching as to a later, -external and visible, forensic judgment. And Catherine has -a similar intermixture of two currents, yet with a strong -predominance of the immanental, present conception of the -matter.</p> - -<p>And even for that one volitional act in the beyond, which, -according to her doctrine, has a certain constitutive importance -for the whole eternity of all still partially impure souls—for -that voluntary plunge—we can find an analogue in the -Joannine writings, although here there is no reference to the -after life. For throughout the greater part of his teaching—from -iii, 15, 16, apparently up to the end of the Gospel,—the -possession of spiritual Life is consequent upon the soul’s own -acts of Faith, and not, as one would expect from his other, -more characteristic teaching, upon its Regeneration from -above, iii, 3. And the result of such acts of Faith is a -“Metabasis,” a “passing over from death to life,” v, 24; 1 John -iii, 14. Catherine will have conceived such an act of Faith as -predominantly an act of Love, and the act as itself already that -Metabasis; and will, most characteristically, have quickened -the movement, and have altered its direction from the -horizontal to the vertical, so that the “passing, going over,” -becomes a “plunge down into” Life. For indeed the Fire -she plunges into is, in her doctrine, Life Itself; since it is -Light, Love, Christ, and God.</p> - -<p>Catherine, once more, is John’s most faithful disciple, where -he declares that Life to stream out immediately from the life-giving -object of Faith into the life-seeking subject of that -Faith, from the believed God into the believing soul: “I am -the Bread of Life; he who cometh to Me, shall not hunger<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span>”; -“he who abideth in Me, and I in him, beareth much fruit”; -vi, 35; xv, 5.</p> - -<p>And finally, she follows John closely where he insists upon -Simultaneity and Eternity as contrasted with Succession and -Immortality, so as even to abstract from the bodily resurrection. -He who “hath passed over from death to life” (already) -“possesses eternal life”; “every one who liveth and believeth -in Me, shall not die for ever (at any time)”; “this,” already -and of itself, “is eternal life, to know Thee, the one true God -and Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent”; and the soul’s -abiding in such an experience is Christ’s own joy, transplanted -into it, and a joy which is full, v, 24; xi, 26; xvii, 3; xv, 11. -And there is here such an insistence upon an unbroken -spiritual life, in spite of and right through physical death, -that, to Martha’s declaration that her brother will arise at the -last day, xi, 24, Jesus answers, “I am the Resurrection and the -Life: he who believeth in Me, even if he die” the bodily -death, “shall live” on in his soul; indeed “every man who -liveth” the life of the body, “and who believeth in Me, shall -not die for ever (at any time)” in his soul, xi, 25, 26. John’s -other line of thought, in which the bodily resurrection is prominent, -remains without any definite or systematic response -in Catherine’s teaching.</p> - -<p>(5) We can then summarize the influence exercised by -John upon Catherine by saying that he encouraged her to -conceive religion as an experience of eternity; as a true, living -knowledge of things spiritual; indeed as a direct touch of -man’s soul by God Himself, culminating in man’s certainty -that God is Love.</p> - -<h4>III. <span class="smcap">The Areopagite Writings.</span></h4> - -<p>Catherine’s close relations to the Areopagite, the Pseudo-Dionysius, -are of peculiar interest, in their manifold agreement, -difference, or non-responsiveness; and this although the -ideas thus assimilated are mostly of lesser depth and importance -than those derived from the New Testament writings -just considered. They can be grouped conveniently under -the subject-matters of God’s creative, providential, and restorative, -outgoing, His action upon souls and all things extant, -and of the reasons for the different results of this action; of -certain symbols used to characterize that essential action of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span> -God upon His creatures; of the states and energizings of the -soul, in so far as it is responsive to that action; of certain -terms concerning these reactions of the soul; and of the -final result of the whole process. I shall try and get back, -in most cases, to the Areopagite’s Neo-Platonist sources, the -dry, intensely scholastic Proclus, and that great soul, the -prince of the non-Christian Mystics, Plotinus.<a name="FNanchor_70_70" id="FNanchor_70_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_70_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a></p> - -<h5>1. <i>God’s general action.</i></h5> - -<p>As to God’s action, we have in Dionysius the Circle with -the three stages of its movement,—a conception so dear to -Catherine. “Theologians call Him the Esteemed and the -Loved, and again Love and Loving-kindness, as being a -Power at once propulsive and leading up” and back “to -Himself; a loving movement self-moved, which pre-exists in -the Good, and bubbles forth from the Good to things existing, -and which again returns to the Good—as it were a sort -of everlasting circle whirling round, because of the Good, from -the Good, in the Good, and to the Good,—ever advancing and -remaining and returning in the same and throughout the -same.” This is “the power of the divine similitude” present -throughout creation, “which turns all created things to their -cause.”<a name="FNanchor_71_71" id="FNanchor_71_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_71_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> The doctrine is derived from Proclus: “Everything -caused both abides in its cause and proceeds from it and -returns to it”; and “everything that proceeds from something -returns, by a natural instinct, to that from which it -proceeds.”<a name="FNanchor_72_72" id="FNanchor_72_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_72_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> And Plotinus had led the way: “there” in the -super-sensible world, experienced in moments of ecstasy, “in -touch and union with the One, the soul begets Beauty, -Justice, and Virtue: and that place and life is, for it, its principle -and end: principle, since it springs from thence; end, -because the Good is there, and because, once arrived there, the -soul becomes what it was at first.”<a name="FNanchor_73_73" id="FNanchor_73_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_73_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span></p> - -<p>And Dionysius has the doctrine, so dear to Catherine, that -“the Source of Good is indeed present to all, but all are not,” -by their intention, “present to It; yet, by our aptitude for -Divine union, we all,” in a sense, “are present to It.” “It -shines, on Its own part, equally upon all things capable -of participation in It.”<a name="FNanchor_74_74" id="FNanchor_74_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_74_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> Already Plotinus had finely said: -“The One is not far away from any one, and yet is liable to -be far away from one and all, since, present though It be, It -is” efficaciously “present only to such as are capable of receiving -It, and are so disposed as to adapt themselves to It -and, as it were, to seize and touch It by their likeness to It, -… when, in a word, the soul is in the state in which it was -when it came from It.”<a name="FNanchor_75_75" id="FNanchor_75_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_75_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a></p> - -<p>We have again in Dionysius the combination, so characteristic -of Catherine, of a tender respect for the substance of -human nature, as good and ever respected by God, and of a -keen sense of the pathetic weakness of man’s sense-clogged -spirit here below. “Providence, as befits its goodness, provides -for each being suitably: for to destroy nature is not a -function of Providence.” “All those who cavil at the Divine -Justice, unconsciously commit a manifest injustice. For they -say that immortality ought to be in mortals, and perfection -in the imperfect … and perfect power in the weak, and that -the temporal should be eternal … in a word, they assign -the properties of one thing to another.”<a name="FNanchor_76_76" id="FNanchor_76_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_76_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>Symbols of God’s action.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) As to the symbols of God’s action, we have first the Chain -or Rope, Catherine’s “fune,” that “rope of His pure Love,” of -which “an end was thrown to her from heaven.”<a name="FNanchor_77_77" id="FNanchor_77_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_77_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> This -symbol was no doubt suggested by Dionysius: “Let us then -elevate our very selves by our prayers to the higher ascent of -the Divine … rays; as though a luminous chain (rope, σειρά) -were suspended from the celestial heights and reached down -hither, and we, by ever stretching out to it up and up … -were thus carried upwards.”<a name="FNanchor_78_78" id="FNanchor_78_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_78_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> And this passage again goes -back to Proclus, who describes the “chain (rope) of love” as -“having its entirely simple and hidden highest point fixed -amongst the very first ranks of the Gods”; its middle effluence<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span> -“amongst the Gods higher than the (sensible) world”; and -its third, lowest, part, as “divided multiformly throughout the -(sensible) world.” “The divine Love implants one common -bond (chain) and one indissoluble friendship in and between -each soul (that participates in its power), and between all and -the Beautiful Itself.”<a name="FNanchor_79_79" id="FNanchor_79_79"></a><a href="#Footnote_79_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> And this simile of a chain from heaven, -which in Dionysius is luminous, and in Catherine and Proclus -is loving, goes back, across Plato (<i>Theaetetus</i> 153<i>c</i> and <i>Republic</i>, -X, 61<i>b</i>, 99<i>c</i>) to Homer, where it again is luminous -(golden). For, in the <i>Iliad</i>, viii, 17-20, Zeus says to the Gods -in Olympus, “So as to see all things, do you, O Gods and -Goddesses all, hang a golden chain from heaven, and do you -all seize hold of it”—so as thus to descend to earth.</p> - -<p>(2) We have next the symbol of the Sun and its purifying, -healing Light, under which God and His action are rapturously -proclaimed by Dionysius. “Even as our sun, by its -very being, enlightens all things able to partake of its light -in their various degrees, so also the Good, by its very existence, -sends unto all things that be, the rays of its entire goodness, -according to their capacity for them. By means of -these rays they are purified from all corruption and death … -and are separated from instability.” “The Divine Goodness, -this our great sun, enlightens … nourishes, perfects, renews.” -Even the pure can thus be made purer still. “He, the Good, -is called spiritual light … he cleanses the mental vision -of the very angels: they taste, as it were, the light.”<a name="FNanchor_80_80" id="FNanchor_80_80"></a><a href="#Footnote_80_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a> All -this imagery goes back, in the first instance, to Proclus. For -Proclus puts in parallel “sun” and “God,” and “to be enlightened” -and “to be deified”; makes all purifying forces to -coalesce in the activity of the Sun-God, Apollo Katharsios, -the Purifier, who “everywhere unifies multiplicity … -purifying the entire heaven and all living things throughout -the world”; and describes how “from above, from his super-heavenly -post, Apollo scatters the arrows of Zeus,—his rays -upon all the world.”<a name="FNanchor_81_81" id="FNanchor_81_81"></a><a href="#Footnote_81_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> The Sun’s rays, here as powerful as -the bolts of Zeus, thus begin to play the part still assigned -to them in Catherine’s imagery of the “Saëtte” and “Radii” -of the divine Light and Love. And the substance of the -whole symbol goes back, through fine sayings of Plotinus -and through Philo, to Plato, who calls the Sun “the offspring<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span> -of the Good and analogous to it,” and who (doubtless rightly) -takes Homer’s “golden chain” to be nothing but the Sun-rays,—thus -identifying the two symbols.<a name="FNanchor_82_82" id="FNanchor_82_82"></a><a href="#Footnote_82_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a></p> - -<p>(3) Fire, as a symbol for God and His action, is thus praised -by Dionysius: “The sacred theologians often describe the -super-essential Essence in terms of Fire.… For sensible -fire is, so to say, present in all things, and pervades them all -without mingling with them, and is received by all things; -… it is intolerable yet invisible; it masters all things by its -own might, and yet it but brings the things in which it resides -to (the development of) their own energy; it has a transforming -power; it communicates itself to all who approach it in -any degree; … it has the power of dividing (what it seizes); -it bears upwards; it is penetrating; … it increases its own -self in a hidden manner; it suddenly shines forth.”<a name="FNanchor_83_83" id="FNanchor_83_83"></a><a href="#Footnote_83_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a>—All -these qualities, and the delicate transitions from fire to light -and from light back to fire, and from heat immanent to heat -applied from without, we can find again, vividly assimilated -and experienced, in Catherine’s teaching and emotional life. -But the Sun-light predominates in Dionysius, the Fire-heat -in Catherine; and whereas the former explicitly attaches -purification only to the Sun-light, the latter connects the -cleansing chiefly with Fire-heat, no doubt because the Greek -man is busy chiefly with the intellectually cognitive, and the -Italian woman with the morally ameliorative, activities and -interests of the mind and soul.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>The soul’s reaction.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) As to the soul’s reaction under God’s action, and its return -to Him, we first get, in Dionysius, the insistence upon Mystical -Quietude and Silence, which, according to him, are strictly -necessary, since only like can know and become one with -like, and God is “Peace and Repose” and, “as compared -with every known progression, Immobility,” and “the one -all-perfect source and cause of the Peace of all”; and He is -Silence, “the Angels are, as it were, the heralds of the Divine -Silence,”—teaching not unlike that of St. Ignatius of Antioch, -“Jesus Christ … the Word which proceeds from Silence.”<a name="FNanchor_84_84" id="FNanchor_84_84"></a><a href="#Footnote_84_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> -Hence “in proportion as we ascend to the higher designations -of God, do our expressions become more and more circumscribed”; -and at last “we shall find, not a little speaking,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span> -but a complete absence of speech and of conception.”<a name="FNanchor_85_85" id="FNanchor_85_85"></a><a href="#Footnote_85_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a> As -Proclus has it: “Let this Fountain of Godhead be honoured -on our part by silence and by the union which is above -silence.”<a name="FNanchor_86_86" id="FNanchor_86_86"></a><a href="#Footnote_86_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> And Plotinus says: “This,” the Divine, “Light -comes not from anywhere nor disappears any whither, but -simply shines or shines not: hence we must not pursue after -it, but must abide in quietness till it appears.” And when it -does appear, “the contemplative, as one rapt and divinely -inspired, abides here with quietude in a motionless condition, -… being entirely stable, and becoming, as it were, stability -itself.”<a name="FNanchor_87_87" id="FNanchor_87_87"></a><a href="#Footnote_87_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a>—All this still finds its echo in Catherine.—But the -treble (cognitive) movement of the Angelic and human -mind,—the circular, the straight-line, and the spiral,—which -Dionysius, in direct imitation of Proclus, carefully develops -throughout three sections, is quite absent from Catherine’s -mind.<a name="FNanchor_88_88" id="FNanchor_88_88"></a><a href="#Footnote_88_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a></p> - -<p>(2) We next get, in Dionysius, the following teachings as -to Mystical Vision and Union. “The Unity-above-Mind is -placed above the minds; and the Good-above-word is unutterable -by word.” “There is, further, the most divine -knowledge of Almighty God, which is known through not -knowing … when the mind, having stood apart from all -existing things, and having then also dismissed itself, has been -made one with the super-luminous rays.” “We must contemplate -things divine by our whole selves standing out of our -whole selves, and becoming wholly of God.” “By the resistless -and absolute ecstasy, in all purity, from out of thyself and all -things, thou wilt be carried on high, to the super-essential ray -of the divine darkness.” “It is during the cessation of every -mental energizing, that such a union of the deified minds and -of the super-divine light takes place.”<a name="FNanchor_89_89" id="FNanchor_89_89"></a><a href="#Footnote_89_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a> And the original -cause and final effect of such a going forth from self, are -indicated in words which were worked out in a vivid -fulness by Catherine’s whole convert life: “Divine Love is -ecstatic, not permitting any lovers to belong to themselves, -but only to those beloved by them. And this love, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span> -superior beings show by being full of forethought for their -inferiors; those equal in rank, by their mutual coherence; -and the inferior by a looking back and up to the superior -ones.”<a name="FNanchor_90_90" id="FNanchor_90_90"></a><a href="#Footnote_90_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a></p> - -<p>Dionysius here everywhere follows Proclus. Yet the -noblest Neo-Platonist sayings are again furnished by Plotinus: -“We are not cut off or severed from the Light, but we breathe -and consist in It, since It ever enlightens and bears us, as long -as It is what It is.” In the moments of Union, “we are able -to see both Him and ourself,—ourself in dazzling splendour, -full of spiritual light, or rather one with the pure Light -Itself … our life’s flame is then enkindled.” “There the -soul rests, after it has fled up, away from evil, to the place -which is free from evils … and the true life is there.” -“Arrived there, the soul becomes that which she was at first.”<a name="FNanchor_91_91" id="FNanchor_91_91"></a><a href="#Footnote_91_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a> -And if Plotinus has thus already got the symbolism of place, -he is as fully aware as Catherine herself that, for purposes of -vivid presentation, he is spacializing spiritual, that is, unextended, -qualitative states and realities. “Things incorporeal -do not get excluded by bodies; they are severed only -by otherness and difference: hence, when such otherness -is absent, they, not differing, are near each other.” And -already, as with Catherine, there is the apparent finality, and -yet also the renewed search for more. “The seer and the seen -have become one, as though it were a case not of vision but -of union.” “When he shall have crossed over as the image to -its Archetype, then he will have reached his journey’s end.” -And yet this “ecstasy, simplification, and donation of one’s -self,” this “quiet,” is still also “a striving after contact,” “a -musing to achieve union.”<a name="FNanchor_92_92" id="FNanchor_92_92"></a><a href="#Footnote_92_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a></p> - -<h5>4. <i>Terminology of the soul’s reaction.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) Certain terms and conceptions in connection with the -soul’s return to God, which are specially dear to Catherine, -already appear, fully developed, in Dionysius, Proclus, and -Plotinus; in part, even in Plato. Her “suddenly “ (<i>subito</i>) -appears but rarely in Dionysius, <i>e.g.</i> in <i>Heavenly Hierarchy</i> -xv, 2; but it is carefully explained by him in his Third -Epistle, specially devoted to the subject.<a name="FNanchor_93_93" id="FNanchor_93_93"></a><a href="#Footnote_93_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a> It is common in -Plotinus: “Suddenly the soul saw, without seeing how it saw”; -“suddenly thou shalt receive light,” “suddenly shining.”<a name="FNanchor_94_94" id="FNanchor_94_94"></a><a href="#Footnote_94_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> And<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span> -in Plato we find: “He who has learnt to see the Beautiful in -due order and succession, when he comes towards the end, will -suddenly perceive a Nature of wondrous beauty—Beauty alone, -absolute, separate, simple and everlasting”: a passage which -derives its imagery from the Epopteia of the Eleusynian -Mysteries,—the sudden appearance, the curtain being withdrawn, -upon the stage whereon the Heathen Mystery-play -was being performed, under a peculiar fairy-illumination, of -the figures of Demeter, Kore, and Iacchus, as the culmination -of a long succession of purifications and initiations.<a name="FNanchor_95_95" id="FNanchor_95_95"></a><a href="#Footnote_95_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a></p> - -<p>Catherine’s “wound,” or “wounding stroke,” (<i>ferita</i>), is, in -part, the necessary consequence of the “arrow” conception -already considered; in part, the echo of that group of terms -which, in Dionysius and Proclus even more than in Plotinus, -express the painfully sudden and overwhelming, free-grace -character of God’s action upon the soul,—especially of ἐπιβολή, -“immissio,” a “coming-upon,” a “hitting,” a very common -word in the Areopagite; μετοχή, “communication,” and -παραδοχή, “reception,” being the corresponding terms for God’s -and the soul’s share in this encounter respectively. Thus: -“Unions, whether we call them immissions or receptions from -God.”<a name="FNanchor_96_96" id="FNanchor_96_96"></a><a href="#Footnote_96_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a></p> - -<p>“Presence,” “presenza,” παρουσιά, is another favourite term, -as with Catherine so also with Dionysius and Proclus. Thus -the Areopagite: “The presence of the spiritual light causes -recollection and unity in those that are being enlightened with -it,” “His wholly inconceivable presence.”<a name="FNanchor_97_97" id="FNanchor_97_97"></a><a href="#Footnote_97_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a> And Proclus: -“Every perfect spiritual contact and communion is owing to -the presence of God.”<a name="FNanchor_98_98" id="FNanchor_98_98"></a><a href="#Footnote_98_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> And the conception of a sudden -presence goes back, among the Neo-Platonists, to Plato and -the Greek Mysteries, in which the God was held suddenly to -arrive and to take part in the sacred dance. Such rings of -sacred dancers, “choirs,” are still characteristic of Dionysius—<i>e.g.</i> -<i>Heavenly Hierarchy</i>, vii, 4—but they are quite wanting -in Catherine.—But “contact,” “touch,” ἐπαφή,—said of God’s -direct action upon the soul,—a conception so intensely active -in Catherine’s mind and life, is again a favourite term with -Dionysius and Proclus. The former declares this “touch” to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span> -be neither “sensible” nor “intelligible” and that “we are -brought into contact with things unutterable”; the latter talks -of “perfect spiritual contact.”<a name="FNanchor_99_99" id="FNanchor_99_99"></a><a href="#Footnote_99_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a></p> - -<p>The symbols of “Nakedness” and “Garments,” as indicative -respectively of the soul’s purity and impurity or self-delusion, -are, though most prominent in Catherine, rare in Dionysius. -But his declaration: “The nakedness of the (Angels’) feet -indicates purification from the addition of all things external -and assimilation to the divine simplicity” exactly expresses -her idea.<a name="FNanchor_100_100" id="FNanchor_100_100"></a><a href="#Footnote_100_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a> And Proclus has it more fully: The soul, on -descending into the body, forsakes unity, “and around her, -from all sides, there grow multiform kinds of existence -and manifold garments”; “love of honour is the last garment -of souls”; and “when,” in mounting up, “we lay aside our -passions and garments which, in coming down, we had put -on, we must also strip off that last garment, in order that, -having become (entirely) naked, we may establish ourselves -before God, having made ourselves like to the divine life.”<a name="FNanchor_101_101" id="FNanchor_101_101"></a><a href="#Footnote_101_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Again, as to Triads, it is interesting to note that Catherine -has nothing about the three stages or ways of the inner life,—purgative, -illuminative, unitive,—of which Dionysius is full, -and which are already indicated in Proclus; for we can find -but two in her life, the purgative and unitive, and in her teaching -these two alone appear, mostly in close combination, sometimes -in strong contrast. Nor has she anything about the -three degrees or kinds of prayer,—Meditation, Contemplation, -Union,—as indicated in Dionysius: “It behoves us, by our -prayers, to be lifted into proximity with the Divine Trinity; -and then, by still further approaching it, to be initiated…; -and (lastly) to make ourselves one with it”; and as taught by -Proclus: “Knowledge leads, then follows proximity, and then -union.”<a name="FNanchor_102_102" id="FNanchor_102_102"></a><a href="#Footnote_102_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a> With her we only get Contemplation and Union.—Nor -do we get in her anything about thrice three choirs of -Angels, or three orders of Christian Ministrants, or three -classes of Christian people, or thrice three groups of Sacraments -and Sacramental acts. For she is too intensely bent -upon immediate intercourse with God, and too much absorbed -in the sense of profound unity and again of innumerable<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span> -multiplicity, to be attracted by Dionysius’s Neo-Platonist -ladder of carefully graduated intermediaries, or by his continuous -interest in triads of every kind. Catherine thus -follows the current in Dionysius which insists upon direct -contact between the soul and the transcendent God, and -ignores the other, which bridges over the abyss between the -two by carefully graduated intermediaries: these intermediaries -having become, with her, successive stages of -purification and of ever more penetrating union of the one -soul with the one God.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Deification, especially through the Eucharist.</i></h5> - -<p>As to the end of the whole process, we find that -Deification, so frequently implied or suggested by Catherine, -is formally taught by Dionysius: “A union of the deified -minds” (ἐκθεουμένων); the heavenly and the earthly Hierarchy -have the power and task “to communicate to their subjects, -according to the dignity of each, the sacred deification” -(ἐκθέωσις); “we are led up, by means of the multiform of -sensible symbols, to the uniform Deification.”<a name="FNanchor_103_103" id="FNanchor_103_103"></a><a href="#Footnote_103_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a> “The One -is the very God,” says Proclus, “but the Mind (the Noûs) is -the divinest of beings, and the soul is divine, and the body is -godlike.… And every body that is God-like is so through -the soul having become divine; and every soul that is divine, -is so through the Mind being very divine; and every Mind -that is thus very divine, is so through participation in the -Divine One.”<a name="FNanchor_104_104" id="FNanchor_104_104"></a><a href="#Footnote_104_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a> There are preformations of this doctrine in -Plotinus and echoes of it throughout Catherine’s sayings.</p> - -<p>And the Areopagite’s teaching that the chief means and -the culmination of this deification are found and reached in -the reception of the Holy Eucharist will no doubt also have -stimulated Catherine’s mind: “The Communicant is led to -the summit of deiformation, as far as this is possible for him.”<a name="FNanchor_105_105" id="FNanchor_105_105"></a><a href="#Footnote_105_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a> -And her soul responds completely to the beautiful Dionysian-Proclian -teaching concerning God’s presence in all things, as -the cause of the profound sympathy which binds them all -together. “They say,” declares Dionysius, “that He is in -minds … and in bodies, and in heaven and in earth; (indeed -that He is) sun, fire, water, spirit … all things existing, -and yet again not one of all things existing.” “The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span> -distribution of boundless power passes from Almighty God -all things, and no single being but has intellectual, or rational, -or sensible, or vital, or essential power.” “The gifts of the -unfailing Power pass on to men and (lesser) living creatures, -to plants, and to the entire nature of the Universe.”<a name="FNanchor_106_106" id="FNanchor_106_106"></a><a href="#Footnote_106_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a> This -latter passage was suggested by Proclus: “One would say -that, through participation in the One, all things are deified, -each according to its rank, inclusive of the very lowest of -beings.” “The image of the One and the inter-communion -existing through it,—this it is that produces the extant -sympathy” which permeates all things.<a name="FNanchor_107_107" id="FNanchor_107_107"></a><a href="#Footnote_107_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a>—But Catherine has -nowhere the term “echo,” which is so dear to Dionysius: “His -all-surpassing power holds together and preserves even the -remotest of its echoes”; “the sun and plants are or hold most -distant echoes of the Good and of Life”; indeed even the -licentious man still possesses, in his very passion, “as it were a -faint echo of Union and of Friendship.”<a name="FNanchor_108_108" id="FNanchor_108_108"></a><a href="#Footnote_108_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a></p> - -<h5>6. <i>Dionysius and Catherine; three agreements and differences.</i></h5> - -<p>I conclude with three important points of difference and -similarity between Catherine and Dionysius.</p> - -<p>(1) Catherine abstains from the use of those repulsive, -impossibly hyperbolic epithets such as “the Super-Good,” “the -Above-Mind,” which Dionysius is never weary of applying to -God, and is content with ever feeling and declaring how high -above the very best conception which she can form of mind -and of goodness He undoubtedly is; thus wisely moderated, -I take it, by her constant experience and faith as to God’s -immediate presence within the human soul, which soul -cannot, consequently, be presented as entirely remote from -the nature of God.</p> - -<p>(2) Catherine transforms over-intense and impoverishing -insistence upon the pure Oneness of God, such as we find it -even in Dionysius and still more in Proclus, into a, sometimes -equally over-intense, conception as to the oneness of -our union with Him, leaving Him to be still conceived as an -overflowing richness of all kinds.</p> - -<p>(3) And Catherine keeps, in an interesting manner, -Hellenic, and specifically Platonic, formulation for the deepest -of her experiences and teachings, since her standing designation<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span> -of God and of Our Lord is never personal, “My Lover” or “My -Friend”; but, as it were, elemental, “Love” or “My Love.” -Her keen self-purifying instinct and reverence for God will -have spontaneously inclined her thus to consider Him first -as an Ocean of Being in which to quench and drown her small, -clamorous individuality, and this as a necessary step towards -reconstituting that true personality, which, itself spirit, -would be penetrated and sustained by the Spirit, Christ, -God. And then the Pauline-Joannine picturings of God as a -quasi-place and extended substance (“from Him and in Him -and to Him,” “in the Spirit,” “in Christ,” “God is Charity and -he that abideth in Charity, abideth in Him”) will have -strongly confirmed this trend. Yet Dionysius too must -have greatly helped on this movement of her mind. For in -Dionysius the standing appellations for God are, in true Neo-Platonist -fashion, derived from extended or diffusive material -substances or conditions, Light, Fire, Fountain, Ocean; -and from that pervasive emotion, Love, strictly speaking -Desire, Eros.</p> - -<p>Now this, for our modern and Christian feeling, curiously -impersonal, general and abstract method goes back, through -Proclus and Plotinus, to Plato, who, above all in his -<i>Symposium</i>, is dominated by the two tendencies and -requirements, of identifying the First and Perfect with the -most General and the most Abstract; and of making the very -prerequisites and instruments of the search for It,—even the -earthly Eros, still so far from the Heavenly Eros and from -the Christian Agapē,—into occasions, effects or instalments of -and for the great Reality sought by them. And since it is -thus the love, the desire, the eros, of things beautiful, and -true, and good,—a love first sensible, then intellectual, and -at last spiritual, which makes us seek and find It, the Beauty, -Truth, and Goodness which is First Cause and Final End of -the whole series, this Cause and End will be considered not -as a Lover but as Love Itself. It is plain, I think, that it is -specially this second motive, this requirement of a pervading -organization and circle of and within the life of spirits and of -the Spirit, which has also determined Catherine to retain -Plato’s terminology.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span></p> - -<h4>IV. <span class="smcap">Jacopone Da Todi’s “lode.”</span></h4> - -<p>In the case of Jacopone, the suddenly wife-bereft and -converted lawyer, an ardent poet doubled by a soaring, daring -mystic, with an astonishing richness of simultaneous symbols -and conceptions and rapidity of successive complements and -contrasts, it will really be simplest if I take the chief touches -which have characteristically stimulated Catherine or have left -her unaffected, in the order and grouping in which they appear -in his chief “Lode,” as these latter are given in the first printed -edition, probably the very one used by Catherine.<a name="FNanchor_109_109" id="FNanchor_109_109"></a><a href="#Footnote_109_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a></p> - -<h5>1. <i>Lode XIII, XXIII, XXXV, XLV.</i></h5> - -<p>In Loda XIII “the vicious soul is likened unto Hell,” -vv. 1-7; and “the soul that yesterday was Hell, to-day has -turned into Heaven,” v. 8. We thus get here, precisely as -in Catherine, the spaceless conditions of the soul and their -modifications treated under the symbols of places and of the -spacial change from one place to the other.</p> - -<p>In Loda XXIII we first have five successive purifications -and purities of Love, “carnal, counterfeit, self-seeking, natural, -spiritual, transformed,” vv. 1-6; and then the symbols of -spacial location and movement reappear, “if height does not -abase itself, it cannot participate with, nor communicate itself -to, the lowest grade”; all which is frequent with Catherine. -But she nowhere echoes the teaching reproduced here, v. 10, -as to the Divine Trinity being figured in man’s three faculties -of soul.</p> - -<p>Loda XXXV gives us a sort of Christian Stoicism very dear -dear to Catherine: “Thou, my soul, hast been created in great -elevation; thy nature is grounded in great nobility (<i>gentilezza</i>),” -v. 7; “thou hast not thy life in created things; it is necessary -for thee to breathe in other countries, to mount up to God -thine inheritance, Who (alone) can satisfy thy poverty,” -v. 10; “great is the honour which thou doest to God, when -thou abidest (stare) in Him, in thy (true) nobility,” v. 11.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span></p> - -<p>Loda XLV gives “the Five Modes in which God appears -in the Soul”—“the state of fear”; mercenary, “beggar-love”; -“the way of love”; “the paternal mode”; “the mode of -espousals.” Catherine leaves the last two, anthropomorphic -and familial, conceptions quite unused, and passes in her life, -at one bound, from the first to the third mode.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Lode LVIIIa, LVIIIb.</i></h5> - -<p>The fine Loda LVIII<i>a</i>, “Of Holy Poverty, Mistress of all -Things,” has evidently suggested much to Catherine. -“Waters, rivers, lakes, and ocean, fish within them and their -swimming; airs, winds, birds, and all their flying: all these -turn to jewels for me,” v. 10. How readily the sense of water, -and of rapid movement within it, passes here into that of -air, and of swift locomotion within <i>it</i>! And both these -movements, are felt to represent, in vivid fashion, certain -very different experiences of the soul.—“Moon, Sun, Sky, and -Stars,—even these are <i>not</i> amongst my treasures; above the -very sky those things abide, which are the object of my song,” -v. 11. The positive, “analogic” method has here turned -suddenly into the negative, “apophatic” one; and yet, even -here, we still have the spacial symbolism, for the best is the -highest up,—indeed it is this very symbolism which is made -to add point to the negative declaration, a declaration which -nevertheless clearly implies the mere symbolism of that -spacialization. All this is fully absorbed by Catherine.—“Since -God has my will, … my wings have such feathers -that from earth to heaven there is no distance for me,” v. 12. -Here we see how Plato filters through, complete, to Jacopone; -but only in his central idea to Catherine. For the <i>Phaedrus</i>, -246<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>, teaches: “The perfect soul then, having become -winged, soars upwards, and is the ruler of the universe; whilst -the imperfect soul sheds her feathers and is borne downwards, -till it settles on the solid ground.” Catherine never mentions -wings nor feathers, but often dwells upon flying.</p> - -<p>The great Loda LVIII<i>b</i>, “Of Holy Poverty and its Treble -Heaven,” (one passage of which is formally quoted and carefully -expounded by Catherine), is a combination of Platonism, -Paulinism, and Franciscanism, and has specially influenced -her through its Platonist element. Verses 1-9 contain a -fine apostrophe to Poverty. “O Love of Poverty, Reign of -tranquillity! Poverty, high Wisdom! to be subject to -nothing; through despising to possess all things created!” -v. 1: all this is echoed by Catherine. But the ex-lawye<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span>r’s -declaration that such a soul “has neither judge nor notary,” -v. 3, did certainly not determine her literally, for we have -had before us some fifteen cases in which she had recourse to -lawyers. “God makes not His abode in a narrow heart; -thou art, oh man, precisely as great as thine affection may be. -The spirit of poverty possesses so ample a bosom, that Deity -Itself takes up its dwelling there,” v. 8. Catherine’s deepest -self seems to breathe from out of this profound saying.</p> - -<p>Verses 10 to 30 describe the three heavens of successive -self-despoilments. The firmamental heaven, which typifies -the four-fold renouncement,—of honour, riches, science, reputation -of sanctity, has left no echo in Catherine. The stellar -heaven is “composed of solidified clear waters (<i>aque solidate</i>)”; -here “the four winds” cease “that move the sea,—that perturb -the mind: fear and hope, grief and joy,” 11-14. Here -Plato again touches Catherine through Jacopone. For the -<i>Symposium</i>, 197<i>a</i>, declares: “Love it is that produces peace -among men and calm on the sea, a cessation of the winds, -and repose and sleep even in trouble”; and Jacopone identifies -the middle “crystalline” heaven, (“the waters above” of -Genesis, chap, i,) with Plato’s “sea”; takes Plato’s (four) winds -as the soul’s chief passions; and considers Plato’s “peace” -and “windlessness” as equivalent to the “much silence,” -which, says the Apocalypse, “arose in heaven,” viii, 1, interpreted -here as “in mid-heaven.” “Not to fear Hell, nor to -hope for Heaven, to rejoice in no good, to grieve over no -adversity,” v. 16, is a formulation unlike Catherine, although -single sayings of hers stand for sentiments analogous to the -first and last.—“If the virtues are naked, and the vices are -not garmented,—mortal wounds get given to the soul,” v. 19, -has a symbolism exactly opposite to Catherine’s, who, we -know, loves to glorify “nakedness” as the soul’s purity.—“The -highest heaven” is “beyond even the imagings of the -mortified fancy”; “of every good it has despoiled thee, and -has expropriated thee from all virtue: lay up as a treasure -this thy gain,—the sense of thine own vileness.” “O purified -Love! it alone lives in the truth!” These verses, 20-22, have -left a deep impress upon Catherine, although she wisely does -not press that “expropriation from virtue,” which goes back -at least to Plotinus, for whom the true Ecstatic is “beyond the -choir of the virtues.”<a name="FNanchor_110_110" id="FNanchor_110_110"></a><a href="#Footnote_110_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a></p> - -<p>“That which appears to thee (as extant), is not truly,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span> -existent: so high (above) is that which truly is. True elevation -of soul (<i>la superbia</i>) dwells in heaven above, and -baseness of mind (<i>humilitade</i>) leads to damnation,” v. 24, is a -saying to which we still have Catherine’s detailed commentary. -In its markedly Platonic distinction between an upper true -and a lower seeming world, and in its characteristically -mystical love of paradox and a play upon words, it is more -curious than abidingly important; but in its deeply Christian -consciousness of “pride” and “humility,” in their ordinary -ethical sense, being respectively the subtlest vice and the -noblest virtue, it rises sheer above all Platonist and Neo-Platonist -apprehension.</p> - -<p>“Love abides in prison, in that darksome light! All light -there is darkness, and all darkness there is as the day,” vv. -26, 27. Here Catherine no doubt found aids towards her -prison-conception,—of the loving soul imprisoned in the -earthly body, and of the imperfect, yet loving, disembodied -souls imprisoned in Purgatory; and towards articulating her -strong sense of the change in the meaning and value of the -same symbols, as the soul grows in depth and experience. But -her symbolization of God, and of our apprehension of Him as -Light and Fire, is too solidly established in her mind, to allow -her to emphasize the darkness-symbol with any reference to -Him.</p> - -<p>“There where Christ is enclosed (in the soul), all the old -is changed by Him,—the one is transformed into the Other, -in a marvellous union. To live as I and yet not I; and my -very being to be not mine: this is so great a cross-purpose -(<i>traversio</i>), that I know not how to define it,” vv. 28-30. This -vivid description, based of course upon St. Paul, of the -apparent shifting of the very centre of the soul’s personality, -has left clear echoes in Catherine’s sayings; but the explicit -reference to Christ is here as characteristically Franciscan as -it is unlike Catherine’s special habits.—And the great poem -ends with a <i>refrain</i> of its opening apostrophe.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Lode LXXIV, LXXIX, LXXXI, LXXXIII.</i></h5> - -<p>In the dramatically vivid Dialogue between the Old and -the Young Friar “Concerning the divers manners of contemplating -the Cross,” Loda LXXIV, the elder says to the -younger man: “And I find the Cross full of arrows, which -issue from its side: they get fixed in my heart. The Archer -has aimed them at me; He causes me to be pierced,” v. 6. -The Cross is here a bow; and yet the arrows evidently issue<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span> -not from it, but, as so many rays, from the Sun, the Light-Christ, -Who is laid upon it,—from the heart of the Crucified. -Catherine maintains the rays and arrows, and the Sun and -Fire from which they issue; but the Cross and the Crucified, -presupposed here throughout, appear not, even to this extent, -in her post-conversion picturings.—“You abide by the -warmth, but I abide within the fire; to you it is delight, but -I am burning through and through, I cannot find a place of -refuge in this furnace,” v. 13. All this has been echoed -throughout by Catherine.</p> - -<p>Loda LXXIX, “Of the Divine Love and its Praises,” has -evidently much influenced her. “O joyous wound, delightful -wound, gladsome wound, for him who is wounded by Thee, -O Love!” “O Love, divine Fire! Love full of laughter and -playfulness!” “O Love, sweet and suave; O Love, Thou -art the key of heaven! Ship that Thou art, bring me to port -and calm the tempest,” vv. 3, 6, 16. All this we have found -reproduced in her similes and experiences. “Love, bounteous -in spending Thyself; Love with widespread tables!” “Love, -Thou art the One that loves, and the Means wherewith the -heart loves Thee!” vv. 24, 26. These verses give us the -wide, wide world outlook, the connection between Love and -the Holy Eucharist, and the identity of the Subject, Means, -and Object of Love, which are all so much dwelt upon by -Catherine.</p> - -<p>Loda LXXXI is interesting by the way in which, although -treating of “the love of Christ upon the Cross,” it everywhere -apostrophizes Love and not the Lover, and treats the former, -again like Catherine, as a kind of boundless living substance; -indeed v. 17 must have helped to suggest one of her favourite -conceptions: “O great Love, greater than the great sea! Oh! -the man who is drowned within it, under it, and with it all -around him, whilst he knows not where he is!”</p> - -<p>Loda LXXXIII has two touches dear to Catherine. “O -Love, whose name is ‘I love’—the plural is never found,” v. 5,—a -saying which evidently is directed, not against a social -conception of religion, but against a denial of the Divine Love -being Source as well as Object of our love; and “I did not -love Thee with any gain to myself, until I loved Thee for -Thine own sake,” v. 15,—a declaration of wondrous depth -and simplicity.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Lode LXXXVIII, LXXXIX, LXXXX, LXXXXVIII, -LXXXXIX.</i></h5> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span></p> - -<p>The great Loda LXXXVIII, “How the soul complains to -God concerning the excessive ardours of the love infused into -it,” contains numerous touches which have been interestingly -responded to or ignored by Catherine. “All my will is on -fire with Love, is united, transformed (into It); who can bear -such Love? Nor fire nor sword can part the loving soul and -her Love; a thing so united cannot be divided; neither -suffering nor death can henceforth mount up to that height -where the soul abides in ecstasy,” vv. 5, 6: a combination -of St. Paul and Plotinus, quite after Catherine’s heart. But -“the light of the sun appears to me obscure, now that I -see that resplendent Countenance,” v. 7, has an anthropomorphic -touch to which she does not respond; and “I have -given all my heart, that it may possess that Lover who -renews me so,—O Beauty ancient and ever new!” v. 10, has -the personal designation “Lover,” which, again, is alien to her -vocabulary.</p> - -<p>“Seeing such Beauty, I have been drawn out of myself … -and the heart now gets undone, melted as though it were wax, -and finds itself again, with the likeness of Christ upon it,” -v. 11, must have stimulated, by its first part, some of her own -experiences, and will, by its second part, taken literally, have -helped on the fantastic expectations of her attendants. “Love -rises to such ardour, that the heart seems to be transfixed as -with a knife,” v. 14, no doubt both expressed an experience of -Jacopone and helped to constitute the form of a similar -experience on the part of Catherine. “As iron, which is all -on fire, as dawn, made resplendent by the sun, lose their own -form (nature) and exist in another, so is it with the pure -mind, when clothed by Thee, O Love,” v. 21, contains ideas, -(all but the symbol of clothing,) very dear to Catherine. But -the astonishingly daring words: “Since my soul has been -transformed into Truth, into Thee, O Christ alone, into Thee -Who art tender Loving,—not to myself but to Thee can be -imputed what I do. Hence, if I please Thee not, Thou dost -not please Thine Own Self, O Love!” v. 22, remain unechoed -by her, no doubt because her states shift from one to another, -and she wisely abstains from pushing the articulation of any -one of them to its own separate logical limit.</p> - -<p>“Thou wast born into the world by love and not by flesh, -O Love become Man (<i>humanato Amore</i>),” v. 27, is like her in -its interesting persistence in the “Love” (not “Lover”) designation, -but is unlike her in its definite reference to the historic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span> -Incarnation. “Love, O Love, Jesus, I have reached the -haven,” v. 32, is closely like her, all but the explicit mention -of the historic name; and “Love, O Love, Thou art the full-orbed -circle,” “Thou art both warp and woof,” beginning and -end, material and transforming agency, v. 33, is Catherine’s -central idea, expressed in a form much calculated to impress -it upon her.</p> - -<p>The daring and profound Loda LXXXIX, “How the soul, -by holy self-annihilation and love, reaches an unknowable -and indescribable state,” contains again numerous touches -which have been assimilated by Catherine. So with: “Drawn -forth, out of her natural state, into that unmeasurable condition -whither love goes to drown itself, the soul, having plunged -into the abyss of this ocean, henceforth cannot find, on any -side, any means of issuing forth from it,” vv. 12, 13. So also -with: “Since thou dost no longer love thyself, but alone that -Goodness … it has become necessary for thee again to love -thyself, but with His Love,—into so great an unity hast thou -been drawn by Him,” vv. 52-54. So too with: “All Faith -ceases for the soul to whom it has been given to see; and all -Hope, since it now actually holds what it used to seek,” v. 70, -although this is more absolute than are her similar utterances.—But -especially are the startling words interesting: “In -this transformation, thou drinkest Another, and that Other -drinketh thee (<i>tu bevi e sei bevuto, in transformazione</i>),” v. 98, -which, in their second part, are identical with R. Browning’s -“My end, to slake Thy thirst”:<a name="FNanchor_111_111" id="FNanchor_111_111"></a><a href="#Footnote_111_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a> for they will have helped to -support or to encourage Catherine’s corresponding inversion—the -teaching of an eating, an assimilation, not of God by man, -but of man by God. Both sets of images go back, of course, -to the Eucharistic reception by the soul of the God-man Christ, -under the forms of Bread eaten and of Wine drunk.</p> - -<p>The striking Loda LXXXX, “How the soul arrives at a -treble state of annihilation,” has doubtless suggested much to -Catherine. “He who has become the very Cause of all -things” (<i>chi è cosa d’ogni cosa</i>) “can never more desire anything,” -v. 4, is, it is true, more daring, because more quietly -explicit, than any saying of hers. But v. 13 has been echoed -by her throughout: “The heavens have grown stagnant; their -silence constrains me to cry aloud:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span> ‘O profound Ocean, the -very depth of Thine Abyss has constrained me to attempt and -drown myself within it,’”—where note the interestingly antique -presupposition of the music of the spheres, which has now -stopped, and of the watery constitution of the crystalline -heaven, which allows of stagnation; and the rapidity of the -change in the impressions,—from immobility to silence, and -from air to water. Indeed that Ocean is one as much of air -as of water, and as little the one as the other; and its attractive -force is still that innate affinity between the river-soul and its -living Source and Home, the Ocean God, which we have so -constantly found in Plotinus, Proclus, and Dionysius. “The -land of promise is, for such a soul, no longer one of promise -only: for the perfect soul already reigns within that land. -Men can thus transform themselves, in any and every place,” -v. 18, has, in its touching and lofty Stoic-Christian teaching, -found the noblest response and re-utterance in and by -Catherine’s words and life.</p> - -<p>Loda LXXXXVIII, “Of the Incarnation of the Divine -Word,” full though it is of beautiful Franciscanism, has left -her uninfluenced. But the fine Loda LXXXXIX, “How true -Love is not idle,” contains touches which have sunk deep -into her mind. “Splendour that givest to all the world its -light, O Love Jesus … heaven and earth are by Thee; -Thine action resplends in all things and all things turn to -Thee. Only the sinner despises Thy Love and severs himself -from Thee, his Creator,” v. 6, is, in its substance, taken over -by her. “O ye cold sinners!” v. 12, is her favourite epithet. -And vv. 13, 14, with their rapid ringing of the changes on the -different sense-perceptions, will, by their shifting vividness, -have helped on a similar iridescence in her own imagery: “O -Odour, that transcendest every sweetness! O living river of -Delight … that causest the very dead to return to their -vigour! In heaven Thy lovers possess Thine immense Sweetness, -tasting there those savoury morsels.”</p> - -<p>And finally Loda LXXXVII, “Of true and false discretion,” -which, in vv. 12-20, consists of a dialogue between “the Flesh” -and “the Reason,” will have helped to suggest the slight -beginnings of this form of apprehension to Catherine which -we have found amongst her authentic sayings and experiences, -and which were, later on, developed on so large a scale, by -Battista Vernazza, throughout her long <i>Dialogo della Beata -Caterina</i>.</p> - -<p>5. Jacopone it is, then, who furnished Catherine with much -help towards that rare combination of deep feeling with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span> -severely abstract thinking which, if at times it somewhat -strains and wearies us moderns who would ever end with the -concrete, gives a nobly virile, bracing note to even the most -effective of her sayings.</p> - -<h4>V. <span class="smcap">Points Common to all Five Minds; and Catherine’s -Main Difference from her Four Predecessors.</span></h4> - -<p>If we now consider for a moment the general points -common to the four writers just considered and to Catherine, -we readily note that all five are profoundly reflective and -interpretative in their attitude towards the given contingencies -of traditional religion; that they all tend to find the Then -and There of History still at work, in various degrees, Here -and Now, throughout Time and Space, and in the last resort, -above and behind both these categories, in a spaceless, timeless -Present. And if only three, Paul, Jacopone, and Catherine, -bear marks, throughout all they think and feel and do -and are, of the cataclysmic conversion-crisis through which -they had passed,—the temporally intermediate two, John and -Dionysius, have also got, but in a more indirect form, much -of a similar Dualism. All five are, in these and other respects, -indefinitely closer to each other than any one of them is to -the still richer, more complete, and more entirely balanced -though less articulated, Synoptic teaching, which enfolds all -that is abiding in those other five, whilst they, even if united, -do not approximately exhaust the substance of that teaching.</p> - -<p>And if we would briefly define the main point on which -Catherine holds views additional to, or other than, those other -four, we must point to her Purgatorial teaching, which has -received but little or no direct suggestion from any one of -them, and which, whatever may have been its literary precursors -and occasions, gives, perhaps more than anything else, -a peculiarly human and personal, original and yet still modern, -touch to what would otherwise be, to our feeling, too abstract -and antique a spiritual physiognomy.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span></p> - -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_XI" id="CHAPTER_XI"></a>CHAPTER XI<br /> -<span class="smaller">CATHERINE’S LESS ULTIMATE THIS-WORLD DOCTRINES</span></h3> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Introductory: Catherine’s less ultimate Positions, -concerning our Life here, are Four.</span></h4> - -<p>We have now attempted, (by means of a doubtless more or -less artificial distinction between things that, in real life, constitute -parts of one whole in a state of hardly separable inter-penetration,) -a presentation of Catherine’s special, mental and -psycho-physical, character and temperament, and of the principal -literary stimulations and materials which acted upon, and -in return were refashioned by, that character; and we have also -given, in sufficient detail, the resultant doctrines and world-view -acquired and developed by that deep soul and noble mind. -The most important and difficult part of our task remains, -however, still to be accomplished,—the attempt to get an (at -least approximate) estimate of the abiding meaning, place, -and worth of this whole, highly synthesized position, for and -within the religious life generally and our present-day requirements -in particular. For the general outline of the -Introduction, (intended there more as an instrument of research -and classification for the literature and history then about to -be examined, than as this history’s final religious appraisement,) -cannot dispense us from now attempting something -more precise and ultimate.—I propose, then, to give the next -four chapters to an examination of Catherine’s principal positions -and practices, the first two, respectively, to “the less -ultimate This-World Doctrines”; and “the Other-World -Doctrines,” or “the Eschatology”; and the last two to -“the Ultimate Implications and Problems” underlying both. -The last chapter shall then sum up the whole book, and -consider the abiding place and function of Mysticism, in its -contrast to, and supplementation of, Asceticism, Institutionalism, -and the Scientific Habit and Activity of the Mind.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span></p> - -<p>Now I think the less ultimate spiritual positions, as far -as they concern our life here below, which are specially -represented, or at least forcibly suggested by, Catherine, can -reasonably be accounted as four: Interpretative Religion; -a strongly Dualistic attitude towards the body; Quietude and -Passivity; and Pure Love. I shall devote a section to each -position.</p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">Interpretative Religion.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Difficulties of the Subjective element of Religion.</i></h5> - -<p>Now, by Interpretative Religion, I do not mean to imply -that there is anywhere, in <i>rerum natura</i>, such a thing as a -religion which is not interpretative, which does not consist as -truly of a reaction on the part of the believing soul to certain -stimulations of and within it, as of these latter stimulations -and actions. As every (even but semi-conscious) act and -state of the human mind, ever embraces both such action of -the object and such reaction of the subject,—a relatively -crude fact of sensation or of feeling born in upon it, and an -interpretation, an incorporation of this fact by, and into, the -living tissue and organism of this mind: so is it also, necessarily -and above all, with the deepest and most richly -complex of all human acts and states,—the specifically -religious ones. But if this interpretative activity of the mind -was present from the very dawn of human reason, and exists -in each individual in the precise proportion as mind can be -predicated as operative within him at all: this mental activity -is yet the last element in the compound process and result -which is, or can be, perceived as such by the mind itself. The -process is too near to the observer, even when he is once -awake to its existence; he is too much occupied with the -materials brought before his mind and with moulding and -sorting them out; and this moulding and sorting activity is -itself too rapid and too deeply independent of those materials -as to its form, and too closely dependent upon them as to its -content, for the observation by the mind of this same mind’s -contributions towards its own affirmations of reality and of -the nature of this reality, not ever to appear late in the history -of the human race or in the life of any human individual, or -not to be, even when it appears difficult, a fitful and an -imperfect mental exercise.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span></p> - -<p>And when the discovery of this constant contribution of -the mind to its own affirmations of reality is first made, it can -hardly fail, for the time being, to occasion misgivings and -anxieties of a more or less sceptical kind. Is not the whole -of what I have hitherto taken to be a solid world of sense -outside me, and the whole of the world of necessary truth and -of obligatory goodness within me,—is it not, perhaps, all a -merely individual creation of my single mind—a mind cut off -from all effective intercourse with reality,—my neighbour’s -mind included? For all having, so far, been held to be -objective, the mind readily flies to the other extreme, and -suspects all to be subjective. Or if all my apprehensions -and certainties are the resultants from the interaction between -impressions received by my senses and mind and reactions -and elaborations on the part of this mind with regard to those -impressions, how can I be sure of apprehending rightly, -unless I can divide each constituent off from the other? And -yet, how can I effect such a continuous discounting of my -mind’s action by means of my own mind itself?</p> - -<p>And this objection is felt most keenly in religion, when the -religious soul first wakes up to the fact that itself, of necessity -and continuously, contributes, by its own action, to the constitution -of those affirmations and certainties, which, until then, -seemed, without a doubt, to be directly borne in upon a purely -receptive, automatically registering mind, from that extra-, -super-human world which it thus affirmed. Here also, all -having for so long been assumed to be purely objective, the -temptation now arises to consider it all as purely subjective. -Or again, if we insist upon holding that, here too, there are -both objective and subjective elements, we readily experience -keen distress at our inability clearly to divide off the -objective, which is surely the reality, from the subjective, -which can hardly fail to be its travesty.</p> - -<p>And finally, this doubt and trouble would seem to find -specially ready material in the mystical element and form of -religion. For here, as we have already seen, psycho-physical -and auto-suggestive phenomena and mechanisms abound; -here especially does the mind cling to an immediate access -to Reality; and here the ordinary checks and complements -afforded by the Historical and Institutional, the Analytically -Rational, and the Volitional, Practical elements of Religion -are at a minimum. Little but the Emotional and the Speculatively -Rational elements seems to remain; and these, more<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span> -than any others, appear incapable of admitting that they -are anything other than the pure and direct effects and -expressions of spiritual Reality.</p> - -<p>What, then, shall we think of all this?</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Answers to the above difficulties.</i></h5> - -<p>We evidently must, in the first instance, guard against any -attempt at doing a doctrinaire violence to the undeniable facts -of our consciousness or of its docile analysis, by explaining -all our knowledge, or only even all our knowledge of any -single thing, as either of purely subjective or of purely -objective provenance; for everywhere and always these two -elements co-exist in all human apprehension, reason, feeling, -will, and faith. We find, throughout, an organization, an -indissoluble organism, of subjective and objective, hence a -unity in diversity, which is indeed so great that (for our own -experience and with respect to our own minds at all events), -the Subjective does not and cannot exist without the Objective, -nor the Objective without the Subjective.</p> - -<p>In the next place, we must beware against exalting the -Objective against the Subjective, or the Subjective against -the Objective, as if Life, Reality, and Truth consisted in the -one rather than the other. Because the subjective element is, -on the first showing, a work of our own minds, it does not -follow (as we shall see more clearly when studying the ultimate -problems) that its operations are bereft of correspondence -with reality, or, at least, that they are further from reality -than are our sense-perceptions. For just as the degree of -worth represented by these sense-perceptions can range from -the crudest delusion to a stimulation of primary importance -and exquisite precision, so also our mental and emotional -reaction and penetration represent almost any and every -degree of accuracy and value.</p> - -<p>And, above all, as already implied, the true priority and -superiority lies, not with one of these constituents against the -other, but with the total subjective-objective interaction and -resultant, which is superior, and indeed gives their place and -worth to, those ever interdependent parts.</p> - -<p>Now, in the general human experience, the Objective element -is constituted, in the first instance and for clear and ready -analysis, by the sense-stimulations; and, after some mental -response to and elaboration of these, by the larger psychic -moods; and later still, by the examples of great spiritual -attitudes and of great personalities offered by other souls to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span> -the soul that keeps itself open to such impressions. And -though the sense of Reality (as contrasted with Appearance), -of the Abiding and Infinite (as different from the Passing and -the Finite), are doubtless awakened, however faintly and -inarticulately, in the human soul from the first, as the background -and presupposition of the foreground and the middle-distances -of its total world of perceptions and aspirations: -yet all these middle-distances, as well as that great background -and groundwork, would remain unawakened but for those -humble little sense-perceptions on the one hand, and intercourse -with human fellow-creatures on the other. And in -such intercourse with the minds and souls, or with the literary -remains and other monuments of souls, either still living here -or gone hence some two thousand years or more, a mass of -mental and moral impressions and stimulations, which, in -those souls, were largely their own elaborations, offer themselves -to any one human mind, or to the minds of a whole generation -or country, with the apparent homogeneity of a purely objective, -as it were a sense-impression.</p> - -<p>Especially in Religion the Historical and Institutional (as -Religion’s manifestation in space and time), come down to us -thus from the past and surround us in the present, and either -press in upon us with a painful weight, or support us with a -comforting solidity, thus giving them many of the qualities -of things physically seen and touched, say, a mystery play or -a vast cathedral. And, on the other hand, the Rational, -(whether Analytic or Synthetic,) and the Emotional and -Volitional Elements, whenever they are at all preponderant -or relatively independent of the other, more objective ones, -are liable, in Religion, to look quite exceptionally subjective,—and -this in the unfavourable sense of the word, as though -either superfluous and fantastic, or as dangerous and destructive.—And -yet both that look of the objective elements being, -in Religion, more self-sufficing than they appear to be in the -ordinary psychic, or the artistic, or social, or scientific life; -and that impression conveyed by the subjective elements in -Religion, as being there less necessary or more dangerous -than elsewhere, are doubtless deceptive. These impressions -are simply caused by two very certain facts. Religion is the -deepest and most inclusive of all the soul’s energizings -and experiences, and hence all its constituents reveal a -difference, at least in amount and degree, when compared -with the corresponding constituents of the more superficial<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span> -and more partial activities of the soul; and Religion, just -because of this, requires the fullest action and co-operation, the -most perfect unity, in and through diversity, of all the soul’s -powers, and all mere non-use of any of these forces, even any -restriction to the use of but one or two, is here, more readily -and extensively than elsewhere, detrimental both to the non-exercised -and to the exercised forces, and, above all, is impoverishing -to the soul itself and to its religion.</p> - -<p>Hence, here as elsewhere, but more than anywhere, our ideal -standard will be the greatest possible development of, and -inter-stimulation between, each and all of the religious elements, -with the greatest possible unity in the resulting organism. -And yet,—in view of the very greatness of the result aimed at, -and of the fact that its even approximate attainment can, -even for any one age of the world, be reasonably expected -only from the co-operation of the differently endowed and -attracted races and nations, social and moral grades, sexes, -ages and individuals that make up mankind,—we shall not -only be very tolerant of, we shall positively encourage, largely -one-sided developments, provided that each keeps some touch -with the elements which itself knows not how to develop in -abundance, and that it considers its own self, and works out -its own special gift and <i>attrait</i>, as but one out of many variously -gifted and apportioned fellow-servants in the Kingdom,—as -only one of the countless, mutually complementary, -individually ever imperfect, part-expressions of the manifold -greatness, of the rich unity of spiritual humanity as willed by -God, and of God Himself.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Partial developments of the full Gospel Ideal.</i></h5> - -<p>Now in the New Testament we have a most instructive, at -first sight puzzling phenomenon, illustrative of the positions -just taken up. For here it is clear that, with regard to the -distinction between richly many-sided but as yet unarticulated -religion, and comparatively one-sided and limited but profoundly -developed religion, we have two considerably -contrasted types of spiritual tone and teaching. We get -the predominantly “Objective” strand of life and doctrine, -in the pre-Pauline parts and in their non-Pauline echoes, -<i>i.e.</i> in the substance of the Synoptic tradition, and in -the Epistles of St. James and of St. Peter; and we find the -predominantly “Subjective” strain in the “Pauline” parts, St. -Paul’s Epistles and the Joannine Gospel and Letters.—And -it has become more and more clear that it is the pre-Pauline<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span> -parts which give us the most immediately and literally -faithful, and especially the most complete and many-sided, -picture of Our Lord’s precise words and actions; whereas the -Pauline parts give us rather what some of these great creative -forces were and became for the first generations of Christians -and for the most penetrating of Christ’s early disciples and -lovers. And yet it is the latter documents which, at first -sight, appear to be the deeper, the wider, and the more profoundly -spiritual; whereas the former look more superficial, -more temporal and local, and more simply popular and -material.</p> - -<p>And yet,—though this first impression has been held to be -finally true by large masses of Christians; although the Greek -Fathers predominantly, and, in the West, the great soul of an -Augustine, and the powerful but one-sided personalities of a -Luther and a Calvin have, in various degrees and ways, helped -to articulate and all but finally fix it for the general Christian -consciousness: this view is yielding, somewhat slowly but -none the less surely, to the sense that it is the Synoptic, the -pre-Pauline tradition which contains the fuller arsenal of the -spiritual forces which have transfigured and which still inspire -the world of souls. This, of course, does not mean that the -Pauline-Joannine developments were not necessary, or are -not abiding elements towards the understanding of the -Christian spirit.</p> - -<p>And, to come to the true answer to our objection, such a -judgment does not mean that the reflective penetration and -reapplication of the original more spontaneous message was, -from the very nature of the case, inferior to the first less -articulated announcement of the Good Tidings. But it merely -signifies that this necessary process of reflection could only -be applied to parts of the original, immensely rich and varied, -because utterly living, divinely spiritual, whole; and that, -thus, the special balance and tension which characterized the -original, complete spirit and temper, could, however profoundly, -be reproduced only in part. For the time being -this later penetration and resetting of some elements from -among the whole of Our Lord’s divinely rich and simple life -and teaching, necessarily and rightly, yet none the less most -really, ignored, or put for the time into some other context, -certain other sides and aspects of that primitive treasure of -inexhaustible experience. Only the full, equable, and simultaneous -unfolding of all the petals could have realized the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span> -promise and content of the bud; whereas the bud, holding -enfolded within itself such various elements and combinations -of truth, could not expand its petals otherwise than -successively, hence, at any one moment only somewhat one-sidedly -and partially. Each and all of these unfoldings bring -some further insight into, and articulation of, the original -spiritual organism; and that they are not more, but less, than -the totality of that primitive experience and revelation, does -not prove that such reflective work is wrong or even simply -dispensable,—for, on the contrary, in some degree or form -it was and ever is necessary to the soul’s apprehension of -that life and truth,—but simply implies the immensity of -the spiritual light and impulsion given by Our Lord, and the -relative smallness of even the greatest of His followers.</p> - -<p>Thus only if it could be shown that those parts of the New -Testament which doubtless give us the nearest approach to -the actual words and deeds of Our Lord require us to conceive -them as having been without the reflective and emotional -element; or again that, in the case of the more -derivative parts of the New Testament, it is their reflectiveness, -and not their relative incompleteness and one-sidedness, -that cause them to be more readily englobed in the former -world, than that former world in the latter: could the facts -here found be used as an argument against the importance -and strict necessity for religion of the reflective and emotional, -the “Subjective” elements, alongside of the “Objective,” the -Historical and Institutional ones.</p> - -<p>It is a most legitimate ground for consolation to a Catholic -when he finds the necessities of life and those of learned -research both driving us more and more to this conclusion; -for it is not deniable that Catholicism has ever refused to -do more than include the Pauline and Joannine theologies -amongst its earliest and most normative stimulations and -expressions; and that it has ever retained, far more than -Protestantism, the sense, which (upon the whole) is most -unbrokenly preserved by the Synoptists, of, if I may so -phrase it, the Christianity of certain true elements in the pre- and -extra-Christian religions. For it is in the Synoptists -that we get the clear presentation of Our Lord’s attitude -towards the Jewish Church of His time, as one, even at its -keenest, analogous to that of Savonarola, and not to that -of a Luther, still less of a Calvin, towards the Christian -Church of their day.—Indeed in these documents all idea<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span> -of limiting Christianity to what He brought of new, appears -as foreign to His mind as it ever has been to that of the -Catholic Church. Here we get the most spontaneous and -many-sided expression of that divinely human, widely traditional -and social, all-welcoming and all-transforming spirit, -which embraces both grace <i>and</i> nature, eternity <i>and</i> time, -soul <i>and</i> body, attachment <i>and</i> detachment. The Pauline -strain stands for the stress necessary to the full spiritualization -of all those occasions and materials, as against all, mere -unregenerate or static, retention of the simple rudiments or -empty names of those things; and predominantly insists -upon grace, <i>not</i> nature; eternity, <i>not</i> time; soul, <i>not</i> body; -the cross and death here, the Crown and Life hereafter. No -wonder it is this latter strain that gets repeated, with varying -truth and success, in times of acute transition, and by characters -more antithetic than synthetic, more great at developing a -part of the truth than the whole.</p> - -<p>Thinkers, of such wide historical outlook and unimpeachable -detachment from immediate controversial interest -as Prof. Wilhelm Dilthey and Dr. Edward Caird, have -brought out, with admirable force, this greater fulness of -content offered by the Synoptists, and how the Pauline-Joannine -writings give us the first and most important of -those concentrations upon, and in part philosophic and -mystical reinterpretations of, certain constituents of the -original happenings, actions and message, as apprehended -and transmitted by the first eye-witnesses and believers.<a name="FNanchor_112_112" id="FNanchor_112_112"></a><a href="#Footnote_112_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a>—Here -I would but try and drive home the apparently vague, -but in reality ever pressing and concrete, lesson afforded by -the clear and dominant fact of these two groups within the -New Testament itself:—of how no mere accumulation of -external happenings, or of external testimony as to their -having happened,—no amount of history or of institutionalism, -taken as sheer, purely positive givennesses,—can -anywhere be found, or can anywhere suffice for the human -mind and conscience, in the apprehension and embodiment -of the truth. For although, in Our Lord’s most literally -transmitted sayings and doings, this continuous and inalienable -element of the apprehending, organizing, vitalizing mind<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span> -and heart,—on His part above all, but also on the part of His -several hearers and chroniclers,—can mostly still be traced -and must everywhere be assumed: yet it is in the Pauline-Joannine -literature that the ever important, the rightly and -fruitfully “subjective,” the speculative and emotional, the -mystical and the volitional strain can best be studied, both -as to its necessity and as to its special character and dangers, -because here it is developed to the relative exclusion of the -other factors of complete religion.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>The exclusive emotionalism of Dionysius and Jacopone.</i></h5> - -<p>Now if even in St. Paul and St. John there is a strong -predominance of these reflective-emotional elements, in -Dionysius and Jacopone they threaten to become exclusive -of everything else. Especially is this the case with the -Pseudo-Areopagite, steeped as he is in reflection upon -reflections and in emotion upon emotions, often of the -most subtle kind: a Christian echo, with curiously slight -modifications, of Neo-Platonism in its last stage,—hence, -unfortunately, of the over-systematic and largely artificial -Proclus, instead of the predominantly experimental and often -truly sublime Plotinus. And even Jacopone, although he -has distinctly more of the historic element, is still predominantly -reflective-emotional, and presents us with many a -hardly modified Platonic or Stoic doctrine, derived no doubt -from late Graeco-Roman writers and their mediaeval Christian -echoes.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Catherine’s interpretation of the Gospel Ideal.</i></h5> - -<p>Catherine herself, although delightfully free from the long -scale of mediations between the soul and God which forms -one of the predominant doctrines of the Areopagite, continues -and emphasizes most of what is common, and much -of what is special to, all and each of these four writers; she -is a reflective saint, if ever there was one. And of her too -we shall have to say that she is great by what she possesses, -and not by what she is without: great because of her noble -embodiment of the reflective and emotional, the mystical and -volitional elements of Christianity and Religion generally. -Religion is here, at first sight at least, all but entirely a -thought and an emotion; yet all this thought and emotion -is directed to, and occasioned by, an abiding Reality which -originates, sustains, regulates, and fulfils it. And although this -Reality is in large part conceived, in Greek and specially in -Neo-Platonist fashion, rather under its timeless and spaceless,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span> -or at least under its cosmic aspect, rather as Law and Substance, -than as Personality and Spirit: yet, already because -of the strong influence upon her of the noblest Platonic -doctrine, it is loved as overflowing Love and Goodness, as -cause and end of all lesser love and goodness; and the real, -though but rarely articulated, acceptance and influence of -History and Institutions, above all the enthusiastic devotion -to the Holy Eucharist with all its great implications, gives to -the whole a profoundly Christian tone and temper.</p> - -<p>True, the Church at large, indeed the single soul (if we -would take such a soul as our standard of completeness) -requires a larger proportion of those crisp, definite outlines, -of those factual, historical, and institutional elements; a -very little less than what remains in Catherine of these -elements, and her religion would be a simple, even though -deep religiosity, a general aspiration, not a definite finding, -an explicit religion. Yet it remains certain, although ever -readily forgotten by religious souls, especially by theological -apologists, that without some degree and kind of those -outgoing, apprehending, interpreting activities, no religion is -possible. Only the question as to what these activities should -be, and what is their true place and function within the whole -religious life, remains an open one. And this question we -can study with profit in connection with such a life and -teaching as Catherine’s, which brings out, with a spontaneous, -childlike profundity and daring, the elemental religious -passion, the spiritual hunger and thirst of man when he is -once fully awake; the depths within him anticipating the -heights above him; the affinity to and contact with the -Infinite implied and required by that nobly incurable restlessness -of his heart, which finds its rest in Him alone Who -made it.</p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">Dualistic Attitude towards the Body.</span></h4> - -<p>And if Catherine is profoundly reflective, that reflection is, -in its general drift, deeply dualistic,—at least in the matter -of body and spirit. Their difference and incompatibility; -the spirit’s fleeing of the body; the spirit’s getting outside -of it,—by ecstasy, for a little while, even in this earthly -life, and by this earthly body’s death, for good and all; the -body a prison-house, a true purgatory to the soul: all this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span> -hangs well together, and is largely, in its very form, of -ultimately Neo-Platonist or Platonic origin.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>New Testament valuations of the body.</i></h5> - -<p>Now here is one of the promised instances of a double -type—if not of doctrine, yet at least of emotional valuation -in the New Testament.</p> - -<p>(1) In the Synoptist documents, (with the but apparent, or -at least solitary, exceptions, of Jesus’ Fasting in the Desert -and of His commendation of those who have made themselves -eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven),<a name="FNanchor_113_113" id="FNanchor_113_113"></a><a href="#Footnote_113_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a> we find no direct or -acute antagonism to the body, even to the average earthly -human body, in the teaching and practice of Our Lord. The -Second Coming and its proximity do indeed, here also, dwarf -all earthly concerns, in so far as earthly.<a name="FNanchor_114_114" id="FNanchor_114_114"></a><a href="#Footnote_114_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> This background -to the teaching and its tradition was, in course of time, in -part abstracted from, in part restated.—The entrance into -life is through the narrow gate and the steep way; only if -a man turn, can he enter into the Kingdom of God; only if -he lose his soul, can he find it:<a name="FNanchor_115_115" id="FNanchor_115_115"></a><a href="#Footnote_115_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a> this great teaching and -example, as to life and joy being ever reached through death -to self and by the whole-hearted turning of the soul from its -false self to its true source, God: remains, in the very form of -its promulgation as given by the Synoptists, the fundamental -test and standard of all truly spiritual life and progress. But -as to the body in particular, Jesus here knows indeed that “the -flesh is weak,” and that we must pray for strength against its -weakness:<a name="FNanchor_116_116" id="FNanchor_116_116"></a><a href="#Footnote_116_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a> but He nowhere declares it evil—an inevitable -prison-house or a natural antagonist to the spirit. The -beautiful balance of an unbroken, unstrained nature, and a -corresponding doctrine as full of sober earnestness as it is -free from all concentrated or systematic dualism, are here -everywhere apparent.</p> - -<p>(2) It is St. Paul, the man of the strongest bodily passions -and temptations, he who became suddenly free from them by -the all-transforming lightning-flash of his conversion, who, on -and on, remained vividly conscious of what he had been and, -but for that grace, still would be, and of what, through that -grace, he had become. The deepest shadows are thus ever<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span> -kept in closest contrast to the highest lights; and the line -of demarcation between them runs here along the division -between body and soul. “Unhappy man that I am, who can -liberate me from this body of sin?” “In my flesh dwelleth -no good thing”:<a name="FNanchor_117_117" id="FNanchor_117_117"></a><a href="#Footnote_117_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a> are sayings which are both keener in their -tone and more limited in their range than are Our Lord’s. -And we have seen how, in one of his most depressed moods, -he transiently adopts and carries on a specifically Platonist -attitude towards the body’s relation to the soul, as he finds -it in that beautiful, profoundly Hellenistic treatise, the Book -of Wisdom.<a name="FNanchor_118_118" id="FNanchor_118_118"></a><a href="#Footnote_118_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a> This attitude evidently represents, in his strenuous -and deeply Christian character, only a passing feeling; -for, if we pressed it home, we could hardly reconcile it with -his doctrine as to the reality and nature of the body’s resurrection. -It is indeed clear how the Platonist, and especially -the Neo-Platonist, mode of conceiving that relation excludes -any and every kind of body from the soul’s final stage of -purification and happiness; and how the Synoptic, and -indeed the generally Christian conception of it, necessarily -eliminates that keen and abiding dualism characteristic of -the late Greek attitude.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Platonic, Synoptic, and Pauline elements in Catherine’s -view.</i></h5> - -<p>Now in Catherine we generally find an interesting combination -of the Platonic form with the Synoptic substance -and spirit: and this can, of course, be achieved only because -that abiding form itself is made to signify a changed set and -connection of ideas.</p> - -<p>(1) We have seen how she dwells much, Plotinus-like, upon -the soul’s stripping itself of all its numerous garments, and -exposing itself naked to the rays of God’s healing light. Yet -in the original Platonic scheme these garments are put on -by the soul in its descent from spirit into matter, and are -stripped off again in its ascent back out of matter into spirit; -in both cases, they stand for the body and its effects. In -Catherine, even more than in Plotinus, the garments stand -for various evil self-attachments and self-delusions of the -soul; and against these evils and dangers the Synoptists -furnish endless warnings. And yet she insists upon purity, -clear separation, complete abstraction of the soul, in such -terms as still to show plainly enough the originally Neo-Platonist<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span> -provenance of much of her form; for in the Neo-Platonists -we get, even more markedly than here, a like -insistence upon the natural dissimilarity of the body and the -soul, and a cognate longing to get away from it in ecstasy -and death. But whilst in the Neo-Platonists there is, at the -bottom of all this, a predominant belief that the senses are -the primary source and occasion of all sin, so that sin is -essentially the contamination of spirit by matter: in Catherine, -(although she shares to the full Plotinus’s thirst for -ecstasy, as the escape from division and trouble into unity -and peace), impurity stands primarily for self-complacency,—belief -in, and love of, our imaginary independence of even -God Himself; and purity means, in the first instance, the -loving Him and His whole system of souls and of life, and -one’s own self only in and as part of that system.</p> - -<p>It is very instructive to note, in this connection, how, after -her four years of directly penitential and ascetical practice, -(an activity which, even then, extended quite as much to -matters of decentralization of the self as of bodily mortification), -her warfare is, in the first instance, all but exclusively -directed against the successive refuges and ambushes of self-complacency -and self-centredness. Thus there is significance -in the secondary place occupied, (even in the <i>Vita</i>, and -doubtless still more in her own mind), by the question of -continence; indeed her great declaration to the Friar indicates -plainly her profound concentration upon the continuous -practice of, and growth in, Love Divine, and her comparative -indifference to the question of the systematic renunciation of -anything but sin and selfish attachments and self-centrednesses -of any kind. Her conception of sinners as “cold,” even more -than as dark or stained; of God as Fire, even more than as -Light; and of purity as indefinitely increasable, since Love -can grow on and on: all similarly point to this finely -positive, flame-, not snow-conception, in which purity has -ceased to be primarily, as with the Greeks, a simple absence -of soiledness, even if it be moral soiledness, and has become, -as with the Synoptic teaching, something primarily positive, -love itself.</p> - -<p>In her occasionally intense insistence upon herself as being -all evil, a very Devil, and in some of her picturings of her -interior combat, we get, on the other hand, echoes, not of -Plato, nor again of the Synoptist teaching, but of St. Paul’s -“in my flesh there dwelleth no good thing,” and of his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span> -combat between flesh and spirit.—Yet the evil which she is -thus conscious of, is not sensual nor even sensible evil and -temptation, but consists in her unbounded natural claimfulness -and intense inclination to sensitive self-absorption.—And -this gives, indeed, to these feminine echoes of St. Paul a -certain thin shrillness which the original tones have not got, -standing there for the massive experiences of a man violently -solicitated by both sense and spirit. But it leaves her free -to note, as regards the flesh, the whole bodily organism, -(and this in beautiful sympathy with Our Lord’s own genially -fervent, homely heroic spirit), not its wickedness, but -its weakness, its short-livedness, and its appeal for merciful -allowance to God, “Who knows that we are dust.” Instead -of a direct and pointed dualism of two distinct substances -informed by all but incurably antagonistic principles, we -thus get a direct conflict between two dispositions of the -soul, and a but imperfect correspondence between the body -and that soul.</p> - -<p>(2) There is, indeed, no doubt that the very ancient association -of the ideas of Fire and of spiritual Purification goes -back, in the first instance, to the conception of the soul being -necessarily stained by the very fact of its connection with the -body, and of those stains being finally removed by the body’s -death and cremation. We find this severely self-consistent -view scattered up and down Hellenic religion and literature.<a name="FNanchor_119_119" id="FNanchor_119_119"></a><a href="#Footnote_119_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a> -And even in Catherine the fire, a sense of fever-heat, still seizes -the body, and this body wastes away, and leaves the soul more -and more pure, during those last years of illness.—Yet the -striking identity, between that old cluster of ideas and her -own forms of thought, brings out, all the more clearly, the -immense road traversed by spirituality between the substance -of those ideas and the essence of this thought. For in her -teaching, which is but symbolized or at most occasioned by -those physico-psychical fever-heats, the Fire is, at bottom, so -spiritual and so directly busy with the soul alone, that it is -ever identical with itself in Heaven, Hell, Purgatory, and on -earth, and stands for God Himself; and that its effects are -not the destruction of a foreign substance, but the bringing -back, wherever and as far as possible, of the fire-like soul’s -disposition and quality to full harmony with its Fire-source -and Parent, God Himself.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span></p> - -<p>(3) Only the Prison-house simile for the body, as essentially -an earthly purgatory for the soul, must be admitted, I think, -to remain a primarily Platonic, not fully Christianizable conception; -just as the absence of all reference by her to the -resurrection of the body will have been, in part, occasioned -by the strong element of Platonism in her general selection -and combination of ideas. Yet it would obviously be unfair -to press these two points too much, since, as to the resurrection, -her long illness and evidently constant physical discomfort -must, even of themselves, have disinclined her to all -picturing of an abiding, even though highly spiritualized, -bodily organization; and as to the likeness of her body to a -prison and purgatory of the soul, we are expressly told that -it began only with the specially suffering last part of her -life.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Dualism pragmatic, not final. Its limits.</i></h5> - -<p>Now, for this whole matter of the right conception as to the -relations of body and soul, it is clear that any more than -partial and increasingly superable antagonism between body -and spirit cannot be accepted.</p> - -<p>(1) A final Dualism is unsound in Psychology, since all the -first materials, stimulations, and instruments for even our most -abstract thinking are supplied to us by our sense-perceptions, -hence also through the body. It is narrow in Cosmology, for -we do not want to isolate man in this great universe of visible -things; and his link with animal- and plant-life, and even -with the mineral creation, is, increasingly as we descend in -the scale of beings, his body. It is ruinous for Ethics, because -purity, in such a physical-spiritual being as is man, consists -precisely in spiritual standards and laws extending to and -transforming his merely physical inclinations. It is directly -contradictory of the central truth and temper of Christianity, -since these require a full acceptance of the substantial goodness -and the thorough sanctifiableness of man’s body; of God’s -condescension to man’s whole physico-spiritual organism; and -of the persistence or reanimation of all that is essential to -man’s true personality across and after death. And it is, -at bottom, profoundly un-Catholic; the whole Sacramental -system, the entire deep and noble conception of the normal -relations between the Invisible and the Visible being throughout -of the Incarnational type,—an action of the one in the -other, which develops the agent and subject at the same time -that it spiritualizes the patient, the object, is in direct conflict<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span> -with it. Neo-Platonism came more and more to treat the body -and the entire visible creation as an intrinsic obstacle to spirit, -to be eliminated by the latter as completely as possible; at -least this very prominent strain within it was undoubtedly -pushed on to this extreme by the Gnostic sects. But Christianity -has ever to come back to its central presupposition—the -substantial goodness and spiritual utility and transfigurableness -of body and matter; and to its final end,—the -actual transformation of them by the spirit into ever more -adequate instruments, materials, and expressions of abiding -ethical and religious values and realities.</p> - -<p>(2) The fact is that here, as practically at every chief turning-point -in ethical and religious philosophy, the movement -of the specifically Christian life and conviction is not a circle -round a single centre,—detachment; but an ellipse round -two centres,—detachment and attachment. And precisely in -this difficult, but immensely fruitful, oscillation and rhythm -between, as it were, the two poles of the spiritual life; in this -fleeing and seeking, in the recollection back and away from -the visible (so as to allay the dust and fever of growing distraction, -and to reharmonize the soul and its new gains -according to the intrinsic requirements and ideals of the -spirit), and in the subsequent, renewed immersion in the -visible, (in view both of gaining fresh concrete stimulation and -content for the spiritual life, and of gradually shaping and -permeating the visible according to and with spiritual ends -and forces): in this combination, and not in either of these -two movements taken alone, consists the completeness and -culmination of Christianity.<a name="FNanchor_120_120" id="FNanchor_120_120"></a><a href="#Footnote_120_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a></p> - -<p>(3) It no doubt looks, at first sight, as though the Church, -by her canonization of the Monastic Ideal, gave us, for the -ultimate pattern and measure of all Christian perfection, as -pure and simple a flight of the soul from the body and the -world, as (short of insanity or suicide) can be made in this -life. But here we have to remember three things.</p> - -<p>In the first place, the Church not only forbids all attacks -upon the legitimacy, indeed sanctity of marriage, or upon its -necessity, indeed duty, for mankind at large; but St. Augustine -and St. Thomas only articulate her ordinary, strenuously anti-Manichean<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span> -teaching, in declaring that man was originally -created by God, in body and in soul, not for celibacy but for -marriage; and that only owing to the accidental event of the -Fall and of its effects,—the introduction of disorder and excess -into human nature, but not any corruption of its substance -and foundations,—does any inferiority,—the dispositions, -motives, and circumstances being equal,—attach to marriage -as compared with virginity.<a name="FNanchor_121_121" id="FNanchor_121_121"></a><a href="#Footnote_121_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a> Hence, still, the absolute ideal -would be that man could and did use marriage as all other -legitimate functions and things of sense, as a necessary, and -ever more and more perfected, means and expression of truly -human spirituality, a spirituality which ever requires some -non-spiritual material in which to work, and by working in -which the soul itself, not only spiritualizes it, but increasingly -develops its own self.</p> - -<p>And secondly, detachment, unification, spiritual recollection -is the more difficult, and the less obviously necessary, of the -two movements, and yet is precisely the one which (by -coming upon the extant or inchoate attachments, and by suppressing -or purifying them according as they are bad or good) -first stamps any and every life as definitely religious at all. -No wonder, then, that it is this sacred detachment and love -of the Cross that we notice, first of all, in the life and doctrine -of Our Lord and of all His followers, indeed in all truly -religious souls throughout the world; and that the Church -should, by her teaching and selection of striking examples, -ever preach and uphold this most necessary test and ingredient, -this very salt of all virile and fruitful spirituality.</p> - -<p>But, in the third place, a man need only directly attack the -family, society, the state; or art, literature, science,—as -intrinsically evil or even as, in practice, true hindrances to -moral and religious perfection,—and the Church,—both the -learning and experimenting, and the official and formulating -Church,—will at once disavow him: so strong is, at bottom, -the instinct that attachment and variety of interests,—variety -both in kind and in degree—that materials, occasions, and -objects for spirituality to leaven and to raise, and to work -on in order to be itself deepened and developed,—are as -truly essential to the spiritual life as are detachment, and -unity, and transcendence of ultimate motive and aim; these -latter furnishing to the soul the power gradually to penetrate<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span> -all that material, and, in and through this labour, more and -more to articulate its own spiritual character.</p> - -<p>(4) No man can become, or is proclaimed to have become, -a Christian saint, who has not thus achieved a profound -spiritualization and unification of a more or less recalcitrant -material and multiplicity. In some cases, it is the unity and -detachment that greatly predominate over the multiplicity and -attachment,—as, say, in the Fathers of the Desert. In other -cases, it is the variety and attachment that strikes us first -of all,—as, for instance, in Sir Thomas More and Edmund -Campion. And, in a third set of cases, it is the depth of the -unity and detachment, in the breath of the variety and attachment, -which is the dominant characteristic, so with St. Paul -and St. Augustine. Catherine herself belongs, for her great -middle period, rather to the third group than to either of the -other two; only during her penitential period and her last -long illness does she clearly belong to the group of intensely -detached and unified saints.—It is evidently impossible in -such a matter to do more than insist upon the necessity of -both movements; upon the immensely fruitful friction and -tension which their well-ordered alternation introduces into -the soul’s inner life; and upon the full ideal and ultimate -measure for the complete and perfected man, humanity at -large, being a maximum of multiplicity and attachment permeated -and purified by a maximum of unity and detachment. -The life which can englobe and organize both these movements, -with their manifold interaction, will have a multitude -of warm attachments, without fever or distraction, and a great -unity of pure detachment, without coldness or emptiness: it -will have the, winning because rich, simplicity and wondrous -combination of apparent inevitableness and of seeming paradox -furnished by all true life, hence exhibited in its greatest -fulness by the religious life which, at its deepest, is deeper -any other kind of life.</p> - -<h4>III. <span class="smcap">Quietude and Passivity. Points in this -tendency to be considered here.</span></h4> - -<p>We have inevitably somewhat anticipated another matter, -in which Catherine shows all the true Mystic’s affinities: the -craving for simplification and permanence of the soul’s states,—her -practice and teaching as to Quietude and Passivity.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span> -Pushed fully home, this tendency involves four closely related, -increasingly profound, convictions and experiences. Utter -unification of the soul’s functions, indeed utter unity of its -substance: <i>i.e.</i> the soul does one single thing, and seems to -do it by one single act; itself is simply one, and expresses -itself by one sole act. Passivity of the soul: <i>i.e.</i> the soul -does not apparently act at all, it simply <i>is</i> and receives—it is -now nothing but one pure immense recipiency. Immediacy -of contact between the soul and God: <i>i.e.</i> there seems to be -nothing separating, or indeed in any way between, the soul -and God. And, finally, an apparent coalescence of the soul -and God: <i>i.e.</i> the soul <i>is</i> God, and God <i>is</i> the soul.—Only the -first two points, and then the closely related question of Pure -Love, shall occupy us here; the last two points must stand -over for our penultimate chapter.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Distinction between experiences, their expression, and their -analysis.</i></h5> - -<p>We have already studied the psycho-physical occasions, -concomitants, and embodiments of Catherine’s keen desire for, -and profound experience of, spiritual unification and passivity; -and we can have no kind of doubt as to the factual reality -and the practical fruitfulness of the state so vividly described -by her. Here we have only to inquire into the accuracy of -the analysis and terminology effected and employed by her, in -so far as they seem to claim more than simply to describe -the soul’s own feeling and impression as to these states thus -experienced by itself. We have then to consider the nature and -truth of what can roughly be styled Quietism and Passivity.</p> - -<p>Now here especially will it be necessary for us carefully -to distinguish between the direct experiences, impressions, and -instinctive requirements of the soul,—here all souls, in precise -proportion to their depth and delicacy of holiness and of -self-knowledge are our masters, and furnish us with our only -materials and tests; and, on the other hand, the implications -and analysis of these states, as, in the first instance, psychological, -and then as requiring elucidation with regard to their -ontological cause and reality by means of a religious philosophy,—here, -psychology, and religious philosophy, especially -also the discriminations and decisions of theologians and -Church authorities as expressive of these ultimate questions, -will be our guides.<a name="FNanchor_122_122" id="FNanchor_122_122"></a><a href="#Footnote_122_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span></p> - -<p>(1) If we start from the history of the nomenclature which, -(though present only partially in Catherine’s sayings, for she -nowhere uses the term “passivity”), runs, with however varying -a completeness, right through the Christian Mystics -more or less from the first, we shall find that it consists, -roughly, of three stages, and, throughout, of two currents. -There is the Pre-Pauline and Pre-Philonian stage; the stage -of Paul, Philo, and John, through Clement and Origen, on to -Gregory of Nyssa and St. Augustine; and the stage from the -Pseudo-Dionysius onward, down to Nicolas of Coes inclusive, -and which, to this hour, still largely influences us all.—And -there are the two currents. The one tends so to emphasize -the sense and reality of the soul’s simple receptivity, and -of what the soul receives at such, apparently, purely receptive -times, as to ignore, or even practically deny, the undeniable -fact that this very receptivity is, inevitably, an act of its own. -Its decisive terms are Passivity, Fixedness, Oneness. The -other current realizes that Grace does not destroy, violate, or -supplant Nature, either entirely or in part, but that it awakens, -purifies, and completes it, so that every divine influx is also -ever a stimulation of all the good and true energy already, -even though latently, present in the soul. And its characteristic -terms are “Action” (as distinguished from “Activity”), -Growth, Harmony.</p> - -<p>(2) And we should note with care that these two currents -are not simply Heathen and Christian respectively. For if -that great, indeed all but central, term and conception of -“Action” has been wisely generalized by most Christian -Mystics, as the truly Christian substitute for the strongly -Neo-Platonist term “Passivity”: that term and conception -of “Action” was first fixed and elucidated by Aristotle, who, -as Mr. Schiller well puts it, “has packed into his technical -term ‘Energeia,’ and especially into the combination ‘Unmoving -Energy,’ all that was most distinctive, most original,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span> -most fundamental, and most profound in his philosophy”;<a name="FNanchor_123_123" id="FNanchor_123_123"></a><a href="#Footnote_123_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a> -whilst the second term, “Passivity,” goes on figuring in Christian -Mystics and Mystical Theologies—(in spite of its demonstrably -dangerous suggestions and frequently scandalous -history)—because the religious, especially the Christian, consciousness -requires a term for the expression of one element -of all its deepest experiences, that character of “giveness” -and of grace, of merciful anticipation by God, which marks all -such states, in exact proportion to their depth and to the soul’s -awakeness.</p> - -<p>(3) Now Aristotle’s conception of God’s Unmoving Energy, -is taken over by St. Thomas in the form of God being One -Actus Purus,—sheer Energy, His very peace and stillness -coming from the brimming fulness of His infinite life. And -even finite spirit, whilst fully retaining, indeed deepening, its -own character, can and does penetrate finite spirit through -and through,—the law of Physics, which does not admit -more than one body in any one place, having here no kind -of application,—so that the Infinite Spirit is at once conceived -unspiritually, if He is conceived as supplanting, and -not as penetrating, stimulating, and transforming the finite -spirits whom He made into an increasing likeness to Him, -their Maker. And hence according to the unanimous teaching -of the most experienced and explicit of the specifically -Theistic and Christian Mystics, the appearance, the soul’s -own impression, of a cessation of life and energy of the soul -in periods of special union with God or of great advance in -spirituality, is an appearance only. Indeed this, at such -times strong, impression of rest springs most certainly from -an unusually large amount of actualized energy, an energy -which is now penetrating, and finding expression by, every -pore and fibre of the soul. The whole moral and spiritual -creature expands and rests, yes; but this very rest is produced -by Action “unperceived because so fleet,” so near, so all -fulfilling; or rather by a tissue of single acts, mental, emotional, -volitional, so finely interwoven, so exceptionally -stimulative and expressive of the soul’s deepest aspirations, -that these acts are not perceived as so many single acts, -indeed that their very collective presence is apt to remain -unnoticed by the soul itself.</p> - -<p>(4) Close parallels to such a state are abundant in all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span> -phases and directions of the soul’s life. The happiest and -most fruitful moments for our aesthetic sense, those in which our -mind expands most and grows most, hence is most active in -aesthetic “action” (though not “activity”) are those in which -we are unforcedly and massively absorbed in drinking in, with a -quiet intentness, the contrasts and harmonies, the grand unity -in variety, the very presence and spirit of an alpine upland, or -of a river’s flowing, or of the ocean’s outspread, or of the Parthenon -sculptures or of Rafael’s madonnas. At such moments -we altogether cease to be directly conscious of ourselves, of -time or of the body’s whereabouts; and when we return to our -ordinary psychical and mental condition, we do so with an -undeniable sense of added strength and youthfulness,—somewhat -as though our face, old and haggard, were, after gazing -in utter self-oblivion upon some resplendent youthfulness, to -feel, beyond all doubt, all its many wrinkles to have gone. -And so too with the mind’s absorption in some great poem -or philosophy or character.—In all these cases, the mind or -soul energizes and develops, in precise proportion as it is so -absorbed in the contemplation of these various over-againstnesses, -these “countries” of the spirit, as to cease to notice -its own overflowing action. It is only when the mind but -partially attends that a part of it remains at leisure to note -the attention of the other part; when the mind is fully -engrossed, and hence most keenly active, there is no part of -it sufficiently disengaged to note the fact of the engrossment -and action of, now, the whole mind. And, with the direct -consciousness of our mind’s action, we lose, for the time being, -all clear consciousness of the mind’s very existence. And let -it be carefully noted, this absence of the direct consciousness -of the self is as truly characteristic of the deepest, most -creative, moments of full external action: the degree of mind -and will-force operating in Nelson at Trafalgar and in Napoleon -at Waterloo, or again in St. Ignatius of Antioch in the -Amphitheatre, and in Savonarola at the stake, was evidently -in the precisely contrary ratio to their direct consciousness of -it or of themselves at all.</p> - -<p>(5) Now if such “Passivity,” or Action, is in reality the -condition in which the soul attains to its fullest energizing, we -can argue back, from this universal principle, to the nature of -the various stages and kinds of the Prayer and States of -Quiet. In each case, that is, we shall combat the still very -common conception that,—though orthodoxy, it is admitted,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span> -requires <i>some</i> human action to remain throughout,—such -Prayer and States consist (not only as to the immediate -feeling of their subjects, but in reality and in their ultimate -analysis) in an ever-increasing preponderance of divine action -within the soul, and an ever-decreasing remnant of acts of -the soul itself. For such a view assumes that God supplants -man, and that, so to speak, His Hand appears unclothed -alongside of the tissue woven by man’s own mind; whereas -God everywhere but stimulates and supports man whom He -has made, and His Hand moves ever underneath and behind the -tissue,—a tissue which, at best, can become as it were a glove, -and suggest the latent hand. The Divine Action will thus -stimulate and inform the human action somewhat like the -force that drives the blood within the stag’s young antlers, or -like the energy that pushes the tender sap-full fern-buds up -through the hard, heavy ground.</p> - -<p>Thus a special intensity of divine help and presence, and -an unusual degree of holiness and of union, have nothing to -do with the fewness of the soul’s own acts at such times, -but with their quality,—with the preponderance amongst -them of divinely informed acts as against merely natural, or -wrongly self-seeking, or downrightly sinful acts. And since -it is certain that living simplicity is but the harmony and -unification, the synthesis, of an organism, and hence is great in -precise proportion to the greater perfection of that synthesis, -it follows that the living, utterly one-seeming Action or State -will, at such times, contain a maximum number of interpenetrating -acts and energies, all worked up into this -harmonious whole.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Four causes of inadequate analysis.</i></h5> - -<p>It is plain, I think, that one thoroughly normal, one accidental, -and two mischievous, causes have all conspired to -arrest or to deflect the analysis of most of the Mystics themselves -concerning Simplicity.</p> - -<p>For one thing, the soul, as has just been shown, at such -moments of harmonious concentration and of willing and -thinking in union with God’s Light and Will, necessarily -ceases, more or less, to be conscious of its own operations, -and, in looking back, braced and rested as it now is, it cannot -but think that it either did not act at all, or that its action was -reduced to a minimum. For how otherwise could it now feel -so rested, when, after its ordinary activity, it feels so tired -and dissatisfied? and how otherwise could it be so unable to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span> -give any clear account of what happened in those minutes of -union? Yet it is, on the contrary, the very fulness of the -action which has rested, by expanding, the soul; and which -has made the soul, returned to its ordinary distractedness, -incapable of clearly explaining that, now past, concentration.</p> - -<p>The accidental cause has been the fairly frequent, though -not necessary, connection of the more pronounced instances -of such habits of mind with more or less of the psycho-physical -phenomena of ecstasy, in the technical sense of the -word. For, in such trances, the breathing and circulation are -retarded, and the operation of the senses is in part suspended. -And it was easy to reason, from such visible, literal simplification -of the physical life, to a similar modification of the soul’s -action at such times; and, from the assumed desirableness of -that psycho-physical condition, to the advantage of the supposed -corresponding state of the soul itself. Any tendency to -an extreme dualism, as to the relations between body and soul, -would thus directly help on an inclination to downright -Quietism.—Here it is, on the contrary, certain that only in -so far as those psycho-physical simplifications are the results -of, or conditions for, a deepening multiplicity in unity, a fuller -synthetic action of the soul, or, at least, of a fuller penetration -by the soul of even one limited experience or idea—an -operation which entails not less, but more, energizing of the -soul,—are such psycho-physical simplifications of any spiritual -advantage or significance. And in such cases they could not -be indications of the cessation or diminution of the deepest -and most docile energizing of the soul.</p> - -<p>And the mischievous causes were a mistake in Psychology -and a mistake in Theology. For, as to Psychology, not only -was simplicity assumed, (through a mistaken acceptance of -the soul’s own feeling, as furnishing the ultimate analysis of -its state), to consist, at any one moment, of an act materially -and literally one, instead of a great organism of various -simultaneous energizings; but this one act was often held -to require no kind of repetition. Since the act was one as -against any simultaneous multiplicity, so was it one as against -any successive multiplicity, even if this latter were taken as -a repetition differentiated by number alone. And yet here -again energizing <i>is</i> energizing; and though the soul’s acts -overlap and interpenetrate each other, and though when, by -their number and harmony, they completely fill and pacify -the soul, many of them are simultaneously or successively<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span> -present to the soul in their effects alone: it is nevertheless -the renewal, however peaceful and unperceived, of these acts, -which keeps the state of soul in existence. For these acts -are not simply unowned acts that happen to be present within -the soul; they are the soul’s own acts, whether, in addition, -the soul is directly conscious of them or not.</p> - -<p>And, theologically, the idea was often at work that it was -more worthy of God to operate alone and, as it were, <i>in -vacuo</i>; and more creaturely of man to make, or try to make, -such a void for Him. Yet this is in direct conflict with the -fundamental Christian doctrine, of the Condescension, the -Incarnation of God to and in human nature, and of the -persistence, and elevation of this humanity, even in the case -of Christ Himself. God’s action does not keep outside of, -nor does it replace, man’s action; but it is,—Our Lord Himself -has told us,—that of yeast working in meal, which -manifests its hidden power in proportion to the mass of -meal which it penetrates and transforms.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Four Quietistic aberrations.</i></h5> - -<p>Now it is certain that the error of Quietism has, in no -doubt many cases, not remained confined to such mistakes in -psychological analysis and theological doctrine, but that -these have joined hands with, and have furnished a defence -to, sloth and love of dreamy ease, or to some impatience -of the necessary details of life, or to fanatical attachment -to some one mood and form of experience; and that they -have, thus reinforced, ravaged not a few wills and souls.</p> - -<p>Four chief Quietistic aberrations can be studied in history.</p> - -<p>(1) The neglect or even contempt of vocal prayer, and of -the historical and institutional elements of religion, at least -in the case of more advanced souls, is one of these abuses.—Now -it is true, and Catherine has been a striking instance, -that the proportion of all these different elements towards -one another vary, and should vary, considerably between soul -and soul, according to the <i>attrait</i> and degree of advance of -each; that the soul’s most solid advance is in the direction of -an ever-deepened spiritual devotedness, and not in that of a -multiplication of particular devotions; that the use of even -the more central of those elements and means may, for souls -called to the prayer of Quiet, become remarkably elastic and -largely unmethodized; and that, for such souls (and, in various -degrees and ways, sooner or latter, for perhaps most other -souls), a prayer of peacefully humble expectation and of all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span> -but inarticulate, practically indescribable, brooding of love, -and of dim, expansive trust and conformity is possible, sometimes -alone possible, and is proved right and useful, if it -leaves them strengthened to act and to suffer, to help and to -devote themselves to their fellows, to Christ, and to God.</p> - -<p>But it remains equally true, even for these as for all other -souls, that the historical and institutional elements must ever -remain represented, and sufficiently represented; indeed the -persistence in these elements of religion will be one of the -chief means for avoiding delusion. We have St. Teresa’s -experience and teaching here, as a truly classical instance. -And if the prayer of Quiet will give a special colour, depth, -and unity to those more contingent-seeming practices, these -practices will, in return, give a particular definiteness, content, -and creaturely quality to that prayer. And thus too the universally -and profoundly important union and interchange with -souls of other, equally legitimate, kinds and degrees of spirituality -will be kept up. Only the sum-total of all these souls, -only the complete invisible Church, is the full Bride of Christ; -and though the souls composing her may and should each -contribute a varying predominance of different elements, no -soul should be entirely without a certain amount of each of -these constituents.</p> - -<p>(2) Another abuse is the neglect, contempt, or misapplied fear -of not directly religious occupations and labours which, however -otherwise appropriate or even necessary to this soul’s -growth and destination, tend to disturb its quiet and to -absorb a part of its time and attention. Here it is doubtless -true that the other elements of religion are also all more or -less apprehensive and jealous with regard to actual, or even -only possible, non-religious rival interests. And it is certain -that they are all right in so far as that a certain interior -leisureliness and recollection, a certain ultimate preference for -the spiritualizing religious force of the soul as against the -materials, non-religious and other, which that force is to -penetrate, are necessary to the soul that would advance.</p> - -<p>But the fear that characterizes the Historical and Institutional -elements is rather a fear, respectively, of error and of -disobedience and singularity, whereas on the part of the -Mystical element it is a fear of distraction and absorption -away from the <i>Unum Necessarium</i> of the soul. Perhaps even -among the Canonized Mystics there is none that has more -impressively warned us, both by word and example, against<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span> -this insidious danger, than the distinguished Platonist scholar -and deep spiritual writer, Père Jean Nicolas Grou, who, -right through the long mystical period of his life, alternated -his prayer of Quiet with extensive and vigorous critical -work on the Graeco-Latin classics, and whose practice only -wants further expansion and application, (according to the -largely increased or changed conditions of such not directly -religious work), in order to bear much fruit, not only for criticism -and science, but, (by the return-effect of such occupations -upon the soul’s general temper and particular devotional -habits), for spirituality itself. But we must return to this -point more fully in our last chapter.</p> - -<p>(3) The third abuse is the neglect or contempt of morality, -especially on its social, visible, and physical sides. Particular -Mystics, and even whole Mystical schools and movements, -have undoubtedly in some instances, and have, possibly, in -many more cases, been maligned on this point, since even such -a spotless life as Fénelon’s, and that of such a profoundly well-intentioned -woman as Madame Guyon, did not, for a time, -escape the most unjust suspicions. It is also true that, as a -man advances in spirituality, he lays increasing stress upon -the intention and general attitude of the agent, and increasingly -requires to be judged by the same interior standard, if -he is to be rightly understood at all. God may and does, to -humble and purify him, allow painful temptations and trials -from within to combine, apparently, against him, with persecutions -and much isolation from without. And the difference, -rather than the similarity, between Religion and Morality,—the -sense of pure grace, of free pardon, of the strange profound -“givenness” of even our fullest willings and of our most -emphatically personal achievements,—can and should grow in -him more and more.</p> - -<p>And yet it is clear that there must have been some fire to -account for all that smoke of accusation; that the material -and the effect outwards, the <i>body</i> of an action, do matter, as -well as does that action’s <i>spirit</i>; that this body does not only -act thus outwards, but also inwards, back upon the spirit of -the act and of the agent; and that temptations and trials are -purifying, not by their simple presence but in proportion as -they are resisted, or, if they have been yielded to, in proportion -as such defeats are sincerely deplored and renounced. -Thus everywhere the full development of any one part of life, -and the true unity of the whole, have to be achieved through<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span> -the gradual assimilation of at first largely recalcitrant other -elements, and within an ever-abiding multiplicity—a maximum -number of parts and functions interacting within one great -organism. And hence not the outrage, neglect, or supersession -of morality, but, on the contrary, its deeper development, by -more precise differentiation from, and more organic integration -into, religion proper, must, here again and here above all, be -the final aim. Once more again it is the Incarnational type -which is the only fully true, the only genuinely Christian -one.</p> - -<p>(4) And, finally, there are certain hardly classifiable fanaticisms, -which are nevertheless a strictly logical consequence -from a wrongly understood Quiet and Passivity,—from -Quietism in its unfavourable, condemned sense. I am thinking -of such a case as that of Margarethe Peters, a young -Quietist, who caused herself to be crucified by her girl-companions, -at Wildenspuch, near Schaffhausen, in 1823,—in -order to carry out, in full literalness and separateness, the -utmost and most painful passivity and dependence and resistless -self-donation, in direct imitation of the culminating act of -Christ’s life on earth and of His truest followers.<a name="FNanchor_124_124" id="FNanchor_124_124"></a><a href="#Footnote_124_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a> Here, in the -deliberate suicide of this undoubtedly noble Lutheran girl, we -get an act which but brings out the strength and weakness -of Quietism wherever found. For the greatest constituents of -the Christian spirit are undoubtedly there: free self-sacrifice, -impelled by love of God, of Christ, and of all men, and by -hatred of self.—Yet, because they here suppress other, equally -necessary, constituents, and are out of their proper context -and bereft of their proper checks, they but render possible and -actual a deed of piteous self-delusion. How terrible is false -simplification, the short cut taken by pure logic, operating -without a sufficient induction from facts, and within an ardent, -self-immolating temperament!</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Rome’s condemnation of Quietism.</i></h5> - -<p>All this is abundantly sufficient to explain and justify -Rome’s condemnation of Quietism. The term “Quietists” -appears, I think, for the first time,—at least in an invidious -sense,—in the Letter which Cardinal Caraccioli, Archbishop<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span> -of Naples, addressed to Pope Innocent XI (Odescalchi) on -June 30, 1682, and in which he graphically describes the -abuses which, (under pretext or through the misapplication -of spiritual Quiet and Passivity), had now appeared in his -Diocese: souls apparently incapable of using their beads -or making the sign of the Cross; or which will neither say -a vocal prayer nor go to Confession; or which, when in -this prayer of Quiet, even when at Holy Communion, will -strive to drive away any image, even of Our Lord Himself, -that may present itself to their imagination; or which tear -down a Crucifix, as a hindrance to union with God; or which -look upon all the thoughts that come to them in the quietude -of prayer, as so many rays and effluences from God Himself, -exempting them henceforth from every law.<a name="FNanchor_125_125" id="FNanchor_125_125"></a><a href="#Footnote_125_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a></p> - -<p>Yet it is important to bear well in mind, the special circumstances, -the admitted limits, and the probable signification of -Rome’s condemnations.</p> - -<p>(1) As to the circumstances of the time, it appears certain that -it was the ready circulation of the doctrines of the Spanish -priest, Miguel de Molinos in the <i>Guida Spirituale</i>, 1675, and -the abuses of the kind we have just now detailed, and that -sprang from this circulation, which formed the primary reason -and motive for the otherwise excessively severe treatment of -a man and a book, which had both received the very highest -and the most deliberate ecclesiastical approbations. That -these two circumstances were the determining causes of at -least the severity of his condemnation is well brought out -by the circumstance that, during his two years’ trial (1685-1687), -not only the short <i>Guida</i> but his whole obtainable -correspondence (some twenty thousand letters) were examined, -and that it is at least as much on such occasional -manuscript material, and on Molinos’s own oral admissions,—in -prison and doubtless, in part at least, under torture,—that -the condemnation was based, containing, as it does, -certain revoltingly immoral propositions and confessions, -admittedly absent from his published writings.</p> - -<p>But if at least some shadow of doubt rests upon the moral -character of Molinos, not a shadow of such suspicion or of -doubt concerning his perfectly Catholic intentions can, in -justice, be allowed to rest upon his chief follower and the most -distinguished apologist for his doctrine, the saintly Oratorian<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span> -and Bishop, the much-tried Cardinal Petrucci; any more than -Fénelon’s moral and spiritual character, or deeply Catholic -spirit and intentions, can, (in spite of the painfully fierce and -unjust attack upon both by Bossuet in his formally classic -invective, <i>Relation sur le Quiétisme</i>), for one moment be -called in question.<a name="FNanchor_126_126" id="FNanchor_126_126"></a><a href="#Footnote_126_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a> Other admittedly deeply spiritual and -entirely well-intentioned Catholics, whose writings were also -condemned during this time when devotional expressions -having an at all quietistic tinge or drift were very severely -judged, are Mère Marie de l’Incarnation (Marie Guyard), a -French Ursuline Religious, who died in Canada in 1672, and -the process of whose Beatification has been introduced; the -saintly French layman, Jean de Bernières-Louvigny, much -admired by Fénelon, who died in 1659; the very interior, -though at times somewhat fantastic, Secular Priest, Henri -Marie Boudon, who died in 1702; and the very austere but -highly experienced ascetical writer, the Jesuit Père Joseph -Surin, whom Bossuet had formally approved, and who died in -1668.<a name="FNanchor_127_127" id="FNanchor_127_127"></a><a href="#Footnote_127_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a> But Madame Guyon herself, that much-tried and -vehemently opposed woman, was held, by many an undoubtedly -Catholic-minded, experienced and close observer, to be (in -spite of the largely misleading and indeed incorrect character -of many of her analyses and expressions) a truly saintly, -entirely filial Catholic.<a name="FNanchor_128_128" id="FNanchor_128_128"></a><a href="#Footnote_128_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a></p> - -<p>(2) As to the limits of these condemnations, we must remember -that only two of them,—those of Molinos and of Fénelon,—claim -to be directly doctrinal at all; and that Fénelon was -never really compromised in the question of Quietism proper, -but was condemned on questions of Pure Love alone. Bossuet -himself was far less sound as against the central Quietist -doctrine of the One Act, which, unless formally revoked, lasts -on throughout life, and hence need never be repeated; -Fénelon’s early criticism of the Molinos propositions remains -one of the clearest extant refutations of that error. Again in -the matter of the Passivity of advanced souls, Bossuet was -distinctly less normal and sober than Fénelon: for whilst<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span> -Fénelon taught that in no state does the soul lose all capacity, -although the facility may greatly vary, to produce distinct acts -of the virtues or vocal prayers and other partially external -exercises, Bossuet taught that, in some cases, all capacity of -this kind is abolished.<a name="FNanchor_129_129" id="FNanchor_129_129"></a><a href="#Footnote_129_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> “I take,” says Fénelon, “the terms -‘Passive’ and ‘Passivity’ as they actually appear everywhere -in the language of the (sound) Mystics, as something -opposed to the terms ‘active’ and ‘activity’: ‘Passivity,’ -taken in the sense of an entire inaction of the will, would be -a heresy.” And he then opposes “Passivity,” not to -“Action,” but to that “Activity,” which is a merely natural, -restless, and hurried excitation.<a name="FNanchor_130_130" id="FNanchor_130_130"></a><a href="#Footnote_130_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a></p> - -<p>(3) And as to the abiding significance of the whole anti-quietist -decisions and measures, we shall do well to consider the -following large facts. From St. Paul and St. John to Clement -of Alexandria and Origen; from these to Dionysius the -Areopagite; from the Areopagite to St. Bernard of Clairvaux -and then the Franciscan and Dominican Mystics; from these, -again, on to the great Renaissance and Counter-Reformation -saints and writers of this type,—the German Cardinal Nicolas -of Coes and the Italian St. Catherine of Genoa, the Spaniards -St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross, and the French Saint -Francis de Sales and Saint Jane Frances de Chantal, we -get a particular type of religious experience and doctrine, -which but unfolds and concentrates, with an unusual articulation, -breadth, and depth, what is to be found, on some -sides of their spiritual character and teaching, among Saints -and religious souls of the more mixed type, such as St. -Augustine, St. Anselm, St. Thomas of Aquin, and St. Ignatius -Loyola. And this mixed type, bearing within it a considerable -amount of that mystical quiet and emotional-speculative -element, is again but a deepening, a purification and a -realization of one of the profoundest affinities and constituents -of every human heart and will.</p> - -<p>Hence, even in the thickest of the quietist controversy, -when that mystical element must have seemed, to many, to be -discredited once for all, those best acquainted with the rich -history of the Church, and with the manifold requirements -of the abiding religious consciousness, could not and did not -doubt that all that was good, deep, and true in that element<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span> -would continue to be upheld by, and represented in, the -Church.—And it is not difficult to point to the more or less -Mystical souls furnished by the Monks, the Friars; the Clerks-Regular, -specially the Jesuits; the Secular Clergy; and the -Laity, down to the present day. Such writers and Saints as -Père de Caussade (<i>d.</i> about 1770) on the one hand, and -Père Jean N. Grou (<i>d.</i> 1803) and the Curé d’Ars (<i>d.</i> 1859) -on the other hand, carry on the two streams of the predominantly -mystical and of the mixed type,—streams so clearly -observable before 1687 and 1699. Quietism, the doctrine of -the One Act; Passivity in a literal sense, as the absence or -imperfection of the power and use of initiative on the soul’s -part in any and every state: these doctrines were finally -condemned, and most rightly and necessarily condemned; -the Prayer of Quiet, and various states and degrees of an -ever-increasing predominance of Action over Activity,—an -Action which is all the more the soul’s very own, because -the more occasioned, directed, and informed by God’s action -and stimulation,—these, and the other chief lines of the -ancient experience and practice, remain as true, correct, and -necessary as ever.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Rome’s alleged change of front.</i></h5> - -<p>And yet it is undeniable that the Roman events between -1675 and 1688 do seem, at first sight, to justify the strongly -Protestant Dr. Heppe’s contention that those twelve years,—not -to speak of the later troubles of Madame Guyon and of -Fénelon—witnessed a complete <i>volte face</i>, a formal self-stultification, -of the Roman teaching and authority, on these -difficult but immediately important matters.</p> - -<p>(1) Let us put aside the many passages in Molinos’s <i>Guida</i> -which were but (more or less) literal reproductions of the -teachings of such solemnly approved authorities as Saints -Teresa, Peter of Alcantara, John of the Cross, Francis de -Sales and Jane Frances de Chantal,—passages which, of -course, remained uncondemned even in Molinos’s pages, but -which it would often be difficult to distinguish from the parts -of his book that were censured. Yet there still remain such -facts as the following.</p> - -<p>Juan Falconi’s <i>Alfabeto</i> and <i>Lettera</i> were at their Fifth -Italian edition, 1680, and all five editions had been approved -by the Master of the Apostolic Palace; but only in 1688 -were these writings forbidden. Yet the <i>Lettera</i> contains, with -unsurpassed directness and clearness, the central doctrine of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span> -Quietism: an exhortation to the production of one single -lively Act of Faith, which will then continue uninterruptedly -through the whole earthly life into eternity, and which, consequently, -is not to be repeated.<a name="FNanchor_131_131" id="FNanchor_131_131"></a><a href="#Footnote_131_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a></p> - -<p>Molinos’s <i>Guida</i> and <i>Breve Trattato</i> appeared in Rome, -respectively in 1675 and 1681, with the approbations of five -theologians, four of whom were Consultors of the Holy -Office,—the Archbishop of Reggio; the Minister-General -of the Franciscans; the late General of the Carmelites; Father -Martin Esparza, the same Jesuit Theologian-Professor of -the Roman College who, some years before, had been one of -those who had examined and approved St. Catherine’s <i>Vita -ed Opere</i>; and the actual General of the Carmelites.<a name="FNanchor_132_132" id="FNanchor_132_132"></a><a href="#Footnote_132_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a></p> - -<p>Even after these two writings of Molinos had been criticised -by the Jesuits Bell Huomo and Segneri and the Clerk Regular -Regio, (Segneri enjoying a deservedly immense reputation, -and showing in this affair much moderation and a strong -sense of the legitimate claims of Mysticism), the Inquisition -examined these criticisms, and forbade, not the incriminated -writings of Molinos and Petrucci, but the critique of Bell -Huomo <i>donec corrigatur</i>, and those of Regio and of Segneri -(in his <i>Lettera</i> of 1681) absolutely. Segneri’s subsequent -<i>Concordia</i> almost cost him his life, so strong was the popular -veneration of Molinos.</p> - -<p>Molinos indeed was the guest of Pope Innocent XI himself, -and the friend and confidant, amongst countless other -spiritually-minded souls, of various Cardinals, especially of -the deeply devout Petrucci, Bishop of Jesi, who was raised -to the Cardinalate eighteen months after the beginning of -Molinos’s trial. The imprisonment of Molinos began in May -1685, but the trial did not end till August 1687, when (after -nineteen “Principal Errors of the New Contemplation” had -been censured by the Holy Office in February 1687) sixty-eight -propositions, out of the two hundred and sixty-three -which had been urged against him, were solemnly condemned: -of these the clearly and directly immoral ones being admittedly -not derived from any printed book, or indeed any ever -published letter of his Molinos.<a name="FNanchor_133_133" id="FNanchor_133_133"></a><a href="#Footnote_133_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span></p> - -<p>(2) To estimate Rome’s attitude (as far as it concerns the -ultimate truth and completeness of these doctrines, taken in -their most characteristic and explicit forms) fairly, we shall -have to put aside all questions as to the motives that impelled, -and the methods that were employed, by either side against -the other. Molinos may have been even worse than the -condemned propositions represent, and yet Petrucci would -remain a saintly soul; and we certainly are driven to ask with -Leibniz: “Si Molinos a caché du venin sous ce miel, est-il -juste que Petrucci et autres personnes de mérite en soient -responsables?”<a name="FNanchor_134_134" id="FNanchor_134_134"></a><a href="#Footnote_134_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a> But neither the wickedness of the one nor -the sanctity of the other would make the doctrines propounded -by them, objectively, any less solid or more spiritual than -they are in themselves. The acutely anti-Roman Anglican -Bishop Burnet may not have invented or exaggerated when -he wrote from Rome, during those critical years, that one -of the chief motives which actuated the opponents of the -Quietists was the fact that, though the latter “were observed to -become more strict in their lives, more retired and serious in -their mental devotions, yet … they were not so assiduous -at Mass, nor so earnest to procure Masses to be said for their -friends: nor … so frequently either at Confession or in -processions”: and so “the trade of those that live by these -things was sensibly sunk.”<a name="FNanchor_135_135" id="FNanchor_135_135"></a><a href="#Footnote_135_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a> And the cruel injustice of many -details and processes of the movement against the Quietists,—a -movement which soon had much of the character of a -popular scare and panic, in reaction against a previous, in -part, heedless enthusiasm,—are beyond dispute or justification. -Yet mercenary and ruthless as part of the motives and much -of the action of the anti-quietists doubtlessly were, the -question as to the worth and wisdom of Quietism, (taken -objectively, and not as an excusable counter-excess but as -a true synthesis of the spiritual life), remains precisely where -it was before.</p> - -<p>(3) Now I think that two peculiarities, most difficult to notice -at the time, seriously differentiate the Molinist movement -from the great current of fully Catholic Mysticism, even in -those points and elements where the two are materially alike -or even identical; and yet that these peculiarities are but the -caricature (through further emphasis and systematization) of -certain elements present, in a more latent and sporadic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span> -manner, in the formulae and philosophic assumptions or -explanations of the older Mysticism,—elements which had -been borrowed too largely from a, at bottom, profoundly -anti-incarnational philosophy, not to be of far less value and -of much greater danger than the profoundly true experiences, -nobly spiritual maxims, and exquisite psychological descriptions -which that predominantly Neo-Platonist framework -handed on.</p> - -<p>The first peculiarity is that the older Mystics, especially -those of the type of St. Catherine of Genoa and St. John of -the Cross, but even also those of the more “mixed” type of -Mysticism, such as St. Teresa, had indeed quite freely used -terms which are vividly true as descriptions of the prima facie -aspect and emotional impression of certain states and experiences -of the soul: “empty,” “fixed,” “motionless,” “the -reason and the will have ceased to act,” “doing nothing,” -“incapable of doing anything,” “moved by irresistible grace,” -“but one act,” “one single desire”: these and equivalent -expressions occur again and again. But these sayings do not -here lead up to such a deliberate and exclusive rule as is that -given by Falconi, and repeated by Molinos in his <i>Guida</i>, Nos. -103-106.<a name="FNanchor_136_136" id="FNanchor_136_136"></a><a href="#Footnote_136_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a></p> - -<p>This doctrine of the One Act, in this its negative form,—for -it is not to be repeated,—and in its application to the whole -waking and sleeping life, is first an exclusive concentration -upon, and then a wholesale extension of, one out of the several -trends of the older teaching, a doctrine which, compared with -that teaching in its completeness, is thin and doctrinaire, and -as untrue to the full psychological explanation and working -requirements of the soul as it is readily abusable in practice -and contrary to the Incarnational type of religion. It is -impossible not to feel that the manifold great ocean-waters -of life, that the diversely blowing winds of God’s Spirit are -here, somehow, expected to flow and breathe in a little shortcut, -single channel, through a tiny pipe; one more infallible -recipe or prescription is here offered to us, hardly more -adequate than the many similar “sure” roads to salvation, -declared by this or that body of devout religionists to attach -to the practice or possession of this or that particular prayer -or particular religious object.</p> - -<p>And the second difference is that the older Catholic Mystics<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span> -leave less the impression that the external side of religion, its -<i>body</i>, is of little or no importance, and indeed very readily -an obstacle to its interior side, its <i>soul</i>. And this, again, for -the simple reason that their teaching is, in general, less -systematic and pointed, more incidental, and careless of much -self-consistency.</p> - -<p>(4) Yet these two differences have largely sprung from the -simple pressing and further extension of precisely the least -satisfactory, the explanatory and systematic side,—the form -as against the content,—of the older Mystics. For once the -more specifically Neo-Platonist constituent, in those Mystics’ -explanation and systematization, was isolated from the elements -of other provenance which there had kept it in check, and now -became, as it were, hypostasized and self-sufficient, this constituent -could not but reveal, more clearly than before, its -inadequacy as a form for the intensely organic and “incarnational” -spiritual realities and processes which it attempted -to show forth. That Neo-Platonist constituent, always present -in those ancient Mystics, had ever tended to conceive the soul’s -unity, at any one moment, as a something outside of all multiplicity -whatsoever. Hence this character of the simultaneous -unity had only to be extended to the successive unity,—and -the literally One Act, as in the present so throughout the -future, became a necessary postulate.</p> - -<p>And that same constituent had, even in those great teachers -of profound maxims, exquisite religious psychology, and -noblest living, tended, (however efficaciously checked by all -this their Christian experience and by certain specifically -Platonist and Aristotelian elements of their philosophy), towards -depreciating the necessity, importance, indeed even the -preponderant utility, of the External, Contingent, Historical -and Institutional, and of the interchange, the inter-stimulation -between these sides and expressions of religion and its -internal centre and spirit.</p> - -<p>Perhaps, amongst all the great ecclesiastically authorized -Mystics of that past, the then most recent of them all, St. -John of the Cross, comes, by his (theoretically continuous -though in his practice by no means exclusive) insistence upon -the abstractive and universal, the obscure and invisible, the -self-despoiling and simplifying element and movement, nearest -to an exclusion of the other element and movement. Indeed -the Quietists’ generally strong insistence upon the necessity -of a Director and upon Frequent Communion gives their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span> -teaching, when taken in its completeness, a prima facie -greater Institutionalism than is offered by the spiritual theory -of the great Spaniard. Yet if, even in him, one misses, in -his theoretical system, a sufficiently organic necessity for the -outgoing movement, a movement begun by God Himself, and -which cannot but be of fundamental importance and influence -for believers in the Incarnation, there is as complete an absence -of the doctrinaire One-Act recipe for perfection as in the -most Historical and Institutional of Christian teachers. But -more about this hereafter.</p> - -<h5>6. <i>Four needs recognised by Quietism.</i></h5> - -<p>Quietism, then, has undoubtedly isolated and further exaggerated -certain explanatory elements of the older Mysticism -which, even there, were largely a weakness and not a strength; -has thus underrated and starved the Particular, Visible, -Historical, Institutional constituents of Religion; and has, -indeed, misunderstood the nature of true Unity everywhere. -Yet the very eagerness with which it was welcomed at the -time,—in France and Italy especially,—and this, not only -as a fashion by the <i>Quidnuncs</i>, but as so much spiritual -food and life by many a deeply religious soul; and the -difficulty, and not infrequent ruthlessness of its suppression, -indicate plainly enough that, with all its faults and dangers, -it was divining and attempting to supply certain profound -and abiding needs of the soul. I take these needs to be the -following four.</p> - -<p>(1) Man has an ineradicable, and, when rightly assuaged, -profoundly fruitful thirst for Unity,—for Unification, Synthesis, -Harmonization; for a living System, an Organization both -within and without himself, in which each constituent gains -its full expansion and significance through being, and more -and more becoming, just <i>that</i> part and function of a great, -dynamic whole; a sense of the essential and ultimate organic -connection of all things, in so far as, in any degree or form, -they are fair and true and good. And this sense and inevitable -requirement alone explain the surprise and pain -caused, at first, to us all, by the actual condition of mutual -aloofness and hostility, characteristic of most of the constituents -of the world within us, as of the world around us, -towards their fellow-constituents. A truly atomistic world,—even -an atomistic conception of the world,—of life, as a -collection of things one alongside of another, on and on, is -utterly repulsive to any deeply religious spirit whose self-knowledge<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span> -is at all equal to its aspirations.—No wonder, -then, if the Quietists, haunted by the false alternative of -one such impenetrable atom-act or of an indefinite number -of them, chose the One Act, and not a multitude of them.</p> - -<p>(2) Man has a deep-seated necessity to purify himself by -detachment, not only from things that are illicit but even -from those that are essential and towards which he is bound -to practise a deep and warm attachment. There is no -shadow of theoretical or ultimate contradiction here: to love -one’s country deeply, yet not to be a <i>Chauvinist</i>; to love one’s -wife tenderly, yet not to be uxorious; to care profoundly -for one’s children, yet to train, rebuke, and ever brace them, -when necessary, up to suffering and even death itself: these -things so little exclude each the other, that each attachment can -only rightly grow in and through the corresponding detachment. -The imperfection in all these cases, and in all the -analogous, specifically religious ones, lies not in the objects -to be loved, nor in these objects being many and of various -degrees and kinds of lovableness, nor in the right (both -effective and affective, appropriately varied) love of them: -but simply in our actual manner of loving them.—No wonder -then that Quietism, face to face with the false alternative of -either Attachment or Detachment, chose Detachment, (the -salt and the leaven of life) and not attachment (life’s meat -and meal).</p> - -<p>(3) Man has a profound, though ever largely latent, capacity -and need for admiration, trust, faith; and does not by any -means improve solely by direct efforts at self-improvement, -and by explicit examinations of his efforts and failures; -but, (a little from the first, and very soon as much, and later -on far more), he progresses by means of a happy absorption -in anything clean and fruitful that can and does lift him out -of and above his smaller self altogether.—And such an absorption -will necessarily be unaccompanied, at the time, by any -direct consciousness on the part of the mind as to this its -absorption. And, religiously, such quiet concentrations will, in -so far as they are at all analyzable after the event, consist in -a quite inarticulate, and yet profound and spiritually renovating, -sense of God; and they will have to be tested, not by their -describable content, but by their ethical and religious effects. -“Psychology and religion,” says that great psychological -authority, Prof. William James, “both admit that there are -forces, seemingly outside of the conscious individual, that bring<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span> -redemption to his life.” “A man’s conscious wit and will, so -far as they strain after the ideal, are aiming at something only -dimly and inaccurately imagined, whilst the deeper forces of -organic ripening within him tend towards a rearrangement -that is pretty surely definite, and definitely different from -what he consciously conceives and determines. It may consequently -be actually interfered with by efforts of too direct -and energetic a kind on our part.”<a name="FNanchor_137_137" id="FNanchor_137_137"></a><a href="#Footnote_137_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a>—No wonder then that -Quietism, finding this element of quiet incubation much -ignored and starved in the lives of most religious souls, flew -to the other extreme, of making this inarticulateness and wise -indirectness of striving into the one test and measure of the -perfection of all the constituents of the religious life, instead -of insisting upon various degrees and combination of full and -direct consciousness and articulation, and of much dimness -and indirect alertness, as each requiring the other, and as -both required by the complete and normal life of the soul.</p> - -<p>(4) And Man has a deep-seated sense of shame, in precise -proportion as he becomes spiritually awake, about appropriating -to himself his virtues and spiritual insight, even -in so much as he perceives and admits his possession of them. -Not all his consciousness and conviction of the reality of his -own efforts and initiative, can or does prevent a growing sense -that this very giving of his is (in a true sense) God’s gift,—that -his very seeking of God ever implies that he had, in some -degree, already found God,—that God had already sought him -out, in order that he might seek and find God.—No wonder -then that, once more shrinking from a Unity constituted in -a Multiplicity, Quietism should, (with the apparently sole -choice before it, of God Himself operating literally all, or of -man subtracting something from that exclusive action and -honour of God), have chosen God alone and entire, rather -than, as it were, a fragmentary, limited, baffled influence -and efficiency of the Almighty within His Own creature. -Yet here again the greater does not supplant, but informs, the -lesser; and the Incarnational action of God is, in this supreme -question also, the central truth and secret of Christianity.</p> - -<h5>7. <i>Multiplicity and unity, in different proportions, needful -for all spiritual life.</i></h5> - -<p>We find, then, that it is essential for even the most advanced -souls, that they should keep and increase the sense and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span> -practice of a right multiplicity, as ever a constituent and -essential condition of every concrete, living unity; of a right -attachment, as ever the necessary material and content for a -fruitful and enriching detachment; of a right consciousness -and articulation of images, thoughts, feelings, volitions, and -external acts, as ever stimulations, restful alternations, and -food for a wise and strengthening prayer or states of Quiet -and inarticulation; and of a right personal initiative and -responsibility, as the most precious means and element -for the operations of God.</p> - -<p>We find, too, that it is equally important, for even the most -imperfect souls, to be helped towards some, (though but ever -semi-conscious and intermittent), sense of the unity which -alone can give much worth or meaning to their multiplicity; -of the detachment which alone can purify and spiritualize -their attachments; of the self-oblivion, in rapt and peaceful -admiration, which alone can save even their right self-watchings -and self-improvements from still further centring them in -themselves; and of the true self-abandonment to pure grace -and the breathing of God’s Spirit, which alone can give a -touch of winning freedom and of joyful spaciousness to all -the prudence and right fear and conscious responsibility -which, left alone, will hip, darken and weigh down the -religious soul.</p> - -<p>And thus we shall find that there is no degree of perfection -for any one set of souls which is not, in some form and -amount, prefigured and required by all other souls of good-will; -and again, that there is no one constituent, to which -any one soul is specially drawn, which does not require the -supplementation and corrective of some other constituents, -more fully represented in other souls of possibly lower -sanctity.</p> - -<p>Thus each soul and grade requires all the others; and -thus the measure of a soul’s greatness is not its possessing -things which cannot, in any degree or way, be found in, or -expected of, all human souls, in proportion as they are fully -and characteristically human, but, on the contrary, its being -full of a spirit and a force which, in different degrees and -forms, are the very salt and yeast, the very light and life, of -all men in every place and time.</p> - -<p>The following weighty declaration, long ascribed to St. -Thomas Aquinas, fully covers, I think, the doctrine and -ideal aimed at throughout this section: “Already in this life<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span> -we ought continuously to enjoy God, as a thing most fully -our own, in all our works.… Great is the blindness and -exceeding the folly of many souls that are ever seeking God, -continuously sighing after God, and frequently desiring God: -whilst, all the time, they are themselves the tabernacles of the -living God … since their soul is the seat of God, in which -He continuously reposes. Now who but a fool deliberately -seeks a tool which he possesses under lock and key? or who -can use and profit by an instrument which he is seeking? or -who can draw comfort from food for which he hungers, but -which he does not relish at leisure? Like unto all this is the -life of many a just soul, which ever seeks God and never -tarries to enjoy Him; and all the works of such an one are, -on this account, less perfect.”<a name="FNanchor_138_138" id="FNanchor_138_138"></a><a href="#Footnote_138_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a></p> - -<h4><span class="smcap">IV. Pure Love, or Disinterested Religion: its -Distinction from Quietism.</span></h4> - -<p>The problem of Pure Love, of Disinterested Religion, can -hardly, in practice, be distinguished from that of Quiet and -Passivity, if only because Quietists, (those who have considered -perfection to diminish more and more the number of -the soul’s acts, or at least to eliminate more and more the -need of distinctness or difference between them), have, quite -inevitably, ever given a special prominence to the question as -to what should be the character of those few acts, of that -one unbroken act. For once allow this their main question -we should all have to answer in the Quietist’s way,—viz. that -this single act must, for a perfect soul, to be the most perfect -of the acts possible to man, and hence must be an act of -Pure Love.—Yet it is well to realize clearly that, if Quietism -necessitates an even excessive and unreal doctrine of Pure -Love, a moderate and solid Pure-Love teaching has no kind -of necessary connection with Quietism. For even though -my interior life be necessarily one continuous stream and -tissue of acts, countless in their number, variety, and degrees -of inter-penetration, it in nowise follows that acts of Pure -Love are not the best, or are impossible; nor that, in proportion -as Pure Love informs the soul’s multiform acts, such -acts must lose in depth and delicacy of variety and articulation.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span> -Indeed here, with regard to the very culmination -of the interior life, we shall again find and must again test -the two conceptions: the finally abstractive and materially -simplifying one, which must ever have any one real thing -outside of another; and the incarnational and synthetic one, -which finds spiritual realities and forces working the one -inside and through the other. And the latter view will -appear the true one.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>New Testament teaching as to Pure Love.</i></h5> - -<p>Now we must first try and get some clear ideas as to how -this difficult matter stands in the New Testament,—in the -Synoptic tradition and in the Pauline-Joannine teaching respectively. -Here again it is the former which, (though on its -surface it appears as the more ordinary and the more locally -coloured teaching), is the richer, in its grandly elastic and -manifold simplicity; and it is the latter which has most -profoundly penetrated and articulated the ultimate meaning -and genius of a part of Our Lord’s doctrine, yet at the cost -of a certain narrowing of the variety and breadth of that -outlook. In both cases I shall move, from the easier and -more popular teaching, to the deepest and most original -enunciations and explanations.<a name="FNanchor_139_139" id="FNanchor_139_139"></a><a href="#Footnote_139_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a></p> - -<p>(1) The Synoptic teaching starts throughout from the -ordinary post-exilic Jewish feeling and teaching, which indeed -recognizes the ceremonial obligations and the more tangible -amongst the ethical demands as standing under the categorical -imperative of the Legal “Thou Shalt,” but places the -large territory of the finer moral precepts outside of the Law. -So with the “Zedakah,” the “Justice” of almsdeeds, and with -the “Gemiluth Chasadim,” the “works of mercy,” such as -visiting the sick, burying the dead, and rejoicing with the -joyful and sorrowing with the sorrowful. Thus Rabbi Simon -the Just tells us: “The world rests on three things: on the -Law (<i>Thorah</i>), on Worship (<i>Abodah</i>), and on Works of -Mercy (<i>Gemiluth Chasadim</i>)”; and Rabbi Eleazar declared -the “Gemiluth Chasadim” to be above the “Zedakah.”<a name="FNanchor_140_140" id="FNanchor_140_140"></a><a href="#Footnote_140_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a> And -it is especially in view of these works of supererogation that -rewards, and indeed a strict scale of rewards, are conceived.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span> -Thus already in the Book of Tobit, (written somewhere -between 175 and 25 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>), we have Tobit instructing his son -Tobias that “Prayer is good with Fasting and Alms, more -than to buy up treasures of gold. For Alms delivereth -from death … they that practise Mercy and Justice -shall live long.”<a name="FNanchor_141_141" id="FNanchor_141_141"></a><a href="#Footnote_141_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a> And one of the sayings of the Jewish -Fathers declares: “So much trouble, so much reward.”<a name="FNanchor_142_142" id="FNanchor_142_142"></a><a href="#Footnote_142_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a></p> - -<p>Now this whole scheme and its spirit seems, at first -to be taken over quite unchanged by Our Lord. The very -Beatitudes end with: “Rejoice … because your reward is -great in heaven.” And, in the following Sermon, his hearers are -bidden to beware of doing their “Zedakah,”—the “Justice” -of Prayer, Fasting, Almsdeeds in order to be seen by men; -since, in that case, “ye shall not have reward from your -Father Who is in heaven.” And this is driven home in -detail: these three kinds of Justice are to be done “in -secret,” and “thy Father will repay thee.” Even Prayer itself -thus appears as a meritorious good work, one of the means -to “treasure up treasures in heaven.” Similarly, the rich man -is bid “Go sell all that thou hast and give it to the poor; -and thou shalt have a treasure in heaven.” Even “he that -shall give you a cup of cold water in My name, shall not lose -his reward.” Indeed we have the general principle, “the -labourer is worthy of his hire.”<a name="FNanchor_143_143" id="FNanchor_143_143"></a><a href="#Footnote_143_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a></p> - -<p>And yet we can follow the delicate indications of the -presence, and the transitions to the expression, of the deeper -apprehension and truth. For, on the part of God, the reward -appears, in the first instance, as in intrinsic relation to the -deed. The reward is the deed’s congenital equivalent: “Blessed -are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy”; “if ye forgive -men their trespasses, your Father … will likewise forgive you -your trespasses”; and “everyone who shall confess Me before -men, him will I also confess before My Father Who is -in heaven.”<a name="FNanchor_144_144" id="FNanchor_144_144"></a><a href="#Footnote_144_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a> Or the reward appears as a just inversion of -the ordinary results of the action thus rewarded: “Blessed are -the meek, for they shall inherit the land”; take the highest -seat at a banquet, and you will be forced down to the lowest, -take the lowest, and you will be moved up to the highest; -and, generally, “he who findeth his soul, shall lose it; and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span> -that loseth his soul, for My sake, shall find it.”<a name="FNanchor_145_145" id="FNanchor_145_145"></a><a href="#Footnote_145_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a> Or the -reward appears as an effect organically connected with the -deed, as its cause or condition: “Blessed are the pure of -heart, for they shall see God.”<a name="FNanchor_146_146" id="FNanchor_146_146"></a><a href="#Footnote_146_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a> And then the reward comes -to vary, although the deed remains quantitatively identical, -solely because of that deed’s qualitative difference,—<i>i.e.</i> -according to the variation in its motive: “He that receiveth a -prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive the reward of -a prophet; and he who receiveth a just man in the name of a -just man, shall receive the reward of a just man.”<a name="FNanchor_147_147" id="FNanchor_147_147"></a><a href="#Footnote_147_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> And then -the reward moves up and up and becomes a grace, through -being so far in excess of the work done: “Every one who -hath forsaken house … or father or children or fields for -My name, shall receive manifold,” indeed “an hundredfold”—“a -full … and overflowing measure shall they pour into -your lap”; and “whosoever shall humble himself, shall be -exalted,”—not simply back to his original level, but into -the Kingdom of Heaven. So, too, “Thou wast faithful over -a few things, I shall place thee over many things”; indeed -this faithful servant’s master “shall place him over all his -possessions;” or rather, “blessed are those servants whom the -Lord, when He cometh, shall find watching. Amen, I say -unto you, that he shall approach … and shall minister unto -them.”<a name="FNanchor_148_148" id="FNanchor_148_148"></a><a href="#Footnote_148_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a></p> - -<p>This immense disproportion between the work and its -reward, and the consequent grace-character of the latter, is -driven home with a purposely paradoxical, provocative -pointedness, in the two Parables of the Wedding Garment -and of the Equal Payment of the Unequal Labourers, both of -which are in St. Matthew alone. The former concerns the -soul’s call to the kingdom, and that soul’s response. The -King here, after having formally invited a certain select -number of previously warned relatives and nobles, who all, as -such, had a <i>claim</i> upon him, Matt, xxii, 3, sends out invitations -with absolute indiscrimination,—to men with no claims -or with less than none; to “bad” as well as “good.” And -it is the King, again, who gratuitously supplies them each -with the appropriate white wedding-feast garment. He has -thus a double right to expect all his guests to be thus clothed,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span> -and to punish instantly, not the mere negligence, but the -active rejection implied on the part of the man clothed in -his ordinary clothing (vv. 11, 12). Both call and investiture -have been here throughout pure graces, which rendered -possible, and which invited but did not force, an acceptance.<a name="FNanchor_149_149" id="FNanchor_149_149"></a><a href="#Footnote_149_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a></p> - -<p>The second Parable describes the “Householder” who hired -labourers for his vineyard at the first, third, sixth, ninth, and -even eleventh hour,—each and all of them for a penny a day; -who actually pays out to them, at the end of the day, this one -identical pay; and who, to the labourer of the first shift who -complains, “These last have wrought but one hour, and thou -hast made them equal unto us who have borne the burden -and heat of the day,” declares, “Friend, I do thee no wrong: -didst thou not agree with me for a penny? Take thine own -and go thy way: I will give to this last even as unto thee. -Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is -thine eye evil (art thou envious) because I am good” (because -I choose to be bountiful)? Matt. xx, 1-15. Here again -the overflowing generosity of God’s grace is brought home -to us, as operating according to other standards than those -of ordinary daily life: nor is this operation unjust, for the -Householder paid their due to the first set of workers, whilst -rewarding, far above their worth, those poor labourers of -the last hour. But, as Jülicher well points out, “we should -not pedantically insist upon finding here a doctrine of the -strict equality of souls in the Beyond—a doctrine contradicted -by other declarations of Jesus. Only the <i>claim</i> of -single groups of souls to preferential treatment is combated -here …: a certain fundamental religious disposition is to -be awakened.” And, as Bugge rightly notes, “the great -supreme conception which lies at the bottom of the parable -has, parablewise, remained here unnamed: Paul has found -the expressive term for it,—‘Grace.’”<a name="FNanchor_150_150" id="FNanchor_150_150"></a><a href="#Footnote_150_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a></p> - -<p>And we get corresponding, increasingly spiritual interpretations -with regard to man’s action and man’s merit. First, -all ostentation in the doing of the deed cancels all reward in -the Beyond; so, in the case of each of the three branches of -“Justice.”<a name="FNanchor_151_151" id="FNanchor_151_151"></a><a href="#Footnote_151_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a> And then the worker is to be satisfied, day by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span> -day, with that day’s pay and sustenance: “Give us this day -our daily bread,” every soul is to pray; the divine Householder -will say, “Didst thou not agree with me for a penny a -day? Take thine own and go thy way.” And even “when -ye have done all that has been commanded you, say ‘we are -unprofitable servants, we have but done what we were bound -to do.’” They are invited to look away from self, to “seek -first the Kingdom and His Justice,” and then “all these -things,” their very necessaries for earthly life, “shall be added -unto you.” Indeed it is the boundlessly generous self-communicativeness -of God Himself which is to be His -disciples’ deliberate ideal, “be ye perfect, as your heavenly -Father is perfect”; and the production of this likeness within -themselves is to be the ultimate end and crown of their most -heroic, most costly acts: “love your enemies, and pray for -those that persecute you: that you may become the sons of -your Father who is in Heaven, who maketh His sun to rise -upon the evil and the good, and who raineth upon the just -and the unjust.” And the more there is of such self-oblivious -love, the more will even the gravest sins be entirely blotted -out, and the more rapid will be the full sanctification of the -soul, as Our Lord solemnly declares concerning the sinful -woman in St. Luke, “her many sins are forgiven her, because -she hath loved much.”<a name="FNanchor_152_152" id="FNanchor_152_152"></a><a href="#Footnote_152_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a></p> - -<p>In all this matter it is St. Luke’s Gospel which is specially -interesting as showing, so to speak, side by side, an increased -Rabbinical-like preciseness of balance between work and -reward, and yet the adoption, doubtlessly under Pauline -influence, of St. Paul’s central term in lieu of the old Jewish -terminology. For, in one of its curious so-called “Ebjonite” -passages, this Gospel works up the Parable of the Talents, -with its only approximate relation between the deeds and -their rewards (Matt. xxv, 14-30), into the Parable of the -Pounds (Luke xix, 12-27), with its mathematically symmetrical -interdependence between the quantities of the merit -and those of this merit’s reward: the man who makes ten<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span> -pounds is placed over ten cities, and he who makes five, -over five. And, on the other hand, in a Lukan equivalent -for part of the Sermon on the Mount, St. Matthew’s “reward” -is replaced by “grace”: “If ye love them that love you, what -grace (χάρις) have you? and if ye do good to those that do -you good, what grace have you?”<a name="FNanchor_153_153" id="FNanchor_153_153"></a><a href="#Footnote_153_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a></p> - -<p>(2) St. Paul indeed it is who, in the specially characteristic -portions of his teaching, unfolds, by means of a partly original -terminology, the deepest motives and implications of Our -Lord’s own divinely deep sayings and doings, and never -wearies of insisting upon the Grace-character of the soul’s -call and salvation,—the Free Mercy, the Pure Love which -God shows to us, and the sheer dependence and complete -self-donation, the pure love which we owe to Him, and which, -at the soul’s best, it can and does give Him.</p> - -<p>It is true that in the contrasting, the traditional layer of his -teaching, we find the old Jewish terminology still intact: -“God will render unto every man according to his works”; -“it behoves us to appear before the Judgment-seat of Christ, -that everyone … may receive according to what he hath -done, whether it be good or bad.”<a name="FNanchor_154_154" id="FNanchor_154_154"></a><a href="#Footnote_154_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a> Indeed it is precisely in -St. Paul’s pages that we find the two most difficult and, at -first sight, least spiritual sayings concerning this matter to be -discovered in the whole New Testament: “If in this life only -we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most miserable.” -And: “If the dead do not rise … let us eat and drink, for -to-morrow we die.”<a name="FNanchor_155_155" id="FNanchor_155_155"></a><a href="#Footnote_155_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> But these two passages must doubtless -be taken partly as arguments adapted to the dispositions of -his hearers,—the “Let us eat and drink” conclusion is given -in the words of a current Heathen Greek proverb,—and, still -more, as expressions not so much of a formal doctrine as of -a mood, of one out of the many intense, mutually supplementary -and corrective moods of that rich nature.</p> - -<p>According to his own deepest, most deliberate, and most -systematic teaching, it is the life of Christ, the living Christ, -energizing even now within the faithful soul, that constitutes -both the primary source and the ultimate motive of Christian -sanctity. “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live, -yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” And through this divine-human -life within us “we faint not; but though our outward -man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span>” -Indeed the Lord Himself said to him: “My grace is sufficient -for thee; for power is made perfect in infirmity”; and hence -he, Paul, could declare: “Gladly therefore will I glory in my -infirmities, that the power of Christ may dwell in me.” And -thus, with Christ living within him, he can exclaim: “If God -be for us, who shall be against us?… Who shall separate -us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or peril, or the -sword?… In all these things we are more than conquerors, -through him that loved us. For I am persuaded that neither -death nor life, nor things present nor things to come … -shall be able to separate us from the love of God.” “Whether -we live, or whether we die, we are the Lord’s.”<a name="FNanchor_156_156" id="FNanchor_156_156"></a><a href="#Footnote_156_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a> We thus get -here a reinsistence upon, and a further deepening of, perhaps -the profoundest utterance of the whole Old Testament: -“What have I in Heaven besides Thee? and besides Thee I -seek nothing upon earth. Even though my flesh and my -heart faint, Thou art my rock and my portion for ever.”<a name="FNanchor_157_157" id="FNanchor_157_157"></a><a href="#Footnote_157_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a></p> - -<p>And then that deathless hymn to Pure Love, the thirteenth -chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, not only -culminates with the proclamation that, of all man can hope -and wish and will and do, of all his doings and his graces, -“there remain these three, Faith, Hope, Love, (Charity): but -the greatest of these is Love (Charity).” But the Love that -has this primacy is Pure Love, for “it seeketh not its own.” -And though of this Love alone it is said that “it never -passeth away,” ever persists in the Beyond: yet even here -already it can and does get exercised,—and this, not only -without any suppression of parallel acts of the other virtues, -but with these other virtues and their specific motives now -taken over and deepened, each in its special characteristic, -by the supreme virtue and motive of Pure Love: “Love -believeth all things, hopeth all things, beareth all things.”<a name="FNanchor_158_158" id="FNanchor_158_158"></a><a href="#Footnote_158_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a> -Thus Faith, Hope, Patience, and all the other virtues, they all -remain, but it is Love that is now the ultimate motive of all -their specific motives. These, his culminating teachings, -indicate clearly enough that virtue’s rewards are regarded by -him, ultimately and substantially, as “the wages of going on -and not to die”; or rather that they are, in their essence, -manifestations of that Eternal Life which is already energizing, -within souls that earnestly seek God, even here and now.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span> -This Life, then, however great may be its further expansion -and the soul’s consciousness of possessing it, already holds -within itself sufficient, indeed abundant motives, (in the fulfilment -of its own deepest nature and of its now awakened -requirements of harmony, strength, and peace through self-donation), -for giving itself ever more and more to God.</p> - -<p>(3) And with regard to the Joannine teaching, it will be -enough for us to refer back to the texts discussed in the -preceding chapter, and to note how large and specially -characteristic is here the current which insists upon the -reward being already, at least inchoatively, enclosed in the -deed itself, and upon this deed being the result and expression -of Eternal Life operating within the faithful soul, even already, -Here and Now. Only the declaration that “perfect love -casteth out fear,” that it does not tolerate fear alongside of -itself, 1 John iv, 18, appears to be contrary to the Pauline -doctrine that Perfect Love, “Love” itself “beareth all things, -believeth, hopeth, endureth all things,” 1 Cor. xiii, 7. Love -then can animate other virtues: why not then a holy fear? -But this Joannine saying seems in fact modelled upon St. -Paul’s quotation and use of a passage from the Septuagint: -“Cast out the bondwoman (the slave-servant) and her son, for -the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir together with -the son of the free,” Gal. iv, 30; and hence this saying will -not exclude “children of the free-woman,”—a holy fear as -well as faith, hope, patience,—but only “children of the -slave-woman,” superstition, presumption, weakmindedness, -and slavish fear.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>The “Pure Love” controversy.</i></h5> - -<p>In turning now to the controversy as to, Pure Love -(1694-1699) and its assured results, we shall have again to -distinguish carefully between the lives and intentions of the -writers who were censured, and the doctrines, analytic or -systematic, taught or implied by them, which were condemned. -This distinction is easier in this case than in that of Quietism, -for the chief writer concerned here is Fénelon, as to whose -pure and spiritual character and deeply Catholic intentions -there never has been any serious doubt.</p> - -<p>But in this instance we have to make a further distinction—viz. -between the objective drift of at least part of his -<i>Explication des Maximes des Saints sur la Vie Interieure</i>, -published in 1697, and especially the twenty-three propositions -extracted from it which were condemned by Pope Innocent<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span> -XII in 1699; and the teaching which he increasingly clarified -and improved in his numerous apologetic writings against -Bossuet and other opponents in this memorable controversy—especially -in his Latin writings, intended for transmission to -the Pope, and written as late as 1710 and 1712.<a name="FNanchor_159_159" id="FNanchor_159_159"></a><a href="#Footnote_159_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a> It is certain -that Bishops and theologians who opposed his <i>Maximes</i> -were found warmly endorsing such pieces as his wonderfully -clear and sober <i>Première Réponse aux Difficultés de M. l’Evêque -de Chartres</i>. It is these pieces, comprising also his remarkably -rich <i>Instruction Pastorale</i>, his admirably penetrating <i>Lettre -sur l’Oraison Passive</i> and <i>Lettre sur la Charité</i>, and his -extraordinarily compact and balanced Second Epistle to -Pope Clement XI, 1712 (where all the censured ambiguities -and expressions are carefully avoided), and which alone -among Fénelon’s writings shall be accepted in what follows.<a name="FNanchor_160_160" id="FNanchor_160_160"></a><a href="#Footnote_160_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a> -Indeed even the earlier of these writings fail in but one -thing—in justifying the actual text of the condemned book, -as distinguished from the intentions of its writer. Bishop -Hedley sums up the real position with the treble authority -of a spiritually trained Monk, of a practised theological writer, -and of a Catholic Bishop of long experience: “The doctrine -intended by Fénelon, in his <i>Maximes des Saints</i>, and as -explained by him during his controversy with Bossuet, has -never been censured, although the opposite party laboured -hard for its condemnation. Fifteen years after the condemnation -of his book, we find him re-stating to Pope -Clement XI (who, as Cardinal, had drawn up the Brief of his -condemnations), in careful scholastic language the doctrine -intended by himself, but which he himself had misstated -in his popular treatise. As there were errors, the other side, -whatever the crudity or novelty of some of its contentions, -whatever its motives or methods—and some of them were -far from creditable—was sure in the end to succeed. And it -is well that it should have succeeded as far as it did succeed.”<a name="FNanchor_161_161" id="FNanchor_161_161"></a><a href="#Footnote_161_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a></p> - -<p>In any case, we shall have to beware of considering Bossuet’s -contentions as to the specific character of Charity, Love, and -as to the possibility, for man here below, of single acts of pure -love, to be representative of the ordinary Catholic teaching<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span> -either before or since the condemnation. On both these -fundamental points Fénelon’s positions are demonstrably, -and indeed have been generally admitted to be, a mere -restatement of that teaching, as is shown, for instance, in the -Jesuit Father Deharbe’s solid and sober, thoroughly traditional -and highly authorized essay: <i>Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes … -dargestellt nach der Lehre des h. Thomas von Aquin</i>, Regensburg, -1856. It is this most useful treatise and the admirable -<i>Analyse Raisonnée de la Controverse du Quiétisme</i> of the Abbé -Gosselin,<a name="FNanchor_162_162" id="FNanchor_162_162"></a><a href="#Footnote_162_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a> (which has already much helped me in the preceding -section), that have been my chief aids in my careful study, -back through Bossuet and Fénelon, to St. Thomas and his -chief commentators, Sylvius, who died in 1649, and Cardinal -Cajetan, who died in 1534, and to the other chief authorities -beyond them.—I group the main points, which alone need -concern us here, under three heads: the specific Nature of -Pure Love; single Acts of Pure Love; a State of Pure Love.</p> - -<p>(1) Now as to the specific Nature of Charity, or Pure, Perfect -Love, St. Thomas tells us: “One Kind of Love is perfect, -the other kind is imperfect. Perfect Love is that wherewith -a man is loved for his own sake: as, for instance, when -some one wishes well to another person, for that other person’s -sake, in the manner in which a man loves his friend. -Imperfect love is the love wherewith a man loves something, -not for its own sake, but in order that this good thing may -accrue to himself,—in the manner in which a man loves a -thing that he covets. Now the former kind of love pertains -to Charity, which clings to God for His own sake, whereas it -is Hope that pertains to the second kind of love, since he -who hopes aims at obtaining something for himself.”<a name="FNanchor_163_163" id="FNanchor_163_163"></a><a href="#Footnote_163_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> And -Cardinal Cajetan explains that this wishing well to God, -“this good that we can will God to have, is double. The -good that is in Him, that (strictly speaking) is God Himself,—we -can, by Love, will Him to have it, when we find our -delight in God being what He is. And the good that is but -referred to God,—His honour and Kingdom and the Obedience -we owe him,—this we can will, not only by finding our -pleasure in it, but by labouring at its maintenance and -increase with all our might.”<a name="FNanchor_164_164" id="FNanchor_164_164"></a><a href="#Footnote_164_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a></p> - -<p>And, says St. Thomas, such Perfect Love alone is Love in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span> -its strict sense and “the most excellent of all the virtues”: for -“ever that which exists for its own sake is greater than that -which exists in view of something else. Now Faith and Hope -attain indeed to God, yet as the source from which there -accrue to us the knowledge of the Truth and the acquisition -of the Good; whilst Love attains to God Himself, with a view -to abide in Him, and not that some advantage may accrue -to us from Him.” And perhaps still more clearly: “ When a -man loves something so as to covet it, he apprehends it as -something pertaining to his own well-being. The lover here -stands towards the object beloved, as towards something -which is his property.”<a name="FNanchor_165_165" id="FNanchor_165_165"></a><a href="#Footnote_165_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a> And note how, although he teaches -that whereas “the beatitude of man, as regards its cause and -its object, is something increate,” <i>i.e.</i> God Himself, “the -essence of the beatitude itself is something created,” for “men -are rendered blessed by participation, and this participation -in beatitude is something created”: yet he is careful to explain -some of his more incidental passages, in which he speaks -of this essence of beatitude as itself man’s end, by the <i>ex -professo</i> declaration: “God” alone “is man’s ultimate end, and -beatitude is only as it were an end before the very end, an -end in immediate proximity to the ultimate end.”<a name="FNanchor_166_166" id="FNanchor_166_166"></a><a href="#Footnote_166_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a></p> - -<p>(2) And next, as to the possibility, actual occurrence and -desirableness of single Acts of such Pure Love, even here -below: all this is assumed as a matter of course throughout -St. Thomas’s <i>ex professo</i> teaching on the matter. For throughout -the passages concerning the Nature of Pure Love he is -not exclusively, indeed not even primarily, busy with man’s -acts in the future life, but with the respective characteristics -of man’s various acts as executed and as analyzable, more -or less perfectly, already here below. And nowhere does he -warn us against concluding, from his reiterated insistence -upon the essential characteristics of Pure Love, that such -love cannot, as a matter of fact, be practised, at least in -single acts, here below at all. Hence it is clear that, according -to him, the soul as it advances in perfection will—alongside -of acts of supernatural Faith, Hope, Fear, etc. (and the -production of such acts will never cease), produce more and -more acts of Pure Love: not necessarily more, as compared<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span> -with the other kinds of contemporary acts, but certainly more -as compared with its former acts of the same character.</p> - -<p>But there is a further, profoundly and delicately experienced -doctrine. Not only can Pure Love be exercised in single and -simple acts, alongside of single and simple acts of other kinds -of virtues, supernatural or otherwise: but Pure Love can itself -come to command or to inform acts which in themselves bear, -and will now bear in increased degree, the characteristics of -the other kinds of acts. St. Thomas tells us, with admirable -clearness: “An act can be derived from Charity in one of two -ways. In the first way, the act is elicited by Charity itself, and -such a virtuous act requires no other virtue beside Charity,—as -in the case of loving the Good, rejoicing in it, and mourning -over its opposite. In the second way, an act proceeds from -Charity in the sense of being commanded by it: and in this -manner,—since Charity” has the full range of and “commands -all the virtues, as ordering them (each and all) to their (ultimate) -end,—an act can proceed from Charity whilst nevertheless -belonging to any other special virtue.” And he assures us -that: “The merit of eternal life,” “the fountain-head of meriting,” -“pertains primarily to, consists in Charity, and pertains -to and consists in other kinds of supernatural acts in only a -secondary manner,—that is, only in so far as these acts are -commanded or informed by Charity” or Pure Love.<a name="FNanchor_167_167" id="FNanchor_167_167"></a><a href="#Footnote_167_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a></p> - -<p>Let us take some instances of such two-fold manifestations -of identical motives and virtues, according as these motives -and virtues operate in simple co-ordination, or within a compound -and organic system. In the scholar’s life, Greek and -Latin and Hebrew may be acquired, each simply for its own -sake and each alongside of the other; or they can be acquired, -from the immediate motive indeed of knowing each in its own -specific nature as thoroughly as possible, yet with the ultimate, -ever more and more conscious and all-penetrating, motive of -thus acquiring means and materials for the science of language, -or for the study of philosophy, or for research into -early phases of the Jewish-Christian religion. In the family -life, a man, woman, or child can live for himself or herself, -and then for his or her other immediate relatives, each -taken as separate alongside of the other, or he or she may -get more and more dominated by the conception and claims -of the family as an organic whole, and may end by working<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span> -largely, even with respect to himself, as but for so many constituents -of that larger organism in which alone each part -can attain its fullest significance. And especially a young -mother can live for her own health and joys, and then, alongside -of these, for those of her child, or she can get to the -point of sustaining her own physical health and her mental -hopes and will to live as so many means and conditions for -feeding and fostering the claimful body and soul of her child.</p> - -<p>So again, in the creatively artistic life, we can have a Dante -writing prose and poetry and painting a picture, and a Rafael -painting pictures and writing sonnets; or we can have -Wagner bringing all his activities of scholar, poet, painter, -musician, stage-manager,—each retaining, and indeed indefinitely -increasing, its specific character and capabilities,—to -contribute, by endless mutual stimulation and interaction, -to something other and greater than any one of them -individually or even than the simple addition of them all,—to -a great Music-Drama and multiform yet intensely unified -image of life itself. And an organist can draw out, as he -plays, the <i>Vox Humana</i> stop, and then another and another -limitedly efficacious organ-stop, whilst each new-comer takes -the place of its predecessor or a place beside it; or he can -draw out the <i>Grand Jeu</i> stop, which sets all the other stops to -work in endless interaction, with itself permeating and organizing -the whole. We thus, in these and countless other cases, -and in every variety of degree within each case, get two kinds -of variety, what we may call the simple and the compound -diversification. And everywhere we can find that the richest -variety not only can co-exist with, but that it requires and is -required by, indeed that it is a necessary constituent and -occasion of, the deepest and most delicate unity.<a name="FNanchor_168_168" id="FNanchor_168_168"></a><a href="#Footnote_168_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a></p> - -<p>(3) And finally, as to a State of Pure Love. Only here do -we reach the class of questions to which the condemnations -of Fénelon really apply.</p> - -<p>We shall do well to begin by bearing in mind the very -ancient, practically unbroken, very orthodox Christian discrimination -of faithful souls,—sometimes into the two classes -of Mercenaries (or Slaves) and Friends or Children, the latter<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span> -of whom the great Clement of Alexandria, who died about -<span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 215, called “Gnostics,” “Gnosis” being his term for perfection -(this scheme is the one to which Catherine’s life and -teaching conform); or into the three classes of Servants -(Slaves); Mercenaries; and Friends (or Children), as is -already worked out with full explicitness by Saints Basil, -Gregory of Nazianzum, and Gregory of Nyssa, who died in the -years 379, 389, and 395 (?) respectively. Now Clement places -the Mercenary on the left of the Sanctuary, but the “Gnostic” -on the right; and, whilst declaring that the former “are those -who, by means of renouncing things perishable, hope to -receive the goods of incorruption in exchange,” he demands of -the “Gnostic” that “he approach the saving word neither from -the fear of punishment, nor from the motive of reward, but -simply because He is good.”<a name="FNanchor_169_169" id="FNanchor_169_169"></a><a href="#Footnote_169_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a> And St. Basil, echoed in this by -his two contemporaries, teaches that, “We obey God and avoid -vices, from the fear of punishment, and in that case we take -on the resemblance of Slaves. Or we keep the precepts, -because of the utility that we derive from the recompense, -thus resembling Mercenaries. Or finally, from love of Him -who has given us the law, we obey with joy at having been -judged worthy of serving so great and good a God, and thus -we imitate the affection of Children towards their parents.”<a name="FNanchor_170_170" id="FNanchor_170_170"></a><a href="#Footnote_170_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a> -And, in the case of all these Fathers, it is clear that, not only -single acts, but whole states of soul and life are meant.</p> - -<p>But the increased fineness in the analysis of interior experiences -and dispositions has since then required, and the Church -formulations have most wisely demanded, that these three -classes be not so sharply distinguished as to make any one -soul seem exclusively and unchangeably to pertain to any one -of them; and, still more, that these three divisions be taken to -represent, even where and whilst they are most completely -realized, only the predominant character of the majority of -the acts constituting the respective state of soul. For it is -clear that not only is there, and can there be, no such thing, -on earth at least, as a state composed of one unrepeated act; -but there is no such thing as a condition of soul made up -solely of acts of “simple” Pure Love, or even of supernatural -acts of all sorts commanded throughout by Charity, or indeed -solely of supernatural acts, both simple and commanded. -The “One-act” state is a chimera; the state of “simple” acts<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span> -of Pure Love alone would, if possible, involve the neglect of -numberless other virtues and duties; and the last two states -indeed highly desirable, but it would be fanaticism to -think we could completely attain to them here below.</p> - -<p>Yet there is nothing in any Church-censure to prevent, -and there is much in the teaching and life of countless saints -to invite, our holding the possibility, hence the working ideal -and standard, for even here below, of a state in which two -kinds of acts, which are still good in their degree, would be in -a considerable minority: acts of merely natural, unspiritualized -hope, fear, desire, etc.; and acts of supernatural hope, fear, -desire, etc., in so far as not commanded by Charity. For even -in this state not fully deliberate venial sins would occasionally -be committed, far more would a certain number of acts of an -unspiritualized, unsupernatural kind occur. And the necessary -variety among the supernatural acts would in nowise be -impaired,—it would indeed be greatly stimulated, by Pure -Love being now, for the most part, the ultimate motive of -their exercise.</p> - -<p>Sylvius, in his highly authoritative commentary on St. -Thomas, puts the matter admirably: “We may not love God -in view of reward in suchwise as to make eternal life the -true and ultimate end of our love, or to love God because -of it, so that without the reward we would not love Him -… We must love God with reference to the eternal reward -in suchwise that we put forth indeed both love and good -works in view of such beatitude,—in so far as the latter is the -end proposed to these works by God Himself; yet that -we subordinate this our beatitude to the love of God as the -true and ultimate end,” so that “if we had no beatitude to -expect at all, we should nevertheless still love Him and -execute good works for His own sake alone. In this manner -we shall first love God above all things and for His own sake; -and we shall next keep the eternal reward before us, for the -sake of God and of His honour.”<a name="FNanchor_171_171" id="FNanchor_171_171"></a><a href="#Footnote_171_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a> A man in these dispositions -would still hope, and desire, and fear, and regret, and strive -for, and aspire to conditions, things, persons both of earth -and of the beyond, both for himself and for others, both for -time and for eternity: but all this, for the most part, from the -ultimate motive, penetrating, deepening, unifying all the other -motives,—of the love of Love, Christ, Spirit, God.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span></p> - -<p>Any hesitation to accept the reality or possibility of such a -state cannot, then, be based upon such acceptance involving -any kind of Quietism, but simply on the admittedly great -elevation of such a condition. Yet this latter objection seems -to be sufficiently met if we continuously insist that even such -a state neither exempts souls from the commission of (more -or less deliberate) venial sin; nor is ever entirely equable; nor -is incapable of being completely lost; nor, as we have just -contended, is ever without more or less numerous acts of an -unsupernaturalized kind, and still less without acts of the -supernatural virtues other than Love and unprompted by -Love.</p> - -<p>And all fear of fanaticism will be finally removed by a further -most necessary and grandly enlarging insistence upon the -Mercenaries and even the Servants having passing moments, -and producing varyingly numerous single acts of, Pure Love -and of the other supernatural virtues prompted by Pure Love. -All souls in a state of Grace throughout God’s wide wide -world,—every constituent, however slight and recent, of the -great soul of the Church throughout every sex, age, race, -clime, and external organization, would thus have some -touches, some at least incidental beginnings of Pure Love, and -of the other supernatural virtues prompted by Pure Love. -All souls would thus, in proportion to their degree of grace -and of fidelity, have some of those touches; and the progress -of all would consist in the degree to which that variety of acts -would become informed and commanded by the supreme -motive of all motives, Pure and Perfect Love.<a name="FNanchor_172_172" id="FNanchor_172_172"></a><a href="#Footnote_172_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a></p> - -<p>And with such an Ideal, required by fundamental Catholic -positions, ever increasingly actuating the soul and binding it -to all souls beneath, around, above it, what there is of truth in -the savage attacks of Spinoza and of Kant and of such recent<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span> -writers as A. E. Taylor,<a name="FNanchor_173_173" id="FNanchor_173_173"></a><a href="#Footnote_173_173" class="fnanchor">[173]</a> upon the supposed hypocritical -self-seeking in the practice and temper of average Christians, -would lose all its force.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Cognate Problems.</i></h5> - -<p>Three much-discussed cognate matters require some -elucidation here. They answer to the questions: Does -reference to the self, as for instance in acts of gratitude and -thanksgiving, prevent an act from being one of Pure Love? -Is the pleasurableness, normally ever attached and subsequent -to all virtuous acts, to be regarded as part of the reward from -which Pure Love abstracts? And finally are, I will not say -any technically ecstatic or other in part psycho-physical -peculiarities and manifestations, but even active Contemplation -or the simple Prayer of Quiet, necessary conditions or -expressions of a state of Pure Love,—understood in the sense -explained above?</p> - -<p>(1) As to reference to the self, it is highly important to distinguish -between acts of Pure Love, and attempts, by means -of the maximum possible degree of abstraction, to apprehend -the absolute character and being of God. For these two -things have no necessary connection, and yet they have been -frequently confounded. St. Teresa’s noble confession of past -error, and consequent doubly valuable, amended teaching is -perhaps the most classical pronouncement extant upon this -profoundly important point.<a name="FNanchor_174_174" id="FNanchor_174_174"></a><a href="#Footnote_174_174" class="fnanchor">[174]</a> The contingent, spacial and -temporal, manifestations and communications of God, above -all as we have them in the life of Our Lord and in those who -have come nearest to Him, but also, in their several degrees -and forms, in the lives of each one of us: all these, in their -sacred, awakening and healing, particularity and closeness of -contact, can and should be occasions and materials for the -most perfect, for the purest Love.</p> - -<p>Indeed it is well never to forget that nothing, and least of -all God, the deepest of all the realities, is known to us at all, -except in and by means of its relation to our own self or to -our fellow-creatures. Hence if Love were Pure only in proportion -as it could be based upon our apprehension of God as -independent of all relation to ourselves, Pure Love would be -simply impossible for us.—But, in truth, such a conception -would, in addition, be false in itself: it would imply that the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span> -whole great Incarnation-fact and -doctrine,—the whole of -that great root of all religion, the certainty that it is because -God has first loved us that we can love Him, that He is a -self-revealing God, and One whom we can know and reach -because “in Him we live and move and have our being”—was -taking us, not towards, but away from, our true goal. There -are, surely, few sadder and, at bottom, more deeply uncreaturely, -unchristian attitudes, than that which would seek -or measure perfection in and by the greatest possible abstraction -from all those touching contingencies which God Himself -has vouchsafed to our nature,—a nature formed by Himself -to require such plentiful contact with the historical and visible.—And -if God’s pure love for us can and does manifest itself -in such contingent acts, then our love can and should become -and manifest itself purer and purer by means, not only of the -prayer of formless abstraction and expectation, but also by -the contemplation of these contingencies and by the production -of analogously contingent acts. And if so, then -certainly gratitude, in so far as it truly deserves the name, -can and does belong to Pure Love, for the very characteristic -of such gratitude consists in a desire to give and not to -receive.<a name="FNanchor_175_175" id="FNanchor_175_175"></a><a href="#Footnote_175_175" class="fnanchor">[175]</a></p> - -<p>Not, then, the degree of disoccupation with the Contingent, -even of the contingent of our own life, but the degree of -freedom from self-seeking, and of the harmonization and -subordination of all these contingencies in and under the -supreme motive of the Pure Love and service of God in man -and of man in God, is the standard and test of Christian -perfection.</p> - -<p>(2) As to the pleasurableness which, in normal psychic -conditions, more or less immediately accompanies or follows -the virtuous acts of the soul, the realizations of its own deeper -and deepest ideals, we should note that, in its earthly degree -and form, it is not included in what theologians mean by the -“rewards” of virtuous action. And in this they are thoroughly -self-consistent, for they adhere, I think with practical -unanimity, to Catherine’s doctrine that these immediate -consequences of virtuous acts are not to be considered a -matter of positive and, as it were, separate divine institution,—as -something which, given the fundamental character of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[171]</a></span> -man’s spiritual nature, might have been otherwise; but as -what,—given the immutable nature of God and of the image -at nature in His creature, man,—follows from an intrinsic, -quite spontaneous necessity.—Hence, at this point especially, -would it be foolish and fanatical, because contrary to the -immanental nature of things, and to the right interplay of -the elemental forces of all life, to attempt the suppression -even of the several actual irruptions of such pleasure, and -still more of the source and recurrence of this delectation. -Fortunately success is here as impossible as it would be -undesirable,—as much so as, on a lower plane, would be the -suppression of the pleasure concomitant with the necessary -kinds and degrees of eating. Indeed, it is clear, upon reflection -that unless a man (at least implicitly) accepts and -(indirectly) wills that spiritual or physical pleasure, he cannot -profitably eat his food or love his God.</p> - -<p>But from this in nowise follows what Bossuet tried so hard -to prove,—that what is thus necessarily present in man, as a -psychical or physical prompting and satisfaction, must also of -necessity be willed by him, directly and as his determining -reason and justification. In turning to eat, man cannot help -feeling a psychic pleasure of an all but purely physical kind; -and, if he is wise, he will make no attempt to meddle with -this feeling. But he can either deliberately will, as his action’s -object, that pleasure which is thus inevitably incident to the -act, and the more he does so, the more simply greedy and -sensual he will become; or he can directly will, as his -determining end, that sustenance of life and strength for his -work and spiritual growth, which is the justification and -ultimate reason of eating (the <i>rationale</i> of that very pleasure -so wisely attached by nature, as a stimulus, to a process so -necessary to the very highest objects), and the more he does -so, the more manly and spiritual he will grow.</p> - -<p>And so with every one of man’s wondrously manifold and -different physical, psychical, spiritual requirements and actions, -within the wide range of his right nature and ideals. There -is not one of them,—not the most purely physical-seeming of -these acts,—which he cannot ennoble and spiritualize by, as it -were, meeting it,—by willing it, more and more, because of its -rational end and justification. And there is not one of them,—not -an act which, judged simply by its direct subject-matter -and by the soul’s faculties immediately engaged, would be -the most purely mental and religious of acts,—which man<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[172]</a></span> -cannot degrade and de-spiritualize, by, as it were, following -it, by willing it more and more because of its psychical -attraction and pleasurable concomitance alone. For, in the -former case, the act, however gross may seem its material, is -made the occasion and instrument of spiritual character-building -and of the constitution of liberty; in the latter case, -the act, however ethereal its body, is but the occasion and -means of the soul’s dispersion in the mere phenomenal flux of -the surface of existence, and of its subjection to the determinism -which obtains here.<a name="FNanchor_176_176" id="FNanchor_176_176"></a><a href="#Footnote_176_176" class="fnanchor">[176]</a></p> - -<p>Catherine’s whole convert life is one long series of the -most striking examples of an heroic delicacy in self-knowledge -and self-fighting in this matter: a delicacy which, as to -the degree of its possibility and desirableness in any particular -soul, is, however, peculiarly dependent upon that soul’s special -circumstances, temperament, <i>attrait</i>, and degree of perfection -reached and to be reached.</p> - -<p>(3) And, finally, as to the relations between the Contemplative -forms of Prayer, and Acts and variously complete States -of Pure Love; and, again, of such Prayer and Love, and -Abnormal or Miraculous conditions: it is clear that, if there -is no true Contemplation without much Pure Love, there can -be much Pure Love without Contemplation.</p> - -<p>Abbé Gosselin well sums up the ordinary Catholic teaching. -“Meditation consists of discursive acts which are easily -distinguished from each other, both because of the kind of -strain and shock with which they are produced, and because -of the diversity of their objects. It is the ordinary foundation -of the interior life and the ordinary prayer of beginners, -whose imperfect love requires to be thus excited and sustained -by distinct and reflective acts. Contemplation consists, -strictly speaking, in direct ‘non-reflex’ acts,—acts so simple -and peaceful as to have nothing salient by which the soul -could distinguish one from the other. It is called by the -Mystical Saints ‘a simple and loving look,’ as discriminating -it from meditation and the latter’s many methodic and -discursive acts, and as limiting it to a simple and loving -consideration and view of God and of divine things, certified -and rendered present to the soul by faith. It is the ordinary -prayer of perfect souls, or at least of those that have already -made much progress in the divine love. For the more purely<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[173]</a></span> -a soul loves God, the less it requires to be sustained by -distinct, reflective acts; reasoning becomes a fatigue and an -embarrassment to it in its prayer—it longs but to love and to -contemplate the object of its love.”</p> - -<p>Or as Fénelon puts it: “‘Passivity,’ ‘Action,’ is not precisely -itself Pure Love, but is the mode in which Pure Love -operates.… ‘Passivity,’ ‘Action,’ is not precisely the purity -of Love, but is the effect of that purity.”<a name="FNanchor_177_177" id="FNanchor_177_177"></a><a href="#Footnote_177_177" class="fnanchor">[177]</a> Yet, as M. Gosselin -adds, “It must be admitted that without Contemplation the -soul can arrive at a very high perfection; and that the most -discursive meditation, and hence still more all prayer as it -becomes effective, often includes certain direct acts which form -an admixture and beginning of contemplation.”<a name="FNanchor_178_178" id="FNanchor_178_178"></a><a href="#Footnote_178_178" class="fnanchor">[178]</a></p> - -<p>And as to any supposed necessary relations between the -very highest contemplation and the most complete state -of Pure Love on the one hand, and anything abnormal -or miraculous on the other hand, Fénelon, in this point -remarkably more sober than Bossuet, well sums up the -most authoritative and classical Church-teaching on the -matter: “‘Passive’ Contemplation is but Pure Contemplation: -‘Active’ Contemplation being one which is still mixed -with hurried and discursive acts. When Contemplation has -ceased to have any remnant of this hurry, of this ‘activity,’ -it is entirely ‘Passive,’ that is, peaceful, in its acts.” “This -free and loving look of the soul means acts of the understanding,—for -it is a look; and acts of the will, for the look -is a loving one; and acts produced by free-will, without any -strict necessity, for the look is a free look.” “We should -not compare Passive Contemplation,” as did Bossuet, “to -prophecy, or to the gift of tongues or of miracles; nor may -we say that this mystical state consists principally in something -wrought by God within us without our co-operation, -and where, consequently, there neither is nor can be any -merit. We must, on the contrary, to speak correctly, say -that the substance of such Passive Prayer, taken in its specific -acts, is free, meritorious, and operated within us by a grace -that acts together with us.” “It is the attraction to the acts -which the soul now produces which, as by a secondary and -counter-effect, occasions a quasi-incapacity for those acts -which it does not produce. Now this attraction is not of a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[174]</a></span> -kind to deprive the soul of the use of its free-will: we see -this from the nature of the acts which this attraction causes -the soul to produce. Whence I conclude that this same -attraction does not, again, deprive it of its liberty with regard -to the acts which it prevents. The attraction but prevents -the latter in the way it produces the other,—by an efficacious -influence that involves no sheer necessity.” “‘Passivity,’ if it -comes from God, ever leaves the soul fully free for the exercise -of the distinct virtues demanded by God in the Gospel; the -<i>attrait</i> is truly divine only in so far as it draws the soul on -to the perfect fulfilment of the evangelical counsels and -promises concerning all the virtues.” “The inspiration of the -Passive state is but an habitual inspiration for the interior -acts of evangelical piety. It renders the Passive soul neither -infallible nor impeccable, nor independent of the Church even -for its interior direction, nor exempt from the obligation of -meriting and growing in virtue.… The inspiration of the -passive soul differs from that of actively just souls only in -being purer; that is, more exempt from all natural self-seeking, -more full, more simple, more continuous, and more developed -at each moment. We have, throughout, ever one and the -same inspiration, which but grows in perfection and purity in -proportion as the soul renounces itself more, and becomes -more sensitive to the divine impressions.”<a name="FNanchor_179_179" id="FNanchor_179_179"></a><a href="#Footnote_179_179" class="fnanchor">[179]</a></p> - -<p>Thus we get an impressive, simple and yet varied, conception -of spirituality, in which a real continuity, and a power and -obligation of mutual understanding and aid underlies all the -changes of degree and form, from first to last. For from first -to last there are different degrees, but of the same supernatural -grace acting in and upon the same human nature responsive -in different degrees and ways. From first to last there is, -necessarily and at every step, the Supernatural: at no point -is there any necessary presence of, or essential connection with, -the Miraculous or the Abnormal.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant.</i></h5> - -<p>Theology and Philosophy have not ceased to occupy themselves, -at least indirectly, with the substance of these great -questions, since they furnished the subject-matter to Bossuet -and Fénelon in their memorable controversy; somewhat over-subtle -although some of it was in its earlier phases, owing to -Fénelon’s chivalrous anxiety to defend, as far as possible, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[175]</a></span> -very expressions, often so nebulous and shifting, of his cousin, -Madame Guyon.</p> - -<p>(1) Indeed about twenty years before that controversy, -Spinoza had, in his <i>Theologico-Political Treatise</i>, and then, -more impressively still, in his <i>Ethics</i>, made a brilliant assault -upon all, especially all religious, self-seeking. Also on this point -these writings showed that strange, pathetic combination of -grandly religious intuitions and instincts with a Naturalistic -system which, logically, leaves no room for those deepest -requirements of that great soul; and here they revealed, in -addition, considerable injustice towards the, doubtless very -mixed and imperfect, motives of average humanity.</p> - -<p>True intuition speaks in his <i>Treatise</i> (published in 1670) -in the words: “Since the love of God is man’s supreme -beatitude and the final end and scope of all human actions: -it follows that only that man conforms to the divine law, who -strives to love God, not from fear of punishment, nor from the -love of some other thing, such as delights, fame, and so forth, -but from this motive alone, that he knows God, or that he -knows the knowledge and love of God, to be his supreme end.” -But a little further back we learn that “the more we know -the things of Nature, the greater and the more perfect knowledge -of God do we acquire”; a frank application of the pure -Pantheism of his reasoned system.</p> - -<p>In his <i>Ethics</i>, again, a noble intuition finds voice where he -says: “Even if we did not know our Mind,” our individual -soul, “to be eternal, we should still put Piety and Religion -and, in a word, all those virtues that are to be referred to -magnanimity and generosity, first in our esteem.” But he is -doubtless excessive in his picturing of the downright, systematic -immorality of attitude of ordinary men—the “slaves” -and “mercenaries.” “Unless this hope of laying aside the -burdens of Piety and Religion after death and of receiving the -price of their service, and this fear of being punished by dire -punishments after death were in men, and if they, contrariwise, -believed that their minds would perish with their bodies: -they would let themselves go to their natural inclination and -would decide to rule all their actions according to their lust.” -And he is doubtlessly, though nobly, excessive in his -contrary ideal: “He who loves God cannot strive that God -shall love him in return,”—an ideal which is, however, certainly -in part determined by his philosophy, which knows no ultimate -abiding personality or consciousness either in God or man.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[176]</a></span></p> - -<p>Yet, once again, we have him at his inspiring best when, -Catherine-like, he tells us: “The supreme Good of those who -pursue virtue is common to them all, and all are equally able -to rejoice in it”; and “this love towards God is incapable of -being stained by the passions of envy and bitterness, but is -increased in proportion as we figure to ourselves a larger -number of men joined to God by the same bonds of love”; -when he declares: “we do not enjoy beatitude because we -master our passions; rather, contrariwise, do we master our -passions because we enjoy beatitude”; and when he insists, -with no doubt too indiscriminating, too Jacopone-like, a -simplification, upon what, in its substance, is a profound truth: -“the intellectual,” the pure “love of the soul for God is the -very love of God, wherewith God loves Himself.”<a name="FNanchor_180_180" id="FNanchor_180_180"></a><a href="#Footnote_180_180" class="fnanchor">[180]</a></p> - -<p>(2) It was, however, the astonishingly circumspect and many-sided -Leibniz who, indefinitely smaller soul though he was, -succeeded, perhaps better than any other modern philosopher, -in successfully combining the divers constitutive elements of -the act and state of Pure Love, when he wrote in 1714: “Since -true Pure Love consists in a state of soul which makes me -find pleasure in the perfections and the felicity of the object -loved by me, this love cannot but give us the greatest pleasure -of which we are capable, when God is that object. And, -though this love be disinterested, it already constitutes, even -thus simply by itself, our greatest-good and deepest interest.”</p> - -<p>Or, as he wrote in 1698: “Our love of others cannot be -separated from our true good, nor our love of God from our -felicity. But it is equally certain that the consideration of -our own particular good, as distinguished from the pleasure -which we taste in seeing the felicity of another, does not enter -into Pure Love.” And earlier still he had defined the act of -loving as “the finding one’s pleasure in the felicity of another”; -and had concluded thence that Love is for man essentially an -enjoyment, although the specific motive of love is not the -pleasure or the particular good of him who loves, but the good -or the felicity of the beloved object.<a name="FNanchor_181_181" id="FNanchor_181_181"></a><a href="#Footnote_181_181" class="fnanchor">[181]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[177]</a></span></p> - -<p>(3) Yet it is especially Kant who, with his predominant hostility -to all Eudaemonism in Morality and Religion, has, more than -all others, renewed the controversy as to the relations between -virtue and piety on the one hand, and self-seeking motives -on the other, and who is popularly credited with an entirely -self-consistent antagonism to even such a wise and necessary -attitude as are the amended positions of Fénelon and those -of Leibniz. And yet I sincerely doubt whether (if we put -aside the question as to the strictly logical consequences of -his Critical Idealism, such as that Idealism appears in its -greatest purity in the <i>Critique of Pure Reason</i>, 1781; and if we -neglect the numerous, often grossly unjust, Spinoza-like sallies -against the supposed undiluted mercenariness of ordinary piety, -which abound in his <i>Religion within the Limits of Pure Reason</i>, -1793), we could readily find any explicit pronouncement -hopelessly antagonistic to the Catholic Pure-Love doctrine.</p> - -<p>Certainly the position taken up towards this point in that -very pregnant and curious, largely-overlooked little treatise, -<i>The Canon of Pure Reason</i>, which (evidently an earlier and -complete sketch), has been inserted by him into his later, -larger, but materially altered scheme of the <i>Critique</i> of 1781, -(where it now forms the <i>Zweite Hauptstück</i> of the <i>Transcendentale -Methodenlehre</i>, ed. Kehrbach, Reclam, pp. 603-628), -appears to be substantially acceptable.<a name="FNanchor_182_182" id="FNanchor_182_182"></a><a href="#Footnote_182_182" class="fnanchor">[182]</a> “Happiness consists -in the satisfaction of all our inclinations, according to their -various character, intensity, and duration. The law of practical -action, in so far as it is derived from the motive of happiness, -I call Pragmatic, a Rule of Good Sense; the same law, in so -far as it has for its motive only the becoming worthy of such -happiness, I call Moral, the Moral Law. Now Morality -already by itself constitutes a system, but Happiness does not -do so, except in so far as Happiness is distributed in exact -accordance with Morality. But such a distribution is only -possible in the intelligible world,”—the world beyond phenomena -which can be reached by our reason alone—“and under -a wise Originator and Ruler. Such an One, together with life -in such a world—a world which we are obliged to consider as -a future one—reason finds itself forced to assume, or else to -look upon the moral laws as empty phantoms, since the -necessary result of these laws,—a result which that same reason<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[178]</a></span> -connects with their very idea,—would have to fall away, if -that assumption were to go. Hence every one looks upon -the moral laws as <i>commandments</i>, a thing which they could -not be, if they did not conjoin with their rule consequences -of <i>a priori</i> appropriateness, and hence if they did not carry -with them <i>promises</i> and <i>threats</i>. But this too they can do -only if they lie within the compass of a Single Necessary -Being, Itself the Supreme Good, Which alone can render -possible such a unity embracing both means and end.—Happiness -alone is, for our reason, far from being the Complete -Good, for reason does not approve of Happiness unless it -be united with the being worthy of Happiness, <i>i.e.</i> Moral -Rectitude. But Morality alone, and with it the simple being -worthy of happiness, is also far from the Complete Good. -Even if reason, free from any consideration of any interest of -its own, were to put itself in the position of a being that had -to distribute all happiness to others alone, it could not judge -otherwise: for, in the complete idea of practical action, both -points are in essential conjunction, yet in suchwise that it is -the moral disposition which, as condition, first renders possible -a sharing in happiness, and not the prospect of happiness -which first gives an opening to the moral disposition. For, -in this latter case, the disposition would not be moral, and, -consequently, would not deserve that complete happiness to -which reason can assign no other limitation than such as -springs from our own immoral attitude of will.”<a name="FNanchor_183_183" id="FNanchor_183_183"></a><a href="#Footnote_183_183" class="fnanchor">[183]</a></p> - -<p>In his <i>Foundation of the Metaphysic of Morals</i>, 1785, the -noble apostrophe to the Good Will no doubt appears formally -to proclaim as possible and desirable a complete human -disposition, in which no considerations of Happiness play any -part: “The good will is good, not through what it effects or -produces, not through its utility for the attainment of any -intention or end, but it is good through the quality of the -volition alone; that is, it is good in itself.…” “If, with its -greatest efforts, nothing were to be effected by it, and only -the good will itself were to remain, this bare will would yet -shine in lonely splendour as a jewel,—as something which has -its full value in itself.” But further on he shows us how, -after all, “this good will cannot, then, be the only and the -whole good, but still it is the highest good and the condition -for all the rest, even for our desire of happiness.”<a name="FNanchor_184_184" id="FNanchor_184_184"></a><a href="#Footnote_184_184" class="fnanchor">[184]</a> Certain<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[179]</a></span> -exaggerations, which are next developed by him here, shall -be considered in a later chapter.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Four important points.</i></h5> - -<p>Here I will but put together, in conclusion, four positions -which I have rejoiced to find in two such utterly, indeed at -times recklessly, independent writers as Professor Georg -Simmel of Berlin and Professor A. E. Taylor.</p> - -<p>(1) Dr. Simmel declares, with admirable cogency: “The -concept of religion completely loses in Kant, owing to his -rationalistic manner of discovering in it a mere compound -of the moral interest and the striving after happiness, its most -specific and deepest character. No doubt these two apprehensions -are also essential to religion, but precisely the -direction in which Kant conjoins them,—that duty issues in -happiness, is the least characteristic of religion, and is only -determined by his Moralism, which refuses to recognize -the striving after happiness as a valuable motive. The -opposite direction appears to me as far more decisively a -part of religion and of its incomparable force: for we thus -find in religion precisely that ideal power, which makes it -the duty of man to win his own salvation. According to -the Kantian Moralism, it is every man’s private affair how -he shall meet his requirement of happiness; and to turn such -a private aspiration into an objective, ideal claim, would be for -Kant a contradiction and abomination. In reality, however, -religion itself <i>requires</i> that man should have a care for his -own welfare and beatitude, and in this consists its incomparable -force of attraction.”<a name="FNanchor_185_185" id="FNanchor_185_185"></a><a href="#Footnote_185_185" class="fnanchor">[185]</a> Let the reader note how entirely -this agrees with, whilst properly safeguarding, the doctrine -of Pure Love: it is the precise position of the best critics of -the unamended Fénelon.</p> - -<p>(2) Professor Taylor insists that “it is possible to desire -directly and immediately pleasant experiences which are not my -own.… Because it is <i>I</i> who in every case have the pleasure -of the anticipation, it is assumed that it must be I who am to -experience the realization of the anticipation.” Yet “it is -really no more paradoxical that I should anticipate with -pleasure some event which is not to form part of my own direct -sensible experience, than it is that I should find pleasure in the -anticipation at twenty of myself at eighty.” “The austerest -saints will and can mortify themselves as a thing well-pleasing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[180]</a></span> -to God.”<a name="FNanchor_186_186" id="FNanchor_186_186"></a><a href="#Footnote_186_186" class="fnanchor">[186]</a> In this way the joy of each constituent of the -Kingdom of God in the joys of all the rest, and in the all-pervading -joy of God, is seen to be as possible as it is -undoubtedly actual: the problem of the relation between -pleasure and egoism is solved.</p> - -<p>(3) And Professor Taylor again insists upon how pleasant -experiences, which do not owe their pleasantness to their -relation to a previous anticipation, are not, properly speaking, -good or worthy. It is by “satisfactions” and not by mere -“pleasures” that “even the most confirmed Hedonist must -compute the goodness of a life.… Only when the pleasant -experience includes in itself the realization of an idea is it -truly good.”<a name="FNanchor_187_187" id="FNanchor_187_187"></a><a href="#Footnote_187_187" class="fnanchor">[187]</a> But, if so, then the experience will be good, -not in proportion as it is unpleasant, as Kant was so prone -to imply; nor directly in proportion as it is pleasant, although -pleasantness will accompany or succeed it, of a finer quality -if not of a greater intensity, according as the idea which it -embodies is good: but directly in proportion to the goodness -of that idea. Thus all things licit, from sense to spirit, will -find their place and function in such acts, and in a life composed -of such acts, spirit expressing itself in terms of sense. -And the purification, continuously necessary for the ever more -adequate expression of the one in and by the other, will be -something different from any attempt at suppressing this -means of expression. Thus here again the great Christian -Incarnation-Doctrine appears as the deepest truth, and as -the solution of the problem as to the relations of pleasure and -duty.<a name="FNanchor_188_188" id="FNanchor_188_188"></a><a href="#Footnote_188_188" class="fnanchor">[188]</a></p> - -<p>(4) And finally, as to the ever-present need and importance -of a theory concerning these matters, Professor Taylor points -out, not only that some such theory is necessary to the full -human life, but that it must place an infinite ideal before us: -paradox though it may sound, nothing less is truly practical, -for “any end that is to be permanently felt as worth striving -for, must be infinite,” and therefore “in a sense infinitely -remote”; and hence “if indifference to the demand for a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[181]</a></span> -practicable ideal be the mark of a dreamer or a fanatic, -contentment with a finite and practicable ideal is no less -undeniably the mark of an <i>esprit borné</i>.”<a name="FNanchor_189_189" id="FNanchor_189_189"></a><a href="#Footnote_189_189" class="fnanchor">[189]</a></p> - -<p>Here Fénelon has adequately interpreted the permanent and -complete requirements of the religious life and spirit. “You -tell me,” he says to his adversaries, “that ‘Christianity is not -a school of Metaphysicians.’ All Christians cannot, it is true, -be Metaphysicians; but the principal Theologians have great -need to be such. It was by a sublime Metaphysic that St. -Augustine soared above the majority of the other Fathers, -who were, for the rest, as fully versed in Scripture and Tradition. -It was by his lofty Metaphysic that St. Gregory of -Nazianzum has merited the distinguishing title of <i>Theologian</i>. -It is by Metaphysic that St. Anselm and St. Thomas -have been such great luminaries of the Church. True, the -Church is not ‘a school of Metaphysicians,’ who dispute without -docility, as did the ancient sects of philosophers. Yet -she is a school in which St. Paul teaches that Charity is more -perfect than Hope, and in which the holiest Doctors declare, -in accordance with the principles of the Fathers, that Love -is more perfect, precisely because it ‘abides in God, not in -view of any benefit that may accrue to us from so doing.’” -“I know well,” he writes to a friend, “that men misuse the -doctrines of Pure Love and Resignation; I know that there -are hypocrites who, under cover of such noble terms, overthrow -the Gospel. Yet it is the worst of all procedures to -attempt the destruction of perfect things, from a fear that -men will make a wrong use of them.” Notwithstanding all -misuse of the doctrine—“the very perfection of Christianity -is Pure Love.”<a name="FNanchor_190_190" id="FNanchor_190_190"></a><a href="#Footnote_190_190" class="fnanchor">[190]</a></p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[182]</a></span></p> - -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_XII" id="CHAPTER_XII"></a>CHAPTER XII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE AFTER-LIFE PROBLEMS AND DOCTRINES</span></h3> - -<p>Moving on now to the questions concerning the After-Life, -it will be convenient to consider them under five heads: the -chief present-day positions and perplexities with regard to -belief in the After-Life in General; the main implications -and convictions inherent to an Eschatology such as Catherine’s; -and then the principal characteristics, difficulties, and -helps of her tendencies and teachings concerning Hell, -Purgatory, and Heaven. And throughout the Chapter we -shall busy ourselves directly only with the After-Life in the -sense of a heightened, or at least an equal, consciousness after -death, as compared to that which existed before death: the -belief in a shrunken state of survival, in non-annihilation, -appearing to be as certainly the universal minimum of belief -as such a minimum is not Immortality.</p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">The Chief Present-day Problems, Perplexities, -and Requirements with Regard to the After-Life -in General.</span></h4> - -<p>Now I take our chief present-day problems, perplexities, -and resultant requirements with regard to the After-Life in -general, to fall into three groups, according as those problems -are predominantly Historical, or Philosophical, or directly -Practical and Ethical.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Three Historical Difficulties.</i></h5> - -<p>The Historical group now brings very clearly and certainly -before us the striking non-universality, the startling lateness, -and the generally strange fitfulness and apparent unreasonableness -characterizing the earliest stage of belief in the soul’s -heightened, or at least equivalent, consciousness after death.</p> - -<p>(1) Now with respect to the Non-Universality of the doctrine, -it is true that, in China, Confucianism is full of care for the -dead. “Throughout the Empire, the authorities are obliged to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[183]</a></span> -hold three annual sacrifices for the refreshment and rest of the -souls of the dead in general.” “It is hardly doubtful that -the cultus of Ancestors formed the chief institution in -classical Confucianism, and constituted the very centre of -religion for the people. Even now ancestor-worship is the -only form of religion for which rules, applicable to the various -classes among the Emperor’s subjects, are laid down in the -Dynastic Statutes.” And Professor De Groot, from whom I -am quoting, gives an interesting conspectus of the numberless -ways in which the religious service of the dead penetrates -Chinese life.<a name="FNanchor_191_191" id="FNanchor_191_191"></a><a href="#Footnote_191_191" class="fnanchor">[191]</a>—Yet we hear of Kong-Tse (Confucius) himself -(551-478 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>), that, though he insisted upon the most -scrupulous execution of the three hundred rules of the -then extant temple-ceremonial, which were no doubt -largely busy with the dead, and though he said that one -should sacrifice to the spirits as if they were present, he -designated, in several of his sayings, occupation with -theological problems as useless: “as long as we do not know -men, how shall we know spirits? As long as we do not -understand life, how should we fathom death?” And to -questions relative to the spirits and the dead, he would give -evasive answers.<a name="FNanchor_192_192" id="FNanchor_192_192"></a><a href="#Footnote_192_192" class="fnanchor">[192]</a> Thus the founder of the most characteristic -of the Chinese religions was without any clear and consistent -conviction on the point in question.</p> - -<p>In India we find, for Brahmanic religion, certain unmistakable -Immortality-Doctrines (in the sense of the survival -of the soul’s self-consciousness), expressed in the hymns of the -<i>Rig-Veda</i>.—But already, in the philosophizings of the <i>Upanishads</i>, -we get a world-soul, and this soul’s exclusive permanence: -“to attain to true unity, the very duality of subject -and object is to disappear. The terms Atman and Brahman -here express the true Being which vivifies all beings and -appearances, and with which cognizing man reunites himself -whilst losing his individual existence.”<a name="FNanchor_193_193" id="FNanchor_193_193"></a><a href="#Footnote_193_193" class="fnanchor">[193]</a></p> - -<p>And if we move on to Buddhism, with its hundreds of -millions of adherents in Burmah, Tibet, China, and Japan, we -can learn, from the classical work of Oldenberg, how interestingly -deep down lies the reason for the long conflict between<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[184]</a></span> -scholars as to whether Nirvana is or is not to be taken for -the complete extinction of the individual soul. “Everything, -in the Buddhist dogmatic system, is part and parcel of a -circle of Becoming and of Dissolution: all things are but a -Dhamma, a Sankhara; and all Dhamma, all Sankhara are but -temporary.… The Mutable, Conditioned is here thinkable -only as conditioned by another Mutable and Conditioned. -If we follow the dialectic consequence alone, there is no seeing -how, according to this system, there can remain over, when a -succession and mutual destruction of things conditioning and -of things conditioned has run its course, anything but a -pure vacuum.” And we have also such a saying of the -Buddha as the following. “Now if, O disciples, the Ego -(<i>atta</i>) and anything appertaining to the Ego (<i>attaniya</i>) cannot -be comprehended with accuracy and certainty, is not then the -faith which declares: ‘This is the world, and this is the Ego; -this shall I become at death,—firm, constant, eternal, unchangeable,—thus -shall I be there, throughout eternity,’—is -not this sheer empty folly?” “How should it not, O Lord, -be sheer empty folly?” answer the disciples. “One who -spoke thus,” is Oldenberg’s weighty comment, “cannot have -been far from the conviction that Nirvana is annihilation. -Yet it is understandable how the very thinkers, who were -capable of bearing this consequence, should have hesitated to -raise it to the rank of an official dogma of the community.… -Hence the official doctrine of the Buddhist Church attained -the form, that, on the question of the real existence of the -Ego, of whether or not the perfected saint lives on after death, -the exalted Buddha has taught nothing. Indeed the legally -obligatory doctrine of the old community required of its -votaries an explicit renunciation of all knowledge concerning -the existence or non-existence of completely redeemed souls.”</p> - -<p>“Buddhism,” so Oldenberg sums up the matter, with, I -think, the substantial adhesion of all present-day competent -authorities, “teaches that there is a way out of the world of -created things, out into the dark Infinite. Does this way -lead to new being? or does it lead to nothingness? Buddhist -belief maintains itself on the knife’s edge of these alternatives. -The desire of the heart, as it longs for the Eternal, is not left -without something, and yet the thinking mind is not given a -something that it could grasp and retain. The thought of -the Infinite, the Eternal, could not be present at all, and yet -vanish further away than here, where, a mere breath and on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[185]</a></span> -the point of sinking into sheer nothingness, it threatens to -disappear altogether.”<a name="FNanchor_194_194" id="FNanchor_194_194"></a><a href="#Footnote_194_194" class="fnanchor">[194]</a> This vast Buddhist community, -numbering, perhaps, a third of the human race, should not, -then, be forgotten, when we urge the contrary instances of -the religions of Assyria and Babylonia; of Egypt; of Greece -and Rome; and, above all, of the Jews and Christianity.</p> - -<p>Yet it is well to remember that such non-universality of belief -is at least as real, to this very hour, for such a fundamental -religious truth and practice as Monotheism and Monolatry; -such purely Ethical convictions as Monogamy and the -Illicitness of Slavery; such a plain dictate of the universal -humanitarian ideal as the illegitimacy of the application of -physical compulsion in matters of religious conviction; and -such directly demonstrable psychical and natural facts as -subconsciousness in the human soul, the sexual character of -plants, and the earth’s rotundity and rotation around the sun. -In none of these cases can we claim more than that the -higher, truer doctrine,—that is, the one which explains and -transcends the element of truth contained in its predecessor -and opposite,—is explicitly reached by a part only of humanity, -and is but implied and required by other men, at their best. -Yet this is clearly enough for leaving us free to decide,—reasonably -conclusive evidence for their truth being forthcoming,—in -favour of the views of the minority: since the -assumption of an equality of spiritual and moral insight -and advance throughout mankind is as little based upon fact, -as would be the supposition of men’s equal physical strength -or height, or of any other quality or circumstance of their -nature and environment.</p> - -<p>(2) The lateness of the doctrine’s appearance, precisely in -the cases where there can be no doubt of its standing for a -conviction of an endless persistence of a heightened consciousness -after death,—that is, amongst the Greeks (and Romans) -and the Jews (and Christians),—has now been well established -by critical historical research.</p> - -<p>With regard to the Greeks,<a name="FNanchor_195_195" id="FNanchor_195_195"></a><a href="#Footnote_195_195" class="fnanchor">[195]</a> the matter is particularly plain,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[186]</a></span> -since we can still trace even in Plato, (427 to 347 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>), who, -next to Our Lord Himself and to St. Paul, is doubtless the -greatest and most influential teacher of full individual -Immortality that the world has seen, two periods of thought -in this matter, and can show that the first was without any -such certain conviction. In his <i>Apology of Socrates</i>, written -soon after the execution in 399 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, he makes his great -master, close to his end, declare that death would bring to -man either a complete unconsciousness, like to a dreamless -sleep, or a transition into another life,—a life here pictured -like to the Homeric Hades. Both possibilities Socrates -made to accept resignedly, in full reliance on the justice of -the Gods, and to look no further; how should he know what -is known to no man?—And this is Plato’s own earlier teaching. -For in the very <i>Republic</i> which, in its chronologically later -constituents, (especially in Book V, 471<i>c</i>, to the end of Book -VIII, Book IX, 560<i>d</i> to 588<i>a</i>, and Book X up to 608<i>b</i>), so -insists upon and develops the truth and importance of -Immortality in the strictest, indeed the sublimest sense: we -get, in its earlier portions, (especially in Book II, 10<i>c</i>, to Book -V, 460<i>c</i>), no trace of any such conviction. For, in these -earlier passages, the Guardians in the Ideal State are not to -consider what may come after death: the central theme is -the manner in which Justice carries with it its own recompense; -and the rewards, that are popularly wont to be placed -before the soul, are referred to ironically,—Socrates is determined -to do without such hopes. In those later portions, -on the contrary, there is the greatest insistence upon the -importance of caring, not for this short life alone, but for the -soul’s “whole time” and for what awaits it after death. And -in the still later parts, (as in Books VI and VII), the sublimest -form of Immortality is presupposed as true and actual -throughout. Thus in Greece it is not till about 390-380 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, -and in Plato himself not till his middle life, that we get a -quite definite and final doctrine of the Immortality of all -souls, and of a blessed after-existence for every just and holy -life here below.</p> - -<p>For the survival after the body’s death, indubitably -attributed to the Psyche in the Homeric Poems, is conceived -there, throughout, as a miserably shrunken consciousness, and -one which is dependent for its continuance upon the good -offices bestowed by the survivors upon the corpse and grave. -And the translation of the still living Menelaus to Elysium<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[187]</a></span> -(Od. IV, 560-568) is probably a later insertion; belongs to a -small class of exceptional cases; implies the writer’s inability -to conceive a heightened consciousness for the soul, after the -soul’s separation from the body; and is based, not upon any -virtue or reward, but upon Menelaus’s family-relationship to -Zeus. Ganymede gets similarly translated because of his -physical beauty (II. XX, 232 <i>seq.</i>).</p> - -<p>Hesiod, though later than Homer as a writer, gives us, in -his account of the Five Ages of the World (<i>Works and -Days</i>, ll. 109-201), some traces of an Animistic conception of a -heightened life of the bodiless soul beyond the grave,—a conception -which had been neglected or suppressed by Homer, -but which had evidently been preserved alive in the popular -religion of, at least, Central Greece. Yet Hesiod knows of -such a life only for the Golden and for the Silver Ages, and -for some miraculous, exceptional cases of the fourth, the -Heroic Age: already in the third, the Bronze Age, and still -more emphatically in his own fifth, the Iron Age, there are no -such consolations: nothing but the shrunken consciousness of -the Homeric after-death Psyche is, quite evidently, felt by -him to be the lot of all souls in the hard, iron present.</p> - -<p>The Cultus of the Heroes is already registered in Draco’s -Athenian Laws, in about 620 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, as a traditional custom. -And these Heroes have certainly lived at one time as men -upon earth, and have become heroes only after death; their -souls, though severed from the body, live a heightened -imperishable life, indeed one that can mightily help men -here below and now,—so at Delphi and at Salamis against -the Persians. Yet here again each case of such an elevation -was felt to be a miracle, an exception incapable of becoming -a universal law: not even the germ of a belief in the Immortality -of the soul as such seems to be here.</p> - -<p>The Cultus of the Nether-World Deities, of the Departed -generally, and, as the culmination of all this movement, the -Eleusinian Mysteries, must not be conceived as involving or -as leading to, any belief in the ecstatic elevation of the soul, -or consciousness of its God-likeness; and such unending bliss -as is secured, is gained by men, not because they are virtuous -and devout, but through their initiation into the Mysteries. -Rhode assures us, rightly I think, that “it remains unproved -that, during the classical period of Greek culture, the belief in -Judges and a Judgment to be held in Hades over the deeds -done by men on earth, had struck root among the people<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[188]</a></span>”; -Professor Percy Gardner adds his great authority to the same -conclusion.<a name="FNanchor_196_196" id="FNanchor_196_196"></a><a href="#Footnote_196_196" class="fnanchor">[196]</a> Here again it is Plato who is the first to take -up a clearly and consistently spiritual and universalistic -position.</p> - -<p>Indeed it is only in the predominantly neuropathic, indeed -largely immoral and repulsive, forms of the Dionysiac sect -and movement, (at work, perhaps, already in the eighth -century <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span> and which leads on to the formation of the more -aristocratic and priestly Orphic communities) that a demonstrable -and direct belief arose in the soul’s intrinsic God-likeness, -or even divinity, and in its immortality, or even -eternity; and that stimulations, materials, and conceptions -were furnished to Greek thought, which are traceable wheresoever -it henceforth inclines to belief in the soul’s intrinsic -Immortality.</p> - -<p>Yet the leaven spread but slowly into philosophy. For -the Ionian philosophers, and among them Heraclitus, the -impressive teacher of the flux of all things, flourish from -about 600 to 430 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>; but, <i>naïve</i> Materialists and Pantheists -as they are, they frankly exclude all survival of individual -consciousness after death. The Eleatic philosophers live -between 550 and 450 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, and are all busy with <i>a priori</i> -logical constructions of the physical world, conceived as sole -and self-explanatory; and amongst them is Parmenides, the -powerful propounder of the complete identity and immutability -of all reality. Those transcendent spiritual beliefs -appear first as part, indeed as the very foundation, although -still rather of a mode of life than of a formal philosophy, in -the teaching and community of Pythagoras, who seems to -have lived about 580 to 490 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, and who certainly emigrated -from Asia Minor to Croton in Southern Italy. The soul -appears here as intrinsically immortal, indeed without -beginning and without end. And then Immortality forms one -(the mystical) of the two thoroughly heterogeneous elements -of the, otherwise predominantly Ionic and Materialistic, -philosophy of Empedocles of Agrigentum in Sicily, about -490 to 435 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span> In both these cases the Dionysiac-Orphic -provenance of the “Immortality”-doctrines is clearly apparent.</p> - -<p>And then, among the poets who bridge over the period up -to Plato, we find Pindar, who, alongside of reproductions of -the ordinary, popular conceptions, gives us at times lofty,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[189]</a></span> -Orphic-like teachings as to the eternity, the migration, and -the eventual persistent rest and happiness of the just Soul, -and as to the suffering of the unjust one; Aeschylus, who -primarily dwells upon the Gods’ judgment in this life, and -who makes occasional allusions to the after-life which are -partly still of the Homeric type; Sophocles, who indeed refers -to the special privileges which, in the after-life, attend upon -the souls that have here been initiated into the Eleusinian -Mysteries, and who causes Oedipus to be translated, whilst -still alive, to Other-World happiness, but who knows nothing -of an unceasing heightened consciousness for all men after -death; and Euripides, who, showing plainly the influence of -the Sophists, gives expression, alongside of Pantheistic identifications -of the soul and of the aether, to every kind of -misgiving and doubt as to any survival after death.</p> - -<p>And as to the appearance of the doctrine among the Jews, -we again find a surprising lateness. I follow here, with but -minor contributions and modifications from other writers -and myself, the main conclusions of Dr. Charles’s standard -<i>Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life</i>, London, -1899, whose close knowledge of the subject is unsurpassed, -and who finds as many and as early attestations as are well-nigh -findable by serious workers.<a name="FNanchor_197_197" id="FNanchor_197_197"></a><a href="#Footnote_197_197" class="fnanchor">[197]</a></p> - -<p>“The primitive beliefs of the individual Israelite regarding -the future life, being derived from Ancestor-worship, were -implicitly antagonistic to Yahwism, from its first proclamation -by Moses.… This antagonism becomes explicit and -results in the final triumph of Yahwism.” And to the early -Israelite, even under Yahwism, “the religious unit was” not -the individual but “the family or tribe.” Thus, even fully -six centuries after Moses, “the message of the prophets of -the eighth century,” Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, “is still -directed to the nation, and the judgments they proclaim are -collective punishment for collective guilt. It is not till late -in the seventh century <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span> that the problem of individual -retribution really emerged, and received its first solution in the -teaching of Jeremiah.” And “the further development of -these ideas,” by the teaching of Ezekiel and of some of the -Psalms and Proverbs, as regards individual responsibility and -retribution in this life, and by the deep misgivings and keen -questionings of Job and Ecclesiastes, as to the adequacy of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[190]</a></span> -this teaching, “led inevitably to the conception of a blessed -life beyond the grave.”</p> - -<p>Yet throughout the Hebrew Old Testament the Eschatology -of the Nation greatly predominates over that of the Individual. -Indeed in pre-Exilic times “the day of Yahwe,” with its -national judgments, constitutes the all but exclusive subject -of the prophetic teaching as to the future. Only from the -Exile, (597 to 538 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>), onwards, does the eschatological -development begin to grow in complexity, for now the -individualism first preached by Jeremiah begins to maintain -its claim also. But not till the close of the fourth century, or -the beginning of the third century <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, do the separate eschatologies -of the individual and of the nation issue finally in their -synthesis: the righteous individual will participate in the -Messianic Kingdom, the righteous dead of Israel will arise to -share therein,—thus in Isaiah xxvi, 1-19, a passage which it is -difficult to place earlier than about 334 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span> The resurrection -is here limited to the just. In Daniel xii, 2, which is probably -not earlier than 165 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, the resurrection is extended, not -indeed to all members of Israel, but, with respective good and -evil effects, to its martyrs and apostates.</p> - -<p>And the slowness and incompleteness of the development -throughout the Hebrew Old Testament is strikingly -illustrated by the great paucity of texts which yield, without -the application of undue pressure, any clear conviction or -hope of a heightened, or even a sheer, maintenance of the -soul’s this-life consciousness and force after death. Besides -the passages just indicated, Dr. Charles can only find Psalms -xlix and lxxiii, and Job xix, 25-27, all three, according to -him, later than Ezekiel, who died in 571 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span><a name="FNanchor_198_198" id="FNanchor_198_198"></a><a href="#Footnote_198_198" class="fnanchor">[198]</a> The textually -uncertain and obscure Job-passage (xix, 25, 26) must be discounted, -since it evidently demands interpretation according to -the plain presupposition and point of the great poem as a whole.—And -the same result is reached by the numerous, entirely -unambiguous, passages which maintain the negative persuasion. -In the hymn put into the mouth of the sick king Hezekiah, -for about 713 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, (a composition which seems to be very -late, perhaps only of the second century <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>), we hear: “The -grave cannot praise Thee … they that go down into the -pit cannot hope for truth. The living, the living, he shall -praise Thee, as I do this day.” And the Psalter contains<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[191]</a></span> -numerous similar declarations. Thus vi, 5: “In death there is -no remembrance of Thee: in the grave who shall give Thee -thanks?” and cxv, 17: “The dead praise not the Lord, neither -any that go down into silence; but <i>we</i> praise the Lord.” See -also Psalms xxx, 19; lxxxviii, 11.</p> - -<p>Indeed the name for the Departed is Rephaim, “the limp, -the powerless ones.” Stade well says: “According to the -ancient Israelitish conception the entire human being, body -and soul, outlasts death, whilst losing all that makes life worth -living. That which persists in Sheol for all eternity is the -form of man, emptied of all content. Antique thought -ignores as yet that there exists no such thing as a form without -substance. The conception has as little in common with -the conviction of the Immortality of the Soul, which found -its chief support in Greek ideas, as with the expectation of the -Resurrection, which grew out of the Jewish Messianic hope, -or with the Christian anticipation of Eternal Life, which is -also based upon religious motives.”<a name="FNanchor_199_199" id="FNanchor_199_199"></a><a href="#Footnote_199_199" class="fnanchor">[199]</a></p> - -<p>Yet, with respect to this objection from the lateness of the -doctrine, we must not forget that fully consistent Monotheism -and Monogamy are also late, but not, on that account, less -true or less precious; and indeed that, as a universal rule, the -human mind has acquired at all adequate convictions as to -most certain and precious truths but slowly and haltingly. -This process is manifest even in Astronomy, Geology, Botany, -Human Anatomy. It could not fail to be, not less but more -the case in a matter like this which, if it concerns us most -deeply, is yet both too close to us to be readily appreciated in -its true proportions, and too little a matter of mathematical -demonstration or of direct experience not to take much time -to develop, and not to demand an ever-renewed acquisition -and purification, being, as it is, the postulate and completion -of man’s ethical and spiritual faiths, at their deepest and -fullest.</p> - -<p>(3) And with regard to the unsatisfactory character of some -of the earliest manifestations of the belief, this point is brought -home to us, with startling vividness, in the beginnings of the -doctrine in ancient Greece. For Rhode’s very careful and -competent examination of precisely this side of the whole -question shows conclusively (even though I think, with Crusius, -that he has overlooked certain rudiments of analogous but<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[192]</a></span> -healthy experiences and beliefs in pre-Dionysiac Greece) how -new and permanently effective a contribution to the full -doctrine was made, for the Hellenic world and hence indirectly -for all Western humanity, by the self-knowledge gained in -that wildly orgiastic upheaval, those dervish-like dances and -ecstatic fits during the Dionysian night-celebrations on the -Thracian mountain-sides. Indeed Rhode traces how from -these experiences, partly from the continuation of them, -partly from the reaction against them, on the part of the -intensely dualistic and ascetic teaching and training of the -Orphic sect, there arose, and filtered through to Pythagoras, -to Plato, and to the whole Neo-Platonist school, the clear -conception and precise terminology concerning ecstatic, enthusiastic -states, the divinity and eternity of the human soul, its -punitive lapse into and imprisonment within the body, and its -need of purification throughout the earthly life and of liberation -through death from this its incurably accidental and impeding -companion.—Thus we get here, concerning one of the chief -sources of at least the formulation of our belief in Immortality, -what looks a very nest of suspicious, repulsive circumstances:—psycho-physical -phenomena, which, quite explicable -to, and indeed explained by, us now as in nowise supernatural, -could not fail to appear portentous to those men who first -experienced them; unmoral or immoral attitudes and activities -of mind and will; and demonstrable excesses of feeling -and conception as regards both the static goodness, the downright -divinity, eternity, and increateness of the soul, and the -unmixed evil of the body with its entirely disconnected alongsideness -to the soul. Does not all this spell a mass of wild -hallucination, impurity, fanaticism, and superstition?</p> - -<p>Yet here again it behoves us, if not to accept, yet also not -to reject, in wholesale fashion and in haste. For the profoundly -experienced Professor Pierre Janet shows<a name="FNanchor_200_200" id="FNanchor_200_200"></a><a href="#Footnote_200_200" class="fnanchor">[200]</a> us, what is now -assumed as an axiom, and as the ultimate justification of the -present widespread interest in the study of Hysteria, that “we -must admit for the moral world the great principle universally -admitted for the physical world since Claude Bernard,—viz. -that the laws of illness are, at bottom, the same as those of -health, and that, in the former, there is but the exaggeration -or the diminution of phenomena which existed already in the -latter.”</p> - -<p>And if thus our recent studies of morbid mentalities have<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[193]</a></span> -been able to throw a flood of light upon the mechanism -and character of the healthy mind, a mind more difficult -to analyze precisely because of the harmonious interaction of -its forces, there is nothing very surprising if man, in the past, -learnt to know his own fundamental nature better in and -through periods of abnormal excitation than in those of -normal balance. And the resultant doctrines in the case in -question only required, and demand again and again, a careful -pruning and harmonizing to show forth an extraordinary -volume of abiding truth. The insuppressible difference between -mind and matter, and the distinction between the fully -recollected soul (intuitive reason), and explicit reasoning; the -immeasurable superiority of mind over matter, and the superiority -of that full reason over this “thin” reasoning; the -certainty, involved in all our inevitable mental categories and -assumptions and in all our motives for action, of this mind -and intuition being more like the cause of all things than -are those other inferior realities and activities; the indestructibleness -of the postulates and standards of objective -and infinite Beauty, Truth, Goodness, of our consciousness of -being intrinsically bound to them, and of our inmost humanity -and its relative greatness being measurable by just this our -consciousness of this our obligation, and hence by the keenness -of our sense of failure, and by our striving after -purification and the realization of our immanental possibilities: -all this remains deeply fruitful and true.</p> - -<p>And those crude early experiences and analyses certainly -point to what, even now, are our most solid reasons for belief -in Immortality: for if man’s mind and soul can thus keenly -suffer from the sense of the contingency and mutability of all -things directly observed by it without and within, it must -itself be, at least in part or potentially, outside of this flux -which it so vividly apprehends as <i>not</i> Permanence, <i>not</i> Rest, -<i>not</i> true Life. Let us overlook, then, and forgive the first -tumultuous, childishly rude and clumsy, mentally and emotionally -hyper-aesthetic forms of apprehension of these great -spiritual facts and laws, forms which are not, after all, more -misleading than is the ordinary anaesthetic condition of our -apprehending faculties towards these fundamental forces and -testimonies of our lot and nature. Not the wholesale rejection, -then, of even those crude Dionysian witnessings, still less of -the already more clarified Orphic teaching, and least of all of -Plato’s great utilizations and spiritualizations can be required<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[194]</a></span> -of us, but only a reinterpretation of those first impressions -and of mankind’s analogous experiences, and a sifting and -testing of the latter by the light of all that has been deeply -lived through, and seriously thought out, by spiritually awake -humanity ever since.—And we should remember that the -history of the doctrine among the Jews is, as has already been -intimated, grandly free from any such suspicious occasions -and concomitances.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Two Philosophical Difficulties.</i></h5> - -<p>Yet it is precisely this latter, social, body-and-soul-survival -doctrine which brings the second group of objections, the -philosophical difficulties, to clear articulation. For thus we -are unavoidably driven to one or other of the equally difficult -alternatives, of a bodiless life of the soul, and of a survival or -resurrection of the body.</p> - -<p>(1) Christianity, by its explicit teachings, and even more -by its whole drift and interior affinities, requires the survival -of all that is essential to the whole man, and conceives this -whole as constituted, not by thought alone but also by feeling -and will and the power of effectuation; so that the body, -or some unpicturable equivalent to it, seems necessary to this -physico-spiritual, ultimately organic conception of what man -is and must continue to be, if he is to remain man at all.—And -Psychology, on its part, is showing us, more and more, -how astonishingly wide and deep is the dependence, at least -for their actuation, of the various functions and expressions of -man’s character and spirit upon his bodily frame. For not -only is the reasoning faculty seen, ever since Aristotle, to -depend, for its material and stimulation, upon the impressions -of the senses, nor can we represent it to ourselves otherwise -than as seated in the brain or in some such physical -organism, but the interesting Lange-James observations and -theory make it likely that also the emotions,—the feelings as -distinct from sensations,—ever result, as a matter of fact, from -certain foregoing, physico-neural impressions and modifications, -which latter follow upon this or that perception of the mind, -a perception which would otherwise, as is the case in certain -neural lesions and anaesthesias, remain entirely dry and unemotional.<a name="FNanchor_201_201" id="FNanchor_201_201"></a><a href="#Footnote_201_201" class="fnanchor">[201]</a>—And -the sense of the Infinite, which we have had -such reason to take as the very centre of religion, arises ever, -within man’s life here below, in contrast to, and as a concomitant<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[195]</a></span> -and supplementation of, his perception of the Finite -and Contingent, and hence not without his senses being alive -and active.</p> - -<p>Now all this fits in admirably with the whole Jewish-Christian -respect for, high claims upon, and constant training -of the body, the senses, the emotions, and with the importance -attached to the Visible and Audible,—History, Institutions, -Society.—Yet our difficulties are clear. For however spiritually -we may conceive a bodily survival or resurrection; however -completely we may place the identity of the various stages -of the body in this life, and the sameness between the body -before death and after the resurrection, in the identity of its -quasi-creator, the body-weaving soul, we can in nowise picture -to ourselves such a new, indefinitely more spiritual, incorporation, -and we bring upon ourselves acute difficulties, for both -before and after this unpicturable event. Before the resurrection -there would have to be unconsciousness between death -and that event; but thus the future life is broken up, and for -no spiritual reason. Or there would be consciousness; but -then the substitute for the body, that occasions this consciousness, -would, apparently, render all further revivification of the -body unnecessary. And if we take the resurrection as effected, -we promptly feel how mixed and clumsy, how inadequate, -how less, and not more, than the best and noblest elements of -our experience and aspirations even here and now, is such a, -still essentially temporal and spacial, mode of existence.</p> - -<p>I take it that, against all this, we can but continue to maintain -two points. The soul’s life after bodily death is not a -matter of experience or of logical demonstration, but a postulate -of faith and a consequence from our realization of the human -spirit’s worth; and hence is as little capable of being satisfactorily -pictured, as are all the other great spiritual realities -which can nevertheless be shown to be presupposed and implicitly -affirmed by every act of faith in the final truth and -abiding importance of anything whatsoever.—And again, it is -not worth while to attempt to rescue, Aristotle-wise, just -that single, and doubtless not the highest, function of man’s -spirit and character, his dialectic faculty, or even his intellectual -intuitive power, for the purpose of thus escaping, or at -least minimizing, the difficulties attendant upon the belief in -Immortality. If we postulate, as we do, man’s survival, we -must postulate, without being able to fill in or to justify any -details of the scheme, the survival of all that may and does<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[196]</a></span> -constitute man’s true and ultimate personality. How much -or how little this may precisely mean, we evidently know -but very imperfectly: but we know enough to be confident -that it means more than the abstractive, increasingly dualistic -school of Plato, Philo, Plotinus, Proclus would allow.</p> - -<p>(2) But speculative reason seems also to raise a quite -general objection, based upon man’s littleness within the -immense Universe, and upon the arbitrariness of excepting -those tiny points, those centres of human consciousness, men’s -souls, from the flux, the ceaseless becoming and undoing, of -all the other parts of that mighty whole, immortal, surely, only -<i>as</i> a whole.</p> - -<p>Here we can safely say that, at least in this precise form, -the difficulty springs predominantly not from reason or experience, -but from an untutored imagination. For all our -knowledge of that great external world, which this objection -supposes to englobe our small internal world, as a part -inferior, or at most but equal, to the other parts of that whole, -is dependent upon this interior world of ours; and however -truly inherent in that external world we may hold that world’s -laws to be, those laws can, after all, be shown to be as truly the -result of our own mind’s spontaneous work,—an architectonic -building up by this mind of the sense-impressions conveyed -to it from without. And that whole Universe, in so far as it -is material, cannot be compared, either in kind or in dignity, -to Mind: only the indications there, parallel in this to our -experiences within our own mind, of a Mind and Spirit -infinitely greater and nobler than, yet with a certain affinity -to, our own,—only these constitute that outer world as great -as this our inner world. Indeed it is plain that Materialism -is so far from constituting the solution to the problem of -existence, that even Psycho-Physical Parallelism, even the -attribution of any ultimate reality to Matter, are on their -trial. It is anyhow already clear that, of the two, it is easier -and nearer to the truth to maintain that Matter and its -categories are simply modes in the manifestation of Mind to -minds and in the apprehension of Mind by minds, than to -declare Mind to be but a function or resultant of Matter.<a name="FNanchor_202_202" id="FNanchor_202_202"></a><a href="#Footnote_202_202" class="fnanchor">[202]</a></p> - -<p>But if all this is so, then no simply sensible predominance -of the sensible Universe, nor even any ascertainment of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[197]</a></span> -mere flux and interchange of and between all things material -and their elements, can reasonably affect the question as to -the superiority and permanence of Mind. But we shall -return, in the next chapter, to the difficulties special to the -Immortality of individual human spirits or personalities,—for -this is, I think, the point at which the problem is still acute.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Three Ethico-Practical Difficulties.</i></h5> - -<p>The last group of objections is directly practical and -ethical, and raises three points: the small space and influence -occupied and exercised, apparently, by such a belief, in the -spiritual life of even serious persons; the seemingly selfish, -ungenerous type of religion and of moral tone fostered by -definite belief in, or at least occupation with, the thought of -an individual future life, as contrasted with the nobility of -tone engendered by such denials or abstractions from all such -beliefs as we find in Spinoza and Schleiermacher; and, finally, -the plausibility of the teaching, on the part of some distinguished -thinkers and poets, that a positive conviction of -this our short earthly life being the sole span of our individual -consciousness is directly productive of a certain deep tenderness, -an heroic concentration of attention, and a virile truthfulness, -which are unattainable, which indeed are weakened or -rendered impossible by, the necessarily vague anticipation of -an unending future life; a hope which, where operative at all, -can but dwarf and deaden all earthly aspiration and endeavour.</p> - -<p>(1) As to the first point, which has perhaps never been -more brilliantly affirmed than by Mr. Schiller,<a name="FNanchor_203_203" id="FNanchor_203_203"></a><a href="#Footnote_203_203" class="fnanchor">[203]</a> I altogether -doubt whether the numerous appearances, which admittedly -seem to point that way, are rightly interpreted by such a -conclusion. For it is, for one thing, most certainly possible -to be deeply convinced of the reality and importance of the -soul’s heightened after-life, and to have no kind of belief or -interest in Psychical Research, at least in such Research as -an intrinsically valuable aid to any specifically religious convictions. -No aloofness from such attempts to find spiritual -realities at the phenomenal level can, (unless it is clear that -the majority of educated Western Europeans share the naïve -assumptions of this position), indicate negation of, or indifference -to, the belief in Immortality.—And next, it is equally -certain that precisely the most fruitful form of the belief is -that which conceives the After-life as already involved in this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[198]</a></span> -one, and which, therefore, dwells specially, not upon the -posteriority in time, but upon the difference in kind of that -spiritual life of the soul which, even <i>hic et nunc</i>, can be sought -after and experienced, in ever imperfect degrees no doubt, yet -really and more and more. Here we ever get an approach to -Simultaneity and Eternity, instead of sheer succession and -clock-time: and here the fundamental attitude of the believer -would appear only if pressed to deny or exclude the deathlessness -of the spirit and its life,—the usual latency and -simple implication of the positive conviction, in nowise -diminishing this conviction’s reality.—And, finally, it would -have to be seen whether those who are indifferent or sceptical -as to Immortal or Eternal Life, are appreciably fewer and -largely other than those who are careless as to the other deep -implications and requirements of spiritual experience. We -may well doubt whether they would turn out to be so.</p> - -<p>(2) As to the second point, we have already found how -utterly insuppressible is the pleasure, normally concomitant -upon every act of noble self-conquest; and how, though -we can and should perform such and all other acts, as -far as possible, from the ultimate, determining motive of -thereby furthering the realization of the Kingdom of God, -there can be no solid truthfulness or sane nobility in insisting -upon attempts at thinking away and denying the fact and -utility of that concomitant pleasure. But if so, then a further, -other-world extension of that realization and of this concomitant -happiness, and a belief here below in such an eventual -extension, cannot of themselves be ignoble or debasing. Occasions -for every degree and kind of purely selfish and -faultily natural acts, of acts inchoatively supernatural but still -predominantly slavish, reappear here, in close parallel to the -variety of disposition displayed by men towards every kind -of reality and ideal, towards the Family, Science, the State, -Humanity, where the same concomitances and the same high -uses and mean abuses are ever possible and actual. Neither -here nor there should we attempt to impoverish truth and -life, in order to exclude the possibility of their abuse.—And it -would, of course, be profoundly unfair to contrast such a -rarely noble spirit as Spinoza among the deniers with the -average mind from among the affirmers. The average or the -majority of the deniers would not, I think, appear as more -generous and devoted than the corresponding average or -majority on the other side.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[199]</a></span></p> - -<p>(3) And as to the supposed directly beneficial effects of a -positive denial of Immortality, such as have been sung for us -by George Eliot and Giovanni Pascoli, we can safely affirm -that the special tendernesses and quiet heroisms, deduced by -them from such a negation, are too obviously dependent upon -spiritual implications and instincts, for us to be able to put -them directly to the credit of that denial. Only in so far as -Immortality were not a postulate intrinsically connected with -belief in objective and obligatory Beauty, Truth, and Goodness,—in -God as our origin and end,—could its persistent and -deliberate denial not be injurious to these fundamental convictions -and to the ultimate health of the soul’s life: and of -this intrinsic non-connection there is no sufficient evidence.—Certainly, -in such a case as Spinoza’s, the same strain of -reasoning which makes him abandon individual Immortality -Ought, in logic, to prevent him, a mere hopelessly determined -link in the <i>Natura Naturata</i>, from ever attaining to the free -self-dedication of himself, as now a fully responsible member -of the <i>Natura Naturans</i>. And if not all the grand depth of -his spiritual instinct and moral nobility, and its persistence -in spite of its having no logical room in the fixedly -naturalistic element of his teaching, can be urged as an -argument in favour of the ultimate truth and ethical helpfulness -of that whole element, neither can it be urged with -respect to what is presumably one part of that element, his -denial of personal Immortality.</p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">Catherine’s General After-Life Conceptions.</span></h4> - -<p>Now Catherine’s general After-Life Conceptions in part -bring into interesting prominence, in part really meet and -overcome, the perplexities and mutually destructive alternatives -which we have just considered. I shall here again -leave over to the next chapter the simply ultimate questions, -such as that of the pure Eternity <i>versus</i> the Unendingness of -the soul; but shall allow myself, as to one set of her general -ideas, a little digression as to the probability of their ultimate -literary suggestion by Plato.—These Platonic passages probably -reached her too indirectly, and by means and in forms -which I have too entirely failed to discover, for me to be able -to discuss them in my chapter devoted to her assured and -demonstrably direct literary sources. But these sayings of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[200]</a></span> -Plato greatly help to illustrate the meaning of her doctrine.—I -shall group these, her general, positions and implications -under four heads, and shall consider three of these as, in -substance, profoundly satisfactory, but one of them, the -second, as acceptable only with many limitations, although -this second has obviously much influenced the form given by -her to several of those other conceptions.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Forecasts of the Hereafter, based upon present experience.</i></h5> - -<p>First, then, we get, as the fundamental presupposition of the -whole Eschatology, a grandly sane, simple, and profound -doctrine formulated over and over again and applied throughout, -with a splendid consistency, as the key and limit to all -her anticipations and picturings. Only because of the fact, -and of our conviction of the fact, of the unbroken continuity -and identity of God with Himself, of the human soul with -itself, and of the deepest of the relations subsisting between -that God and the soul, across the chasm formed by our -body’s death, and only in proportion as we can and do -experience and achieve, during this our earthly life, certain -spiritual laws and realities of a sufficiently elemental, universal, -and fruitful, more or less time- and space-less character, can -we (whilst ever remembering the analogical nature of such -picturings even as to the soul’s life here) safely and profitably -forecast certain general features of the future which is thus -already so largely a present. But, given these conditions in -the present, we can and should forecast the future, to the -extent implied. And as Plato’s great imaginative projection, -his life-work, the <i>Republic</i>, achieves its original end, (of -making more readily understandable, by objectivizing on a -large scale, the life of the inner city of our own soul), in so -far as he has rightly understood the human soul and has -found appropriate representations of its powers, laws, and -ideals in his future commonwealth, even if we cannot accept -this picture for political purposes and in all its details: so is -it also with Catherine’s projection, which, if bolder in its -subject-matter, is, most rightly, indefinitely more general in -its indications than is Plato’s great diagram of the soul. -Man’s spiritual personality, being held by her to survive -death,—to retain its identity and an at least equivalent consciousness, -of that identity,—the deepest experiences of that -personality before the body’s death are conceived as re-experienced -by it, in a heightened degree and form, after -death itself. Hence these great pictures, of what the soul will<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[201]</a></span> -experience then, would remain profoundly true of what the -soul seeks and requires now, even if there were no <i>then</i> at all.</p> - -<p>And note particularly how only with regard to one stage -and condition of the spirit’s future life,—that of the purification -of the imperfect soul,—does she indulge in any at all -direct doctrine or detailed picturing; and this, doubtless, not -only because she has experienced much concerning this -matter in her own life here, but also because the projection -of these experiences would still give us, not the ultimate state, -but more or less only a prolongation of our mixed, joy-in-suffering -life upon earth. As to the two ultimate states, we -get only quite incidental glimpses, although even these are -strongly marked by her general position and method.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Catherine’s forecasts and present experience correspondingly -limited.</i></h5> - -<p>And next, coming to the projection itself, we naturally find -it to present all the strength and limitations of her own -spiritual experiences which are thus projected: her attitude -towards the body and towards human fellowship, (two subjects -which are shown to be closely inter-related by the continuous -manner in which they stand and fall together throughout the -history of philosophy and religion,) thus constitute the second -general peculiarity of her Eschatology. We have already -noted, in her life, her strongly ecstatic, body-ignoring, body-escaping -type of religion; and how, even in her case, it tended -to starve the corporate, institutional conceptions and affections. -Here, in the projection, we find both the cause and the effect -again, and on a larger scale. Her continuous psycho-physical -discomforts and keen thirst for a unity and simplicity as rapid -and complete as possible, the joy and strength derived from -ecstatic habits and affinities, would all make her, without even -herself being aware of it, drop all further thought as to the -future fate of that oppressive “prison-house” from which her -spirit had at last got free.</p> - -<p>Now such non-occupation with the fate of the body and of -her fellow-souls may appear quite appropriate in her Purgatorial -Eschatology, yet we cannot but find that, even here, it -already possesses grave disadvantages, and that it persists -throughout all her After-life conceptions. For in all the states -and stages of the soul we get a markedly unsocial, a <i>sola cum -solo</i> picture. And yet there is, perhaps, no more striking -difference, amongst their many affinities, between Platonism -and Christianity than the intense Individualism which marks<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[202]</a></span> -the great Greek’s doctrine, and the profoundly social conception -which pervades Our Lord’s own teaching,—in each case -as regards the next life as well as this one. Plotinus’s great -culminating commendation of “the flight of the alone to the -Alone” continues Plato’s tradition; whereas, if even St. Paul -and the Joannine writings speak at times as though the individual -soul attained to its full personality in and by direct -intercourse with God alone, the Synoptic Gospels, and at -bottom also those two great lovers of Our Lord’s spirit, never -cease to emphasize the social constituent of the soul’s life -both here and hereafter. The Kingdom of Heaven, the Soul -of the Church, as truly constitutes the different personalities, -their spirituality and their joy, as they constitute it,—that -great Organism which, as such, is both first and last in the -Divine thought and love.</p> - -<p>Here, in the at least partial ignoring of these great social -facts, we touch the main defect of most mystical outlooks; -yet this defect does not arise from what they possess, but -from what they lack. For solitude, and the abstractive, -unifying, intuitive, emotional, mystical element is also wanted, -and this element and movement Catherine exemplifies in rare -perfection. Indeed, in the great classical, central period of -her life she had, as we know, combined all this with much of -the outward movement, society, detailed observation, attachment, -the morally <i>en-static</i>, the immanental type. Unfortunately -the same ill-health and ever-increasing predominance -of the former element, which turned her, quite naturally, to -these eschatological contemplations, and which indeed helped -to give them their touching tone of first-hand experience, also -tended, of necessity, to make her drop even such slight and -lingering social elements as had formerly coloured her -thought. It is, then, only towards the understanding and -deepening of the former of these two necessary movements -of religion, that these, her latter-day enlargements of some of -her deepest experiences and convictions will be found true -helps.</p> - -<p>Yet if the usual <i>ad extra</i> disadvantages of such an abstractive -position towards the body are thus exemplified by her, -in this her unsocial, individualistic attitude, it is most interesting -to note how entirely she avoids the usual <i>ad intra</i> -drawbacks of this same position. For if her whole attention, -and, increasingly, even her consciousness are, in true ecstatic -guise, absorbed away from her fellows and concentrated<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[203]</a></span> -exclusively upon God in herself and herself in God, yet this -consciousness consists not only of <i>Noûs</i>, that dry theoretic -reason which, already by Plato, but still more by Aristotle, is -alone conceived as surviving the body, but contains also the -upper range of <i>Thumos</i>,—all those passions of the noblest -kind,—love, admiration, gratitude, utter self-donation, joy in -purifying suffering and in an ever-growing self-realization as -part of the great plan of God,—all the highest notes in that -wondrous scale of deep feeling and of emotionally coloured -willing which Plato made dependent, not for its character but -for the possibility of its operation, upon the body’s union with -the soul.—And thus we see how, in her conception of the -soul’s own self within itself and of its relation to God, the -Christian idea of Personality, as of a many-sided organism in -which Love and Will are the very flower of the whole, has -triumphed over the Platonic presentation of the Spirit, in so -far as this is taken to require and achieve an ultimate sublimation -free from all emotive elements. Thus in her doctrine -the whole Personality survives death, although this Personality -energizes only, as it were upwards, to God alone, and not also -sideways and downwards, towards its fellows and the lesser -children of God.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Catherine’s forecast influenced by Plato.</i></h5> - -<p>Catherine’s third peculiarity consists in a rich and profound -organization of two doctrines, the one libertarian, the other -determinist; and requires considerable quotation from Plato, -whose teachings, bereft of all transmigration-fancies, seem -clearly to reappear here, (however complex may have been -the mediation,) in Catherine’s great conception.</p> - -<p>The determinist doctrine maintains that virtue and vice, -in proportion as they are allowed their full development, -spontaneously and necessarily attain to their own congenital -consummation, a consummation which consists, respectively, -in the bliss inseparable from the final and complete identity -between the inevitable results upon itself of the soul’s deliberate -endeavours, and the indestructible requirements of this -same soul’s fundamental nature; and in the misery of the, now -fully felt but only gradually superable, or even, in other cases, -insuperable, antagonism between the inevitable consequences -within its own self of the soul’s more or less deliberate -choosings, and those same, here also ineradicable, demands of -its own truest nature.</p> - -<p>As Marsilio Ficino says, in his <i>Theologia Platonica</i>,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[204]</a></span> -published in Florence in 1482: “Virtue is reward in its first -budding, reward is virtue full-grown. Vice is punishment at -the moment of its birth; punishment is vice at its consummation. -For, in each of these cases, one and the same thing is -first the simple seed and then the full ear of corn; and one -and the same thing is the full ear of corn and then the food -of man. Precisely the very things then that we sow in this -our (earthly) autumn, shall we reap in that (other-world) -summer-day.”<a name="FNanchor_204_204" id="FNanchor_204_204"></a><a href="#Footnote_204_204" class="fnanchor">[204]</a> It is true that forensic terms and images are -also not wanting in Catherine’s sayings; but these, in part, -run simply parallel to the immanental conception without -modifying it; in part, they are in its service; and, in part, they -are the work of the theologians’ arrangements and glosses -discussed in my Appendix.</p> - -<p>And the libertarian doctrine declares that it is the soul -itself which, in the beyond and immediately after death, -chooses the least painful, because the most expressive of her -then actual desires, from among the states which the natural -effects upon her own self of her own earthly choosings have -left her interiorly free to choose.</p> - -<p>Now it is in this second doctrine especially that we find so -detailed an anticipation by Plato of a whole number of highly -original and characteristic points and combinations of points, -as to render a fortuitous concurrence between Catherine and -Plato practically impossible. Yet I have sought in vain, -among Catherine’s authentic sayings, actions, possessions, or -friends, for any trace of direct acquaintance with any of -Plato’s writings. But Ficino’s Latin translation of Plato, -published, with immense applause, in Florence in 1483, 1484, -must have been known, in those intensely Platonizing times, to -even non-professed Humanists in Genoa, long before Catherine’s -death in 1510, so that one or other of her intimates may have -communicated the substance of these Platonic doctrines to -her.<a name="FNanchor_205_205" id="FNanchor_205_205"></a><a href="#Footnote_205_205" class="fnanchor">[205]</a> Plotinus, of whom Ficino published a Latin translation -in 1492, contains but a feeble echo of Plato on this point. -Proclus, directly known only very little till much after<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[205]</a></span> -Catherine’s time, is in even worse case. The Areopagite, -who has so continuously taken over whole passages from all -three writers, although directly almost exclusively from -Proclus, contains nothing more immediately to the purpose -than his impressive sayings concerning Providence’s continuous -non-forcing of the human personality in its fundamental -constitution and its free elections with their inevitable -consequences; hence Catherine cannot have derived her ideas, -in the crisp definiteness which they retain in her sayings, from -her cousin the Dominican nun and the Areopagite. And it -is certain, as we have seen, how scattered and inchoate are -the hints which she may have found in St. Paul, the Joannine -writings, and Jacopone da Todi. St. Augustine contains -nothing that would be directly available,—an otherwise likely -source considering Catherine’s close connection with the -Augustinian Canonesses of S. Maria delle Grazie.</p> - -<p>In Plato, then, we get five conceptions and symbolic -pictures that are practically identical with those of Catherine.</p> - -<p>(1) First we get the conception of souls having each, in exact -accordance with the respective differences of their moral and -spiritual disposition and character, as these have been constituted -by them here below, a “place” or environment, -expressive of that character, ready for their occupation after -the body’s death. “The soul that is pure departs at death, -herself invisible, to the invisible world,—to the divine, immortal -and rational: thither arriving, she lives in bliss. But the soul -that is impure at the time of her departure and is … -engrossed by the corporeal …, is weighed down and drawn -back again into the visible place (world).”</p> - -<p>And this scheme, of like disposition seeking a like place, -is then carried out, by the help of the theory of transmigration, -as a re-incarnation of these various characters into environments, -bodies, exactly corresponding to them: gluttonous -souls are assigned to asses’ bodies, tyrannous souls to those -of wolves, and so on: in a word, “there is no difficulty in -assigning to all ‘a whither’ (a place) answering to their general -natures and propensities.”<a name="FNanchor_206_206" id="FNanchor_206_206"></a><a href="#Footnote_206_206" class="fnanchor">[206]</a> For this corresponds to a law -which runs throughout all things,—a determinism of consequences -which does not prevent the liberty of causes. “The -King of the universe contrived a general plan, by which a -thing of a certain nature found a seat and place of a certain<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[206]</a></span> -kind. But the formation of this nature, he left to the wills of -individuals.”</p> - -<p>Or, with the further spacial imagery of movements up, -level, or down, we get: “All things that have a soul change -… and, in changing, move according to law and the order of -destiny. Lesser changes of nature move on level ground, but -great crimes sink … into the so-called lower places …; -and, when the soul becomes greatly different and divine, she -also greatly changes her place, which is now altogether holy.”<a name="FNanchor_207_207" id="FNanchor_207_207"></a><a href="#Footnote_207_207" class="fnanchor">[207]</a> -The original, divinely intended “places” of souls are all high -and good, and similar to each other though not identical, -each soul having its own special “place”; and for this -congenital “place” each soul has a resistible yet ineradicable -home-sickness. “The first incarnation” of human souls which -“distributes each soul to a star,” is ordained to be similar -for all.… “And when they have been of necessity implanted -in bodily forms, should they master their passions … they -live in righteousness; if otherwise, in unrighteousness. And -he who lived well through his allotted time shall be conveyed -once more to a habitation in his kindred star, and there shall -enjoy a blissful and congenial life; but failing this he shall -pass into … such a form of (further) incarnation as fits his -disposition … until he shall overcome, by reason, all that -burthen that afterwards clung around him.”<a name="FNanchor_208_208" id="FNanchor_208_208"></a><a href="#Footnote_208_208" class="fnanchor">[208]</a></p> - -<p>If from all this we exclude the soul’s existence before any -beginning of its body, its transmigration into other bodies, -and the self-sufficiency of reason; and if we make it all to be -penetrated by God’s presence, grace, and love, and by our -corresponding or conflicting emotional and volitional as well -as intellectual attitude: we shall get Catherine’s position -exactly.</p> - -<p>(2) But again, in at least one phase of his thinking, Plato -pictures the purification of the imperfect soul as effected, of -at least as begun, not in a succession of “places” of an -extensionally small but organic kind, bodies, but in a “place” -of an extensionally larger but inorganic sort,—the shore of a -lake, where the soul has to wait. “The Acherusian lake is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[207]</a></span> -the lake to the shores of which the many go when they are -dead; and, after waiting an appointed time, which to some is -longer and to others shorter, they are sent back to be born as -animals.” Here we evidently get a survival of the conception, -predominant in Homer, of a pain-and-joyless Hades, but -limited here to the middle, the imperfect class of souls, and -followed, in their case, by transmigration, to which alone, -apparently, purification is directly attached.</p> - -<p>In the same Dialogue we read later on: “Those who -appear to have lived neither well nor ill … go to the river -Acheron, and are carried to the lake; and there they dwell -and are purified of their evil deeds … and are absolved and -receive the rewards of their good deeds according to their -deserts.” Here we have, evidently, still the same “many” -and the same place, the shores of the Acherusian lake, but -also an explicit affirmation of purification effected there, for -this purification is now followed directly, not by re-incarnation, -but by the ultimate happiness in the soul’s original and -fundamentally congenial “place.” And this scheme is far -more conformable to Plato’s fundamental position: for how -can bodies, even lower than the human, help to purify the -soul which has become impure precisely on occasion of its -human body?—We can see how the Christian Purgatorial -doctrine derives some of its pictures from the second of these -parallel passages; yet that the “longer or shorter waiting” -of the first passage also enters into that teaching,—especially -in its more ordinary modern form, according to which there -is, in this state, no intrinsic purification.</p> - -<p>And lower down we find: “Those who have committed -crimes which, although great, are not unpardonable,—for these -it is necessary to plunge (ἐμπεσεῖν) into Tartarus, the pains of -which they are compelled to undergo for a year; but at the -end of the year they are borne to the Acherusian lake. But -those who appear incurable by reason of the greatness of their -crimes … such their appropriate destiny hurls (ῤίπτει) into -Tartarus, whence they never come forth.” Here we get a -Purgatory, pictured as a watery substance in which the more -gravely impure of the curable souls are immersed before -arriving at the easier purification, the waiting on the dry land -alongside the lake; this Purgatory is, as a “place” and, in -intensity, identical with Hell; and into this place the -curable souls “plunge” and the incurable ones are “hurled.”—Of -this third passage Catherine retains the identification of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[208]</a></span> -the pains of Purgatory and those of Hell; the “plunge,” or -“hurling,” of two distinct classes of souls into these pains; -and the mitigation, after a time, previous to complete cessation, -of the suffering in the case of the curable class. But the -“plunge,” with her, is common to all degrees of imperfectly -pure souls; there is, for all these souls, no change of “place” -during their purgation, but only a mitigation of suffering; -and this mitigation is at work gradually and from the first. -And the ordinary modern Purgatorial teaching is like this -passage, in that it keeps the curable souls in Tartarus, say, -for one year, and lets them suffer there, apparently without -mitigation, throughout that time: and that, in the case of -both classes of souls, it conceives the punishment as extrinsic, -vindictive, and inoperative.</p> - -<p>And a fourth <i>Phaedo</i> passage tells us: “Those who are -remarkable for having led holy lives are released from this -earthly prison, and go to their pure home, which is above, and -dwell in the purer earth,” the Isles of the Just, in Oceanus. -“And those, again, amongst these who have duly purified -themselves with philosophy, live henceforth altogether without -the body, in mansions fairer far than these.” Here we get, -alongside of the two Purgatories and the one Hell, two -Heavens, of which the first is but taken over from Homer and -Pindar, but of which the second is Plato’s own conception. -Catherine, in entire accord with the ordinary teaching, has -got but one “place” of each kind; and her Heaven -corresponds, apart from his formal and final exclusion of -every sort of body, to the second of these Platonic Heavens; -whilst, here again, the all-encompassing presence of God’s -love for souls as of the soul’s love for God, which, in her -teaching, is the beginning, means, and end of the whole -movement, effects an indefinite difference between the two -positions.<a name="FNanchor_209_209" id="FNanchor_209_209"></a><a href="#Footnote_209_209" class="fnanchor">[209]</a></p> - -<p>(3) Yet Plato, in his most characteristic moods, explicitly -anticipates Catherine as to the intrinsic, ameliorative nature -and work of Purgatory: “The proper office of punishment is -two-fold: he who is rightly punished ought either to become -better … by it, or he ought to be made an example to his -fellows, that they may see what he suffers and … become -better. Those who are punished by Gods and men and -improved, are those whose sins are curable … by pain and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[209]</a></span> -suffering:—for there is no other way in which they can be -delivered from evil, as in this world so also in the other. But -the others are incurable—the time has passed at which they -can receive any benefit themselves.… Rhadamanthus,” the -chief of the three nether-world judges, “looks with admiration -on the soul of some just one, who has lived in holiness and -truth … and sends him” without any intervening suffering -“to the Isles of the Blessed.… I consider how I shall -present my soul whole and undefiled before the Judge, in that -day.”<a name="FNanchor_210_210" id="FNanchor_210_210"></a><a href="#Footnote_210_210" class="fnanchor">[210]</a> Here the last sentence is strikingly like in form as -well as in spirit to many a saying of St. Paul and Catherine.</p> - -<p>(4) But the following most original passages give us a sentiment -and an image which, in their special drift, are as opposed -to St. Paul, and indeed to the ordinary Christian consciousness, -as they are dear to Catherine, in this matter so strongly, -although probably unconsciously, Platonist, indeed Neo-Platonist, -in her affinities. “In the time of Kronos, indeed -down to that of Zeus, the Judgment was given on the day on -which men were to die,” <i>i.e.</i> immediately <i>before</i> their death; -“and the consequence was, that the judgments were not well -given,—the souls found their way to the wrong places. Zeus -said: ‘The reason is, that the judged have their clothes on, -for they are alive.… There are many, having evil souls, who -are apparelled in fair bodies or wrapt round in wealth and -rank.… The Judges are awed by them; and they themselves -too have their clothes on when judging: their -eyes and ears and their whole bodies are interposed, as a veil, -before their own souls. What is to be done? … Men shall -be entirely stript before they are judged, for they shall be -judged when dead; the Judge too shall be naked, that is, -dead: he, with his naked soul, shall pierce into the other -naked soul immediately <i>after</i> each man dies … and is -bereft of all his kith and kin, and has left behind him all his -brave attire upon earth, and thus the Judgment will be just.’”<a name="FNanchor_211_211" id="FNanchor_211_211"></a><a href="#Footnote_211_211" class="fnanchor">[211]</a>—If -we compare this with St. Paul’s precisely contrary instinct -and desire to be “clothed upon” at death, “lest we be found -naked,” i.e. without the protection of any kind of body; and -then realize Catherine’s intense longing for “nudità,”—to strip -herself here, as far as possible, from all imperfection and self-delusion -before the final stripping off of the body in death, -and to appear, utterly naked, before the utterly naked eye of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[210]</a></span> -God, so that no “clothes” should remain requiring to be -burnt away by the purifying fires,<a name="FNanchor_212_212" id="FNanchor_212_212"></a><a href="#Footnote_212_212" class="fnanchor">[212]</a> the profound affinity of -sentiment and imagery between Catherine and Plato—and -this on a point essentially Platonic,—is very striking.</p> - -<p>(5) But, above all, in his deep doctrine as to the soul’s -spontaneous choice after death of that condition, “place,” -which, owing to the natural effects within her of her earthly -willings and self-formation, she cannot but now find the most -congenial to herself, Plato appears as the ultimate source of -a literary kind for Catherine’s most original view, which -otherwise is, I think, without predecessors. “The souls,” -he tells us in the <i>Republic</i>, “immediately on their arrival in -the other world, were required to go to Lachesis,” one of the -three Fates. And “an interpreter, having taken from her -lap a number of lots and plans of life, spoke as follows: -‘Thus saith Lachesis, the daughter of Necessity.… “Your -destiny shall not be allotted to you, but you shall choose it -for yourselves. Let him who draws the first lot, be the first -to choose a life which shall be his irrevocably.… The -responsibility lies with the chooser, Heaven is guiltless.”’” -“No settled character of soul was included in the plans of -life, because, with the change of life, the soul inevitably became -changed itself.” “It was a truly wonderful sight, to watch -how each soul selected its life.… When all the souls had -chosen their lives, Lachesis dispatched with each of them the -Destiny he had selected, to guard his life and satisfy his -choice.”<a name="FNanchor_213_213" id="FNanchor_213_213"></a><a href="#Footnote_213_213" class="fnanchor">[213]</a> And in the <i>Phaedrus</i> Plato tells us that “at the end -of the first thousand years” (of the first incarnation) “the -good souls and also the evil souls both come to cast lots and -to choose their second life; and they may take any that they -like.”<a name="FNanchor_214_214" id="FNanchor_214_214"></a><a href="#Footnote_214_214" class="fnanchor">[214]</a></p> - -<p>In both the dialogues the lots are evidently taken over from -popular mythology, but are here made merely to introduce a -certain orderly succession among the spontaneous choosings -of the souls themselves, whilst the lap of the daughter of -Necessity, spread out before all the choosers previous to their -choice, and the separate, specially appropriate Destiny that -accompanies each soul after its choice, indicate plainly that, -although the choice itself is the free act and pure self-expression -of each soul’s then present disposition, yet that this -disposition is the necessary result of its earthly volitions and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[211]</a></span> -self-development or self-deformation, and that the choice now -made becomes, in its turn, the cause of certain inevitable -consequences,—of a special environment which itself is then -productive of special effects upon, and of special occasions -for, the final working out of this soul’s character.—Plotinus -retains the doctrine: “the soul chooses there” in -the Other world,—“its Daemon and its kind of life.”<a name="FNanchor_215_215" id="FNanchor_215_215"></a><a href="#Footnote_215_215" class="fnanchor">[215]</a> But -neither Proclus nor Dionysius has the doctrine, whilst -Catherine, on the contrary, reproduces it with a penetrating -completeness.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Simplifications characteristic of Catherine’s Eschatology.</i></h5> - -<p>And under our last, fourth head, we can group the simplifications -characteristic of Catherine’s Eschatology.</p> - -<p>(1) One simplification has, of course, for now some fifteen -hundred years, been the ordinary Christian conception: I -mean the elimination of the time-element between the -moment of death and the beginning of the three states. Yet -it is interesting to note how by far the greatest of the Latin -Fathers, St. Augustine, who died in <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 430, still clings predominantly -to the older Christian and Jewish conception of -the soul abiding in a state of shrunken, joy-and-painless consciousness -from the moment of the body’s death up to that -of the general resurrection and judgment. “After this short -life, thou wilt not yet be where the saints will be,” <i>i.e.</i> in -Heaven. “Thou wilt not yet be there: who is ignorant of -this? But thou canst straightway be where the rich man -descried the ulcerous beggar to be a-resting, far away,” <i>i.e.</i> in -Limbo. “Placed in that rest, thou canst await the day of -judgment with security, when thou shalt receive thy body -also, when thou shalt be changed so as to be equal to an -Angel.”<a name="FNanchor_216_216" id="FNanchor_216_216"></a><a href="#Footnote_216_216" class="fnanchor">[216]</a> Only with regard to Purgatory, a state held by him, -in writings of his last years, 410-430 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, to be possible, indeed -probable, does he make an exception to his general rule: for -such purification would have to take place” in the interval -of time between the death of the body and the last day of -condemnation and reward.”<a name="FNanchor_217_217" id="FNanchor_217_217"></a><a href="#Footnote_217_217" class="fnanchor">[217]</a></p> - -<p>It is doubtless the still further fading away of the expectation, -so vivid and universal in early Christian times, of -the proximity of Our Lord’s Second Advent, and the tacit<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[212]</a></span> -prevalence of Greek affinities and conceptions concerning -the bodiless soul, that helped to eliminate, at last universally, -this interval of waiting, in the case of souls too good or too -bad for purgation, from the general consciousness of at least -Western Christendom. The gain in this was the great simplification -and concentration of the immediate outlook and -interest; the loss was the diminished apprehension of the -essentially complex, concrete, synthetic character of man’s -nature, and of the necessity for our assuming that this -characteristic will be somehow preserved in this nature’s -ultimate perfection.</p> - -<p>(2) There is a second simplification in Catherine which, -though here St. Augustine leads the way, is less common -among Christians: her three other-world “places” are not, -according to her ultimate thought, three distinct spacial extensions -and localities, filled, respectively, with ceaselessly -suffering, temporarily suffering, and ceaselessly blessed souls; -but they are, (notwithstanding all the terms necessitated by -such spacial picturings as “entering,” “coming out,” “plunging -into”), so many distinct states and conditions of the soul, -of a painful, mixed, or joyful character. We shall have these -her ultimate ideas very fully before us presently. But here I -would only remark that this her union of a picturing faculty, -as vivid as the keenest sense-perception, and of a complete -non-enslavement to, a vigorous utilization of, these life-like -spacial projections, by a religious instinct and experience -which never forgets that God and souls are spirits, to whom -our ordinary categories of space and extension, time and -motion, do not and cannot in strictness apply, is as rare as it -is admirable; and that, though her intensely anti-corporeal -and non-social attitude made such a position more immediately -easy for her than it can be for those who remain keenly -aware of the great truths involved in the doctrines of the -Resurrection of the Body and the Communion of Saints, this -her trend of thought brings into full articulation precisely the -deepest of our spiritual apprehensions and requirements, whilst -it is not her fault if it but further accentuates some of our -intellectual perplexities.</p> - -<p>We get much in St. Augustine, which he himself declares -to have derived, in the first instance, from “the writings of the -Platonists,” which doubtless means above all Plotinus, (that -keen spiritual thinker who can so readily be traced throughout -this part of the great Convert’s teaching), as to this<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[213]</a></span> -profound incommensurableness between spiritual presence, -energizing, and affectedness on the one hand, and spacial -position, extension, and movement on the other. “What -place is there within me, to which my God can come? … I -would not exist at all, unless Thou already wert within me.” -“Thou wast never a place, and yet we have receded from -Thee; and we have drawn near to Thee, yet Thou art never -a place.” “ Are we submerged and do we emerge? Yet it -is not places into which we are plunged and out of which we -rise. What can be more like to places and yet more unlike? -For here the affections are in case,—the impurity of our spirit, -which flows downwards, oppressed by the love of earthly -cares; and the holiness of Thy Spirit, which lifts us upwards -with the love of security.”<a name="FNanchor_218_218" id="FNanchor_218_218"></a><a href="#Footnote_218_218" class="fnanchor">[218]</a> For, as he teaches “the spiritual -creature can only be changed by times,”—a succession within -a duration: “by remembering what it had forgotten, or by -learning what it did not know, or by willing what it did not -will. The bodily creature can be changed by times and places,” -by spacial motion, “from earth to heaven, from heaven to -earth, from east to west.” “That thing is not moved through -space which is not extended in space … the soul is not -considered to move in space, unless it be held to be a body.”<a name="FNanchor_219_219" id="FNanchor_219_219"></a><a href="#Footnote_219_219" class="fnanchor">[219]</a></p> - -<p>In applying the doctrine just expressed to eschatological -matters, St. Augustine concludes: “If it be asked whether -the soul, when it goes forth from the body, is borne to some -corporeal places, or to such as, though incorporeal, are like -to bodies, or to what is more excellent than either: I readily -answer that, unless it have some kind of body, it is not borne -to bodily places at all, or, at least, that it is not borne to them -by bodily motion.… But I myself do not think that it -possesses any body, when it goes forth from this earthly body.… -It gets borne, according to its deserts, to spiritual conditions, -or to penal places having a similitude to bodies.”<a name="FNanchor_220_220" id="FNanchor_220_220"></a><a href="#Footnote_220_220" class="fnanchor">[220]</a></p> - -<p>The reader will readily note a curiously uncertain frame of -mind in this last utterance. I take it that Plotinian influences -are here being checked by the Jewish conception of certain, -definitely located, provision-chambers (<i>promptuaria</i>), in which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[214]</a></span> -all souls are placed for safe keeping, between the time of the -body’s death and its resurrection. So in the Fourth Book of -Esra (of about 90 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), “the souls of the just in their -chambers said: ‘How long are we to remain here?’”; and in -the Apocalypse of Baruch (of about 150-250 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), “at the -coming of the Messiah, the provision-chambers will open, in -which the” whole, precise “number of the souls of the just -have been kept, and they will come forth.”<a name="FNanchor_221_221" id="FNanchor_221_221"></a><a href="#Footnote_221_221" class="fnanchor">[221]</a></p> - -<p>But it is St. Thomas Aquinas who, by the explicit and -consistent adoption and classification of these <i>promptuaria -receptacula</i>, reveals to us more clearly the perplexities and -fancifulnesses involved in the strictly spacial conception. -“Although bodies are not assigned to souls (immediately) -after death, yet certain bodily places are congruously assigned -to these souls in accordance with the degree of their dignity, -in which places they are, as it were, locally, in the manner in -which bodiless things can be in space: each soul having a -higher place assigned to it, according as it approaches more or -less to the first substance, God, whose seat, according to -Scripture, is Heaven.” “In the Scriptures God is called the -Sun, since He is the principle of spiritual life, as the physical -sun is of bodily life; and, according to this convention, … -souls spiritually illuminated have a greater fitness for luminous -bodies, and sin-darkened souls for dark places.” “It is -probable that, as to local position, Hell and the Limbo of the -Fathers constitute one and the same place, or are more or less -continuous.” “The place of Purgatory adjoins (that of) Hell.” -“There are altogether five places ready to receive (<i>receptanda</i>) -souls bereft of their bodies: Paradise, the Limbo of the -Fathers, Purgatory, Hell, and the Limbo of Infants.”<a name="FNanchor_222_222" id="FNanchor_222_222"></a><a href="#Footnote_222_222" class="fnanchor">[222]</a></p> - -<p>No doubt all these positions became the common scholastic -teaching. But then, as Cardinal Bellarmine cogently points -out: “no ancient, as far as I know, has written that the -Earthly Paradise was destroyed … and I have read a large -number who affirm its existence. This is the doctrine of all -the Scholastics, beginning with St. Thomas, and of the Fathers. -… St. Augustine indeed appears to rank this truth amongst -the dogmas of faith.”<a name="FNanchor_223_223" id="FNanchor_223_223"></a><a href="#Footnote_223_223" class="fnanchor">[223]</a> We shall do well, then, not to press<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[215]</a></span> -these literal localization-schemes, especially since, according to -St. Augustine’s penetrating analysis, our spiritual experiences, -already in this our earthly existence, have a distinctly non-spacial -character. Catherine’s position, if applied to the -central life of man here, and hence presumptively hereafter, -remains as true and fresh and unassailable as ever.</p> - -<p>(3) And her last simplification consists in taking the Fire -of Hell, the Fire of Purgatory, and the Fire and Light of -Heaven as profoundly appropriate symbols or descriptions of -the variously painful or joyous impressions produced, through -the differing volitional attitudes of souls towards Him, by the -one God’s intrinsically identical presence in each and all. In -all three cases, throughout their several grades, there are ever -but two realities, the Spirit-God and the spirit-soul, in various -states of inter-relation.</p> - -<p>Here again it is Catherine’s complete abstraction from the -body which renders such a view easy and, in a manner, necessary -for her mind. But here I would only emphasize the -impressive simplicity and spirituality of view which thus, as -in the material world it finds the one sun-light and the one -fire-heat, which, in themselves everywhere the same, vary -indefinitely in their effects, owing to the varying condition of -the different bodies which meet the rays and flames; so, in -the Spiritual World it discovers One supreme spiritual Energy -and Influence which, whilst ever self-identical, is assimilated, -deflected, or resisted by the lesser spirits, with inevitably -joyous, mixed, or painful states of soul, since they can each -and all resist, but cannot eradicate that Energy’s impression -within their deepest selves. And though, even with her, the -Sun-light image remains quasi-Hellenic and Intellectual, and -the Fire-heat picture is more immediately Christian and -Moral: yet she also frequently takes the sunlight as the -symbol of the achieved Harmony and Peace, and the Fire-heat -as that of more or less persisting Conflict and Pain. She -is doubtless right in keeping both symbols, and in ever thinking -of each as ultimately implying the other, for God is Beauty -and Truth, as well as Goodness and Love, and man is made -with the indestructible aspiration after Him in His living -completeness.</p> - -<p>And here again Catherine has a complicated doctrinal -history behind her.</p> - -<p>We have already considered the numerous Scriptural -passages where God and His effects upon the soul are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[216]</a></span> -symbolized as light and fire; and those again where joy or, -contrariwise, trial and suffering are respectively pictured by -the same physical properties. And Catherine takes the latter -passages as directly explanatory of the first, in so far as these -joys and sufferings are spiritual in their causes or effects.</p> - -<p>Among the Greek Fathers, Clement of Alexandria tells -us that “the Fire” of Purgatory,—for he has no Eternal -Damnation,—“is a rational,” spiritual, “fire that penetrates -the soul”; and Origen teaches that “each sinner himself -lights the flame of his own fire, and is not thrown into a fire -that has been lit before that moment and that exists in front -of him.… His conscience is agitated and pierced by its own -pricks.” Saints Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzum -are more or less influenced by Origen on this point. And -St. John Damascene, who died in about 750 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, says explicitly -that the fire of Hell is not a material fire, that it is -very different from our ordinary fire, and that men hardly -know what it is.<a name="FNanchor_224_224" id="FNanchor_224_224"></a><a href="#Footnote_224_224" class="fnanchor">[224]</a></p> - -<p>Among the Latins, St. Ambrose declares: “neither is the -gnashing, a gnashing of bodily teeth; nor is the everlasting -fire, a fire of bodily flames; nor is the worm, a bodily one.”—St. -Jerome, in one passage, counts the theory of the non-physical -fire as one of Origen’s errors; but elsewhere he -mentions it without any unfavourable note, and even enumerates -several Scripture-texts which favour it, and admits that -“‘the worm which dieth not and the fire which is not -quenched,’ is understood, by the majority of interpreters (<i>a -plerisque</i>), of the conscience of sinners which tortures them.”<a name="FNanchor_225_225" id="FNanchor_225_225"></a><a href="#Footnote_225_225" class="fnanchor">[225]</a>—St. -Augustine, in 413 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, declares: “In the matter of the -pains of the wicked, both the unquenchable fire and the intensely -living worm are interpreted differently by different -commentators. Some interpreters refer both to the body, -others refer both to the soul; and some take the fire literally, -in application to the body, and the worm figuratively, in -application to the soul, which latter opinion appears the more -credible.” Yet when, during the last years of his life, he came, -somewhat tentatively, to hold an other-world Purgatory as -well, he throughout assimilated this Purgatory’s fire to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[217]</a></span> -fire of this-world sufferings. Thus in 422 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>: “Souls which -renounce the wood, hay, straw, built upon that foundation -(I Cor. iii, 11-15), not without pain indeed (since they loved -these things with a carnal affection), but with faith in the -foundation, a faith operative through love … arrive at salvation, -through a certain fire of pain.… Whether men suffer -these things in this life only, or such-like judgments follow even -after this life—in either case, this interpretation of that text -is not discordant with the truth.” “‘He shall be saved yet -so as by fire,’ because the pain, over the loss of the things he -loved, burns him. It is not incredible that some such thing -takes place even after this life … that some of the faithful -are saved by a certain purgatorial fire, more quickly or more -slowly, according as they have less or more loved perishable -things.”<a name="FNanchor_226_226" id="FNanchor_226_226"></a><a href="#Footnote_226_226" class="fnanchor">[226]</a></p> - -<p>St. Thomas, voicing and leading Scholastic opinion, teaches -that the fire of Purgatory is the same as that of Hell; and -Cardinal Bellarmine, who died in 1621, tells us: “The common -opinion of theologians is that the fire of Purgatory is a real -and true fire, of the same kind as an earthly fire. This -opinion, it is true, is not of faith, but it is very probable,”—because -of the “consent of the scholastics, who cannot be -despised without temerity,” and also because of “the eruptions -of Mount Etna.”<a name="FNanchor_227_227" id="FNanchor_227_227"></a><a href="#Footnote_227_227" class="fnanchor">[227]</a> Yet the Council of Florence had, in -1439, restricted itself to the quite general proposition that -“if men die truly penitent, in the love of God, before they -have satisfied … for their sins … their souls are purified -by purgatorial pains after death”; thus very deliberately -avoiding all commitment as to the nature of these pains.<a name="FNanchor_228_228" id="FNanchor_228_228"></a><a href="#Footnote_228_228" class="fnanchor">[228]</a> -Cardinal Gousset, who died in 1866, tells us: “The more -common opinion amongst theologians makes the sufferings -of Purgatory to consist in the pain of fire, or at least in a pain -analogous to that of fire.”<a name="FNanchor_229_229" id="FNanchor_229_229"></a><a href="#Footnote_229_229" class="fnanchor">[229]</a> This latter position is practically -identical with Catherine’s.</p> - -<p>As to the fire of Hell, although here especially the Scholastics, -old and new, are unanimous, it is certain that there is -no definition or solemn judgment of the Church declaring it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[218]</a></span> -to be material. On this point again we find St. Thomas and -those who follow him involved in practically endless difficulties -and in, for us now, increasingly intolerable subtleties, -where they try to show how a material fire can affect an -immaterial spirit. Bossuet, so severely orthodox in all such -matters, preaching, before the Court, about sin becoming in -Hell the chastisement of the sinner, does not hesitate to -finish thus: “We bear within our hearts the instrument of -our punishment. ‘I shall produce fire from thy midst, -which shall devour thee’ (Ezek. xxviii, 18). I shall not send -it against thee from afar, it will ignite in thy conscience, its -flames will arise from thy midst, and it will be thy sins which -will produce it.”<a name="FNanchor_230_230" id="FNanchor_230_230"></a><a href="#Footnote_230_230" class="fnanchor">[230]</a>—And the Abbé F. Dubois, in a careful -article in the Ecclesiastical <i>Revue du Clergé Français</i> of Paris, -has recently expressed the conviction that “the best minds -of our time, which are above being suspected of yielding to -mere passing fashions, feel the necessity of abandoning the -literal interpretation, judged to be insufficient, of the ancient -symbols; and of returning to a freer exegesis, of which some -of the Ancients have given us the example.”<a name="FNanchor_231_231" id="FNanchor_231_231"></a><a href="#Footnote_231_231" class="fnanchor">[231]</a> Among these -helpful “Ancients” we cannot but count Catherine, with her -One God Who is the Fire of Pain and the Light of Joy to -souls, according as they resist Him or will Him, either here or -hereafter.</p> - -<h4><span class="smcap">III. Catherine and Eternal Punishment.</span></h4> - -<h5><i>Introductory: four doctrines and difficulties to be considered.</i></h5> - -<p>Taking now the three great after-life conditions separately, -in the order of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven, I would first of -all note that some readers may be disappointed that Catherine -did not, like our own English Mystic, the entirely orthodox -optimist, Mother Juliana of Norwich—her <i>Revelations</i> belong -to the year 1373 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>—simply proclaim that, whilst the teaching -and meaning of Christ and His Church would come true, -all, in ways known to God alone, would yet be well.<a name="FNanchor_232_232" id="FNanchor_232_232"></a><a href="#Footnote_232_232" class="fnanchor">[232]</a> In this -manner, without any weakening of traditional teaching, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[219]</a></span> -whole dread secret as to the future of evil-doers is left in the -hands of God, and a beautifully boundless trust and hope -glows throughout those contemplations.</p> - -<p>Yet, as I hope to show as we go along, certain assumptions -and conceptions, involved in the doctrine of Eternal Punishment, -cannot be systematically excluded, or even simply -ignored, without a grave weakening of the specifically Christian -earnestness; and that, grand as is, in certain respects, the -idea of the Apocatastasis, the Final Restitution of all Things -and Souls—as taught by Clement and Origen—it is not, at -bottom, compatible with the whole drift, philosophy, and tone, -(even apart from specific sayings) of Our Lord. And this latter -teaching—of the simply abiding significance and effect of our -deliberate elections during this our one testing-time,—and not -that of an indefinite series of chances and purifications with -an ultimate disappearance of all difference between the results -of the worst life and the best, answers to the deepest postulates -and aspirations of the most complete and delicate ethical -and spiritual sense. For minds that can discriminate between -shifting fashions and solid growth in abiding truth, that will -patiently seek out the deepest instinct and simplest implications -underlying the popular presentations of the Doctrine of -Abiding Consequences, and that take these implications as -but part of a larger whole: this doctrine still, and now -again, presents itself as a permanent element of the full -religious consciousness.</p> - -<p>It would certainly be unfair to press Catherine’s rare and -incidental sayings on Hell into a formal system. Yet those -remarks are deep and suggestive, and help too much to -interpret, supplement, and balance her central, Purgatorial -teaching, and indeed to elucidate her general religious principles, -for us to be able to pass them over. We have already -sufficiently considered the question as to the nature of the -Fire; and that as to Evil Spirits is reserved for the next -Chapter. Here I shall consider four doctrines and difficulties, -together with Catherine’s attitude towards them: the soul’s -final fate, dependent upon the character of the will’s act or -active disposition at the moment of the body’s death; the -total moral perversion of the lost; the mitigation of their -pains; and the eternity of their punishment.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Eternity dependent on the earthly life’s last moment.</i></h5> - -<p>Now as to the soul’s final fate being made dependent upon -the character of that soul’s particular act or disposition at the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[220]</a></span> -last moment previous to death, this teaching, prominent in -parts of the <i>Trattato and Vita</i>, goes back ultimately to Ezekiel, -who, as Prof. Charles interestingly shows, introduces a double -individualism into the older, Social and Organic, Eschatology -of the Hebrew Prophets. For Man is seen, by him, as responsible -for his own acts alone, and as himself working out -separately his own salvation or his own doom; and this individual -man again is looked at, not in his organic unity, but as -repeating himself in a succession of separate religious acts. -The individual act is taken to be a true expression of the -whole man at the moment of its occurrence: and hence, if -this act is wicked at the moment of the advent of the Kingdom, -the agent will rightfully be destroyed; but if it be -righteous, he will be preserved.<a name="FNanchor_233_233" id="FNanchor_233_233"></a><a href="#Footnote_233_233" class="fnanchor">[233]</a>—Now the profound truth and -genuine advance thus proclaimed, who can doubt them? And -yet it is clear that the doctrine here is solidly true, only if -taken as the explicitation and supplement, and even in part -as the corrective, of the previously predominant teaching. -Take the Ezekielian doctrine as complete, even for its own -time, or as final over against the later, the Gospel depth of -teaching, (with its union of the social body and of individual -souls, and of the soul’s single acts and of the general disposition -produced by and reacting upon these acts), and -you get an all but solipsistic Individualism and an atomistic -Psychology, and you offend Christianity and Science equally.</p> - -<p>It is evident that Catherine, if she can fairly be taxed with -what, if pressed, would, in her doctrine rather than in her life, -be an excessive Individualism, is, in her general teaching and -practice, admirably free from Psychological Atomism; indeed -did any soul ever understand better the profound reality of -habits, general dispositions, tones of mind and feeling and -will, as distinct from the single acts that gradually build them -up and that, in return, are encircled and coloured by them -all? Her whole Purgatorial doctrine stands and falls by this -distinction, and this although, with a profound self-knowledge, -she does not hesitate to make the soul express, in one particular -act after death,—that of the Plunge,—an even deeper -level of its true attitude of will and of its moral character -than is constituted by those imperfect habits of the will, -habits which it will take so much suffering and acceptance -of suffering gradually to rectify.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[221]</a></span></p> - -<p>Thus the passages in which Catherine seems to teach that -God can and does, as it were, catch souls unawares, calling -them away, and finally deciding their fate on occasion of any -and every <i>de facto</i> volitional condition at the instant of -death, however little expressive of the radical determination -of that soul such an act or surface-state may be, will have, -(even if they be genuine, and most of them have doubtlessly -grown, perhaps have completely sprung up, under the pen of -sermonizing scribes), to be taken as hortatory, hence as partly -hyperbolical. And such an admission will in nowise deny -the possibility for the soul to express its deliberate and full -disposition and determination in a single act or combination -of acts; nor that the other-world effects will follow according -to such deep, deliberate orientations of the character: it will -only deny that, at any and every moment, any and every act -of the soul sufficiently expresses its deliberate disposition. -Certainly it is comparatively rarely that the soul exerts its -full liberty, in an act of true, spiritual self-realization; and an -analogous rarity cannot but be postulated by religious philosophy -for contrary acts, of an approximately equal fulness of -deliberation and accuracy of representation, with regard to -the soul’s volitional state. And yet the operative influence -towards such rare, fully self-expressive acts of the right kind, -and the aid towards similar, massive, and truly representative -volitions of the wrong kind, afforded by even quite ordinary -half-awake acts and habits of respectively good or evil quality -are so undeniable, and it is so impossible to draw a general -line as to where such wishes pass into full willings and -deliberate states: that the prevalence of a hortatory attitude -towards the whole subject is right and indeed inevitable.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>The reprobate will of the lost.</i></h5> - -<p>As to Moral Perversion, the reprobate will of the lost, -we find that Catherine approaches the question from two -different, and at bottom, on this point, incompatible, systems; -but some incidental and short sayings of hers give us suggestive -hints towards a consistent position in this difficult -matter.</p> - -<p>Catherine has a double approach. For, consistently with -the strong Neo-Platonist, Dionysian strain in her mind, she -frequently teaches and implies that Evil is the absence of -Good, of Love, and nothing positive at all. In this case Evil -would not only be less strong than good—only Manichaeans -would maintain that they were equal—but, as against the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[222]</a></span> -constructive force of good, it would have no kind even of -destructive strength. Varying amounts, degrees, and kinds of -good, but good and only good, everywhere, would render all, -even transitory, pollution of the soul, and all, even passing, -purification of it, so much actual impossibility and theoretical -superstition. All that survived at all, could but be good; -and at most some good might be added, but no evil could be -removed, since none would exist.—Yet all this is, of course, -strongly denied and supplanted by the, at first sight, less -beautiful, but far deeper and alone fully Christian, position of -her specifically Purgatorial teaching. Here Evil is something -positive, an active disposition, orientation, and attachment of -the will; it is not without destructive force; and its cure is a -positive change in that will and its habits, and not a mere -addition of good. Yet it is plain that, even exclusively within -the implications of this deeper conviction, there is no necessity -to postulate unmixed evil in the disposition of any soul. -In some the evil would be triumphing over the good; in -others good would be triumphing over evil,—each over the -other, in every degree of good or of evil, up to the all but -complete extinction of all inclinations to evil or to good -respectively.</p> - -<p>And Catherine has suggestive sayings. For one or two of -them go, at least in their implications, beyond a declaration -as to the presence of God’s extrinsic mercy in Hell, a presence -indicated by a mitigation of the souls’ sufferings to -below what these souls deserve; and even beyond the -Areopagite’s insistence upon the presence of some real good -in these souls, since he hardly gets beyond their continuous -possession of those non-moral goods, existence, intelligence, -and will-power.<a name="FNanchor_234_234" id="FNanchor_234_234"></a><a href="#Footnote_234_234" class="fnanchor">[234]</a> For when she says, “The ray of God’s -mercy shines even in Hell,” she need not, indeed, mean more -than that extrinsic mercy, and its effect, that mitigation. But -when she declares: “if a creature could be found that did not -participate in the divine Goodness,—that creature would, as -it were, be as malignant as God is good,” we cannot, I think, -avoid applying this to the moral dispositions of such souls.<a name="FNanchor_235_235" id="FNanchor_235_235"></a><a href="#Footnote_235_235" class="fnanchor">[235]</a></p> - -<p>Now I know that St. Thomas had already taught, in at -first sight identical terms: “Evil cannot exist (quite) pure -without the admixture of good, as the Supreme Good exists -free from all admixture of evil.… Those who are detained<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[223]</a></span> -in Hell, are not bereft of all good”;<a name="FNanchor_236_236" id="FNanchor_236_236"></a><a href="#Footnote_236_236" class="fnanchor">[236]</a> and yet he undoubtedly -maintained the complete depravation of the will’s dispositions -in these souls. And, again, after Catherine’s first declaration -there follow, (at least in the text handed down in the <i>Vita</i>), -words which explain that extrinsic mercy, not as mitigating -the finite amount of suffering due to the sinner, but as -turning the infinite suffering due to the sinner’s infinite -malice, into a finite, though indefinite amount; and hence, -in the second declaration, a corresponding interior mercy -may be signified—God’s grace preventing the sinner from -being infinitely wicked.</p> - -<p>But Catherine, unlike St. Thomas, expressly speaks not -only of Good and Evil, but of Good and Malignancy; and -Malignancy undoubtedly refers to dispositions of the will. -And even if the words, now found as the sequel to the first -saying, be authentic, they belong to a different occasion, and -cannot be allowed to force the meaning of words spoken at -another time. In this latter saying the words “as it were” -show plainly that she is not thinking of a possible infiniteness -of human wickedness which has been changed, through God’s -mercy, to an actual finitude of evil; but is simply asking -herself whether a man could be, not infinitely but wholly, -malignant. For she answers that, were this possible, a man -would “as it were” be as malignant as God is good, and thus -shows that the malignancy, which she denies, would only in a -sense form a counterpart to God’s benevolence: since, though -the man would be as entirely malignant as God is entirely -good, God would still remain infinite in His goodness as -against the finitude of Man’s wickedness.</p> - -<p>The difficulties of such a combination of convictions are, of -course, numerous and great. Psychologically it seems hard -to understand why this remnant of good disposition should -be unable to germinate further and further good, so that, at -last, good would leaven the whole soul. From the point of -view of any Theodicy, it appears difficult to justify the unending -exclusion of such a soul from growth in, and the -acquirement of, a predominantly good will and the happiness -that accompanies such a will. And the testimony of Our -Lord Himself and of the general doctrine of the Church -appear definitely opposed: for does not His solemn declaration: -“Hell, where their worm dieth not” (Mark ix, 48), find<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[224]</a></span> -its authoritative interpretation in the common Church teaching -as to the utterly reprobate will of the lost? And indeed -Catherine herself, in her great saying that if but one little -drop of Love could fall into Hell (that is, surely, if but the -least beginning of a right disposition towards God could -enter those souls) Hell would be turned into Heaven, seems -clearly to endorse this position.</p> - -<p>And yet, we have full experience in this life of genuinely -good dispositions being present, and yet not triumphing or -even spreading within the soul; of such conditions being, in -various degrees, our own fault; and of such defeat bringing -necessarily with it more or less of keen suffering.—There -would be no injustice if, after a full, good chance and sufficient -aid had been given to the soul to actualize its capabilities of -spiritual self-constitution, such a soul’s deliberately sporadic, -culpably non-predominant, good did not, even eventually, lead -to the full satisfaction of that soul’s essential cravings.—The -saying attributed to Our Lord, which appears in St. Mark -alone, is a pure quotation from Isaiah lxvi, 24 and Ecclesiasticus -vii, 17, and does not seem to require more than an abiding -distress of conscience, an eternal keenness of remorse.</p> - -<p>Again, the common Church-teaching is undoubtedly voiced -by St. Thomas in the words, “Since these souls are completely -averse to the final end of right reason, they must be declared -to be without any good will.” Yet St. Thomas himself -(partly in explanation of the Areopagite’s words, “the evil -spirits desire the good and the best, namely, to be, to live, and -to understand”), is obliged to distinguish between such souls’ -deliberate will and their “natural will and inclination,” and to -proclaim that this latter, “which is not from themselves but -from the Author of nature, who put this inclination into -nature … can indeed be good.”<a name="FNanchor_237_237" id="FNanchor_237_237"></a><a href="#Footnote_237_237" class="fnanchor">[237]</a> And, if we would not construct -a scheme flatly contradictory of all earthly experience, -we can hardly restrict the soul, even in the beyond, to entirely -indeliberate, good inclinations, and to fully deliberate, bad -volitions, but cannot help interposing an indefinite variety -of inchoative energizings, half-wishes, and the like, and thinking -of these as mixed with good and evil. Indeed this conclusion -seems also required by the common teaching that the -suffering there differs from soul to soul, and this because of -the different degrees of the guilt: for such degrees depend<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[225]</a></span> -undoubtedly even more upon the degree of deliberation and -massiveness of the will than upon the degree of objective badness -in the deed, and hence can hardly fail to leave variously -small or large fragments of more or less good and imperfectly -deliberate wishings and energizings present in the soul.</p> - -<p>And finally Catherine’s “little drop of Love” would, she -says, “at once” turn Hell into Heaven, and hence cannot -mean some ordinary good moral disposition or even such -supernatural virtues as theological Faith and Hope, but Pure -Love alone, which latter queen of all the virtues she is -explicitly discussing there. Thus she in nowise requires the -absence from these souls of a certain remnant of semi-deliberate -virtue of a less exalted, and not necessarily regenerative kind.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Mitigation of the sufferings of the lost.</i></h5> - -<p>As to the Mitigation of the Suffering, it is remarkable that -Catherine, who has been so bold concerning the source of the -pains, and the dispositions, of the lost souls, does not more -explicitly teach such an alleviation. I say “remarkable,” -because important Fathers and Churches, that were quite uninfected -by Origenism, have held and have acted upon such a -doctrine. St. Augustine, in his <i>Enchiridion</i> (<span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 423 (?)) -tells us that “in so far as” the Offering of the Sacrifice of the -Altar and Alms “profit” souls in the beyond, “they profit -them by procuring a full remission (of the punishment), or at -least that their damnation may become more tolerable.” And -after warning men against believing in an end to the sufferings -of the lost, he adds: “But let them consider, if they like, -that the sufferings of the damned are somewhat mitigated -during certain intervals of time.”<a name="FNanchor_238_238" id="FNanchor_238_238"></a><a href="#Footnote_238_238" class="fnanchor">[238]</a>—Saints John Chrysostom -and John Damascene, thoroughly orthodox Greek Fathers, -and the deeply devout hymn-writer Prudentius among the -Latins, teach similar doctrine; and in many ancient Latin -missals, ranging from the eleventh to the fourteenth century, -prayers for the Mitigation of the Sufferings of the Damned -are to be found.<a name="FNanchor_239_239" id="FNanchor_239_239"></a><a href="#Footnote_239_239" class="fnanchor">[239]</a></p> - -<p>Hence the great Jesuit Theologian Petau, though not himself -sharing this view, can declare: “Concerning such a -breathing-time (<i>respiratio</i>) of lost souls, nothing certain has as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[226]</a></span> -yet been decreed by the Catholic Church, so that this opinion -of most holy Fathers should not temerariously be rejected as -absurd, even though it be foreign to the common opinion of -Catholics in our time.”<a name="FNanchor_240_240" id="FNanchor_240_240"></a><a href="#Footnote_240_240" class="fnanchor">[240]</a> And the Abbé Emery, that great -Catholic Christian, the second founder of St. Sulpice, who died -in 1811, showed, in a treatise <i>On the Mitigation of the Pains of -the Damned</i>, that this view had also been held by certain -Scholastic Theologians, and had been defended, without any -opposition, by Mark of Ephesus, in the Sessions of the -Council of Florence (<span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 1439); and concluded that this -doctrine was not contrary to the Catholic Faith and did not -deserve any censure. The most learned Theologians in Rome -found nothing reprehensible in this treatise, and Pope Pius -VII caused his Theologian, the Barnabite General, Padre -Fontana, to thank M. Emery for the copy sent by him to the -Holy Father.<a name="FNanchor_241_241" id="FNanchor_241_241"></a><a href="#Footnote_241_241" class="fnanchor">[241]</a></p> - -<p>Catherine herself cannot well have been thinking of anything -but some such Mitigation when she so emphatically -teaches that God’s mercy extends even into Hell. Indeed, -even the continuation of this great saying in the present -<i>Vita</i>-text formally teaches such Mitigation, yet practically -withdraws it, by making it consist in a rebate and change, -from an infinitude in degree and duration into a finitude in -degree though not in duration.<a name="FNanchor_242_242" id="FNanchor_242_242"></a><a href="#Footnote_242_242" class="fnanchor">[242]</a> But, as we have already -found, this highly schematic statement is doubtless one of -the later glosses, in which case her true meaning must -have been substantially that of the Fathers referred to, viz. -that the suffering, taken as anyhow finite in its degree, gets -mercifully mitigated for these souls.—And, if she was here -also faithful to her general principles, she will have conceived -the mitigation, not as simply sporadic and arbitrary, -but as more or less progressive, and connected with the -presence in these souls of those various degrees of semi-voluntary -good inclinations and wishes, required by her other -saying. Even if these wishings could slowly and slightly -increase, and the sufferings could similarly decrease, this -would in nowise imply or require a final full rectification of -the deliberate will itself, and hence not a complete extinction -of the resultant suffering. Hell would still remain essentially<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[227]</a></span> -distinct from Purgatory; for in Purgatory the deliberate, -active will is good from the first, and only the various semi-volitions -and old habits are imperfect, but are being gradually -brought into full harmony with that will, by the now complete -willing of the soul; and hence this state has an end; -whereas in Hell the deliberate, active will is bad from the -first, and only various partially deliberate wishes and tendencies -are good, but cannot be brought to fruition in a full -virtuous determination of the dominant character of the soul, -and hence <i>this</i> state has no end.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>The Endlessness of Hell.</i></h5> - -<p>And lastly, as to the Endlessness of this condition of the -Lost, it is, of course, plain that Catherine held this defined -doctrine; and again, that “the chief weight, in the Church-teaching -as to Hell, rests upon Hell’s Eternity.”<a name="FNanchor_243_243" id="FNanchor_243_243"></a><a href="#Footnote_243_243" class="fnanchor">[243]</a></p> - -<p>Here I would suggest five groups of considerations:</p> - -<p>(1) Precisely this Eternity appears to be the feature of all -others which is ever increasingly decried by contemporary -philosophy and liberal theology as impossible and revolting. -Thus it is frequently argued as though, not the indiscriminateness -nor the materiality nor the forensic externality nor the -complete fixity of the sufferings, nor again the complete -malignity of the lost were incredible, and hence the unendingness -of such conditions were impossible of acceptance; but, -on the contrary, as though,—be the degree and nature of those -sufferings conceived as ever so discriminated, spiritual, interior, -and relatively mobile, and as occasioned and accompanied by -a disposition in which semi-voluntary good is present,—the -simple assumption of anything unending or final about them, -at once renders the whole doctrine impossible to believe. It -is true that Tennyson and Browning take the doctrine simply -in its popular Calvinistic form, and then reject it; and even -John Stuart Mill and Frederick Denison Maurice hardly consider -the eternity separately. But certainly that thoughtful -and religious-minded writer, Mr. W. R. Greg, brings forward -the eternity-doctrine as, already in itself, “a <i>curiosa infelicitas</i> -which is almost stupidity on the part of the Church.”<a name="FNanchor_244_244" id="FNanchor_244_244"></a><a href="#Footnote_244_244" class="fnanchor">[244]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Yet it is plain how strongly, even in Mr. Greg’s case, -the supposed (local, physical, indiscriminate, etc.) nature of -the state affects the writer’s judgment as to the possibility of -its unendingness,—as indeed is inevitable. And it is even<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[228]</a></span> -clearer, I think, that precisely this eternity-doctrine stands for -a truth which is but an ever-present mysterious corollary to -every deeply ethical or spiritual, and, above all, every specifically -Christian view of life. For every such view comes, surely, -into hopeless collision with its own inalienable requirements if -it <i>will</i> hold that the deepest ethical and spiritual acts and conditions -are,—avowedly performed though they be in time and -space—simply temporary in their inmost nature and effects; -whereas every vigorously ethical religion, in so far as it has -reached a definite personal-immortality doctrine at all, cannot -admit that the soul’s deliberate character remains without any -strictly final and permanent results. The fact is that we get -here to a profound ethical and spiritual postulate, which cannot -be adequately set aside on the ground that it is the product -of barbarous ages and vindictive minds, since this -objection applies only to the physical picturings, the indiscriminateness, -non-mitigation, and utter reprobation; or on -the ground that a long, keen purification, hence a temporally -finite suffering, would do as well, since, when all this has completely -passed away, there would be an entire obliteration -of all difference in the consequences of right and wrong; or -that acts and dispositions built up in time cannot have other -than finite consequences, since this is to naturalize radically -the deepest things of life; or finally that “Evil,” as the Areopagite -would have it, “is not,”<a name="FNanchor_245_245" id="FNanchor_245_245"></a><a href="#Footnote_245_245" class="fnanchor">[245]</a> since thus the very existence -of the conviction as to free-will and sin becomes more inexplicable -than the theoretical difficulties against Libertarianism -are insoluble.—Against this deep requirement of the most -alert and complete ethical and spiritual life the wave of any -Apocatastasis-doctrine or -emotion will, in the long run, ever -break itself in vain.</p> - -<p>(3) The doctrine of Conditional Immortality has, I think, -many undeniable advantages over every kind of Origenism. -This view does not, as is often imputed to it, believe in the -annihilation by Omnipotence of the naturally immortal souls -of impenitent grave sinners; but simply holds that human -souls begin with the capacity of acquiring, with the help -of God’s Spirit, a spiritual personality, built up out of the -mere possibilities and partial tendencies of their highly mixed -natures, which, if left uncultivated and untranscended, become -definitely fixed at the first, phenomenal, merely individual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[229]</a></span> -level,—so that spiritual personality alone deserves to live on -and does so, whilst this animal individuality does not deserve -and does not do so. The soul is thus not simply born as, but -can become more and more, that “inner man” who alone -persists, indeed who “is renewed day by day, even though our -outward man perish.”<a name="FNanchor_246_246" id="FNanchor_246_246"></a><a href="#Footnote_246_246" class="fnanchor">[246]</a></p> - -<p>This conception thus fully retains, indeed increases, the -profound ultimate difference between the results of spiritual -and personal, and of animal and simply individual life respectively,—standing, -as it does, at the antipodes to Origenism; -it eliminates all unmoralized, unspiritualized elements from -the ultimate world, without keeping souls in an apparently -fruitless suffering; and it gives full emphasis to a supremely -important, though continually forgotten fact,—the profoundly -expensive, creative, positive process and nature of spiritual -character. No wonder, then, that great thinkers and scholars, -such as Goethe, Richard Rothe, Heinrich Holtzmann, and -some Frenchmen and Englishmen have held this view.<a name="FNanchor_247_247" id="FNanchor_247_247"></a><a href="#Footnote_247_247" class="fnanchor">[247]</a></p> - -<p>Yet the objections against this view, taken in its strictness, -are surely conclusive. For how can an originally simply -mortal substance, force, or entity become immortal, and a -phenomenal nature be leavened by a spiritual principle -which, <i>ex hypothesi</i>, is not present within it? And how -misleadingly hyperbolical, according to this, would be the -greatest spiritual exhortations, beginning with those of Our -Lord Himself!</p> - -<p>(4) And yet the conception of Conditional Immortality -cannot be far from the truth, since everything, surely, points -to a lowered consciousness in the souls in question, or at -least to one lower than that in the ultimate state of the saved. -This conception of the shrunken condition of these souls was -certainly held by Catherine, even if the other, the view of a -heightened, consciousness, appears in hortatory passages which -just <i>may</i> be authentic; and indeed only that conception is -conformable with her fundamental position that love alone is -fully positive and alone gives vital strength, and that all fully -deliberate love is absent from the lost souls. And if we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[230]</a></span> -consider how predominantly hortatory in tone and object the -ordinary teaching on this point cannot fail to be; and, on the -other hand, how close to Manichaeism, any serious equating -of the force and intensity of life and consciousness between -the Saved and the Lost would be, we can hardly fail to find -ourselves free, indeed compelled, to hold a lesser consciousness -for the Lost than for the Saved. Whilst the joyful life of the -Saved would range, in harmonious intensity, beyond all that -we can experience here, the painful consciousness of the Lost -would be, in various degrees, indefinitely less. The Saved -would thus not be only <i>other</i> than the Lost, they would -actually be <i>more</i>: for God is Life supreme, and, where there -is more affinity with God, there is more life, and more -consciousness.</p> - -<p>(5) But, if the view just stated is the more likely one, then -we cannot soften the sufferings of those souls, by giving them -a sense of Eternity, of one unending momentary Now, instead -of our earthly sense of Succession, as Cardinal Newman and -Father Tyrrell have attempted to do, in a very instructive -and obviously orthodox manner.<a name="FNanchor_248_248" id="FNanchor_248_248"></a><a href="#Footnote_248_248" class="fnanchor">[248]</a> I shall presently argue -strongly in favour of some consciousness of Eternity being -traceable in our best moments here, and of this consciousness -being doubtless more extended in the future blessed life. -But here I have only to consider whether for one who, like -Catherine, follows the analogy of earthly experience, the Lost -should be considered nearer to, or farther from, such a <i>Totum-Simul</i> -consciousness than we possess now, here below, at our -best? And to this the answer must, surely, be that they are -further away from it. Yet God in His mercy may allow this -greater successiveness, if unaccompanied by any keen memory -or prevision, to help in effecting that mitigation of the -suffering which we have already allowed.</p> - -<h4><span class="smcap">IV. Catherine and Purgatory.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Introductory.</i></h5> - -<h6>(1) <i>Changed feeling concerning Purgatory.</i></h6> - -<p>In the matter of a Purgatory, a very striking return of -religious feeling towards its normal equilibrium has been -occurring in the most unexpected, entirely unprejudiced<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[231]</a></span> -quarters, within the last century and a half. In Germany -we have Lessing, who, in the wake of Leibniz, encourages the -acceptance of “that middle state which the greater part of -our fellow-Christians have adopted”: Schleiermacher, who -calls the overpassing of a middle state by a violent leap at -death “a magical proceeding”; David F. Strauss, who entirely -agrees; Carl von Hase, who, in his very Manual of Anti-Roman -Polemics admits that “most men when they die are -probably too good for Hell, but they are certainly too bad -for Heaven”; the delicately thoughtful philosopher Fechner -who, in the most sober-minded of his religious works, insists -upon our “conceiving the life beyond according to the analogy -of this-life conditions,” and refers wistfully to “the belief -which is found amongst all peoples and is quite shrunken -only among Protestants—that the living can still do something -to aid the dead”; and Prof. Anrich, probably the -greatest contemporary authority on the Hellenic elements -incorporated in Christian doctrine, declares, all definite -Protestant though he is, that “legitimate religious postulates -underlie the doctrine of Purgatory.”<a name="FNanchor_249_249" id="FNanchor_249_249"></a><a href="#Footnote_249_249" class="fnanchor">[249]</a> And in England that -sensitively religious Unitarian, W. R. Greg, tells us “Purgatory, -ranging from a single day to a century of ages, offers that -borderland of discriminating retribution for which justice and -humanity cry out”; and the Positivist, John Stuart Mill, -declares at the end of his life: “All the probabilities in case -of a future life are that such as we have been made or have -made ourselves before the change, such we shall enter into -the life hereafter.… To imagine that a miracle will be -wrought at death … making perfect every one whom it is -His will to include among His elect … is utterly opposed -to every presumption that can be adduced from the light of -nature.”<a name="FNanchor_250_250" id="FNanchor_250_250"></a><a href="#Footnote_250_250" class="fnanchor">[250]</a></p> - -<h6>(2) <i>Causes of the previous prejudice.</i></h6> - -<p>Indeed the general principle of ameliorative suffering is so<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[232]</a></span> -obviously true and inexhaustibly profound that only many, -long-lived abuses in the practice, and a frequent obscuration -in the teaching, of the doctrine, can explain and excuse -the sad neglect, indeed discredit, into which the very principle -and root-doctrine has fallen among well-nigh one-half of -Western Christendom. As to the deplorably widespread -existence, at the time of the Protestant Reformation, of both -these causes, which largely occasioned or strengthened each -other, we have the unimpeachable authority of the Council -of Trent itself: for it orders the Bishops “not to permit -that uncertain doctrines, or such as labour under the presumption -of falsity, be propagated and taught,” and “to -prohibit, as so many scandals and stones of stumbling for the -faithful, whatever belongs to a certain curiosity or superstition -or savours of filthy lucre.”<a name="FNanchor_251_251" id="FNanchor_251_251"></a><a href="#Footnote_251_251" class="fnanchor">[251]</a> The cautious admissions of the -strictly Catholic scholar-theologian, Dr. N. Paulus, and the -precise documentary additions and corrections to Paulus -furnished, directly from the contemporary documents, by the -fair-minded Protestant worker at Reformation History, Prof. -T. Brieger, now furnish us, conjointly, with the most vivid -and detailed picture of the sad subtleties and abuses which -gave occasion to that Decree.<a name="FNanchor_252_252" id="FNanchor_252_252"></a><a href="#Footnote_252_252" class="fnanchor">[252]</a></p> - -<h6>(3) <i>Catherine’s purgatorial conceptions avoid those causes. -Her conceptions harbour two currents of thought.</i></h6> - -<p>It is surely not a small recommendation of Catherine’s -mode of conceiving Purgatory, that it cuts, as we shall see, at -the very root of those abuses. Yet we must first face certain -opposite dangers and ambiguities which are closely intertwined -with the group of terms and images taken over, for the -purpose of describing an immanental Purgation, by her and -her great Alexandrian Christian predecessors, from the Greek -Heathen world. And only after the delimitation of the -defect in the suggestions which still so readily operate from -out of these originally Hellenic ideas, can we consider the -difficulties and imperfections peculiar to the other, in modern -times the predominant, element in the complete teaching as -to the Middle State, an element mostly of Jewish and Roman -provenance, and aiming at an extrinsically punitive conception. -Both currents can be properly elucidated only if we -first take them historically.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[233]</a></span></p> - -<h5>1. <i>Jewish prayers for the dead.</i></h5> - -<p>It is admitted on all hands that, in the practical form -of Prayers for the Dead, the general doctrine of a Middle -State can be traced back, in Judaism, up to the important -passage in the Second Book of Maccabees, c. ii, vv. 43-45, -where Judas Maccabaeus sends about two thousand drachms -of silver to Jerusalem, in order that a Sin-Offering may be -offered up for the Jews fallen in battle against Gorgias, upon -whose bodies heathen amulets had been found. “He did -excellently in this … it is a holy and devout thought. -Hence he instituted the Sin-Offering for the dead, that they -might be loosed from their sins.” That battle occurred in -<span class="smcap">B.C</span>. 166, and this book appears to have been written in <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span> -124, in Egypt, by a Jew of the school of the Pharisees.</p> - -<p>Now it is difficult not to recognize, in the doctrinal comment -upon the facts here given, rather as yet the opinions of -a Judaeo-Alexandrian circle, which was small even at the time -of the composition of the comment, than the general opinion -of Judaism at the date of Judas’s act. For if this act had -been prompted by a clear and generally accepted conviction -as to the resurrection, and the efficacy of prayers for the dead, -the writer would have had no occasion or inclination to make -an induction of his own as to the meaning and worth of that -act; and we should find some indications of such a doctrine -and practice in the voluminous works of Philo and Josephus, -some century and a half later on. But all such indications -are wanting in these writers.</p> - -<p>And in the New Testament there is, with regard to helping -the dead, only that curious passage: “If the dead do not -arise, what shall they do who are baptized for the dead?”<a name="FNanchor_253_253" id="FNanchor_253_253"></a><a href="#Footnote_253_253" class="fnanchor">[253]</a> -where St. Paul refers, without either acceptance or blame, to -a contemporary custom among Christian Proselytes from -Paganism, who offered up that bath of initiation for the -benefit of the souls of deceased relatives who had died without -any such purification. Perhaps not till Rabbi Akiba’s time, -about 130 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, had prayers for the dead become part of the -regular Synagogue ritual. By 200 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> Tertullian speaks of -the practice as of an established usage among the Christian -communities: “we make oblations for the Dead, on their -anniversary, every year”; although “if you ask where is the -law concerning this custom in Scripture, you cannot read of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[234]</a></span> -any such there. Tradition will appear before you as its -initiator, custom as its confirmer, and faith as its observer.”<a name="FNanchor_254_254" id="FNanchor_254_254"></a><a href="#Footnote_254_254" class="fnanchor">[254]</a></p> - -<p>It is interesting to note how considerably subsequent to the -practice is, in this instance also, its clear doctrinal justification. -Indeed the Jews are, to this hour, extraordinarily deficient -in explicit, harmonious conceptions on the matter. Certainly -throughout Prof. W. Bacher’s five volumes of Sayings of the -Jewish Rabbis from 30 <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span> to 400 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, I can only find the -following saying, by Jochanan the Amoraean, who died 279 -<span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>: “There are three books before God, in which men are -inscribed according to their merit and their guilt: that of the -perfectly devout, that of the perfect evil-doers, and that of the -middle, the uncertain souls. The devout and the evil-doers -receive their sentence on New Year’s day … the first, unto -life; the second, unto death. As to middle souls, their -sentence remains in suspense till the day of Atonement: if -by then they have done penance, they get written down -alongside of the devout; if not, they are written down alongside -of the evil-doers.”<a name="FNanchor_255_255" id="FNanchor_255_255"></a><a href="#Footnote_255_255" class="fnanchor">[255]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>Alexandrine Fathers on Purgatory.</i></h5> - -<p>Yet it is the Platonizing Alexandrian Fathers Clement -and Origen, (they died, respectively, in about 215 and in 254 -<span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), who are the first, and to this hour the most important, -Christian spokesmen for a state of true intrinsic purgation. -We have already deliberately rejected their Universalism; -but this error in no way weakens the profound truth of their -teaching as to the immanental, necessary inter-connection -between suffering and morally imperfect habits, and as to the -ameliorative effects of suffering where, as in Purgatory, it is -willed by a right moral determination. Thus Clement: “As -children at the hands of their teacher or father, so also are we -punished by Providence. God does not avenge Himself, for -vengeance is to repay evil by evil, but His punishment aims -at our good.” “Although a punishment, it is an emendation -of the soul.” “The training which men call punishments.”<a name="FNanchor_256_256" id="FNanchor_256_256"></a><a href="#Footnote_256_256" class="fnanchor">[256]</a> -And Origen: “The fury of God’s vengeance profits unto the -purification of souls; the punishment is unto purgation.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[235]</a></span>” -“These souls receive, in the prison, not the retribution of -their folly, but a benefaction in the purification from the -evils contracted in that folly,—a purification effected by -means of salutary troubles.”<a name="FNanchor_257_257" id="FNanchor_257_257"></a><a href="#Footnote_257_257" class="fnanchor">[257]</a></p> - -<p>Now Clement is fully aware of the chief source for his -formulation of these deeply spiritual and Christian instincts -and convictions. “Plato speaks well when he teaches that -‘men who are punished, experience in truth a benefit: for -those who get justly punished, profit through their souls -becoming better.’”<a name="FNanchor_258_258" id="FNanchor_258_258"></a><a href="#Footnote_258_258" class="fnanchor">[258]</a> But Plato, in contradistinction from -Clement, holds that this applies only to such imperfect souls -as “have sinned curable sins”; he has a Hell as well as a -Purgatory: yet his Purgatory, as Clement’s, truly purges: the -souls are there because they are partially impure, and they -cease to be there when they are completely purified.</p> - -<p>And Plato, in his turn, makes no secret as to whence he got -his suggestions and raw materials, <i>viz.</i> the Orphic priesthood -and its literature, which, ever since the sixth century <span class="smcapuc">B.C.</span>, had -been succeeding to and supplanting the previous Orgiastic -Dionysianism.<a name="FNanchor_259_259" id="FNanchor_259_259"></a><a href="#Footnote_259_259" class="fnanchor">[259]</a> Plato gives us vivid pictures of their doings -in Athens, at the time of his writing, in about 380 B.C. -“Mendicant prophets go to rich men’s doors, and persuade -these men that they have a power committed to them of -making an atonement for their sins, or for those of their -fathers, by sacrifices and incantations … and they persuade -whole cities that expiations and purifications of sin may be -made by sacrifices and amusements which fill a vacant hour, -and are equally at the service of the living and the dead.”<a name="FNanchor_260_260" id="FNanchor_260_260"></a><a href="#Footnote_260_260" class="fnanchor">[260]</a>—Yet -from these men, thus scorned as well-nigh sheer impostors, -Plato takes over certain conceptions and formulations which -contribute one of the profoundest, still unexhausted elements -to his teaching,—although this element is, at bottom, in -conflict with that beautiful but inadequate, quite anti-Orphic, -conception of his—the purely negative character of Evil. -For the Orphic literary remains, fragmentary and late though -they be, plainly teach that moral or ritual transgressions are -a defilement of the soul, an infliction of positive stains upon -it; that these single offences and “spots” produce a generally<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[236]</a></span> -sinful and “spotted” condition; and that this condition is -amenable to and requires purification by suffering,—water, or -more frequently fire, which wash or burn out these stains of -sin. So Plutarch (who died about 120 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>) still declares that -the souls in Hades have stains of different colours according -to the different passions; and the object of the purificatory -punishment is “that, these stains having been worn away, -the soul may become altogether resplendent.” And Virgil, -when he declares “the guilt which infects the soul is washed -out or burnt out … until a long time-span has effaced the -clotted stain, and leaves the heavenly conscience pure”: is -utilizing an Orphic-Pythagorean Hades-book.<a name="FNanchor_261_261" id="FNanchor_261_261"></a><a href="#Footnote_261_261" class="fnanchor">[261]</a></p> - -<p>This conception of positive stains is carefully taken over -by the Alexandrian Fathers: Clement speaks of “removing, -by continuous prayer, the stains (κηλίδας) contracted through -former sins,” and declares that “the Gnostic,” the perfect -Christian, “fears not death, having purified himself from all -the spots (σπίλους) on his soul.” And Origen describes “the -pure soul that is not weighed down by leaden weights of -wickedness,” where the spots have turned to leaden pellets -such as were fastened to fishing-nets. Hence, says Clement, -“post-baptismal sins have to be purified out” of the soul; -and, says Origen, “these rivers of fire are declared to be of -God, who causes the evil that is mixed up with the whole -soul to disappear from out of it.”<a name="FNanchor_262_262" id="FNanchor_262_262"></a><a href="#Footnote_262_262" class="fnanchor">[262]</a></p> - -<p>In Pseudo-Dionysius the non-Orphic, purely negative, view -prevails: “Evil is neither in demons nor in us as an existent -evil, but as a failure and dearth in the perfection of our own -proper goods.” And St. Thomas similarly declares that -“different souls have correspondingly different stains, like -shadows differ in accordance with the difference of the bodies -which interpose themselves between the light.”<a name="FNanchor_263_263" id="FNanchor_263_263"></a><a href="#Footnote_263_263" class="fnanchor">[263]</a></p> - -<p>But Catherine, in this inconsistent with her own general -Privation-doctrine, again conceives the stain, the “macchia -del peccato,” as Cardinal Manning has acutely observed, not -simply as a deprivation of the light of glory, but “as the cause, -not the effect, of God’s not shining into the soul”: it includes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[237]</a></span> -in it the idea of an imperfection, weakness with regard to -virtue, bad (secondary) dispositions, and unheavenly tastes.<a name="FNanchor_264_264" id="FNanchor_264_264"></a><a href="#Footnote_264_264" class="fnanchor">[264]</a></p> - -<h5>3. <i>The true and the false in the Orphic conception.</i></h5> - -<p>Now precisely in this profoundly true conception of Positive -Stain there lurk certain dangers, which all proceed from the -original Orphic diagnosis concerning the source of these -stains, and these dangers will have to be carefully guarded -against.</p> - -<p>(1) The conviction as to the purificatory power of fire -was no doubt, originally, the direct consequence from the -Orphic belief as to the intrinsically staining and imprisoning -effect of the body upon the soul. “The soul, as the Orphics -say, is enclosed in the body, in punishment for the punishable -acts”; “liberations” from the body, and “purifications” of -the living and the dead, ever, with them, proceed together. -And hence to burn the dead body was considered to purify -the soul that had been stained by that prison-house: the slain -Clytemnestra, says Euripides, “is purified, as to her body, by -fire,” for, as the Scholiast explains, “fire purifies all things, -and burnt bodies are considered holy.”<a name="FNanchor_265_265" id="FNanchor_265_265"></a><a href="#Footnote_265_265" class="fnanchor">[265]</a> And such an -intensely anti-body attitude we find, not only fully developed -later on into a deliberate anti-Incarnational doctrine, among -the Gnostics, but, as we have already seen, slighter traces of -this same tone may be found in the (doubtless Alexandrian) -Book of Wisdom, and in one, not formally doctrinal passage, -a momentary echo of it, in St. Paul himself. And Catherine’s -attitude is generally, and often strongly, in this direction.</p> - -<p>(2) A careful distinction is evidently necessary here. The -doctrine that sin defiles,—affects the quality of the soul’s -moral and spiritual dispositions, and that this defilement and -perversion, ever occasioned by the search after facile pleasure -or the flight from fruitful pain, can normally be removed and -corrected only by a long discipline of fully accepted, gradually -restorative pain, either here, or hereafter, or both: are profound -anticipations, and have been most rightly made integral -parts, of the Christian life and conception. The doctrine that -the body is essentially a mere accident or superaddition or -necessary defilement to the soul, is profoundly untrue, in its -exaggeration and one-sidedness: for if the body is the occasion -of the least spiritual of our sins, it can and should become the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[238]</a></span> -chief servant of the spirit; the slow and difficult training of -this servant is one of the most important means of development -for the soul itself; and many faults and vices are not -occasioned by the body at all, whilst none are directly and -necessarily caused by it. Without the body, we should not have -impurity, but neither should we have specifically human purity -of soul; and without it, given the persistence and activity of -the soul, there could be as great, perhaps greater, pride and -<i>solipsism</i>, the most anti-Christian of all the vices. Hence if, -in Our Lord’s teaching, we find no trace of a Gnostic desire -for purification from all things bodily as essentially soul-staining, -we do find a profound insistence upon purity of -heart, and upon the soul’s real, active “turning,” conversion, -(an interior change from an un- or anti-moral attitude to an -ethical and spiritual dependence upon God), as a <i>sine qua non</i> -condition for entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven. And -the Joannine teachings re-affirm this great truth for us as a -<i>Metabasis</i>, a moving from Death over to Life.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Catherine’s conceptions as to the character of the stains and -of their purgation.</i></h5> - -<p>And this idea, as to an intrinsic purgation through suffering -of impurities contracted by the soul, can be kept thoroughly -Christian, if we ever insist, with Catherine in her most -emphatic and deepest teachings, that Purgation can and -should be effected in this life, hence in the body,—in and -through all the right uses of the body, as well as in and -through all the legitimate and will-strengthening abstentions -from such uses; that the subject-matter of such purgation are -the habits and inclinations contrary to our best spiritual lights, -and which we have largely ourselves built up by our variously -perverse or slothful acts, but which in no case are directly -caused by the body, and in many cases are not even occasioned -by it; and, finally, that holiness consists primarily, -not in the absence of faults, but in the presence of spiritual -force, in Love creative, Love triumphant,—the soul becoming -flame rather than snow, and dwelling upon what to do, -give and be, rather than upon what to shun.—Catherine’s -predominant, ultimate tone possesses this profound positiveness, -and corrects all but entirely whatever, if taken alone, -would appear to render the soul’s substantial purity impossible -in this life; to constitute the body a direct and necessary -cause of impurity to the soul; and to find the ideal of perfection -in the negative condition of being free from stain.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[239]</a></span> -In her greatest sayings, and in her actual life, Purity is found -to be Love, and this Love is exercised, not only in the inward, -home-coming, recollective movement,—in the purifying of the -soul’s dispositions, but also in the outgoing, world-visiting, -dispersive movement,—in action towards fellow-souls.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Judaeo-Roman conception of Purgatory.</i></h5> - -<p>And this social side and movement brings us to the second -element and current in the complete doctrine of a Middle -State,—a constituent which possesses affinities and advantages, -and produces excesses and abuses, directly contrary to those -proper to the element of an intrinsic purgation.</p> - -<p>(1) Here we get early Christian utilizations, for purposes of a -doctrine concerning the Intermediate State, of sayings and -images which dwell directly only upon certain extrinsic -consequences of evil-doing, or which, again, describe a future -historical and social event,—the Last Day. For already -Origen interprets, in his beautiful <i>Treatise on Prayer</i>, XXIX, -16, Our Lord’s words as to the debtor: “Thou shalt be cast -into prison, thou shalt not come forth from thence, until -thou hast paid the uttermost farthing,” Matt, v, 25, 26, as -applying to Purgatory. And in his <i>Contra Celsum</i>, VII, 13, -he already takes, as the Biblical <i>locus classicus</i> for a Purgatory, -St. Paul’s words as to how men build, upon the one foundation -Christ, either gold, silver, gems, or wood, hay, stubble; and -how fire will test each man’s work; and, if the work remain, -he shall receive a reward, but if it be burnt, he shall suffer -loss and yet he himself shall be saved yet so as by fire, 1 Cor. -iii, 10-15. It appears certain, however, that St. Paul is, in this -passage, thinking directly of the Last Day, the End of the -World, with its accompaniment of physical fire, and as to -how far the various human beings, then on earth, will be able -to endure the dread stress and testing of that crisis; and he -holds that some will be fit to bear it and some will not.</p> - -<p>Such a destruction of the world by fire appears elsewhere in -Palestinian Jewish literature,—in the Book of Enoch and the -Testament of Levi; and in the New Testament, in 2 Peter -iii, 12: “The heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, the -elements shall melt with fervent heat.” Josephus, <i>Antiquities</i>, -XI, ii, 3, teaches a destruction by fire and another by water. -And the Stoics, to whom also Clement and Origen appeal, -had gradually modified their first doctrine of a simply cosmological -Ekpyrōsis, a renovation of the physical universe by -fire, into a moral purification of the earth, occasioned by, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[240]</a></span> -applied to, the sinfulness of man. Thus Seneca has the -double, water-and-fire, instrument: “At that time the tide” of -the sea “will be borne along free from all measure, for the -same reason which will cause the future conflagration. Both -occur when it seems fit to God to initiate a better order of -things and to have done with the old.… The judgment of -mankind being concluded, the primitive order of things will -be recalled, and to the earth will be re-given man innocent -of crimes.”<a name="FNanchor_266_266" id="FNanchor_266_266"></a><a href="#Footnote_266_266" class="fnanchor">[266]</a></p> - -<p>(2) It is interesting to note how—largely under the influence -of the forensic temper and growth of the Canonical Penitential -system, and of its successive relaxations in the form of substituted -lighter good works, Indulgences,—the Latin half of -Christendom, ever more social and immediately practical than -the Greek portion, came, in general, more and more to dwell -upon two ideas suggested to their minds by those two, Gospel -and Pauline, passages. The one idea was that souls which, -whilst fundamentally well-disposed, are not fit for Heaven at -the body’s death, can receive instant purification by the -momentary fire of the Particular Judgment; and the other -held that, thus already entirely purified and interiorly fit for -Heaven, they are but detained (in what we ought, properly, to -term a <i>Satisfactorium</i>), to suffer the now completely non-ameliorative, -simply vindictive, infliction of punishment,—a -punishment still, in strict justice, due to them for past sins, of -which the guilt and the deteriorating effects upon their own -souls have been fully remitted and cured.</p> - -<p>In this way it was felt that the complete unchangeableness -of the condition of every kind of soul after death, or at least -after the Particular Judgment (a Judgment held practically -to synchronize with death), was assured. And indeed how -could there be any interior growth in Purgatory, seeing that -there is no meriting there? Again it was thought that thus -the vision of God at the moment of Judgment was given an -operative value for the spiritual amelioration of souls which, -already in substantially good dispositions, could hardly be -held to pass through so profound an experience without -intrinsic improvement, as the other view seemed to hold.—And, -above all, this form of the doctrine was found greatly to -favour the multiplication among the people of prayers, Masses -and good-works for the dead; since the <i>modus operandi</i> of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[241]</a></span> -such acts seemed thus to become entirely clear, simple, -immediate, and, as it were, measurable and mechanical. For -these souls in their “Satisfactorium,” being, from its very -beginning, already completely purged and fit for Heaven,—God -is, as it were, free to relax at any instant, in favour of -sufficiently fervent or numerous intercessions, the exigencies -of his entirely extrinsic justice.</p> - -<p>(3) The position of a purely extrinsic punishment is -emphasized, with even unusual vehemence, in the theological -glosses inserted, in about 1512 to 1529, in Catherine’s -<i>Dicchiarazione</i>. Yet it is probably the very influential Jesuit -theologian Francesco Suarez, who died in 1617, who has done -most towards formulating and theologically popularizing this -view. All the guilt of sin, he teaches, is remitted (in these -Middle souls) at the first moment of the soul’s separation -from the body, by means of a single act of contrition, whereby -the will is wholly converted to God, and turned away from -every venial sin. “And in this way sin may be remitted, as -to its guilt, in Purgatory, because the soul’s purification dates -from this moment”;—in strictness, from before the first -moment of what should be here termed the “Satisfactorium.” -As to bad habits and vicious inclinations, “we ought not to -imagine that the soul is detained for these”: but “they are -either taken away at the moment of death, or expelled by an -infusion of the contrary virtues when the soul enters into -glory.”<a name="FNanchor_267_267" id="FNanchor_267_267"></a><a href="#Footnote_267_267" class="fnanchor">[267]</a> This highly artificial, inorganic view is adopted, -amongst other of our contemporary theologians, by Atzberger, -the continuator of Scheeben.<a name="FNanchor_268_268" id="FNanchor_268_268"></a><a href="#Footnote_268_268" class="fnanchor">[268]</a></p> - -<h5>6. <i>The Judaeo-Roman conception must be taken in synthesis -with the Alexandrine.</i></h5> - -<p>Now it is plain that the long-enduring Penitential system -of the Latin Church, and the doctrine and practice of Indulgences -stand for certain important truths liable to being -insufficiently emphasized by the Greek teachings concerning -an intrinsically ameliorative <i>Purgatorium</i>, and that there can -be no question of simply eliminating these truths. But -neither are they capable of simple co-ordination with, still -less of super-ordination to, those most profound and spiritually -central immanental positions. As between the primarily -forensic and governmental, and the directly ethical and -spiritual, it will be the former that will have to be conceived<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[242]</a></span> -and practised as, somehow, an expression and amplification -of, and a practical corrective and means to, the latter.<a name="FNanchor_269_269" id="FNanchor_269_269"></a><a href="#Footnote_269_269" class="fnanchor">[269]</a></p> - -<p>(1) The ordinary, indeed the strictly obligatory, Church teaching -clearly marks the suggested relation as the right one, at -three, simply cardinal points. We are bound, by the Confession -of Faith of Michael Palaeologus, 1267 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, and by the -Decree of the Council of Florence, 1429 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, to hold that -these Middle souls “are purged after death by purgatorial or -cathartic pains”; and by that of Trent “that there is a -Purgatory.”<a name="FNanchor_270_270" id="FNanchor_270_270"></a><a href="#Footnote_270_270" class="fnanchor">[270]</a> Yet we have here a true <i>lucus a non lucendo</i>, if -this place or state does not involve purgation: for no theologian -dares explicitly to transfer and restrict the name “Purgatory” -to the instant of the soul’s Particular Judgment; even -Suarez, as we have seen, has to extend the name somehow.</p> - -<p>Next we are bound, by the same three great Decrees, to -hold indeed that “the Masses, Prayers, Alms, and other pious -offices of the Faithful Living are profitable towards the relief -of these pains,” yet this by mode of “suffrage,” since, as the -severely orthodox Jesuit, Father H. Hurter, explains in his -standard <i>Theologiae Dogmaticae Compendium</i>, “the fruit of -this impetration and satisfaction is not infallible, for it depends -upon the merciful acceptance of God.”<a name="FNanchor_271_271" id="FNanchor_271_271"></a><a href="#Footnote_271_271" class="fnanchor">[271]</a> Hence in no case -can we, short of superstition, conceive such good works as -operating automatically: so that the <i>a priori</i> simplest view -concerning the mode of operation of these prayers is declared -to be mistaken. We can and ought, then, to choose among -the conceptions, not in proportion to their mechanical simplicity, -but according to their spiritual richness and to their -analogy with our deepest this-life experiences.</p> - -<p>And we are all bound, by the Decree of Trent and the -Condemnation of Baius, 1567 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, to hold that Contrition -springing from Perfect Love reconciles man with God, even -before Confession, and this also outside of cases of necessity or -of martyrdom.<a name="FNanchor_272_272" id="FNanchor_272_272"></a><a href="#Footnote_272_272" class="fnanchor">[272]</a> Indeed, it is the common doctrine that one -single act of Pure Love abolishes, not only Hell, but Purgatory, -so that, if the soul were to die whilst that act was in operation,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243">[243]</a></span> -it would forthwith be in Heaven. If then, in case of perfect -purity, the soul is at once in heaven, the soul cannot be quite -pure and yet continue in Purgatory.</p> - -<p>(2) It is thus plain that, as regards Sin in its relation to the -Sinner, there are, in strictness, ever three points to consider: -the guilty act, the reflex effect of the act upon the disposition -the agent, and the punishment; for all theologians admit -that the more or less bad disposition, contracted through the -sinful act, remains in the soul, except in the case of Perfect -Contrition, after the guilt of the act has been remitted. But -whilst the holders of an Extrinsic, Vindictive Purgatory, work -for a punishment as independent as possible of these moral -effects of sin still present in the pardoned soul, the advocates -of an Intrinsic, Ameliorative Purgatory find the punishment -centre in the pain and difficulty attendant upon “getting -slowly back to fully virtuous dispositions, through retracing -the steps we have taken in departing from it.”<a name="FNanchor_273_273" id="FNanchor_273_273"></a><a href="#Footnote_273_273" class="fnanchor">[273]</a> And the -system of Indulgences appears, in this latter view, to find its -chief justification in that it keeps up a link with the past -Penitential system of the Church; that it vividly recalls -and applies the profound truth of the interaction, for good -even more than for evil, between all human souls, alive and -dead; and that it insists upon the readily forgotten truth of -even the forgiven sinner, the man with the good determination, -having ordinarily still much to do and to suffer before he is -quit of the effects of his sin.</p> - -<p>(3) And the difficulties and motives special to those who -supplant the Intrinsic, Ameliorating Purgatory by an Extrinsic, -Vindicative <i>Satisfactorium</i>, can indeed be met by those who -would preserve that beautifully dynamic, ethical, and spiritual -conception. For we can hold that the fundamental condition,—the -particular determination of the active will,—remains -quite unchanged, from Death to Heaven, in these souls; that -this determination of the active will requires more or less of -time and suffering fully to permeate and assimilate to itself -all the semi-voluntary wishes and habits of the soul; and -that this permeation takes place among conditions in which -the soul’s acts are too little resisted and too certain of success -to be constituted meritorious. We can take Catherine’s -beautiful Plunge-conception as indicating the kind of operation -effected in and by the soul, at and through the momentary -vision of God. And we can feel convinced that it is ever, in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244">[244]</a></span> -the long run, profoundly dangerous to try to clarify and simplify -doctrines beyond or against the scope and direction of the -analogies of Nature and of Grace, which are ever so dynamic -and organic in type: for the poor and simple, as truly as the -rich and learned, ever require, not to be merely taken and left -as they are, but to be raised and trained to the most adequate -conceptions possible to each.—It is, in any case, very certain -that the marked and widespread movement of return to belief -in a Middle State is distinctly towards a truly Purgative Purgatory, -although few of these sincere truth-seekers are aware, -as is Dr. Anrich, that they are groping after a doctrine all -but quite explained away by a large body of late Scholastic -and Neo-Scholastic theologians.<a name="FNanchor_274_274" id="FNanchor_274_274"></a><a href="#Footnote_274_274" class="fnanchor">[274]</a></p> - -<p>(4) Yet it is very satisfactory to note how numerous, and -especially how important are, after all is said, the theologians -who have continued to walk, in this matter, in the footsteps -of the great Alexandrines. St. Gregory of Nyssa teaches a -healing of the soul in the beyond and a purification by fire.<a name="FNanchor_275_275" id="FNanchor_275_275"></a><a href="#Footnote_275_275" class="fnanchor">[275]</a> -St. Augustine says that “fire burns up the work of him who -thinketh of the things of this world, since possessions, that -are loved, do not perish without pain on the part of their -possessor. It is not incredible that something of this sort -takes place after this life.”<a name="FNanchor_276_276" id="FNanchor_276_276"></a><a href="#Footnote_276_276" class="fnanchor">[276]</a></p> - -<p>St. Thomas declares most plainly: “Venial guilt, in a soul -which dies in a state of grace, is remitted after this life by -the purging fire, because that pain, which is in some manner -accepted by the will, has, in virtue of grace, the power of -expiating all such guilt as can co-exist with a state of grace.” -“After this life … there can be merit with respect to some -accidental reward, so long as a man remains in some manner -in a state of probation: and hence there can be meritorious -acts in Purgatory, with respect to the remission of venial -sin.”<a name="FNanchor_277_277" id="FNanchor_277_277"></a><a href="#Footnote_277_277" class="fnanchor">[277]</a>—Dante (<i>d.</i> 1321) also appears, as Father Faber finely -notes, to hold such a voluntary, immanental Purgatory, where -the poet sees an Angel impelling, across the sea at dawn, -a bark filled with souls bent for Purgatory: for the boat is -described as driving towards the shore so lightly as to draw -no wake upon the water.<a name="FNanchor_278_278" id="FNanchor_278_278"></a><a href="#Footnote_278_278" class="fnanchor">[278]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245">[245]</a></span></p> - -<p>Cardinal Bellarmine, perhaps the greatest of all anti-Protestant -theologians (<i>d.</i> 1621) teaches that “venial sin is -remitted in Purgatory <i>quoad culpam</i>,” and that “this guilt, -as St. Thomas rightly insists, is remitted in Purgatory by -an act of love and patient endurance.”<a name="FNanchor_279_279" id="FNanchor_279_279"></a><a href="#Footnote_279_279" class="fnanchor">[279]</a> St. Francis of -Sales, that high ascetical authority (<i>d.</i> 1622), declares: “By -Purgatory we understand a place where souls undergo purgation, -for a while, from the stains and imperfections which -they have carried away with them from this mortal life.”<a name="FNanchor_280_280" id="FNanchor_280_280"></a><a href="#Footnote_280_280" class="fnanchor">[280]</a></p> - -<p>And recently and in England we have had Father Faber, -Cardinal Manning, and Cardinal Newman, although differing -from each other on many other points, fully united in holding -and propagating this finely life-like, purgative conception of -purgatory.<a name="FNanchor_281_281" id="FNanchor_281_281"></a><a href="#Footnote_281_281" class="fnanchor">[281]</a></p> - -<h5>7. <i>A final difficulty.</i></h5> - -<p>One final point concerning a Middle State. In the Synoptic -tradition there is a recurrent insistence upon the forgiveness -of particular sins, at particular moments, by particular human -and divine acts of contrition and pardon. In the Purgatorial -teaching the stress lies upon entire states and habits, stains -and perversities of soul, and upon God’s general grace working, -in and through immanently necessary, freely accepted -sufferings, on to a slow purification of the complete personality. -As Origen says: “The soul’s single acts, good or bad, go by; -but, according to their quality, they give form and figure to -to the mind of the agent, and leave it either good or bad, and -destined for pains or for rewards.”<a name="FNanchor_282_282" id="FNanchor_282_282"></a><a href="#Footnote_282_282" class="fnanchor">[282]</a></p> - -<p>The antagonism here is but apparent. For the fact that -a certain condition of soul precedes, and that another condition -succeed, each act of the same soul, in proportion as -this act is full and deliberate, does not prevent the corresponding, -complimentary fact that such acts take the preceding -condition as their occasion, and make the succeeding condition -into a further expression of themselves. Single acts -which fully express the character, whether good or bad, are -doubtless rarer than is mostly thought. Yet Catherine, in -union with the Gospels and the Church, is deeply convinced<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246">[246]</a></span> -of the power of one single act of Pure Love to abolish, not of -course the effects outward, but the reflex spiritual consequences -upon the soul itself, of sinful acts or states.</p> - -<p>Catherine’s picture again, of the deliberate Plunge into -Purgatory, gives us a similar heroic act which, summing up -the whole soul’s active volitions, initiates and encloses the -whole subsequent purification, but which itself involves a -prevenient act of Divine Love and mercy, to which this act -of human love is but the return and response. Indeed, as we -know, this plunge-conception was but the direct projection, on -to the other-world-picture, of her own personal experience at -her conversion, when a short span of clock-time held acts -of love received and acts of love returned, which transformed -all her previous condition, and initiated a whole series of states -ever more expressive of her truest self.—Act and state and -state and act, each presupposes and requires the other: -and both are present in the Synoptic pictures, and both are -operative in the Purgatorial teaching; although in the former -the accounts are so brief as to make states and acts alike look -as though one single act; and, in the latter, the descriptions -are so large as to make the single acts almost disappear behind -the states.</p> - -<h4>V. <span class="smcap">Catherine and Heaven—Three Perplexities to -be considered.</span></h4> - -<p>We have found a truly Purgational Middle state, with its -sense of succession, its mixture of joy and suffering, and -its growth and fruitfulness, to be profoundly consonant with -all our deepest spiritual experiences and requirements. But -what about Heaven, which we must, apparently, hold to -consist of a sense of simultaneity, a condition of mere reproductiveness -and utterly uneventful finality, and a state of -unmixed, unchanging joy?—Here again, even if in a lesser -degree, certain experiences of the human soul can help us -to a few general positions of great spiritual fruitfulness, -which can reasonably claim an analogical applicability to -the Beyond, and which, thus taken as our ultimate ideals, -cannot fail to stimulate the growth of our personality, and, -with it, of further insight into these great realities. I shall -here consider three main questions, which will roughly -correspond to the three perplexities just indicated.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247">[247]</a></span></p> - -<h5>1. <i>Time and Heaven.</i></h5> - -<p>Our first question, then, is as to the probable character of -man’s happiest ultimate consciousness,—whether it is one -of succession or of simultaneity: in other words, whether, -besides the disappearance of the category of space (a point -already discussed), there is likely to be the lapse of the -category of time also.—And let it be noted that the retention -of the latter sense for Hell, and even for Purgatory, does -not prejudge the question as to its presence or absence in -Heaven, since those two states are admittedly non-normative, -whereas the latter represents the very ideal and measure of -man’s full destination and perfection.</p> - -<p>(1) Now it is still usual, amongst those who abandon the -ultimacy of the space-category, simultaneously to drop, as -necessarily concomitant, the time-category also. Tennyson, -among the poets, does so, in his beautiful “Crossing the Bar”: -“From out our bourne of Time and Place, the flood may -bear me far”; and Prof. H. J. Holtzmann, among speculative -theologians, in criticising Rothe’s conception of man as a -quite ultimately spacial-temporal being, treats these two -questions as standing and falling together.<a name="FNanchor_283_283" id="FNanchor_283_283"></a><a href="#Footnote_283_283" class="fnanchor">[283]</a>—Yet a careful -study of Kant’s critique of the two categories of Space and -Time suffices to convince us of the indefinitely richer content, -and more ultimate reality, of the latter. Indeed, I shall -attempt to show more fully in the next Chapter, with the -aid of M. Henri Bergson, that mathematical, uniform clock-time -is indeed an artificial compound, which is made up of -our profound experience of a duration in which the constituents -(sensations, imaginations, thoughts, feelings, willings) -of the succession ever, in varying degrees, overlap, interpenetrate, -and modify each other, and the quite automatic -and necessary simplification and misrepresentation of this -experience by its imaginary projection on to space,—its -restatement, by our picturing faculty, as a perfectly equable -succession of mutually exclusive moments. It is in that -interpenetrative duration, not in this atomistic clock-time, -that our deeper human experiences take place.</p> - -<p>(2) But that sense of duration, is it indeed our deepest -apprehension? Dr. Holtzmann points out finely how that -we are well aware, in our profoundest experiences, of “that -permanently incomprehensible fact,—the existence of, as it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248">[248]</a></span> -were, a prism, through which the unitary ray of light, which -fills our consciousness with a real content, is spread out into -a colour-spectrum, so that what, in itself, exists in pure -unitedness” and simultaneity, “becomes intelligible to us -only as a juxtaposition in space and a succession in time. -Beyond the prism, there are no such two things.” And he -shows how keenly conscious we are, at times, of that deepest -mode of apprehension and of being which is a Simultaneity, -an eternal Here and Now; and how ruinous to our spiritual -life would be a full triumph of the category of time.<a name="FNanchor_284_284" id="FNanchor_284_284"></a><a href="#Footnote_284_284" class="fnanchor">[284]</a></p> - -<p>But it is St. Augustine who has, so far, found the noblest -expression for the deepest human experiences in this whole -matter of Duration and Simultaneity, as against mere Clock-Time, -although, here as with regard to Space, he is deeply -indebted to Plotinus. “In thee, O my soul, I measure time,—I -measure the impression which passing events make upon -thee, who remainest when those events have passed: this -present impression then, and not those events which had to -pass in order to produce it, do I measure, when I measure time.” -“The three times,” tenses, “past, present, and future … are -certain three affections in the soul, I find them there and -nowhere else. There is the present memory of past events, -the present perception of present ones, and the present -expectation of future ones.” God possesses “the splendour -of ever-tarrying Eternity,” which is “incomparable with never-tarrying -times,” since in it “nothing passes, but the content -of everything abides simply present.” And in the next life -“perhaps our own thoughts also will not be flowing, going -from one thing to another, but we shall see all we know -simultaneously, in one intuition.” St. Thomas indeed is more -positive: “All things will,” in Heaven, “be seen simultaneously -and not successively.”<a name="FNanchor_285_285" id="FNanchor_285_285"></a><a href="#Footnote_285_285" class="fnanchor">[285]</a></p> - -<p>(3) If then, even here below, we can so clearly demonstrate -the conventionality of mere Clock-Time, and can even conceive -a perfect Simultaneity as the sole form of the consciousness -of God, we cannot well avoid holding that, in the other life, -the clock-time convention will completely cease, and that, -though the sense of Duration is not likely completely to disappear, -(since, in this life at least, this sense is certainly not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249">[249]</a></span> -merely phenomenal for man, and its entire absence would -apparently make man into God), the category of Simultaneity -will, as a sort of strong background-consciousness, englobe -and profoundly unify the sense of Duration. And, the more -God-like the soul, the more would this sense of Simultaneity -predominate over the sense of Duration.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>The Ultimate Good, concrete, not abstract.</i></h5> - -<p>Our second question concerns the kind and degree of -variety in unity which we should conceive to characterize -the life of God, and of the soul in its God-likeness. Is this -type and measure of all life to be conceived as a maximum -of abstraction or as a maximum of concretion; as pure -thought alone, or as also emotion and will; as solitary and -self-centred, or as social and outgoing; and as simply -reproductive, or also as operative?</p> - -<p>(1) Now it is certain that nothing is easier, and nothing -has been more common, than to take the limitations of our -earthly conditions, and especially those attendant upon the -strictly contemplative, and, still more, those connected with -the technically ecstatic states, as so many advantages, or even -as furnishing a complete scheme of the soul’s ultimate life.</p> - -<p>As we have already repeatedly seen in less final matters, so -here once more, at the end, we can trace the sad impoverishment -to the spiritual outlook produced by the esteem in which -the antique world generally held the psycho-physical peculiarities -of trances, as directly valuable or even as prophetic -of the soul’s ultimate condition; the contraposition and -exaltation, already on the part of Plato and Aristotle, of a -supposed non-actively contemplative, above a supposed non-contemplatively -active life; the largely excessive, not fully -Christianizable, doctrines of the Neo-Platonists as to the -Negative, Abstractive way, when taken as self-sufficient, and -as to Quiet, Passivity, and Emptiness of Soul, when understood -literally; and the conception, rarely far away from the -ancient thinkers, of the soul as a substance which, full-grown, -fixed and stainless at the first, requires but to be kept free -from stain up to the end.</p> - -<p>And yet the diminution of vitality in the trance, and even -the inattention to more than one thing at a time in Contemplation, -are, in themselves, defects, at best the price paid -for certain gains; the active and the contemplative life are, -ultimately, but two mutually complementary sides of life, so -that no life ever quite succeeds in eliminating either element,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250">[250]</a></span> -and life, <i>caeteris paribus</i>, is complete and perfect, in proportion -as it embraces both elements, each at its fullest, and the two -in a perfect interaction; the Negative, Abstractive way -peremptorily requires also the other, the Affirmative, Concrete -way; the Quiet, Passivity, Emptiness are really, when wholesome, -an incubation for, or a rest from, Action, indeed they -are themselves a profound action and peace, and the soul is -primarily a Force and an Energy, and Holiness is a growth -of that Energy in Love, in full Being, and in creative, spiritual -Personality.</p> - -<p>(2) Now on this whole matter the European Christian -Mystics, strongly influenced by, yet also largely developing, -certain doctrines of the Greeks, have, I think, made two most -profound contributions to the truths of the spirit, and have -seriously fallen short of reality in three respects.</p> - -<p>The first contribution can, indeed, be credited to Aristotle, -whose luminous formulations concerning Energeia, Action, (as -excluding Motion, or Activity), we have already referred to. -Here to <i>be</i> is to <i>act</i>, and Energeia, a being’s perfect functioning -and fullest self-expression in action, is not some kind of -movement or process; but, on the contrary, all movement and -process is only an imperfect kind of Energeia. Man, in his life -here, only catches brief glimpses of such an Action; but God -is not so hampered,—He is ever completely all that He can -be, His Action is kept up inexhaustibly and ever generates -supreme bliss; it is an unchanging, unmoving Energeia.<a name="FNanchor_286_286" id="FNanchor_286_286"></a><a href="#Footnote_286_286" class="fnanchor">[286]</a>—And -St. Thomas echoes this great doctrine, for all the -Christian schoolmen: “A thing is declared to be perfect, -in proportion as it is in act,”—as all its potentialities are -expressed in action; and hence “the First Principle must -be supremely in act,” “God’s Actuality is identical with His -Potentiality,” “God is Pure Action (<i>Actus Purus</i>).”<a name="FNanchor_287_287" id="FNanchor_287_287"></a><a href="#Footnote_287_287" class="fnanchor">[287]</a>—Yet it -is doubtless the Christian Mystics who have most fully -experienced, and emotionally vivified, this great truth, and -who cease not, in all their more characteristic teachings, from -insisting upon the ever-increasing acquisition of “Action,” -the fully fruitful, peaceful functioning of the whole soul, at -the expense of “activity,” the restless, sterile distraction and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251">[251]</a></span> -internecine conflict of its powers. And Heaven, for them, ever -consists in an unbroken Action, devoid of all “activity,” rendering -the soul, in its degree, like to that Purest Action, God, -who, Himself “Life,” is, as our Lord declared, “not the God -of the dead but of the living.”<a name="FNanchor_288_288" id="FNanchor_288_288"></a><a href="#Footnote_288_288" class="fnanchor">[288]</a></p> - -<p>And the second contribution can, in part, be traced back to -Plato, who does not weary, in the great middle period of his -writings, from insisting upon the greatness of the nobler -passions, and who already apprehends a Heavenly Eros -which in part conflicts with, in part transcends, the Earthly -one. But here especially it is Christianity, and in particular -Christian Mysticism, which have fully experienced and proclaimed -that “God” is “Love,” and that the greatest of all -the soul’s acts and virtues is Charity, Pure Love. And hence -the Pure Act of God, and the Action of the God-like soul, are -conceived not, Aristotle-like, as acts of pure intelligence alone, -but as tinged through and through with a noble emotion.</p> - -<p>(3) But in three matters the Mystics, as such and as a -whole, have, here especially under the predominant influence -of Greek thought, remained inadequate to the great spiritual -realities, as most fully revealed to us by Christianity. The -three points are so closely interconnected that it will be best -first to illustrate, and then to criticise them, together.</p> - -<p>(i) Aristotle here introduces the mischief. For it is he who -in his great, simply immeasurably influential, theological -tractate, Chapters VI to X of the Twelfth Book of his <i>Metaphysic</i>, -has presented to us God as “the one first unmoved -Mover” of the Universe, but Who moves it as desired by it, -not as desiring it, as outside of it, not as also inside it. God -here is sheer Pure Thought, Noēsis, for “contemplation is the -most joyful and the best” of actions. And “Thought” here -“thinks the divinest and worthiest, without change,” hence -“It thinks Itself, and the Thinking is a Thinking of -Thought.”<a name="FNanchor_289_289" id="FNanchor_289_289"></a><a href="#Footnote_289_289" class="fnanchor">[289]</a> We have here, as Dr. Caird strikingly puts -it, a God necessarily shut up within Himself, “of purer eyes -than to behold, not only iniquity but even contingency and -finitude, and His whole activity is one act of pure self-contemplation.” -“The ideal activity which connects God with -the world, appears thus as in the world and not in God.”<a name="FNanchor_290_290" id="FNanchor_290_290"></a><a href="#Footnote_290_290" class="fnanchor">[290]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252">[252]</a></span></p> - -<p>(ii) Now we have already allowed that the Mystics avoid -Aristotle’s elimination of emotion from man’s deepest action, -and of emotion’s equivalent from the life of God. But they -are, for the most part, much influenced in their speculations -by this intensely Greek, aristocratic, intellectualist conception, -in the three points of a disdain of the Contingent and Historical; -of a superiority to volitional, productive energizing; -and of a presentation of God as unsocial, and as occupied -directly with Himself alone. We have already studied -numerous examples of the first two, deeply un-Christian, errors -as they have more or less influenced Christian Mysticism; -the third mistake, of a purely Transcendental, Deistic God, is -indeed never consistently maintained by any Christian, and -Catherine, in particular, is ever dominated by the contrary -great doctrine, adumbrated by Plato and fully revealed by -Our Lord, of the impulse to give Itself intrinsic to Goodness, -so that God, as Supreme Goodness, becomes the Supreme -Self-giver, and thus the direct example and motive for our -own self-donation to Him. Yet even so deeply religious a -non-Christian as Plotinus, and such speculative thinkers as -Eriugena and Eckhart (who certainly intended to remain -Christians) continue all three mistakes, and especially insist -upon a Supreme Being, Whose true centre, His Godhead, is -out of all relation to anything but Himself. And even the -orthodox Scholastics, and St. Thomas himself, attempt at -times to combine, with the noblest Platonic and the deepest -Christian teachings, certain elements, which, in strictness, -have no place in an Incarnational Religion.</p> - -<p>(iii) For, at times, the fullest, deepest Action is still not -conceived, even by St. Thomas, as a Harmony, an Organization -of all Man’s essential powers, the more the better. “In -the active life, which is occupied with many things, there is -less of beatitude than in the contemplative life, which is busy -with one thing alone,—the contemplation of Truth”; “beatitude -must consist essentially in the action of the intellect; -and only accidentally in the action of the will.”<a name="FNanchor_291_291" id="FNanchor_291_291"></a><a href="#Footnote_291_291" class="fnanchor">[291]</a> God is still -primarily intelligence: “God’s intelligence is His substance”; -whereas “volition must be in God, since there is intelligence -in Him,” and “Love must of necessity be declared to be in God, -since there is volition in Him.”<a name="FNanchor_292_292" id="FNanchor_292_292"></a><a href="#Footnote_292_292" class="fnanchor">[292]</a> God is still, in a certain sense, -shut up in Himself: “As He understands things other than<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253">[253]</a></span> -Himself, by understanding His own essence, so He wills things -other than Himself, by willing His own goodness.” “God enjoys -not anything beside Himself, but enjoys Himself alone.”<a name="FNanchor_293_293" id="FNanchor_293_293"></a><a href="#Footnote_293_293" class="fnanchor">[293]</a>—And -we get, in correspondence to this absorption of God in -Himself, an absorption of man in God, of so direct and -exclusive a kind, as, if pressed, to eliminate all serious, permanent -value, for our soul, in God’s actual creation of our fellow-creatures. -“He who knoweth Thee and creatures, is not, on -this account, happier than if he knows them not; but he is -happy because of Thee alone.” And “the perfection of Love -is essential to beatitude, with respect to the Love of God, not -with respect to the Love of one’s neighbour. If there were but -one soul alone to enjoy God, it would be blessèd, even though -it were without a single fellow-creature whom it could love.”<a name="FNanchor_294_294" id="FNanchor_294_294"></a><a href="#Footnote_294_294" class="fnanchor">[294]</a></p> - -<p>(iv) And yet St. Thomas’s own deeply Christian sense, -explicit sayings of Our Lord or of St. Paul, and even, in part, -certain of the fuller apprehensions of the Greeks, can make -the great Dominican again uncertain, or can bring him to -entirely satisfactory declarations, on each of these points. -For we get the declaration that direct knowledge of individual -things, and quasi-creative operativeness are essential to all -true perfection. “To understand something merely in general -and not in particular, is to know it imperfectly”; Our Lord -Himself has taught us that “the very hairs of your head are -all numbered”; hence God must “know all other individual -things with a distinct and proper knowledge.”—And “a thing -is most perfect, when it can make another like unto itself. -But by tending to its own perfection, each thing tends to -become more and more like God. Hence everything tends -to be like God, in so far as it tends to be the cause of other -things.”<a name="FNanchor_295_295" id="FNanchor_295_295"></a><a href="#Footnote_295_295" class="fnanchor">[295]</a>—We get a full insistence, with St. Paul, (in I Cor. xiii), -upon our love of God, an act of the will, as nobler than our -cognition of Him; and with Plato and St. John, upon God’s -forthgoing Love for His creatures, as the very crown and measure -of His perfection. “Everything in nature has, as regards its -own good, a certain inclination to diffuse itself amongst others, -as far as possible. And this applies, in a supreme degree, to -the Divine Goodness, from which all perfection is derived.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254">[254]</a></span>” -“Love, Joy, Delight can be predicated of God”; Love which, -of its very essence “causes the lover to bear himself to the -beloved as to his own self”: so that we must say with -Dionysius that “He, the very Cause of all things, becomes -ecstatic, moves out of Himself, by the abundance of His -loving goodness, in the providence exercised by Him towards -all things extant.”<a name="FNanchor_296_296" id="FNanchor_296_296"></a><a href="#Footnote_296_296" class="fnanchor">[296]</a></p> - -<p>(v) And we get in St. Thomas, when he is too much dominated -by the abstractive trend, a most interesting, because -logically necessitated and quite unconscious, collision with -certain sayings of Our Lord. For he then explains Matt. -xviii, 10, “their,” the children’s, “Angels see without ceasing -the face of their Father who is in Heaven” as teaching that -“the action (<i>operatio</i>), by which Angels are conjoined to the -increate Good, is, in them, unique and sempiternal”; whereas -his commentators are driven to admit that the text, contrariwise, -implies that these Angels have two simultaneous -“operations,” and that their succouring action in nowise -disturbs their intellectual contemplation. Hence, even if we -press Matt. xxii, 30, that we “shall be as the Angels of God,” -we still have an organism of peaceful Action, composed of -intellectual, affective, volitional, productive acts operating -between the soul and God, and the soul and other souls, -each constituent and object working and attained in and -through all the others.</p> - -<p>(vi) Indeed all Our Lord’s Synoptic teachings, as to man’s -ultimate standard and destiny, belong to this God-in-man -and man-in-God type of doctrine: for there the two great -commandments are strictly inseparable; God’s interest in -the world is direct and detailed,—it is part of His supreme -greatness that He cares for every sparrow that falls to the -ground; and man, in the Kingdom of God, will sit down at a -banquet, the unmistakable type of social joys.—And even -the Apocalypse, which has, upon the whole, helped on so -much the conception of an exclusive, unproductive entrancement -of each soul singly in God alone, shows the deepest -emotion when picturing all the souls, from countless tribes -and nations, standing before the throne,—an emotion which -can, surely, not be taken as foreign to those souls themselves.<a name="FNanchor_297_297" id="FNanchor_297_297"></a><a href="#Footnote_297_297" class="fnanchor">[297]</a><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[255]</a></span> -But, indeed, Our Lord’s whole life and message become -unintelligible, and the Church loses its deepest roots, unless -the Kingdom of God is, for us human souls, as truly a part -of our ultimate destiny as is God Himself, that God who fully -reveals to us His own deepest nature as the Good Shepherd, -the lover of each single sheep and of the flock as a whole.<a name="FNanchor_298_298" id="FNanchor_298_298"></a><a href="#Footnote_298_298" class="fnanchor">[298]</a></p> - -<p>(4) We shall, then, do well to hold that the soul’s ultimate -beatitude will consist in its own greatest possible self-realization -in its God-likeness,—an Action free from all -Activity, but full of a knowing, feeling, willing, receiving, -giving, effectuating, all which will energize between God and -the soul, and the soul and other souls,—each force and -element functioning in its proper place, but each stimulated -to its fullest expansion, and hence to its deepest delight, by -the corresponding vitalization of the other powers and ends, -and of other similar centres of rich action.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>The pain-element of Bliss.</i></h5> - -<p>And our third, last question is whether our deepest this-life -apprehensions and experiences give us any reason for holding -that a certain equivalent for what is noblest in devoted -suffering, heroic self-oblivion, patient persistence in lonely -willing, will be present in the life of the Blessed. It would -certainly be a gain could we discover such an equivalent, for -a pure glut of happiness, an unbroken state of sheer enjoyment, -can as little be made attractive to our most spiritual -requirements, as the ideal of an action containing an element -of, or equivalent for, devoted and fruitful effort and renunciation -can lose its perennial fascination for what is most Christian -within us.</p> - -<p>(1) It is not difficult, I take it, to find such an element, which -we cannot think away from any future condition of the soul -without making that soul into God Himself. The ultimate -cause of this element shall be considered, as Personality, in -our next Chapter: here I can but indicate this element at -work in our relations to our fellow-men and to God.—Already -St. Thomas, throughout one current of his teaching, is full -of the dignity of right individuality. “The Multitude and -Diversity of natures in the Universe proceed directly from -the intention of God, who brought them into being, in order to -communicate His goodness to them, and to have It represented -by them. And since It could not be sufficiently represented<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[256]</a></span> -by one creature alone, He produced many and diverse ones, -so that what is wanting to the one towards this office, should -be supplied by the other.”<a name="FNanchor_299_299" id="FNanchor_299_299"></a><a href="#Footnote_299_299" class="fnanchor">[299]</a> Hence the multiplication of the -Angels, who differ specifically each from all the rest, adds -more of nobility and perfection to the Universe, than does -the multiplication of men, who differ only individually.<a name="FNanchor_300_300" id="FNanchor_300_300"></a><a href="#Footnote_300_300" class="fnanchor">[300]</a> And -Cardinal Nicolas of Coes writes, in 1457 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, “Every man is, -as it were, a separate species, because of his perfectibility.”<a name="FNanchor_301_301" id="FNanchor_301_301"></a><a href="#Footnote_301_301" class="fnanchor">[301]</a> -As Prof. Josiah Royce tells us in 1901, “What is real, is -not only a content of experience and the embodiment of a -type; but an individual content of experience, and the unique -embodiment of a type.”<a name="FNanchor_302_302" id="FNanchor_302_302"></a><a href="#Footnote_302_302" class="fnanchor">[302]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Now in the future beatitude, where the full development -of this uniqueness in personality cannot, as so often -here, be stunted or misapplied, all this will evidently reach its -zenith. But, if so, then it follows that, although one of the two -greatest of the joys of those souls will be their love and understanding -of each other,—this love and trust, given as it will be -to the other souls, in their full, unique personality, will, of necessity, -exceed the comprehension of the giving personalities. -Hence there will still be an equivalent for that trust and venture, -that creative faith in the love and devotion given by us -to our fellows, and found by us in them, which are, here below, -the noblest concomitants and conditions of the pain and the -cost and the joy in every virile love and self-dedication.—There -is then an element of truth in Lessing’s words of 1773: -“The human soul is incapable of even one unmixed emotion,—one -that, down to its minutest constituent, would be nothing -but pleasurable or nothing but painful: let alone of a condition -in which it would experience nothing but such -unmixed emotions.”—For, as Prof. Troeltsch says finely in -1903, “Everything historical retains, in spite of all its relation to -absolute values, something of irrationality,”—of impenetrableness -to finite minds, “and of individuality. Indeed just this -mixture is the special characteristic of the lot and dignity of -man; nor is a Beyond for him conceivable in which it would -altogether cease. Doubt and unrest can indeed give way to -clear sight and certitude: yet this very clarity and assurance<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[257]</a></span> -will, in each human soul, still bear a certain individual -character,” fully comprehensible to the other souls by love -land trust alone.<a name="FNanchor_303_303" id="FNanchor_303_303"></a><a href="#Footnote_303_303" class="fnanchor">[303]</a></p> - -<p>(3) And this same element we find, of course, in a still -greater degree,—although, as I shall argue later on, our experimental -knowledge of God is greater than is our knowledge -of our fellow-creatures,—in the relations between our love of -God and our knowledge of Him. St. Thomas tells us most -solidly: “Individual Being applies to God, in so far as it -implies Incommunicableness.” Indeed, “<i>Person</i> signifies the -most perfect thing in nature,”—“the subsistence of an individual -in a rational nature.” “And since the dignity of the -divine nature exceeds every other dignity, this name of -Person is applicable, in a supreme degree, to God.” And -again: “God, as infinite, cannot be held infinitely by anything -finite “; and hence “only in the sense in which comprehension -is opposed to a seeking after Him, is God comprehended, <i>i.e.</i> -possessed, by the Blessed.” And hence the texts: “I follow, if -that I may apprehend, seeing that I also am apprehended” -(Phil. iii, 12); “then shall I know even as I am known” -(1 Cor. xiii, 12); and “we shall see Him as He is” (1 John -iii, 2): all refer to such a possession of God. In the last -text “the adverb ‘as’ only signifies ‘we shall see His essence’ -and not ‘we shall have as perfect a mode of vision as God has -a mode of being.’”<a name="FNanchor_304_304" id="FNanchor_304_304"></a><a href="#Footnote_304_304" class="fnanchor">[304]</a>—Here again, then, we find that souls -loving God in His Infinite Individuality, will necessarily love -Him beyond their intellectual comprehension of Him; the -element of devoted trust, of free self-donation to One fully -known only through and in such an act, will thus remain to man -for ever. St. John of the Cross proclaimed this great truth: -“One of the greatest favours of God, bestowed transiently -upon the soul in this life, is its ability to see so distinctly, and -to feel so profoundly, that … it cannot comprehend Him -at all. These souls are herein, in some degree, like to the -souls in heaven, where they who know Him most perfectly -perceive most clearly that He is infinitely incomprehensible; -for those that have the less clear vision, do not perceive so -distinctly as the others how greatly He transcends their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[258]</a></span> -vision.”<a name="FNanchor_305_305" id="FNanchor_305_305"></a><a href="#Footnote_305_305" class="fnanchor">[305]</a> With this teaching, so consonant with Catherine’s -experimental method, and her continuous trust in the persistence -of the deepest relations of the soul to God, of the -self-identical soul to the unchanging God, we can conclude -this study of her Eschatology.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[259]</a></span></p> - -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_XIII" id="CHAPTER_XIII"></a>CHAPTER XIII<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE FIRST THREE ULTIMATE QUESTIONS. THE RELATIONS -BETWEEN MORALITY, MYSTICISM, PHILOSOPHY, AND -RELIGION. MYSTICISM AND THE LIMITS OF HUMAN -EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE. MYSTICISM AND THE -NATURE OF EVIL</span></h3> - -<p>I take the ultimate questions involved in the religious -positions which are taken up by Catherine, and indeed by the -Christian Mystics generally, and which we have studied in the -preceding two chapters, to be four. In the order of their -increasing difficulty they are: the question as to the relations -between Morality, Mysticism, Philosophy, and Religion; that -as to the Limits of Human Knowledge, and as to the special -character and worth of the Mystics’ claim to Trans-subjective -Cognition; that as to the Nature of Evil and the Goodness or -Badness of Human Nature; and that as to Personality,—the -character of, and the relations between, the human spirit and -the Divine Spirit. The consideration of these deepest matters -in the next two chapters will, I hope, in spite of its inevitable -element of dimness and of repetition, do much towards binding -together and clarifying the convictions which we have been -slowly acquiring,—ever, in part, with a reference to these -coming ultimate alternatives and choices.</p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">The Relations between Morality and Mysticism -Philosophy and Religion.</span></h4> - -<p>Now the first of these questions has not, for most of the -more strenuous of our educated contemporaries, become, so -far again, a living question at all. A morally good and pure, -a socially useful and active life,—all this in the sense and with -the range attributed to these terms by ordinary parlance: this -and this alone is, for doubtless the predominant public present-day -consciousness, the true object, end, and measure of all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[260]</a></span> -healthy religion; whatever is alongside of, or beyond, or other -than, or anything but a direct and exclusive incentive to this, -is so much superstition and fanaticism. According to this -view, at least one half of Catherine’s activity at all times, and -well-nigh the whole of it during her last period, would be -practically worthless. Thus only certain elements of such a -life would be retained even for and in religion, and even these -would be bereft of all that has hitherto been held to be their -specifically religious sense and setting.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Kant’s non-mystical religion.</i></h5> - -<p>It is doubtless Kant who, among the philosophers, has -been the most consistent and influential in inculcating such -non-Mystical Religion. “Religion,” he says in 1793, “is, on -its subjective side, the cognition of all our duties as so many -Divine Commandments.” “The delusion that we can effect -something, in view of our justification before God, by means -of acts of religious worship, is religious superstition; and the -delusion that we can effect something by attempts at a supposed -intercourse with God, is religious fanaticism.… Such -a feeling of the immediate presence of the Supreme Being, -and such a discrimination between this feeling and every -other, even moral, feeling, would imply a capacity for an -intuition, which is without any corresponding organ in human -nature.… If then a Church doctrine is to abolish or to -prevent all religious delusion, it must,—over and above its -statutory teachings, with which it cannot, for the present, -entirely dispense,—contain within itself a principle which shall -enable it to bring about the religion of a pure life, as the true -end of the whole movement, and then to dispense with those -temporary doctrines.”<a name="FNanchor_306_306" id="FNanchor_306_306"></a><a href="#Footnote_306_306" class="fnanchor">[306]</a></p> - -<p>It is deeply instructive to note how thoroughly this, at first -sight, solid and triumphant view, has not only continued to -be refuted by the actual practice and experience of specifically -religious souls, but how explicitly it is being discredited by -precisely the more delicately perceptive, the more truly -detached and comprehensive, students and philosophers of -religion of the present day,—heirs, let us not forget in justice -to Kant, of the intervening profound development of the -historical sense, and of the history and psychology of religion.—Thus -that most vigorous, independent thinker, Prof. -Simmel of Berlin, writes in 1904: “Kant has, I think, simply<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261">[261]</a></span> -passed by the essentials of religion,—that is to say, of that -reality which historically bears the name of religion. Only -the reflection, that the harmony of complete happiness with -complete morality is producible by a Divine Being alone, is -here supposed to lead us to believe in such a Being. There -is here a complete absence of that direct laying hold of the -Divine by our souls, because of our intrinsic needs, which -characterizes all genuine piety. And the religious sense is -not recognized as an organism with a unity of its own, as a -growth springing from its own root. The entirely specific -character of religion, which is resolvable neither into morality -nor into a thirst after happiness: the direct self-surrender of the -soul to a higher reality, the giving and taking, the unification -and differentiation,—that quite organic unity of the religious -experience, which we can but most imperfectly indicate by a -multiplicity of some such, simultaneously valid, antitheses: this, -there is no evidence to show, was ever really known to Kant. -What was religion for Augustine and Francis of Assisi, he -was unable to reproduce in himself; indeed religion, of this -type, he readily rejects as fanaticism. Here lay the limit both -of his own nature and of his own times.”<a name="FNanchor_307_307" id="FNanchor_307_307"></a><a href="#Footnote_307_307" class="fnanchor">[307]</a></p> - -<p>The rich mind of Prof. Troeltsch is, perhaps, more entirely -just: “As Kant’s theory of knowledge is throughout -dependent upon the state of contemporary psychology, so -also is his theory of religious knowledge dependent upon -the psychology of religion predominant in his day. Locke, -Leibniz, Pascal had already recognized the essentially practical -character of all religion; and since their psychology -was unable to conceive the ‘practical’ otherwise than as the -moral, it had looked upon Religion as Morality furnished -forth with its metaphysical concomitants. And as soon as -this psychology had become the very backbone of his conception -of Religion, Morality gained an entirely one-sided predominance -over Kant’s mind,—considerably, indeed, beyond -his own personal feelings and perceptions.” For he remains -deeply penetrated by “the conceptions of Regeneration and -Redemption; the idea of divine Grace and Wisdom, which -accepts the totality of a soul’s good disposition in lieu of that -soul’s ever defective single good works; the belief in a -Providence which strengthens the Good throughout the world -against Evil; adoring awe in face of the majesty of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262">[262]</a></span> -Supersensible”: and “all these” conceptions “are no more -simply moral, they are specifically religious thoughts.”<a name="FNanchor_308_308" id="FNanchor_308_308"></a><a href="#Footnote_308_308" class="fnanchor">[308]</a></p> - -<p>Such a fuller conception of religion is admirably insisted on -by that penetrating philosopher and historian of philosophy, -Prof. Windelband: “Actual Religion, in its complete reality, -belongs to all the spheres of life, and yet transcends -them all, as something new and <i>sui generis</i>. It is first an -interior life—an apprehending, cognizing, feeling, willing, -accomplishing. But this accomplishing leads it on to being -also an exterior life: an acting out, according to their various -standards, of such feeling and willing; and an outward -expression of that inner life in general, in ritual acts and -divine worship. Yet this worship takes it beyond the little -circle of the individual, and constitutes the corporate acts of -a community, a social, external organization with visible -institutions. And yet Religion ever claims to be more than -the whole series of such empirical facts and doings, it ever -transcends mere earthly experience, and is an intercourse -with the inmost nature and foundation of all reality; it is a -life in and with God, a metaphysical life. All these elements -belong to the complete concept of actual religion.”<a name="FNanchor_309_309" id="FNanchor_309_309"></a><a href="#Footnote_309_309" class="fnanchor">[309]</a> I would -add, that they each stimulate the other, the external, <i>e.g.</i> being -not only the expression of the awakened internal, but also -the occasion of that awakening.</p> - -<p>And the great Dutch scholar, Prof. C. P. Tiele, unexcelled -in the knowledge of the actual course taken by the -great religions of the world, declares: “All progress, not only -in Morality, but also in Science, Philosophy, Art, necessarily -exerts an influence upon that of Religion. But … Religion -is not, on that account, identical with Ethics any more than -with Philosophy or Art. All these manifestations of the -human spirit respond to certain needs of man; but none -of them, not even Morality, is capable of supplying the -want which Religion alone can satisfy.… Religion -differs from the other manifestations of the human -mind” in this, that whereas “in the domain of Art, -the feelings and the imagination predominate; in that of -Philosophy, abstract thought is paramount”; and “the main -object of Science is to know accurately, whilst Ethics are -chiefly concerned with the emotions and with the fruit they<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263">[263]</a></span> -yield: in Religion all these factors operate alike, and if their -equilibrium be disturbed, a morbid religious condition is the -result.”<a name="FNanchor_310_310" id="FNanchor_310_310"></a><a href="#Footnote_310_310" class="fnanchor">[310]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>Ritschlian modification of Kant’s view.</i></h5> - -<p>It is deeply interesting to note the particular manner in -which Kant’s impoverishment of the concept of religion has -been in part retained, in part modified, by the Ritschlian -school,—I am thinking especially of that vigorous writer, -Prof. Wilhelm Hermann.</p> - -<p>(1) If in Kant we get the belief in God derived from reflection -upon Goodness and Happiness, and as the only possible -means of their ultimate coalescence: in Hermann we still get -the Categorical Imperative, but the thirst for Happiness has -been replaced by the historic figure of Jesus Christ. “Two -forces of different kinds,” he says, “ever produce the certainty -of Faith: the impression of an Historic Figure which -approaches us in Time; and the Moral Law which, when -we have heard it, we can understand in its Eternal Truth. -Faith arises, when a man recognizes, in the appearance of -Jesus, that symbol of his own existence which gives him the -courage to recognize in the Eternal, which claims him in -the Moral Imperative, the source of true life for his own -self.”<a name="FNanchor_311_311" id="FNanchor_311_311"></a><a href="#Footnote_311_311" class="fnanchor">[311]</a>—And these two sole co-efficients of all entirely living -religion are made to exclude, as we have already seen, -especially all Mysticism from the life of Faith. “True, -outside of Christianity, Mysticism will everywhere arise, as -the very flower of the religious development. But a Christian -is bound to declare the mystical experience of God to be a -delusion. Once he has experienced his elevation, by Christ -alone, above his own previous nature, he cannot believe that -another man can attain the same result, simply by means -of recollection within his own self.… We are Christians -precisely because we have struck, in the person of Jesus, upon -a fact which is incomparably richer in content than the feelings -that arise within ourselves.” “Only because Christ is -present for us can we possess God with complete clearness -and certainty.” And, with Luther,—who remained, however, -thoroughly faithful to the Primitive and Mediaeval high -esteem for the Mystical element of religion;—“right prayer -is a work of faith, and only a Christian can perform it.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264">[264]</a></span>” -And, more moderately: “We have no desire to penetrate -through Christ on to God: for we consider that in God -Himself we still find nothing but Christ.”<a name="FNanchor_312_312" id="FNanchor_312_312"></a><a href="#Footnote_312_312" class="fnanchor">[312]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Now it is surely plain that we have here a most understandable, -indeed respectable, reaction against all empty, -sentimental Subjectivism, and a virile affirmation of the -essential importance of the Concrete and Historical. And, in -particular, the insistence upon the supreme value and irreplaceable -character and function of Christ is profoundly true.—Yet -three counter-considerations have ever to be borne -in mind.</p> - -<p>(i) It remains certain that we do not know, or -experience anything, to which we can attribute any fuller -reality, which is either purely objective or purely subjective; -and that there exists no process of knowing or experiencing -such a reality which would exclude either the objective or -the subjective factor. “Whatever claims to be fully real,” -either as apprehending subject or as apprehended object, -“must be an individual … an organic whole, which has -its principle of unity in itself.” The truly real, then, is a -thing that has an inside; and the sharp antithesis drawn, -although in contrary directions, by Aristotle and by Kant, -between the Phenomenal and the Intelligible worlds, does not -exist in the reality either of our apprehending selves, or of -our apprehended fellow-men, or God.<a name="FNanchor_313_313" id="FNanchor_313_313"></a><a href="#Footnote_313_313" class="fnanchor">[313]</a>—But Hermann is so -haunted by the bogey-fear of the subjective resonance within -us being necessarily useless towards, indeed obstructive of, the -right apprehension of the object thus responded to, that he -is driven to follow the will-o’-the-wisp ideal of a pure, entirely -exclusive objectivity.</p> - -<p>(ii) Bent on this will-o’-the-wisp quest of an exclusive -objectivity, he has to define all Mysticism in terms of -Exclusive Mysticism, and then to reject such an aberration. -“Wherever the influence of God upon the soul is sought and -found solely in an interior experience of the individual soul, -in an excitation of the feelings which is supposed directly to -reveal the true nature of this experience, <i>viz.</i> in a state of -possession by God, and this without anything exterior bei<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265">[265]</a></span>ng -apprehended and held fast with a clear consciousness, without -the positive content of some mental contemplation setting -thoughts in motion and raising the spiritual level of the soul’s -life; <i>there</i> is Mystical Piety.”<a name="FNanchor_314_314" id="FNanchor_314_314"></a><a href="#Footnote_314_314" class="fnanchor">[314]</a></p> - -<p>Now it is, of course, true that false Mysticism does attempt -such an impossible feat as the thing at which Hermann is thus -aiming. But, even here, the facts and problems are again -misstated. Just now the object presented was everything, -and the apprehending subject was nothing. Here, on the -contrary, the apprehension by the subject is pressed to the -degree of requiring the soul to remain throughout reflexly -aware of its own processes.</p> - -<p>Already in 1798 Kant had, in full acceptance of the -great distinction worked out by Leibniz in the years 1701-1709, -but not published till 1765, declared: “We can be -mediately conscious of an apprehension as to which we have -no direct consciousness”; and “the field of our obscure -apprehensions,—that is, apprehensions and impressions of -which we are not directly conscious, although we can conclude -without doubt that we have them,—is immeasurable, whereas -clear apprehensions constitute but a very few points within -the complete extent of our mental life.”<a name="FNanchor_315_315" id="FNanchor_315_315"></a><a href="#Footnote_315_315" class="fnanchor">[315]</a> This great fact -psychologists can now describe with greater knowledge and -precision: yet the observations and analyses of Pierre Janet, -William James, James Ward and others, concerning Subconsciousness, -have but confirmed and deepened the Leibnizian-Kantian -apprehensions. Without much dim apprehension, -no clear perception; nothing is more certain than this.</p> - -<p>And it is certain, also, that this absence of reflex consciousness, -of perceiving that we are apprehending, applies not only -to impressions of sensible objects, or to apprehensions of -realities inferior in richness, in interiority, to our own nature, -but also, indeed especially, to apprehensions of realities -superior, in dignity and profundity of organization, to our -own constitution. When engrossed in a great landscape of -Turner, the Parthenon sculptures, a sonata of Beethoven, -Dante’s <i>Paradiso</i>; or when lost in the contemplation of the -seemingly endless spaces of the heavens, or of the ap<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266">[266]</a></span>parently -boundless times of geology; or when absorbed in the -mysterious greatness of Mind, so incommensurable with -matter, and of Personality, so truly presupposed in all these -appreciations yet so transcendent of even their collectivity—we -are as little occupied with the facts of our engrossment, -our self-oblivion, our absorption, or with the aim and use of -such immensely beneficial self-oblivion, as we are, in our -ordinary, loosely-knit states, occupied with the impression -which, nevertheless, is being produced upon our senses and -mind by some small insect or slight ray of light to which we -are not giving our attention, or which may be incapable of -impressing us sufficiently to be thus attended to and clearly -perceived.<a name="FNanchor_316_316" id="FNanchor_316_316"></a><a href="#Footnote_316_316" class="fnanchor">[316]</a> And, as in the case of these under-impressions, so -in that of those over-impressions, we can often judge, as to -their actual occurrence and fruitfulness, only from their after-effects, -although this indirect proof will, in each case, be of -quite peculiar cogency.—All this leaves ample room for that -prayer of simple quiet, so largely practised by the Saints, and -indeed for all such states of recollection which, though the -soul, on coming from them, cannot discover definite ideas or -picturings to have been contained in them, leave the soul -braced to love, work, and suffer for God and man, beyond -its previous level. Prof. William James is too deeply versed -a Psychologist not fully to understand the complete normality -of such conditions, and the entire satisfactoriness of such -tests.<a name="FNanchor_317_317" id="FNanchor_317_317"></a><a href="#Footnote_317_317" class="fnanchor">[317]</a></p> - -<p>(iii) And finally, it is indeed true that God reveals Himself to -us, at all fully, in Human History alone, and within this history, -more fully still, in the lives and experiences of the Saints of all -the stages of religion, and, in a supreme and normative manner, -in the life and teaching of Jesus Christ; that we have thus a -true immanence of the Divine in the Human; and that it is -folly to attempt the finding or the making of any shorter way -to God than that of the closest contact with His own condescensions. -Yet such a wisely Historical and fully Christian -attitude would be imperilled, not secured, by such an excessive -Christocentrism, indeed such <i>Panchristism</i>, as that of Prof. -Hermann.</p> - -<p>We shall indeed beware of all indifferentist levelling-down -of the various religions of the world. For, as Prof.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267">[267]</a></span> -Robertson Smith, who knew so well the chief great religions, -most wisely said, “To say that God speaks to all men alike, -and gives the same communication directly to all without the -use of a revealing agency, reduces religion to Pure Mysticism. -In point of fact it is not true of any man that what he believes -and knows of God, has come to him directly through the voice -of nature and conscience.” And he adds: “History has not -taught us anything in true religion to add to the New Testament. -Jesus Christ still stands as high above us as He did -above His disciples, the perfect Master, the supreme head of -the fellowship of all true religion.”<a name="FNanchor_318_318" id="FNanchor_318_318"></a><a href="#Footnote_318_318" class="fnanchor">[318]</a></p> - -<p>Yet we must equally guard against making even Our Lord -into so exclusive a centre and home of all that is divine, as to -cause Him to come into an entirely God-forsaken, completely -God-forgetting world, a world which did not and could not, -in any degree or manner whatsoever, rightly know, love, or -serve God at all; and against so conceiving the religion, -taught and practised by Him, as to deprive it of all affinity -with, or room for, such admittedly universal forces and -resultants of the human soul and the religious sense as are -dim apprehension, formless recollection, pictureless emotion, -and the sense of the Hiddenness and Transcendence of the -very God, Who is also Immanent and Self-Revealing, in various -degrees and ways, in every place and time. Indeed, these two -forces: the diffused Religiosity and more or less inchoate -religion, readily discoverable, by a generous docility, more or -less throughout the world of human souls, and the concentrated -spirituality and concrete, thoroughly characteristic Religion, -which has its culmination, after its ample preludings in the -Hebrew Prophets, in the Divine-Human figure and spirit of -Jesus Christ: are interdependent, in somewhat the way in -which vague, widely spread Subconsciousness requires, and is -required by, definite, narrowly localized Consciousness in each -human mind. Precisely because there have been and are -previous and simultaneous lesser communications of, and -correspondences with, the one “Light that enlighteneth every -man that cometh into the world”; because men can and do -believe according to various, relatively preliminary, degrees -and ways, in God and a Providence, in Sin and Contrition, -without a knowledge of the Historic Christ (although never -without the stimulation of some, often world-forgotten, histor<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268">[268]</a></span>ic -personality, and ever with some real, though unconscious -approximation to His type of life and teaching), therefore can -Christ be the very centre, and sole supreme manifestation -and measure of all this light. Not only can Christ remain -supreme, even though Moses and Elijah, Amos and Isaiah, -Jeremiah and Ezekiel; and indeed, in their own other degrees -and ways, Plato and Plotinus, Epictetus and Marcus -Aurelius, Gautama Buddha and Rabbi Akiba be all revered -as God-loved and God-loving, as, in various amounts, truly, -spiritually great: but only thus can His central importance be -fully realized.</p> - -<p>There is certainly much in Our Lord’s own attitude, as we -have already found, to demand such a view; and Clement of -Alexandria, Origen and St. Justin Martyr have emphasized it -continually. And there is no necessary Naturalism here—for -the position is entirely compatible with the profoundest -belief in the great truth that it is Grace which everywhere -produces the various degrees of God-pleasing religion to be -found scattered throughout the world. Father Tyrrell has -admirably said: “God’s salutary workings in man’s heart have -always been directed, however remotely, to the life of Grace -and Glory; of ‘the Order of mere nature,’ and its exigencies, -we have no experimental knowledge … In the present -order, Theism is but embryonic Christianity, and Christianity -is but developed Theism: ‘purely natural’ religion is what -might have been, but never was.”<a name="FNanchor_319_319" id="FNanchor_319_319"></a><a href="#Footnote_319_319" class="fnanchor">[319]</a></p> - -<p>(3) Now this must suffice as a sketch of the relations between -(Historical) Religion and Mysticism, and will have shown -why I cannot but regret that so accomplished a scholar as -Prof. Morice Jastrow should class all and every Mysticism, -whether Pure or Mixed, as so far forth a religious malady; -why I rejoice that so admirably circumspect an investigator -as Prof. C. P. Tiele should, (in the form of a strenuous -insistence upon the apprehension, indeed the ontological -action of, the Infinite, by and within the human spirit, as -the very soul and mainspring of Religion), so admirably -reinforce the fundamental importance of the Mystical apprehensions; -why I most warmly endorse Prof. Rauwenhoff’s -presentment of Mysticism as, with Intellectualism and -Moralism, one of the three psychological forms of religion, -which are each legitimate and necessary, and which each<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269">[269]</a></span> -require the check of the other two, if they are not to degenerate -each into some corruption special to the exclusive development -of that particular form; and why I cordially applaud -the unequalled analysis and description by Prof. Eucken -of the manner in which “Universal Religion” is at work, as -an often obscure yet (in the long run) most powerful leaven, -throughout all specifically human life,—Sciences, Art, Philosophy, -and Ethics, calling for, and alone satisfied with, the -answering force and articulation of “Characteristic Religion,” -each requiring and required by the other, each already containing -the other in embryo, and both ever operating together, -in proportion as Man and Religion attain to their fulness.<a name="FNanchor_320_320" id="FNanchor_320_320"></a><a href="#Footnote_320_320" class="fnanchor">[320]</a></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Hermann’s impossible simplification concerning philosophy.</i></h5> - -<p>But what shall we say as to the relations between Religion -and Philosophy? Here again Hermann is the vigorous -champion of a very prevalent and plausible simplification. -“There exists no Theory of Knowledge for such things as we -hold to be real in the strength of faith. In such religious -affirmations, the believer demolishes every bridge between -his conviction and that which Science can recognize as real.” -Indeed Hermann’s attitude is here throughout identical with -that of his master, Albrecht Ritschl: Metaphysics of any and -every kind appear everywhere, to both writers, as essentially -unnecessary, unreal, misleading, as so much inflation and -delusion of soul.—Yet this again is quite demonstrably excessive, -and can indeed be explained only as an all but inevitable -recoil from the contrary metaphysical excesses of the Hegelian -school.</p> - -<p>(1) Since the culmination of that reaction, “it has,” as -Prof. H. J. Holtzmann, himself so profoundly historical and -so free from all extreme metaphysical bent, tells us, “become -quite impossible any further to deny the metaphysical factors -which had a share in constituting such types of New Testament -doctrine as the Pauline and Joannine. Indeed, not even -if we were to reduce the New Testament to the Synoptic -Gospels and the Acts on the one hand, and to the Pastoral -Epistles, the Epistle of James and the Apocalypse on the -other hand, would the elements which spring from speculative<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270">[270]</a></span> -sources be entirely eliminated. And since, again, the Old -Testament religion, in its last stage, assimilated similarly -metaphysical materials from the East and from the West; -since Mohammedanism, in its Persian and Indian branches, did -the same with regard to the older civilized religions of Middle -and Eastern Asia; since also these latter religions received -a speculative articulation in even the most ancient times, so -that they are both Philosophy and Religion simultaneously: -we are forced to ask ourselves, whether so frequent a concomitant -of religion is satisfactorily explicable as a mere -symptom of falsification or decay.” And whilst answering -that the primary organ for religion is Feeling and Conscience, -he points out how large an amount of Speculation was, nevertheless, -required and exercised by a St. Augustine, even after -his unforgettable experiences of the sufferings attendant upon -Sin, and of their cure by Grace alone.<a name="FNanchor_321_321" id="FNanchor_321_321"></a><a href="#Footnote_321_321" class="fnanchor">[321]</a></p> - -<p>(2) The fact is that, if man cannot apprehend the objects,—the -historic and other facts,—of Religion, without certain subjective -organs, dispositions, and effects, any more than can all -these subjective capacities, without those objects, produce -religious convictions and acts, or be waked up into becoming -efficient forces: neither can man thus experience and effect -the deepest foundations and developments of his own true -personality in and through contact with the divine Spirit, -without being more or less stimulated into some kind of, at -least rudimentary, Philosophy as to these his profoundest -experiences of reality, and as to their rights and duties -towards the rest of what he is and knows.</p> - -<p>(3) Indeed his very Religion is already, in itself, the profoundest -Metaphysical Affirmation. As the deeply historical-minded -Prof. Tiele admits: “Every man in his sound senses, -who does not lead the life of a half-dormant animal, philosophizes -in his own way”; and “religious doctrine rests on a -metaphysical foundation; unless convinced of the reality of -a supersensual world, it builds upon sand.”<a name="FNanchor_322_322" id="FNanchor_322_322"></a><a href="#Footnote_322_322" class="fnanchor">[322]</a> Or as Prof. -Eucken, the most eloquent champion of this central characteristic -of all vital religion, exclaims: “If we never, as a matter -of fact, get beyond merely subjective psychological processes, -and we can nowhere trace within us the action of cosmic -forces; if we in no case experience through them an enlargement, -elevation, and transformation of our nature: then not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271">[271]</a></span> -all the endeavours of its well-meaning friends can preserve -religion from sinking to the level of a mere illusion. Without a -universal and real principle, without hyper-empirical processes, -there can be no permanence for religion.”<a name="FNanchor_323_323" id="FNanchor_323_323"></a><a href="#Footnote_323_323" class="fnanchor">[323]</a></p> - -<p>(4) Some kind of philosophy, then, will inevitably accompany, -follow, and stimulate religion, were it only as the, -necessarily ever inadequate, attempt at giving a fitting expression -to the essentially metaphysical character of belief -in a super-sensible world, in God, in man’s spiritual capacities -and in God’s redemption of man. Not because the patient -analysis of the completer human personalities, (as these are -to be found throughout the length and breadth of history), -requires the elimination of a wholesome Mysticism and a sober -Metaphysic from among the elements and effects of the fullest -Manhood and Religion; but because of the ever serious difficulties -and the liability to grave abuses attendant upon both -these forces, the inevitably excessive reactions against these -abuses, and the recurrent necessity of remodelling much of -the theory and practice of both, in accordance with the growth -of our knowledge of the human mind, (a necessity which, at -first sight, seems to stultify all the hyper-empirical claims of -both these forces): only because of this have many men of -sense and goodness come to speak as though religion, even -at its fullest, could and should get on without either, contenting -itself to be a somewhat sentimental, Immanental -Ethics.</p> - -<p>(5) Yet, against such misgivings, perhaps the most immediately -impressive counter-argument is the procession, so largely -made up of men and of movements not usually reckoned as -exclusively or directly religious, whose very greatness,—one -which humanity will not let die,—is closely interwoven with -Mystical and Metaphysical affirmations. There are, among -philosophers, a Spinoza and a Leibniz, a Fichte, Hegel, -Schopenhauer, a Trendelenburg and a Lotze, with the later -stages of a John Mill, a Littré, and a Herbert Spencer; among -poets, a Pindar and Aeschylus, a Lucretius and Vergil, a -Lessing and a Goethe, a Wordsworth and a Browning; among -historians, a Thucydides and a Tacitus, a St. Simon and de -Tocqueville, a Carlyle, a Jacob Grimm, a Droysen and a -Ranke; among scientists, a Copernicus and a Kepler, a -Newton, a Lyell, indeed, largely still, also a Darwin; an<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272">[272]</a></span>d -among men of action, a Moltke and a Gordon, a Burke and -a von Stein. Shear any of these men of their Mystical and -Metaphysical elements, and you will have shorn Samson of -his locks.</p> - -<p>And if we can frame a contrary list of men of force and -distinction, who have represented an un- or even an anti-Mystical -and anti-Metaphysical type: Caesar and Hannibal, -Napoleon and Bismarck, Voltaire and Laplace, Hume and -Bentham, Huxley and Mommsen, we must ever remember -the complex truth as to the Polarity of Life,—the strict necessity -of the movement towards an intensely close contact with -empirical reality, as well as of the movement back to recollection; -the frequent sickliness of the recollective movement, as -found in the average practice of life, which cannot but produce -a reaction and contrary excess; and hence the legitimacy of -what this second type has got of positiveness and of corrective -criticism. Yet here too the greatness will consist directly in -what these men are and have, not in what they are not; and -wherever this their brutal-seeming sense of the apparent -brutalities of life is combined with an apprehension of a higher -world and of a deeper reality, <i>there</i> something fuller and more -true has been attained than is reached by such strong but -incomplete humanity alone.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Religion and Morality, their kinship and difference.</i></h5> - -<p>And, finally, as to Religion and Morality, we should note -how that the men, who deny all essential connection between -Religion and Mysticism and Religion and Philosophy, ever, -when they do retain Religion at all, tend to identify it with -Morality, if not as to the motives, yet as to the contents of -the two forces. And yet it is not difficult to show that, if -the relation between Religion and Morality is closer than that -between Religion and Philosophy, though not as intimate as is -that between Historical-Institutional Religion and Mysticism: -Religion and Morality are nevertheless not identical.</p> - -<p>(1) This non-identity is indicated by the broad historical fact -that, though the development of Religion tells upon that of -Morality, and <i>vice versa</i>: yet that the rate of development of -these two forces is practically never the same, even in one -and the same soul, still less in any one country or race. In -each case we get various inequalities between the two developments, -which would be impossible, were the two forces different -only in name.</p> - -<p>We reach again the same conclusion, if we note, what Dr.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273">[273]</a></span> -Edward Caird has so well pointed out, “the imperfection of -the subjective religion of the prophets and psalmists of -Israel,”—who nevertheless already possessed a very advanced -type of profoundly ethical religion,—“shown by its inability -to overcome the legal and ceremonial system of worship to -which it was opposed”; as, “in like manner, Protestantism -… has never been able decisively to conquer the system of -Rome.”<a name="FNanchor_324_324" id="FNanchor_324_324"></a><a href="#Footnote_324_324" class="fnanchor">[324]</a> For this, as indeed the failure of Buddhism to -absorb and supersede Hindooism, evidently implies that -Religion cannot find its full development and equilibrium in -an exclusive concentration upon Morality Proper, as alone -essential; and hence that complete Religion embraces other -things besides Morality.</p> - -<p>Once more we find non-identity between the very Ethics -directly postulated by Religion at its deepest, and the Ethics -immediately required by the Family, Society, the State, Art, -Science, and Philosophy. As Prof. Troeltsch admirably puts -it, “the special characteristic of our modern consciousness -resides in the insistence both upon the Religious, the That-world -Ends, <i>and</i> upon the Cultural, This-World Ends, -which latter are taken as Ends-in-themselves: it is precisely -in this combination that this consciousness finds its -richness, power, and freedom, but also its painful interior -tension and its difficult problems.” “As in Christian Ethics -we must recognize the predominance of an Objective Religious -End,—for here certain relations of the soul to God are the -chief commandments and the supreme good,—so in the -Cultural Ends we should frankly recognize objective Moral -Ends of an Immanental kind.” And in seeking after the -right relations between the two, we shall have to conclude -that “Ethics, for us, are not, at first, a unity but a multiplicity: -man grows up amongst a number of moral ends, the unification -of which is his life’s task and problem, and not its starting-point.” -And this multiplicity “is” more precisely “a polarity -in human nature, for it contains two poles—that of Religious -and that of Humane Ethics, neither of which can be ignored -without moral damage, but which, nevertheless, cannot be -brought under a common formula.” “We can but keep a -sufficient space open for the action of both forms, so that from -their interaction there may ever result, with the least possible -difficulty, the deepening of the Humane Ends by the Chr<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274">[274]</a></span>istian -Ethics, and the humanizing of the Christian End by the -Humane Ethics, so that life may become a service of God -within the Cultural Ends, and that the service of God may -transfigure the world.”<a name="FNanchor_325_325" id="FNanchor_325_325"></a><a href="#Footnote_325_325" class="fnanchor">[325]</a></p> - -<p>We can perceive the difference between the two forces most -clearly in Our Lord’s life and teaching—say, the Sermon on -the Mount; in the intolerableness of every exegesis which -attempts to reduce the ultimate meaning and worth of this -world-renewing religious document to what it has of literal -applicability in the field of morality proper. Schopenhauer -expressed a profound intuition in the words: “It would be -a most unworthy manner of speech to declare the sublime -Founder of the Christian Religion, whose life is proposed to -us as the model of all virtue, to have been the most reasonable -of men, and that his maxims contained but the best instruction -towards an entirely reasonable life.”<a name="FNanchor_326_326" id="FNanchor_326_326"></a><a href="#Footnote_326_326" class="fnanchor">[326]</a></p> - -<p>(2) The fact is that Religion ever insists, even where it but -seems to be teaching certain moral rules and motives as -appropriate to this visible world of ours, upon presenting -them in the setting of a fuller, deeper world than that immediately -required as the field of action and as the justification -of ordinary morality. Thus whilst, in Morality Proper, the -concepts of Responsibility, Prudence, Merit, Reward, Irretrievableness, -are necessarily primary; in Religious Ethics the -ideas of Trust, Grace, Heroism, Love, Free Pardon, Spiritual -Renovation are, as necessarily, supreme. And hence it is not -accidental, although of course not necessary, that we often -find men with a keen religious sense but with a defective -moral practice or even conception, and men with a strong -moral sense and a want of religious perception; that Mystics, -with their keen sense for one element of religion, so often -seem, and sometimes are, careless of morality proper; and -that, in such recent cases (deeply instructive in their very -aberrations) as that of Nietzsche, we get a fierce anti-Moralism -combined with a thirst for a higher and deeper world than -this visible one, which not all its fantastic form, nor even all -Nietzsche’s later rant against concrete religion, can prevent -from being essentially religious.<a name="FNanchor_327_327" id="FNanchor_327_327"></a><a href="#Footnote_327_327" class="fnanchor">[327]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275">[275]</a></span></p> - -<p>(3) We have then, here, the deepest instance of the law and -necessity which we have, so often, found at the shallower -levels of the spirit’s life. For here, once more, there is one -apprehension, force, life,—This-world Morality,—which requires -penetration and development, in nowise destruction, by -another, a deeper power, That-world Ethics and Religion. -Let the one weaken or blunt the edge and impact of the -other, and it has, at the same time, weakened itself. For here -again we have, not a Thing which simply exists, by persistence -in its dull unpenetratingness and dead impenetrability, but a -Life, growing by the incorporation and organization, within -its ampler range, of lesser lives, each with its own legitimate -autonomy.</p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">Mysticism and the Limits of Human Knowledge -and Experience.</span></h4> - -<p>But have not even the most sober-minded of the Partial -Mystics greatly exceeded the limits of human knowledge, -more or less continuously, throughout their conclusions? Is -Kant completely in the wrong? And are not the Positivists -right in restricting all certain cognition to the experiences of -the senses and to the Mathematico-Physical Sciences built -upon those experiences? And, again, is there such a thing -at all as specifically Mystical Experience or Knowledge? -And, if so, what is its worth?—I must keep the elaboration -of the (ultimately connected) question, as to the nature of -the realities experienced or known—as to the human spirit -and the Divine Spirit, and their inter-relations, hence as to -Pantheism and Personality—for the next chapter, and can -here but prepare the ground for it, by the elucidation of certain -important points in general Epistemology, and of the more -obvious characteristics of Mystical apprehension.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Positivist Epistemology an error.</i></h5> - -<p>As regards general Epistemology, we may well take up the -following positions.</p> - -<p>(1) We cannot but reject, with Prof. Volkelt, as a mere -vulgar error, the Positivist limitation of trans-subjectively -valid knowledge to direct sense-perception and to the laws of -the so-called Empirical Sciences. For, as he shows conclusively, -the only fact which is absolutely indubitable, is that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276">[276]</a></span> -of the bare occurrence of our (possibly utterly misleading) -sensations and impressions. Some of these are, it is true, -accompanied by a certain pressure upon our minds to credit -them with trans-subjective validity; and the fact of this (possibly -quite misleading) pressure is itself part of our undeniable -experience. Yet we can, if we will, treat this pressure also as -no more than a meaningless occurrence, and not as evidencing -the trans-subjective reality which it seems to indicate. No -man, it is true, has ever succeeded in consistently carrying -out such a refusal of assent,—since no scepticism is so thorough -but that it derives its very power, against the trans-subjective -validity of some of the impressions furnished with trans-subjective -pressure, from an utterly inconsistent acceptance, as -trans-subjectively valid, of other impressions furnished with a -precisely similar trans-subjective intimation. Yet the fact -remains that, in all such cases of trans-subjective pressure, the -mind has “an immediate experience of which the content is -precisely this, that we are justified in proceeding with these -concepts into what is absolutely beyond the possibility of being -experienced by us.” “Positivistic Cognition,” to which no -man, Positivist included, can systematically restrict himself, -“abides absolutely within the immediately experienced. -Logical Cognition,” which every man practises surreptitiously -if not avowedly, “exceeds experience at every step, and -conceptually determines what is absolutely incapable of being -experienced, yet the justification for this kind of cognition is, -here also, an immediately experienced certitude.”<a name="FNanchor_328_328" id="FNanchor_328_328"></a><a href="#Footnote_328_328" class="fnanchor">[328]</a></p> - -<p>We have, “then, immediately experienced presentations -which of themselves already constitute a knowledge,—our first -knowledge, and the only one possessed of absolute indubitableness.” -And some of these presentations “are accompanied by -a kind of immediate certainty or revelation that, in some way, -they reach right into the Thing-in-Itself, that they directly -express something objectively valid, present in that Thing-in-Itself”; -and “this pressure ever involves, should the -contradictory of what it enunciates be admitted as objectively -existent, the self-destruction of objective reality.”—“And this -pressure can, in any one case, be resisted by the mind; an -act of endorsement, of a kind of faith, is necessary on the -part of the mind: for these presentations, furnished with such -pressure, do not transform themselves into the Things-in-Themselves<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277">[277]</a></span> -directly,—we do not come to see objective reality -simply face to face.”<a name="FNanchor_329_329" id="FNanchor_329_329"></a><a href="#Footnote_329_329" class="fnanchor">[329]</a> And we find thus that “<i>in principle</i> the -entire range of reality, right down to its last depths, lies open -to cognition, proceeding according to the principle of the -necessities of thought. For he who recognizes this principle, -thereby admits that the necessities of thought have trans-subjective -significance, so that, if any affirmation concerning -the ultimate reasons and depths of Reality can be shown to -be necessary in thought, this affirmation possesses as rightful -a claim to trans-subjective validity, as any determination, -necessary in thought, which concern only such parts of the -Thing-in-Itself as are the nearest neighbours to our sense-impressions -concerning it. Everywhere our principle leaves -us only the question whether thought, as a matter of fact, does -or does not react, under the given problems, with the said -logical constraint and pressure.”<a name="FNanchor_330_330" id="FNanchor_330_330"></a><a href="#Footnote_330_330" class="fnanchor">[330]</a></p> - -<p>(2) We can next insist upon how we have thus already -found that the acquisition of even so rudimentary an outline -of Reality, as to be ever in part presupposed in the attacks -of the most radical sceptics, necessarily involves a certain -emotive disposition and volitional action. And, over and -above this partially withholdable assent, such quite elementary -thinking will also ever require the concomitant energizing -of the picturing faculty. And again, the more interior and -spiritual are this thinking’s subject-matters, the more will it -be permeated by, and be inseparable from, deep feeling. It -is then all man’s faculties conjoined, it is the whole man, who -normally thus gives, without reflecting on it, his all, to gain -even this elementary nucleus of certainty as to Reality. -“Even receptivity,” as Prof. Ward well says, “is activity”; for -even where non-voluntary, it is never indifferent. “Not mere -receptivity, but conative or selective activity, is the essence -of subjective reality.” Or, with Prof. Volkelt: “Purely -isolated thought,”—which, in actual life ever more or less of -a fiction, is not rarely set up by individuals as an ideal,—“is, -however intensified and interiorized, something ever only -formal, something, in the final resort, insignificant and -shadowy.”—And, concurrently with the recognition of this -fact, man will come to find that “the ultimate Substance or -Power of and in the world,”—that objective reality which -is the essential counterpart to his own subjective reality,—“is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278">[278]</a></span> -something possessed of a true, deep content and of a positive -aim, and alive according to the analogy of a willing individual. -The world would thus be a Logical Process only in the sense -that this concrete fundamental Power is bound by the ideal -necessity of its own nature.”<a name="FNanchor_331_331" id="FNanchor_331_331"></a><a href="#Footnote_331_331" class="fnanchor">[331]</a></p> - -<p>(3) And again, I would note with Volkelt how Kant, owing -to his notoriously intense natural tendency to universal -Dualism, never admits, even as a point for preliminary -settlement, the possibility that our subjective conceptions -of Objective Reality may have some true relation to that -Reality. His professed ignorance as to the nature of that -Reality changes instantaneously, quite unbeknown to himself, -into an absolutely unvarying, negative knowledge concerning -that Reality,—he simply <i>knows</i> that it is <i>utterly heterogeneous</i> -to our conception of it. Thus he finds the view that “God -has implanted into the human mind certain categories and -concepts of a kind spontaneously to harmonize with things,” -to be “the most preposterous solution that we could possibly -choose.”<a name="FNanchor_332_332" id="FNanchor_332_332"></a><a href="#Footnote_332_332" class="fnanchor">[332]</a> Thus the epistemological difference between Presentation -and Thing-in-Itself becomes a metaphysical exclusion -of each by the other. And yet we know of no fact, -whether of experience or of thought, to prevent something -which is <i>my</i> presentation existing also, in so far as it is the -content of that presentation, outside of this presentment. -Indeed Psychology and Epistemology have, driven by every -reason and stopped by none, more and more denied and -refuted this excessive, indeed gratuitous, Dualism.</p> - -<p>As Prof. Henry Jones well puts it: “The hypothesis -that knowledge consists of two elements which are so -radically different as to be capable of description only by -defining each negatively in terms of the other, the pure -manifold or differences of sense, and a purely universal or -relative thought,” breaks down under the fact that “pure -thought and the manifold of sense pass into each other, the -one proving meaningless and the other helpless in its -isolation.” These elements “are only aspects of one fact, -co-relates mutually penetrating each other, distinguishable -in thought, but not separable as existences.” Hence we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279">[279]</a></span> must -not “make logical remnants do the work of an intelligence -which is never purely formal, upon a material which is -nowhere a pure manifold”: for “the difference between -the primary data of thought on the one hand, and the -highest kinds of systematized knowledge on the other, is -no difference … between a mere particular and a mere -universal, or a mere content and a mere form; but it is a -difference in comprehensiveness of articulation.” However -primary may be the distinction of subjective and objective, -“we are not entitled to forget the unity of the reality in which -the distinction takes place.” If we begin with the purely -subjective, we must doubtless end there; but then, in spite -of certain, never self-consistent, philosophical hypotheses, “the -purely subjective is as completely beyond our reach as the -purely objective.”<a name="FNanchor_333_333" id="FNanchor_333_333"></a><a href="#Footnote_333_333" class="fnanchor">[333]</a></p> - -<p>Prof. Ward indeed pushes the matter, I think rightly, -even a step further. He points out how readily, owing to -the ambiguous term “consciousness,” “we confound experience -with knowledge”; but holds that experience is the wider term. -“Knowledge must fall within experience, and experience -extend beyond knowledge. Thus I am not left to infer my -own being from my knowing.… Objective reality is immediately -‘given,’ or immediately ‘there,’ not inferred.” But -the subjective reality is not immediately given, immediately -there. “There is no such parallelism between the two.… -The subjective factor in experience is not <i>datum</i> but <i>recipiens</i>: -it is not ‘there’ but ‘here’; a ‘here’ relative to that -‘there.’”<a name="FNanchor_334_334" id="FNanchor_334_334"></a><a href="#Footnote_334_334" class="fnanchor">[334]</a> Nothing of this, I think, really conflicts with the -positions we have adopted from Volkelt, since “experience” -is evidently used here in a sense inclusive of the presentations, -the trans-subjective pressure and the endorsement of the -latter’s estimations,—the three elements which, according also -to Volkelt, form an organism which even the most daring -subjectivism can never consistently reject. At most, the -term “experience” is more extended in Prof. Ward, since it -includes all three elements, than in Prof. Volkelt, who restricts -it to the two first.</p> - -<p>(4) And further, we must take care to find room for -the only unforced explanation of the wondrous fact that -“although,” as Dr. Volkelt strikingly says, “the various<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280">[280]</a></span> -schools of philosophy “—this is largely true of those of theology -also,—are “in part essentially determined by historical -currents, forces which follow other standards than those of -logical necessity”: yet “these points of view and modes of -thought, thus determined by” apparently non-logical “history, -subserve nevertheless logical necessity, indeed represent its” -slow, intermittent, yet real “progressive realization.” The -explanation is that “the forces of history are, unbeknown to -themselves, planned, in their depths, for agreement with the -necessities and ends of thought and of truth.” “And thus -the different spheres” and levels “of spiritual life and endeavour -appear as originally intended for each other, so that each -sphere, whilst consciously striving only after its own particular -laws and standards, in reality furthers the objects of the rest.” -For “only the operative presence of such an original, teleological -inter-relation can explain how historic forces, by their -influence upon, and determination of, philosophical thinking, -can, instead of staining and spoiling it by the introduction of -religious, artistic, political, and other motives, actually advance -it most essentially.”<a name="FNanchor_335_335" id="FNanchor_335_335"></a><a href="#Footnote_335_335" class="fnanchor">[335]</a>—Here then we get a still further enlargement -of the already wide range of interaction, within the -human mind, between forces which, at first sight, appear -simply external to, indeed destructive of, each other; and a -corresponding increase in the indications of the immense -breadth, depth, and closeness of inter-penetration characterizing -the operative ground-plan, the pre-existing Harmony and -Teleology of the fundamental forces of Reality. Thus once -more man’s spirit appears as possessed of a large interiority; -and as met, supported and penetrated, by a Spirit stupendously -rich in spiritual energy.</p> - -<p>(5) And finally, let us never forget that “the only experience -immediately accessible to us” men, “is our own; this, -in spite of its complexity, is the first we know.”<a name="FNanchor_336_336" id="FNanchor_336_336"></a><a href="#Footnote_336_336" class="fnanchor">[336]</a> And this -means that we have direct experience and anything like -adequate knowledge, (because knowledge from within,) not -of things, but of mind and will, of spiritual life struggling -within an animal life; and that in face, say, of plant-life, and -still more of a pebble or of a star, we have a difficulty as to -an at all appropriate and penetrative apprehension, which, if -opposite to, is also in a sense greater than, the difficulty<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281">[281]</a></span> -inherent to our apprehension of God Himself. For towards -this latter apprehension we have got the convergent testimony -of certain great, never quite obliterable facts without us and -within ourselves.</p> - -<p>There is the upward trend, the ever-increased complexity -of organization, the growing depth and interiority in the -animate world,—Plant-Life itself being already, very probably, -possessed of a vague consciousness, and Man, at the -other end of the scale, summing up the tendency of the whole -series in a deep self-consciousness which, at the same time, -makes him alone keenly aware of the great difference, in the -midst of the true kinship, between himself and the humbler -members of that one world. For Natural Selection can but -describe the results and explain part of the method of this -upward trend, but cannot penetrate to its ultimate cause -and end.</p> - -<p>There is, again, the great, deep fact of the mutually necessary, -mutually stimulating presence and interaction, within -our own mental and spiritual life, of sense-impressions, -imaginative picturings, rational categories, emotional activities, -and volitional acts; and, again, of subject and object; -and, once more, of general, philosophic Thought and the -contingencies of History. For the immanental inter-adaptation -and Teleology, that mysteriously link together all these, -profoundly disparate-seeming, realms and forces is far too -deep-down, it too much surprises, and exacts too much of us, -it too much reveals itself, precisely at the end of much labour -of our own and in our truest and most balanced moods, as -the mostly unarticulated presupposition and explanation of -both the great cost and the rich fruitfulness of every approximately -complete actuation of all our faculties, each with and -in the others, and in and with their appropriate objects, to be -permanently ruled out of court as mere sentimentalism or -baseless apologetic.</p> - -<p>And there is the deepest fact of all, the one which precisely -constitutes the specific characteristic of all true humanity, the -sense of mental oppression, of intolerable imprisonment inflicted -by the very idea of the merely contingent, the simply -phenomenal and Finite, and the accompanying noble restlessness -and ready dwarfing of all man’s best achievements -by the agent’s own Ideal of Perfection. For this latter sense -is, precisely in the greater souls, so spontaneous and so keen, -so immensely operative in never leaving our, otherwise<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282">[282]</a></span> -indolent and readily self-delusive, self-complacent race fully -and long satisfied with anything that passes entirely away, or -that is admittedly merely a subjective fancy, even though -this fancy be shared by every member of the human race; -and this sense operates so explosively within Sceptics as well -as Dogmatists, within would-be Agnostic Scientists as well -as in the most Intellectualist Theologians; it so humbles, -startles, and alone so braces, sweetens, widens, indeed constitutes -our humanity: as to be unforcedly explicable only by -admitting that man’s spirit’s experience is not shut up within -man’s own clear analysis or picturing of it; that it is indefinitely -wider, and somehow, in its deepest reaches, is directly -touched, affected, in part determined, by the Infinite Spirit -Itself. “Man never knows how anthropomorphic he is,” says -Goethe. Yes, but it was a man, Goethe, it is at bottom all -men, in proportion as they are fully, sensitively such, who -have somehow discovered this truth; who suffer from -its continuous evidences, as spontaneously as from the -toothache or from insomnia; and whose deepest moments -give them a vivid sense of how immensely the Spirit, thus -directly experienced by their spirit, transcends, and yet also -is required by and is immanent in, their keen sense of the -Finitude and Contingency present throughout the world of -sense-perception and of clear intellectual formulation.</p> - -<p>(6) With Plato and Plotinus, Clement of Alexandria and -St. Augustine, St. Bernard, Cardinal Nicolas of Coes and -Leibniz in the past; with Cardinal Newman, Professors -Maurice Blondel and Henri Bergson, Siegwart, Eucken, -Troeltsch and Tiele, Igino Petrone and Edward Caird, in -the present; with the explicit assent of practically all the -great Mystics of all ages and countries, and the implicit -instinct, and at least partial, practical admission, of all sane -and developed human souls; we will then have to postulate -here, not merely an intellectual reasoning upon finite data, -which would somehow result in so operative a sense of the -Infinite; nor even simply a mental category of Infinitude -which, evoked in man by and together with the apprehension -of things finite, would, somehow, have so massive, so explosive -an effect against our finding satisfaction in the other categories, -categories which, after all, would not be more subjective, than -itself: but the ontological presence of, and the operative penetration -by the Infinite Spirit, within the human spirit. This -Spirit’s presence would produce, on occasion of man’s appre<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283">[283]</a></span>hension -or volition of things contingent and finite, the keen -sense of disappointment, of contrast with the Simultaneous, -Abiding, and Infinite.—And let the reader note that this is -not Ontologism, for we here neither deduce our other ideas -from the idea of God, nor do we argue from ideas and their -clarity, but from living forces and their operativeness.</p> - -<p>We thus get man’s spirit placed within a world of varying -degrees of depth and interiority, the different levels and kinds -of which are necessary, as so many materials, stimulants, -obstacles, and objects, for the development of that spirit’s -various capacities, which themselves again interact the one -upon the other, and react upon and within that world. For if -man’s experience of God is not a mere discursively reasoned -conclusion from the data of sense, yet man’s spirit experiences -the Divine Spirit and the spirits of his fellow-men on occasion -of, and as a kind of contrast, background, and support to, the -actuation of his senses, imagination, reason, feeling, and -volition, and, at least at first and in the long run, not -otherwise.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>No distinct faculty of Mystical apprehension.</i></h5> - -<p>Is there, then, strictly speaking, such a thing as a specifically -distinct, self-sufficing, purely Mystical mode of apprehending -Reality? I take it, <i>distinctly not</i>; and that all the -errors of the Exclusive Mystic proceed precisely from the -contention that Mysticism does constitute such an entirely -separate, completely self-supported kind of human experience.—This -denial does not, of course, mean that soul does not -differ quite indefinitely from soul, in the amount and kind of -the recollective, intuitive, deeply emotive element possessed -and exercised by it concurrently or alternately with other -elements,—the sense of the Infinite within and without the -Finite springing up in the soul on occasion of its contact -with the Contingent; nor, again, that these more or less congenital -differences and vocations amongst souls cannot and -are not still further developed by grace and heroism into -types of religious apprehension and life, so strikingly divergent, -as, at first sight, to seem hardly even supplementary the -one to the other. But it means that, in even the most purely -contingent-seeming soul, and in its apparently but Institutional -and Historical assents and acts, there ever is, there -never can fail to be, <i>some</i>, however implicit, however slight, -however intermittent, sense and experience of the Infinite, -evidenced by at least some dissatisfaction with the Finite,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284">[284]</a></span> -except as this Finitude is an occasion for growth in, and a -part-expression of, that Infinite, our true home. And, again, -it means, that even the most exclusively mystical-seeming -soul ever depends, for the fulness and healthiness of even the -most purely mystical of its acts and states, as really upon -its past and present contacts with the Contingent, Temporal, -and Spacial, and with social facts and elements, as upon its -movement of concentration, and the sense and experience, -evoked on occasion of those contacts or of their memories, of -the Infinite within and around those finitudes and itself.</p> - -<p>Only thus does Mysticism attain to its true, full dignity, -which consists precisely in being, not everything in any one -soul, but something in every soul of man; and in presenting, -at its fullest, the amplest development, among certain -special natures with the help of certain special graces and -heroisms, of what, in some degree and form, is present in -every truly human soul, and in such a soul’s every, at all genuine -and complete, grace-stimulated religious act and state. And -only thus does it, as Partial Mysticism, retain all the strength -and escape the weaknesses and dangers of would-be Pure -Mysticism, as regards the mode and character of Religious -Experience, Knowledge, and Life.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>The first four pairs of weaknesses and strengths special to -the Mystics.</i></h5> - -<p>I take the Mystic’s weaknesses and strengths to go together -in pairs, and that there are seven such pairs. Only the first -four shall be considered here; the fifth and the last two -couples are reserved respectively for the following, and for the -last section, of this chapter.</p> - -<p>(1) The Mystic finds his joy in the recollective movement -and moments of the soul; and hence ever tends, <i>qua</i> Mystic, -to ignore and neglect, or to over-minimize, the absolutely -necessary contact of the mind and will with the things of -sense. He will often write as though, could he but completely -shut off his mind from all sense-perceptions,—even of grand -scenery, or noble works of art, or scenes of human devotedness, -suffering, and peace,—it would be proportionately fuller -of God.—Yet this drift is ever more or less contradicted by -his practice, often at the very moment of such argument: for -no religious writers are more prolific in vivid imagery derived -from noble sensible objects and scenes than are the Mystics,—whose -characteristic mood is an intuition, a resting in a -kind of vision of things invisible.—And this contradiction i<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285">[285]</a></span>s -satisfactory, since it is quite certain that if the mind, heart, -and will could be completely absorbed, (from the first or for -any length of time), in the flight from the sensible, it would -become as dangerously empty and languid concerning things -invisible themselves as, with nothing but an outgoing -occupation with the sensible, it would become distracted -and feverish. It is this aversion from Outgoing and from -the world of sense, of the contemporaneous contingencies -environing the soul, that gives to Mysticism, as such, its -shadowy character, its floating above, rather than penetrating -into, reality,—in contradiction, where this tendency becomes -too exclusive, to the Incarnational philosophy and practice -of Christianity, and indeed of every complete and sound -psychology.</p> - -<p>And yet the Incoming, what the deep religious thinker -Kierkegaard has so profoundly analyzed in his doctrine of -“Repetition,”<a name="FNanchor_337_337" id="FNanchor_337_337"></a><a href="#Footnote_337_337" class="fnanchor">[337]</a>—recollection and peaceful browsing among -the materials brought in by the soul’s Outgoing,—is most -essential. Indeed it is the more difficult, and, though never -alone sufficient, yet ever the more centrally religious, of the -two movements necessary for the acquisition of spiritual -experience and life.</p> - -<p>(2) Again, the Mystic finds his full delight in all that -approximates most nearly to Simultaneity, and Eternity; and -consequently turns away, <i>qua</i> Mystic, from the Successive and -Temporal presented by History.—Yet here also there are two -movements, both necessary for man. He will, by the one, -once more in fullest sympathy with the grand Christian love -of lowliness, strive hard to get into close, and ever closer, -touch with the successivenesses of History, especially those of -Our Lord’s earthly life and of His closest followers. Without -this touch he will become empty, inflated, as St. Teresa -found to be the case with herself, when following the false -principle of deliberate and systematic abstraction from -Christ’s temporal words and acts: for man’s soul, though it -does not energize in mere Clock-Time, cannot grow if we -attempt to eliminate Duration, that interpenetrative, overlapping -kind of Succession, which is already, as it were, -halfway to the Simultaneity of God. It is this aversion from -Clock-Time Succession and even from Duration which gives to -Mysticism, as such, its remarkable preference for Spacial<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286">[286]</a></span> -images, and its strong bent towards concepts of a Static and -Determinist type, profoundly antagonistic though these are -to the Dynamic and Libertarian character which ever marks -the occasions and conditions for the acquiring of religious -experience.</p> - -<p>And yet, here again, the Mystic is clinging, even one-sidedly, -to the more central, more specifically religious, of -the two movements. For it is certain that God is indeed -Simultaneous and Eternal; that it is right thus to try and -apprehend, what appears to us stretched out successively in -time, as simultaneously present in the one great Now of God; -and that our deepest experiences testify to History itself -being ever more than mere process, and to have within it -a certain contribution from, a certain approximation to and -expression of, Eternity.</p> - -<p>(3) And again, the Mystic finds his joy in the sense of a Pure -Reception of the Purely Objective; that God should do all -and should receive the credit of all, is here a primary -requirement.—And yet all penetrating Psychology, Epistemology, -and Ethics find this very receptivity, however seemingly -only such, to be, where healthy and fruitful, ever an action, a -conation of the soul,—an energizing and volition which, as we -have seen, are present in its very cognition of anything -affirmed by it as trans-subjective, from a grain of sand up to -the great God Himself. This antipathy to even a relative, -God-willed independence and power of self-excitation, gives -Mysticism, as such, its constant bent towards Quietism; and -hence, with regard to the means and nature of knowledge, its -tendency to speak of such a purely spiritual effect as Grace, -and such purely spiritual beings as the Soul and God, as -though they were literally sensible objects sensibly impressing -themselves upon the Mystic’s purely passive senses. This -tendency reinforces the Mystic’s thirst for pictorial, simultaneous -presentation and intuition of the verities apprehended -by him, but is in curious contradiction to his even excessive -conceptions concerning the utter separateness and difference -from all things material of all such spiritual realities.—And -yet, here too, it is doubtless deeply important ever to remember, -and to act in accordance with, the great truth that -God Himself is apprehended by us only if there be action -of our own, and that, from elementary moral dispositions -right up to consummate sanctity, the whole man has ever to -act and will more and more manysidedly, fully, and -persistently.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287">[287]</a></span></p> - -<p>But the corresponding, indeed the anterior and more -centrally religious, truth here is, that all this range of our -activity could never begin, and, if it could, would lose itself <i>in -vacuo</i>, unless there already were Reality around it and within -it, as the stimulus and object for all this energizing,—a Reality -which, as Prof. Ward has told us with respect to Epistemology, -must, for a certain dim but most true experience -of ours, be simply given, not sought and found. And indeed -the operations of Grace are ever more or less penetrating and -soliciting, though nowhere forcing, the free assent of the -natural soul: we should be unable to seek God unless He -had already found us and had thus, deep down within ourselves, -caused us to seek and find Him. And hence thus again -the most indispensable, the truest form of experience underlies -reasoning, and is a kind of not directly analyzable, but -indirectly most operative, intuition or instinct of the soul.</p> - -<p>(4) And yet the Mystic, in one of his moods (the corresponding, -contradictory mood of a Pantheistic identification of his -true self with God shall be considered in our next chapter), finds -his joy in so exalting the difference of nature between himself -and God, and the incomprehensibility of God for every finite -intelligence, as,—were we to press his words,—to cut away -all ground for any experience or knowledge sufficient to -justify him in even a guess as to what God is like or is not -like, and for any attempt at intercourse with, and at becoming -like unto, One who is so utterly unlike himself.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Criticism of the fourth pair, mystical “Agnosticism.”</i></h5> - -<p>Now this acutely paradoxical position, of an entire certainty -as to God’s complete difference from ourselves, has been -maintained and articulated, with a consistency and vividness -beyond that of any Mystic known to me, by that most -stimulating, profound, tragically non-mystical, religious ascetic -and thinker, the Lutheran Dane, Sören Kierkegaard (1813-1855). -His early friend, but philosophical opponent, Prof. -Höffding, describes him as insisting that “the suffering -incident to the religious life is necessarily involved in the -very nature of the religious relation. For the relation of -the soul to God is a relation to a Being utterly different -from man, a Being which cannot confront man as his Superlative -and Ideal, and which nevertheless is to rule within him.” -“What, wonder, then,” as Kierkegaard says, “if the Jew held -that the vision of God meant death, and if the Heathe<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288">[288]</a></span>n -believed that to enter upon relations with God was the -beginning of insanity?” For the man who lives for God -“is a fish out of water.”<a name="FNanchor_338_338" id="FNanchor_338_338"></a><a href="#Footnote_338_338" class="fnanchor">[338]</a>—We have here what, if an error, is -yet possible only to profoundly religious souls; indeed it -would be easy to point out very similar passages in St. -Catherine and St. John of the Cross. Yet Höffding is clearly -in the right in maintaining that “Qualitative or Absolute -difference abolishes all possibility of any positive relation.… -If religious zeal, in its eagerness to push the Object of religion -to the highest height, establishes a yawning abyss between -this Object and the life whose ideal It is still to remain,—such -zeal contradicts itself. For a God who is not Ideal and -Exemplar, is no God.”<a name="FNanchor_339_339" id="FNanchor_339_339"></a><a href="#Footnote_339_339" class="fnanchor">[339]</a></p> - -<p>Berkeley raised similar objections against analogous -positions of the Pseudo-Dionysius, in his Alciphron in 1732.<a name="FNanchor_340_340" id="FNanchor_340_340"></a><a href="#Footnote_340_340" class="fnanchor">[340]</a> -Indeed the Belgian Jesuit, Balthazar Corderius, has a very -satisfactory note on this matter in his edition, in 1634, of -the Areopagite,<a name="FNanchor_341_341" id="FNanchor_341_341"></a><a href="#Footnote_341_341" class="fnanchor">[341]</a> in which he shows how all the negative -propositions of Mystical Theology, <i>e.g.</i> “God is not Being, -not Life,” presuppose a certain affirmative position, <i>e.g.</i> “God -is Being and Life, in a manner infinitely more sublime and -perfect than we are able to comprehend”; and gives reasons -and authorities, from St. Jerome to St. Thomas inclusive, for -holding that some kind and degree of direct confused knowledge -(I should prefer, with modern writers, to call it -experience) of God’s existence and nature is possessed by -the human soul, independently of its reasoning from the data -of sense.</p> - -<p>St. Thomas’s admissions are especially striking, as he -usually elaborates a position which ignores, and would -logically exclude, such “confused knowledge.” In his -<i>Exposition and Questions on the Book of Boetius on the Trinity</i>, -after arguments to show that we know indeed <i>that</i> God is, -but not <i>what</i> He is,—at most only what He is not, he says: -“We should recognize, however, that it is impossible, with -regard to anything, to know whether it exists, unless, in some -way or other, we know <i>what</i> it is, either with a perfect or with -a confused knowledge.… Hence also with regard to God,—we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289">[289]</a></span> -could not know whether He exists, unless we somehow knew -<i>what</i> He is, even though in a confused manner.” And this -knowledge of <i>what</i> He is, is interestingly, because unconsciously, -admitted in one of the passages directed to proving that we -can but know <i>that</i> He is. “In our earthly state we cannot -attain to a knowledge of Himself beyond the fact that He -exists. And yet, among those who know <i>that</i> He is, the one -knows this more perfectly than the other.”<a name="FNanchor_342_342" id="FNanchor_342_342"></a><a href="#Footnote_342_342" class="fnanchor">[342]</a> For it is plain -that, even if the knowledge of the existence of something were -possible without any knowledge of that thing’s nature, no -difference or increase in such knowledge of the thing’s bare -existence would be possible. The different degrees in the -knowledge, which is here declared to be one concerning the -bare existence of God, can, as a matter of fact, exist only -in knowledge concerning His nature. I shall have to return -to this great question further on.</p> - -<p>Here I would only point out how well Battista Vernazza -has, in her <i>Dialogo</i>, realized the importance of a modification in -such acutely dualistic statements as those occasionally met -with in the <i>Vita</i>. For, in the <i>Dialogo</i>, the utter qualitative -difference between God and the Soul, and the Soul and the -Body, which find so striking an utterance in one of Catherine’s -moods, is ever carefully limited to the soul’s sinful acts and -habits, and to the body’s unspiritualized condition; so that -the soul, when generous and faithful to God’s grace, can and -does grow less and less unlike God, and the body can, in its -turn, become more and more an instrument and expression of -the soul. A pity only that Battista has continued Catherine’s -occasional over-emphasis in the parallel matter of the knowledge -of God: since, even in the <i>Dialogo</i>, we get statements -which, if pressed, would imply that even the crudest, indeed -the most immoral conception of God is, objectively, no farther -removed from the reality than is the most spiritual idea that -man can attain of Him.</p> - -<p>It would indeed be well if the Christian Mystics who, since -about 500 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, are more and more dependent for their -formulations upon the Areopagite, had followed, in this -matter, not his more usual and more paradoxical, but his -exceptional, thoroughly sober vein of teaching,—that contained -in the third chapter of his <i>Mystical Theology</i>, where he -finds degrees of worth and approximation among the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290">[290]</a></span> -affirmative attributions, and degrees of unfitness and distance -among the negative ones. “Are not life and goodness more -cognate to Him than air and stone? And is He not further -removed from debauchery and wrath, than from ineffableness -and incomprehensibility”?<a name="FNanchor_343_343" id="FNanchor_343_343"></a><a href="#Footnote_343_343" class="fnanchor">[343]</a> But such a scale of approximations -would be utterly impossible did we not somehow, at -least dimly, experience or know <i>what</i> He is.</p> - -<p>We shall then have to amend the Mystic’s apparent -Agnosticism on three points. We shall have to drop any -hard and fast distinction between knowledge of God’s -Existence and knowledge of His Nature, since both -necessarily more or less stand and fall together. We shall -have to replace the terms as to our utter ignorance as to what -He is, by terms expressive of an experience which, if not -directly and independently clear and analyzable to the reflex, -critical reason, can yet be shown to be profoundly real and -indefinitely potent in the life of man’s whole rational and -volitional being. It is this dim, deep experience which ever -causes our reflex knowledge of God to appear no knowledge -at all. And we shall reject any absolute qualitative difference -between the soul’s deepest possibilities and ideals, and God; -and shall, in its stead, maintain an absolute difference between -God and all our downward inclinations, acts, and habits, and -an indefinite difference, in worth and dignity, between God -and the very best that, with His help, we can aim at and -become. With regard to every truly existent subject-matter, -we can trace the indefinitely wider range and the more delicate -penetration possessed by our dim yet true direct contact and -experience, as contrasted with our reflex analysis concerning -all such contacts and experiences; and this surplusage is at -its highest in connection with God, Who is not simply a -Thing alongside of other things, but the Spirit, our spirit’s -Origin, Sustainer, and End, “in whom we live and move and -have our being.”</p> - -<h4>III. <span class="smcap">Mysticism and the Question of Evil.</span></h4> - -<h5><i>Introductory: Exclusive and Inclusive Mysticism in Relation -to Optimism.</i></h5> - -<p>The four couples of weaknesses and corresponding strong<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291">[291]</a></span> -points characteristic of Mysticism that we have just considered, -and the fact that, in each case, they ever spring respectively -from an attempt to make Mysticism be the all of religion, and -from a readiness to keep it as but one of the elements more -or less present in, and necessary for, every degree and form of -the full life of the human soul: make one wish for two -English terms, as useful as are the German names “Mystik” -and “Mystizismus,” for briefly indicating respectively “the legitimate -share of Feeling in the constitution of the religious life, -and the one-sidedness of a religion in which the Understanding -and the Will,” and indeed also the Memory and the Senses, -with their respective variously external occasions, vehicles, and -objects, “do not come to their rights,” as Prof. Rauwenhoff -well defines the matter.<a name="FNanchor_344_344" id="FNanchor_344_344"></a><a href="#Footnote_344_344" class="fnanchor">[344]</a> I somehow shrink from the term -“Mysticality” for his “Mystizismus”; and must rest content -with the three terms—of “Mysticism,” as covering both the -right and the wrong use of feeling in religion; and of “True” -or “Inclusive Mysticism,” and of “Pseudo-” or “Exclusive -Mysticism,” as denoting respectively the legitimate, and the -(quantitatively or qualitatively) mistaken, share of emotion in -the religious life.</p> - -<p>Now the four matters, which we have just considered, have -allowed us to reach an answer not all unlike that of Nicolas -of Coes, Leibniz, and Hegel,—one which, if it remained alone -or quite final, would, in face of the fulness of real life, strike -us all, nowadays, as somewhat superficial, because too -Optimistic and Panlogistic in its trend. The fifth set of -difficulties and problems now to be faced will seem almost to -justify Schopenhauer at his gloomiest. Yet we must bear in -mind that our direct business here is not with the problem of -Evil in general, but only with the special helps and hindrances, -afforded by Inclusive and by Exclusive Mysticism respectively, -towards apprehending the true nature of Evil and -turning even it into an occasion for a deeper good. In this -case the special helps and hindrances fall under three heads.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Mysticism, too optimistic. Evil positive, but not supreme.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) First of all, I would strongly insist upon the following -great fact to which human life and history bear witness, if -we but take and test these latter on a large scale and with a -patient persistency. It is, that not the smoother, easier ti<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292">[292]</a></span>mes -and circumstances in the lives of individuals and of peoples, -but, on the contrary, the harder and hardest trials of every -conceivable kind, and the unshrinking, full acceptance of -these, as part of the price of conscience and of its growing -light, have ever been the occasions of the deepest trust in and -love of God to which man has attained. In Jewish History, -the Exile called forth a Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and the -profound ideal of the Suffering Servant; the persecution of -Antiochus Epiphanes raised up a Judas Maccabaeus; and the -troubles under the Emperor Hadrian, a Rabbi Akiba. And -in Christian History, the persecutions from Nero to Robespierre -have each occasioned the formation of heroic lovers of Love -Crucified. And such great figures do not simply manage to -live, apart from all the turmoil, in some Mystic upper region -of their own; but they face and plunge into the very heart of -the strife, and get and give spiritual strength on occasion of -this closest contact with loneliness, outrage, pain, and death. -And this fact can be traced throughout history.</p> - -<p>Not as though suffering automatically deepens and widens -man into a true spiritual personality,—of itself it does not -even tend to this; nor as though there were not souls grown -hard or low, or frivolous or bitter, under suffering,—to leave -madness and suicide unconsidered,—souls in which it would -be difficult to find any avoidable grave fault. But that, -wherever there is the fullest, deepest, interiority of human -character and influence, <i>there</i> can ever be found profound -trials and sufferings which have been thus utilized and transfigured. -It is doubtless Our Lord’s uniquely full and clear -proclamation of this mysterious efficacity of all suffering -nobly borne; above all it is the supreme exemplification and -fecundity of this deepest law of life, afforded and imparted -by His own self-immolation, that has given its special power -to Christianity, and, in so doing, has, more profoundly than -ever before or elsewhere, brought home to us a certain -Teleology here also,—the deepest ever discovered to man. -For though we fail in our attempts at explaining how or why, -with an All-knowing, All-powerful, and All-loving God, there -can be Evil at all, we can but recognize the law, which is ever -being brought home to us, of a mysterious capacity for purification -and development of man’s spiritual character, on -occasion and with the help of trouble, pain, and death itself.</p> - -<p>(2) Now all this, we must admit, is practised and noted, -directly and in detail, only by the Ascetical and the Outw<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293">[293]</a></span>ard-going -elements in Religion; whereas Mysticism, as such, is optimistic, -not only as is Christianity, with respect to the end, but, -in practice, with regard to the actual state of things already -encircling it as well. For so careful a selection and so rigorous -an abstraction is practised by Mysticism, as such, towards the -welter of contingencies around it, that the rough shocks, the -bitter tonics, the expansive birth-pangs of the spirit’s deeper -life, in and by means of the flux of time and sense, of the -conflict with hostile fellow-creatures, and of the claimfulness -of the lower self, are known by it only in their result, not -in their process, or rather only as this process ebbs and fades -away, in such recollective moments, into the distance.</p> - -<p>No wonder, then, that Mysticism, as such, has ever tended -to deny all positive character to Evil. We have already -found how strongly this is the case with the prince of Mystic -philosophers, Plotinus. But even St. Augustine, with his -massive experience, and (in his other mood) even excessive -realization, of the destructive force of Evil and of the corrupt -inclinations of man’s heart, has one whole large current of -teaching expressive of the purely negative character of Evil. -The two currents, the hot and concrete, and the cold and -abstract one, appear alternately in the very <i>Confessions</i>, of -397 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> There, ten years after his conversion, he can write: -“All things that are corrupted, are deprived of good. But, if -they are deprived of all good, they will cease to exist.… -In so far, then, as they exist, they are good.… Evil is no -substance.” Notwithstanding such Neo-Platonist interpretations, -he had found Evil a terribly powerful force; the directly -autobiographical chapters of this same great book proclaim -this truth with unsurpassable vividness,—he is here fully Christian.<a name="FNanchor_345_345" id="FNanchor_345_345"></a><a href="#Footnote_345_345" class="fnanchor">[345]</a> -And in his unfinished work against the Pelagianizing -Monk Julianus, in 429 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, he even declares—characteristically, -whilst discussing the Origin of Sin: “Such and so great -was Adam’s sin, that it was able to turn (human) nature -itself into this evil.” Indeed, already in 418, he had maintained -that “this wound” (of Original Sin) “forces all that is -born of that human <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294">[294]</a></span>race to be under the Devil, so that the -latter, so to speak, plucks the fruit from the fruit-tree of his -own planting.”<a name="FNanchor_346_346" id="FNanchor_346_346"></a><a href="#Footnote_346_346" class="fnanchor">[346]</a></p> - -<p>Pseudo-Dionysius, writing about 500 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, has evidently -no such massive personal experience to oppose to the Neo-Platonic -influence, an influence which, in the writings of Proclus -(who died 485 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), is now at its height. “Evil,” he says, “is -neither in Demons nor in us, as an existent (positive) evil, -but (only) as a failure and dearth of the perfection of our own -proper goods.”<a name="FNanchor_347_347" id="FNanchor_347_347"></a><a href="#Footnote_347_347" class="fnanchor">[347]</a> He says this and more of the same kind, -but nothing as to the dread power of Evil. St. Thomas -Aquinas (who died in 1271 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>) is, as we know, largely under -the influence of the Negative conception: thus “the stain of -sin is not something positive, existent in the soul.… It is -like a shadow, which is the privation of light.”<a name="FNanchor_348_348" id="FNanchor_348_348"></a><a href="#Footnote_348_348" class="fnanchor">[348]</a></p> - -<p>Catherine, though otherwise much influenced by the -Negative conception, as <i>e.g.</i> in her definition of a soul -possessed by the Evil Spirit as one suffering from a “privation -of love,” finds the stain of sin, doubtless from her own -experience, to be something distinctly positive, with considerable -power of resistance and propagation.<a name="FNanchor_349_349" id="FNanchor_349_349"></a><a href="#Footnote_349_349" class="fnanchor">[349]</a>—Mother Juliana -of Norwich had, in 1373, also formulated both conceptions. -“I saw not Sin, for I believe it hath no manner of substance, -nor no part of being”: Neo-Platonist theory. “Sin is so -vile and so mickle for to hate, that it may be likened to no -pain.… All is good but Sin, and naught is evil but Sin”: -Christian experience.<a name="FNanchor_350_350" id="FNanchor_350_350"></a><a href="#Footnote_350_350" class="fnanchor">[350]</a></p> - -<p>Eckhart had, still further back (he died in 1327 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), insisted -much that “Evil is nothing but privation, or falling -away from Being; not an effect, but a defect”:<a name="FNanchor_351_351" id="FNanchor_351_351"></a><a href="#Footnote_351_351" class="fnanchor">[351]</a> yet he also -finds much work to do in combating this somehow very -powerful “defect.”—Not till we get to Spinoza (who died in -1677) do we get the Negative conception pushed home to its -only logical conclusion: “By Reality and Perfection, I mean -the same thing.… All knowledge of Evil is inadequate -knowledge.… If the human mind had nothing but adequate -ideas, it would not form any notion of Evil.”<a name="FNanchor_352_352" id="FNanchor_352_352"></a><a href="#Footnote_352_352" class="fnanchor">[352]</a></p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295">[295]</a></span></p> -<p>(3) As regards the Christian Mystics, their negative conception -of evil, all but completely restricted as it was to cosmological -theory, did those Mystics themselves little or no harm; -since their tone of feeling and their volitional life, indeed a large -part of their very speculation, were determined, not by such -Neo-Platonist theories, but by the concrete experiences of Sin, -Conscience, and Grace, and by the great Christian historical -manifestation of the powers of all three.—It is clear too that -our modern alternative: “positive-negative,” is not simply -identical with the scholastic alternative: “substantial-accidental,” -which latter alternative is sometimes predominant in -the minds of these ancient theorizers; and that, once the -question was formulated in the latter way, they were profoundly -right in refusing to hypostatize Evil, in denying that -there exists any distinct thing or being wholly bad.—Yet it -is equally clear how very Greek and how little Christian is -such a preoccupation (in face of the question of the nature -of Evil) with the concepts of Substance and Accident, rather -than with that of Will; and how strangely insufficient, -in view of the tragic conflicts and ruins of real life, is all, -even sporadic, denial, of a certain obstructive and destructive -efficacy in the bad will, and of a mysterious, direct -perversity and formal, intentional malignity in that will at its -worst.</p> - -<p>(4) On these two points it is undeniable that Kant, (with all -his self-contradictions, insufficiencies, and positive errors on -other important matters), has adequately formulated the practical -dispositions and teachings of the fully awakened Christian -consciousness, and hence, pre-eminently, of the great Saints in -the past, although, in the matter of the perverse will, the -Partial Mystics have, even in their theory, (though usually -only as part of the doctrine of Original Sin), largely forestalled -his analysis. “Nowhere in this our world, nowhere -even outside it, is anything thinkable as good without any -reservation, but the good will alone.” “That a corrupt inclination -to evil is rooted in man, does not require any -formal proof, in view of the clamorous examples furnished -to all men by the experience of human behaviour. If you -would have such cases from the so-called state of nature, -where some philosophers have looked for the chief home -of man’s natural goodness, you need only compare, with -such an hypothesis, the unprovoked cruelties enacted in -Tofoa, New Zealand … and the ceaseless scenes of murder<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296">[296]</a></span> -in the North-Western American deserts, where no human -being derives the slightest advantage from them,—and you -will quickly have more than sufficient evidence before you -to induce the abandonment of such a view. But if you -consider that human nature is better studied in a state of -civilization, since there its gifts have a better chance of development,—you -will have to listen to a long melancholy -string of accusations: of secret falseness, even among friends; -of an inclination to hate him to whom we owe much; of a -cordiality which yet leaves the observation true that ‘there -is something in the misfortune of even our best friend which -does not altogether displease us’: so that you will quickly have -enough of the vices of culture, the most offensive of all, and -will prefer to turn away your look from human nature -altogether, lest you fall yourself into another vice,—that of -hatred of mankind.”<a name="FNanchor_353_353" id="FNanchor_353_353"></a><a href="#Footnote_353_353" class="fnanchor">[353]</a></p> - -<p>It is sad to think how completely this virile, poignant -sense of the dread realities of human life again disappeared -from the teachings of such post-Kantians as Hegel and -Schleiermacher,—in other important respects so much more -satisfactory than Kant. As Mr. Tennant has well said, in -a stimulating book which, on this point at least, voices the -unsophisticated, fully awakened conscience and Christian -sense with refreshing directness, “for Jesus Christ and for the -Christian consciousness, sin means something infinitely deeper -and more real than what it can have meant for Spinoza or -the followers of Hegel.”<a name="FNanchor_354_354" id="FNanchor_354_354"></a><a href="#Footnote_354_354" class="fnanchor">[354]</a> Here again we have now in -Prof. Eucken, a philosopher who, free from ultimate Pessimism, -lets us hear once more those tones which are alone -adequate to the painful reality. “In great things and in -small, there exists an evil disposition beyond all simple -selfishness: hatred and envy, even where the hater’s self-interest -is not touched; an antipathy to things great and -divine; a pleasure found in the disfigurement or destruction -of the Good.… Indeed the mysterious fact of Evil, as a -positive opposition to Good, has never ceased to occupy the -deepest minds.… The concept of moral guilt cannot be got -rid of, try as we may.”<a name="FNanchor_355_355" id="FNanchor_355_355"></a><a href="#Footnote_355_355" class="fnanchor">[355]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297">[297]</a></span></p> - -<p>(5) And yet even with regard to this matter, Mysticism represents -a profound compensating truth and movement, which -we cannot, without grave detriment, lose out of the complete -religious life. For in life at large, and in human life and -history in particular, it would be sheer perversity to deny that -there is much immediate, delightful, noble Beauty, Truth, and -Goodness; and these also have a right to the soul’s careful, -ruminating attention. And it is the Mystical element that -furnishes this rumination.—Again, “it is part of the essential -character of human consciousness, as a Synthesis and an -organizing Unity, that, as long as the life of that consciousness -lasts at all, not only contrast and tension, but also concentration -and equilibrium must manifest themselves. Taking life’s -standard from life itself, we cannot admit its decisive constituent -to lie in tension alone.”<a name="FNanchor_356_356" id="FNanchor_356_356"></a><a href="#Footnote_356_356" class="fnanchor">[356]</a> And it is the Mystical mood -that helps to establish this equilibrium.—And finally, deep -peace, an overflowing possession and attainment, and a noble -joy, are immensely, irreplaceably powerful towards growth in -personality and spiritual fruitfulness. Nothing, then, would be -more shortsighted than to try and keep the soul from a deep, -ample, recollective movement, from feeding upon and relishing, -from as it were stretching itself out and bathing in, spiritual air -and sunshine, in a rapt admiration, in a deep experience of -the greatness, the beauty, the truth, and the goodness of the -World, of Life, of God.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Mysticism and the Origin of Evil.</i></h5> - -<p>The second hindrance and help, afforded respectively by -Exclusive and by Inclusive Mysticism in the matter of Evil, -concerns the question of its Origin.</p> - -<p>(1) Now it appears strange at first sight that, instead of first -directly realizing and picturing the undeniable, profoundly -important facts of man’s interior conflict, his continuous lapses -from his own deepest standard, and his need of a help not his -own to become what he cannot but wish to be, and of leaving -the theory as to how man came by this condition to the second -place; the Mystics should so largely,—witness Catherine—directly -express only this theory, and should face what is -happening <i>hic et nunc</i> all but exclusively under the picture -of the prehistoric beginnings of these happenings, in the state -of innocence and the lapse of the first man. For men of other<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298">[298]</a></span> -religious modalities have held this doctrine as firmly as the -Mystics, yet have mostly dwelt directly upon the central core -of goodness and the weakness and sinfulness to be found -in man; whilst the Mystics had even less scruple than -other kinds of devout souls in embodying experimental -truths in concepts and symbols other than the common ones.</p> - -<p>(2) I think that, here again, it was the Neo-Platonist literary -influence, so strong also on other points with the Mystics -of the past, and a psychological trend characteristic of the -Mystical habit of mind, which conjoined thus to concentrate -the Mystics’ attention upon the doctrines of Original Justice -and of a First Lapse, and to give to these doctrines the peculiar -form and tone taken on by them here. We have noted, -for instance, in the case of Catherine herself, how powerfully -her thought and feeling, as to the first human soul’s first lapse -into sin, is influenced by the idea of each human soul’s lapse -into a body; and we have found this latter idea to be, notwithstanding -its echoes in the Deutero-Canonical Book of -Wisdom and in one non-doctrinal passage in St. Paul, not -Christian but Neo-Platonist. Yet it is this strongly anti-body -idea that could not fail to attract Mysticism, as such.—And -the conception as to the plenary righteousness of that -first soul before its lapse, which she gets from Christian -theology, is similarly influenced, in her theorized emotion -and thought, by the Neo-Platonist idea of every soul having -already existed, perfectly spotless, previous to its incarnation: -a view which could not but immensely attract such a high-strung -temperament, with its immense requirement of something -fixed and picturable on which to rest. Thus here the -ideal for each soul’s future would have been already real in -each soul’s past. In this past the soul would have been, as it -were, a mirror of a particular fixed size and fixed intensity -of lustre; its business here below consists in removing the -impurities adhering to this mirror’s surface, and in guarding -it against fresh stains.</p> - -<p>(3) Now it is well known how it was St. Augustine, that -mighty and daring, yet at times ponderous, intellect, who, (so -long a mental captive of the Manichees and then so profoundly -influenced by Plotinus,) was impelled, by the experiences of his -own disordered earlier life and by his ardent African nature, to -formulate by far the most explicit and influential of the -doctrines upon these difficult matters. And if, with the aid of -the Abbé Turmel’s admirable articles on the subject, w<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299">[299]</a></span>e can, -with a fairly open mind, study his successive, profoundly varying, -speculations and conclusions concerning the Nature and -Origin of Sin,<a name="FNanchor_357_357" id="FNanchor_357_357"></a><a href="#Footnote_357_357" class="fnanchor">[357]</a> we shall not fail to be deeply impressed with -the largely impassable maze of opposite extremes, contradictions -and difficulties of every kind, in which that adventurous -mind involved itself.—And to these difficulties immanent to -the doctrine,—at least, in the form it takes in St. Augustine’s -hands,—has, of course, to be added the serious moral danger -that would at once result, were we, by too emphatic or literal -an insistence upon the true guiltiness of Original sin, to -weaken the chief axiom of all true morality—that the concurrence -of the personality, in a freely-willed assent, is -necessarily involved in the idea of sin and guilt.—And now -the ever-accumulating number and weight of even the most -certain facts and most moderate inductions of Anthropology -and Ethnology are abolishing all evidential grounds for holding -a primitive high level of human knowledge and innocence, -and a single sudden plunge into a fallen estate, as above, -apparently against, all our physiological, psychological, -historical evidences and analogies, (which all point to a -gradual rise from lowly beginnings), and are reducing such -a conception to a pure postulate of Theology.</p> - -<p>Yet Anthropology and Ethnology leave in undisturbed -possession the great truths of Faith that “man’s condition -denotes a fall from the Divine intention, a parody of God’s -purpose in human history,” and that “sin is exceedingly sinful -for us in whom it is a deliberate grieving of the Holy Spirit”; -and they actually reinforce the profound verities that “the -realization of our better self is a stupendously difficult task,” -and as to “Man’s crying need of grace, and his capacity for a -gospel of Redemption.”<a name="FNanchor_358_358" id="FNanchor_358_358"></a><a href="#Footnote_358_358" class="fnanchor">[358]</a> But they point, with a force great -in proportion to the highly various, cumulatively operative, -immensely interpretative character of the evidence,—to the -conclusion that “Sin,” as the Anglican Archdeacon Wilson -strikingly puts it, “is … the survival or misuse of habits and -tendencies that were incidental to an earlier stage of -development.… Their sinfulness would thus lie in their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300">[300]</a></span> -anachronism, in their resistance to the … Divine force that -makes for moral development and righteousness.” Certainly -“the human infant” appears to careful observers, as Mr. Tennant -notes, “as simply a non-moral animal,” with corresponding -impulses and propensities. According to this view “morality -consists in the formation of the non-moral material of nature -into character …”; so that “if goodness consists essentially -in man’s steady moralization of the raw material of morality, its -opposite, sin, cannot consist in the material awaiting moralization, -but in the will’s failure to completely moralize it.” -“Evil” would thus be “not the result of a transition from the -good, but good and evil would” both alike “be voluntary -developments from what is ethically neutral.”<a name="FNanchor_359_359" id="FNanchor_359_359"></a><a href="#Footnote_359_359" class="fnanchor">[359]</a> Dr. Wilson -finds, accordingly, that “this conflict of freedom and conscience -is precisely what is related as ‘the Fall’ <i>sub specie historiae</i>.” -Scripture “tells of the fall of a creature from unconscious -innocence to conscious guilt. But this fall from innocence” -would thus be, “in another sense, a rise to a higher grade of -being.”<a name="FNanchor_360_360" id="FNanchor_360_360"></a><a href="#Footnote_360_360" class="fnanchor">[360]</a></p> - -<p>(4) It is, in any case, highly satisfactory for a Catholic -to remember that the acute form, given to the doctrine of -Original Sin by St. Augustine, has never been finally accepted -by the Catholic Roman Church; indeed, that the Tridentine -Definition expressly declares that Concupiscence does not, in -strictness, possess the nature of Sin, but arises naturally, on -the withdrawal of the <i>donum superadditum</i>,—so that Mr. -Tennant can admit, in strictest accuracy, that “in this respect, -the Roman theology is more philosophical than that of the -Symbols of Protestant Christendom.”<a name="FNanchor_361_361" id="FNanchor_361_361"></a><a href="#Footnote_361_361" class="fnanchor">[361]</a> It is true that the -insistence upon “Original Sin” possessing somehow “the true -and proper nature of Sin” remains a grave difficulty, even in -this Tridentine formulation of the doctrine; whilst the -objections, already referred to as accumulating against the -theory in general, retain some of their cogency against other -parts of this decree.—Yet we have here an impressive proclamation -of the profoundest truths: the spiritual greatness -of God’s plan for us, the substantial goodness of the material -still ready to our hand for the execution of that plan, and -His necessary help ever ready from the first; the reality -of our lapse, away from all these, into sin, and of the eff<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301">[301]</a></span>ects of -such lapse upon the soul; the abiding conflict between sense -and spirit, the old man and the new, within each one of us; -and the close solidarity of our poor, upward-aspiring, downward-plunging -race, in evil as well as in good.</p> - -<p>(5) And as to the Christian Mystics, their one particular -danger here,—that of a Static Conception of man’s spirit as -somehow constituted, from the first, a substance of a definite, -final size and dignity, which but demands the removal of -disfiguring impurities, is largely eliminated, even in theory, -and all but completely overcome in practice, by the doctrine -and the practice of Pure Love. For in “Charity” we get -a directly dynamic, expansive conception and experience: -man’s spirit is, at first, potential rather than actual, and has to -be conquered and brought, as it were, to such and such a size -and close-knitness of organization, by much fight with, and -by the slow transformation of, the animal and selfish nature. -Thus Pure Love, Charity, Agape, has to fight it out, inch by -inch, with another, still positive force, impure love, concupiscence, -Eros, in all the latter’s multiform disguises. Here -Purity has become something intensely positive and of boundless -capacities for growth; as St. Thomas says, “Pure Love -has no limit to its increase, for it is a certain participation in -the Infinite Love, which is the Holy Spirit.”<a name="FNanchor_362_362" id="FNanchor_362_362"></a><a href="#Footnote_362_362" class="fnanchor">[362]</a>—In this utterly -real, deeply Christian way do these Mystics overcome Neo-Platonist -static abstractions, and simultaneously regain, in -their practical theory and emotional perception, the great -truth of the deep, subtle force of Evil, against which Pure -Love has to stand, in virile guard, as long as earth’s vigil lasts. -And the longest and most difficult of these conflicts is found,—here -again in utterly Christian fashion,—not in the sensual -tendencies proceeding from the body, but in the self-adoration, -the solipsism of the spirit. We have found this in Catherine: -at her best she ever has something of the large Stoic joy at -being but a citizen in a divine Cosmopolis; yet but Love and -Humility, those profoundest of the Christian affections, have -indefinitely deepened the truth of the outlook, and the range -of the work to be done, in and for herself and others.</p> - -<p>(6) Yet even apart from Pure Love, Mysticism can accurately -be said to apprehend an important truth when, along its static -line of thought and feeling, it sees each soul as, from the first, -a substance of a particular, final size. For each soul is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302">[302]</a></span> -doubtless intended, from the first, to express a particular -thought and wish of God, to form one, never simply replaceable -member in His Kingdom, to attain to a unique kind and -degree of personality: and though it can refuse to endorse -and carry out this plan, the plan remains within it, in the form -of never entirely suppressible longings. The Mystic, then, -sees much here also.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>The warfare against Evil. Pseudo-Mysticism.</i></h5> - -<p>The third of the relations between Mysticism and the -conception and experience of Evil requires a further elucidation -of an important distinction, which we have already -found at work all along, more or less consciously, between -the higher and the lower Mysticism, and their respective, -profoundly divergent, tempers, objects, and range.</p> - -<p>(1) Prof. Münsterberg discriminates between these two -Mysticisms with a brilliant excessiveness, and ends by -reserving the word “Mysticism” for the rejected kind alone. -“As soon as we speak of psychical objects,—of ideas, feelings, -and volitions,—as subject-matters of our direct consciousness -and experience, we have put before ourselves an artificial -product, a transformation, to which the categories of real life -no longer apply.” In this artificial product causal connections -have taken the place of final ends. But “History, Practical -Life, … Morality, Religion have nothing to do with these -psychological constructions; the categories of Psychology,” -treated by Münsterberg himself as a Natural, Determinist -Science, “must not intrude into their teleological domains. -But if,” on the other hand, “the categories belonging to -Reality,” which is Spiritual and Libertarian, “are forced on -to the psychological system, a system which was framed” by -our mind “in the interest of causal explanation, we get a -cheap mixture, which satisfies neither the one aim nor the -other. Just this is the effect of Mysticism. It is the personal, -emotional view applied, not to the world of Reality, where it -fits, but to the Physical and Psychological worlds, which are -constructed by the human logical will, with a view to gaining -an impersonal, unemotional causal system.… The ideals of -Ethics and Religion … have now been projected into the -atomistic structure” (of the Causal System), “and have thus -become dependent upon this system’s nature; they find their -right of existence limited to the regions where ignorance of -Nature leaves blanks in the Causal System, and have to tremble -at every advance which Science makes.” It is to this projection<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303">[303]</a></span> -alone that Münsterberg would apply the term “Mysticism,” -which thus becomes exclusively “the doctrine that the processes -in the world of physical and psychical objects are not -always subject to natural laws, but are influenced, at times, in -a manner fundamentally inexplicable from the standpoint of -the causal conception of Nature.… Yet, the special interest -of the Mystic stands and falls here with his conviction that, -in these extra-causal combinations,” thus operative right -within and at the level of this causal system, “we have a” -direct, demonstrable “manifestation of a positive system of -quite another kind, a System of Values, a system dominated, -not by Mechanism, but by Significance.”<a name="FNanchor_363_363" id="FNanchor_363_363"></a><a href="#Footnote_363_363" class="fnanchor">[363]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Now we have been given here a doubtless excessively -antithetic and dualistic picture of what, in actual life, is a -close-knit variety in unity,—that interaction between, and -anticipation of the whole in, the parts, and that indication of -the later stages in the earlier,—which is so strikingly operative -in the order and organization of the various constituents -and stages of the processes and growth of the human mind -and character, and which appears again in the Reality -apprehended, reproduced, and enriched by man’s powers.</p> - -<p>Even in the humblest of our Sense-perceptions, there is -already a mind perceiving and a Mind perceived; and, in the -most abstract and artificial of our intellectual constructions, -there is not only a logical requirement, but also, underlying -this requirement as this cause’s deepest cause, an ever-growing -if unarticulated experience and sense that only by the closest -contact with the most impersonal-seeming, impersonally conceived -forces of life and nature, and by the deepest recollection -within its own interior world of mind and will, can man’s soul -adequately develop and keep alive, within itself, a solid degree -and consciousness of Spirit, Free-will, Personality, Eternity, -and God. Thus, in proportion as he comes more deeply to -advance in the true occasions of his spirit’s growth, does man -still further emphasize and differentiate these two levels: the -shallower, spacial-temporal, mathematico-physical, quantitative -and determinist aspect of reality and level of apprehension; -and the deeper, alone at all adequate, experience of all the -fuller degrees of Reality and effectuations of the spirit’s life, -with their overlapping, interpenetrating Succession, (their -Duration), and their Libertarianism, Interiority, and Sense<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304">[304]</a></span> -of the Infinite. He thus emphasizes both levels, because the -determinist level is found to be, though never the source or -direct cause, yet ever a necessary awakener and purifier of -the Libertarian level.</p> - -<p>Strictly within the temporal-spacial, quantitative method -and level, indeed, we can nowhere find Teleology; but if we -look back upon these quantitative superficialities from the -qualitative, durational and personal, spiritual level and standpoint, -(which alone constitute our direct experience), we find -that the quantitative, causal level and method is everywhere -inadequate to exhaust or rightly to picture Reality, in exact -proportion to this reality’s degree of fulness and of worth. -From the simplest Vegetable-Cell up to Orchids and Insectivorous -Plants; from these on to Protozoans and up, through -Insects, Reptiles, and Birds, to the most intelligent of Domestic -Animals; from these on to Man, the Savage, and up to the -most cultured or saintly of human personalities: we have -everywhere, and increasingly, an inside, an organism, a subject -as well as object,—a series which is, probably from the first, -endowed with some kind of dim consciousness, and which -increasingly possessed of a more and more definite consciousness, -culminates in the full self-consciousness of the most fully -human man. And everywhere here, though in indefinitely -increasing measure, it is the individualizing and historical, -the organic and soul-conceptions and experiences which constitute -the most characteristic and important truths and -reality about and in these beings. For the higher up we -get in this scale of Reality, the more does the Interior -determine and express itself in the Exterior, and the more -does not only kind differ from kind of being, but even the -single individual from the other individuals within each -several kind. And yet nowhere, not even in free-willing, -most individualized, personal Man do we find the quantitative, -determinist envelope simply torn asunder and revealing -the qualitative, libertarian spirit perfectly naked and -directly testable by chronometer, measuring-rod, or crucible. -The spirit is thus ever like unto a gloved hand, which, let it -move ever so spontaneously, will ever, in the first instance, -present the five senses with a glove which, to their exclusive -tests, appears as but dead and motionless leather.</p> - -<p>(3) Now we have already in Chapter IX studied the contrasting -attitudes of Catherine and her attendants towards one -class of such effects,—those attributed to the Divine Spiri<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_305" id="Page_305">[305]</a></span>t,—and -hence, in principle, towards this whole question. Yet it -is in the matter of phenomena, taken to be directly Diabolic -or Preternatural, that a Pseudo-Mysticism has been specially -fruitful in strangely materialistic fantasies. As late as 1774 -the <i>Institutiones Theologiae Mysticae</i> of Dom Schram, O.S.B., -a book which even yet enjoys considerable authority, -still solemnly described, as so many facts, cases of -Diabolical <i>Incubi</i> and <i>Succubae</i>. Even in 1836-1842 the -layman Joseph Görres could still devote a full half of his -widely influential <i>Mystik</i> to “Diabolical Mysticism,”—witchcraft, -etc.; a large space to “Natural Mysticism,”—divination, -lycanthropy, vampires, etc.; and a considerable part -of the “Divine Mysticism,” to various directly miraculous -phenomenalisms. The Abbé Ribet could still, in his <i>La -Mystique Divine, distinguée de ses Contrefaçons Diaboliques</i>, -of 1895, give us a similarly uncritical mixture and transposition -of tests and levels. But the terrible ravages of the belief -in witchcraft in the later Middle Ages, and, only a few years -back, the humiliating fraud and craze concerning “Diana -Vaughan,” are alone abundantly sufficient to warn believers -in the positive character of Evil away from all, solidly -avoidable, approaches to such dangerous forms of this -belief.<a name="FNanchor_364_364" id="FNanchor_364_364"></a><a href="#Footnote_364_364" class="fnanchor">[364]</a></p> - -<p>(4) Yet the higher and highest Mystical attitude has never -ceased to find its fullest, most penetrating expression in the -life and teaching of devoted children of the Roman Church,—several -of whom have been proclaimed Doctors and Models -by that Church herself. And by a conjunction of four -characteristics these great normative lives and teachers still -point the way, out of and beyond all false or sickly Mysticism, -on to the wholesome and the true.</p> - -<p>(i) There is, first, the grand trust in and love of God’s beautiful, -wide world, and in and of the manifold truth and goodness -present throughout life,—realities which we have already -found rightly to be dwelt on, in certain recollective movements -and moments, to the momentary exclusion of their positively -operative, yet ever weaker, opposites. “Well I wote,” says -Mother Juliana, “that heaven and earth, and all that is made,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_306" id="Page_306">[306]</a></span> -is great, large, fair and good”; “the full-head of joy is to -behold God in all,” and “truly to enjoy in Our Lord, is a full -lovely thanking in His sight.”<a name="FNanchor_365_365" id="FNanchor_365_365"></a><a href="#Footnote_365_365" class="fnanchor">[365]</a> This completely un-Manichaean -attitude,—so Christian when held as the ultimate among the -divers, sad and joyful, strenuous and contemplative moods of the -soul,—is as strongly present in Clement of Alexandria, in the -Sts. Catherine of Siena and of Genoa, in St. John of the Cross, -and indeed in the recollective moments of all the great Mystics.</p> - -<p>(ii) There is, next, a strong insistence upon the soul having -to transcend all particular lights and impressions, in precise -proportion to their apparently extraordinary character, if it -would become strong and truly spiritual. “He that will rely -on the letter of the divine locution, or on the intellectual form -of the vision, will necessarily fall into delusion. ‘The letter -killeth, the spirit quickeneth’; we must therefore reject the -literal sense, and abide in the obscurity of faith.” “One -desire only doth God allow in His presence, that of perfectly -observing His law and carrying the Cross of Christ.… That -soul, which has no other aim, will be a true ark containing the -true Manna, which is God.” “One act of the will, wrought -in charity, is more precious in the eyes of God, than that -which all the visions and revelations of heaven might effect.” -“Let men cease to regard these supernatural apprehensions … -that they may be free.”<a name="FNanchor_366_366" id="FNanchor_366_366"></a><a href="#Footnote_366_366" class="fnanchor">[366]</a> Here the essence of the doctrine lies -in the importance attached to this transcendence, and not in -the particular views of the Saint concerning the character -of this or that miraculous-seeming phenomenon to be -transcended.</p> - -<p>(iii) And this essential doctrine retains all its cogency, even -though we hold the strict necessity of a contrary, alternating -movement of definite occupation with the Concrete, Contingent, -Historical, Institutional, in thought and action. For this -occupation will be with the normal, typical means, duties, and -facts of human and religious life; and, whilst fully conscious -of the Supernatural working in and with these seemingly but -natural materials, will, with St. Augustine, pray God to -“grant men to perceive in little things the common-seeming -indications of things both small and great,” and, with him, will -see a greater miracle in the yearly t<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_307" id="Page_307">[307]</a></span>ransformation of the vine’s -watery sap into wine, and in the germination of any single -seed, than even in that of Cana.<a name="FNanchor_367_367" id="FNanchor_367_367"></a><a href="#Footnote_367_367" class="fnanchor">[367]</a></p> - -<p>(iv) And then there is, upon the whole, a tendency to concentrate, -at these recollective stages, the soul’s attention upon -Christ and God alone. “I believe I understand,” says Mother -Juliana, “the ministration of holy Angels, as Clerks tell; but -it was not shewed to me. For Himself is nearest and meekest, -highest and lowest, and doeth all. God alone took our nature, -and none but He; Christ alone worked our salvation, and -none but He.”<a name="FNanchor_368_368" id="FNanchor_368_368"></a><a href="#Footnote_368_368" class="fnanchor">[368]</a> And thus we get a wholesome check upon -the Neo-Platonist countless mediations, of which the reflex is -still to be found in the Areopagite. God indeed is alone -held, with all Catholic theologians, to be capable of penetrating -to the soul’s centre, and the fight against Evil is simplified to -a watch and war against Self, in the form of an ever-increasing -engrossment in the thought of God, and in the interests -of His Kingdom. “Only a soul in union with God,” says -St. John of the Cross, “is capable of this profound loving -knowledge: for this knowledge is itself that union.… -The Devil has no power to simulate anything so great.” -“Self-love,” says Père Grou, “is the sole source of all the -illusions of the spiritual life.… Jesus Christ on one occasion -said to St. Catherine of Siena: ‘My daughter, think of Me, -and I will think of thee’: a short epitome of all perfection. -‘Wheresoever thou findest self,’ says the <i>Imitation</i>, ‘drop -that self’: the soul’s degree of fidelity to this precept is the -true measure of its advancement.”<a name="FNanchor_369_369" id="FNanchor_369_369"></a><a href="#Footnote_369_369" class="fnanchor">[369]</a> The highly authorized -<i>Manuel de Théologie Mystique</i> of the Abbé Lejeune, 1897, -gives but one-sixth of its three-hundred pages to the discussion -of all quasi-miraculous phenomena, puts them all apart -from the substance of Contemplation and of the Mystical -Life, and dwells much upon the manifold dangers of such, -never essential, things. The French Oratorian, Abbé L. -Laberthonnière, represents, in the <i>Annales de Philosophie -Chrétienne</i>, a spirituality as full of a delicate Mysticism as -it is free from any attachment to extraordinary phenomena. -The same can be said of the Rev. George Tyrrell’s <i>Hard -Sayings</i> and <i>External Religion</i>. And<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_308" id="Page_308">[308]</a></span> the Abbé Sandreau -has furnished us with two books of the most solid tradition -and discrimination in all these matters.<a name="FNanchor_370_370" id="FNanchor_370_370"></a><a href="#Footnote_370_370" class="fnanchor">[370]</a></p> - -<p>(5) And we should, in justice, remember that the Phenomenalist -Mysticism, objected to by Prof. Münsterberg and so sternly -transcended by St. John of the Cross, is precisely what is still -hankered after, and treated as of spiritual worth, by present-day -Spiritualism. Indeed, even Prof. James’s in many respects -valuable <i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i> is seriously -damaged by a cognate tendency to treat Religion, or at least -Mysticism, as an abnormal faculty for perceiving phenomena -inexplicable by physical and psychical science.</p> - -<p>(6) And finally, with respect to the personality of Evil, we -must not forget that “there are drawings to evil as to good, -which are not mere <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_309" id="Page_309">[309]</a></span>self-temptations, … but which derive -from other wills than our own; strictly, it is only persons that -can tempt us.”<a name="FNanchor_371_371" id="FNanchor_371_371"></a><a href="#Footnote_371_371" class="fnanchor">[371]</a></p> - -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_XIV" id="CHAPTER_XIV"></a>CHAPTER XIV<br /> -<span class="smaller">THE TWO FINAL PROBLEMS: MYSTICISM AND PANTHEISM. -THE IMMANENCE OF GOD, AND SPIRITUAL PERSONALITY, -HUMAN AND DIVINE</span></h3> - -<h4><span class="smcap">INTRODUCTORY.</span> -<i>Impossibility of completely abstracting from the theoretical -form in the study of the experimental matter.</i></h4> - -<p>We now come to the last two of our final difficulties and -problems—the supposed or real relations between Inclusive or -Exclusive Mysticism and Pantheism; and the question concerning -the Immanence of God and Spiritual Personality, -Human and Divine.</p> - -<p>(1) A preliminary difficulty in this, our deepest, task arises -from the fact that, whereas the evidences of a predominantly -individual, personal, directly experimental kind, furnished by -every at all deeply religious soul, have hitherto been all but -completely overlooked by trained historical investigators, in -favour of the study of the theological concepts and formulations -accepted and transmitted by such souls, now the -opposite extreme is tending to predominate, as in Prof. -William James’s <i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, or -in Prof. Weinel’s interesting study, <i>The Effects of the Spirit -and of the Spirits in the Sub-Apostolic Age</i>, 1899. For -here, as Prof. Bousset points out in connection with the -latter book, we get an all but complete overlooking of the -fact that, even in the most individual experience, there is -always some intellectual framework or conception, some more -or less traditional form, which had previously found lodgment -in, and had been more or less accepted by, that soul; so that, -though the experience itself, where at all deep, is never the -mere precipitate of a conventionally accepted traditional intellectual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_310" id="Page_310">[310]</a></span> -form, it is nevertheless, even when more or less -in conflict with this form, never completely independent of it.<a name="FNanchor_372_372" id="FNanchor_372_372"></a><a href="#Footnote_372_372" class="fnanchor">[372]</a>—Yet -though we cannot discriminate in full detail, we can -show certain peculiarities in the traditional Jewish, Mohammedan, -Christian Mysticism to be not intrinsic to the -Mystical apprehensions as such, but to come from the then -prevalent philosophies which deflected those apprehensions -in those particular ways.</p> - -<p>(2) In view then of this inevitable inter-relation between the -experimental, personal matter and the theoretical, traditional -form, I shall first consider the Aristotelian and Neo-Platonist -conceptions concerning the relations between the General and -the Particular, between God and Individual Things, as being -the two, partly rival yet largely similar, systems that, between -them, have most profoundly influenced the intellectual starting-point, -analysis, and formulation of those experiences; and -shall try to show the special attraction and danger of these -conceptions for the mystically religious temperament. I shall -next discuss the conceptions as to the relations between God -and the individual personality,—the Noûs, the Spirit, and the -Soul,—which, still largely Aristotelian and Neo-Platonist, -have even more profoundly commended themselves to those -Mystics, since these conceptions so largely met some of those -Mystics’ requirements, and indeed remain still, in part, the -best analysis procurable. I shall, thirdly, face the question as -to any intrinsic tendency to Pantheism in Mysticism as such, -and as to the significance and the possible utility of any such -tendency, keeping all fuller description of the right check -upon it for my last chapter. And finally, I shall consider -what degree and form of the Divine Immanence in the human -soul, of direct Experience or Knowledge of God on the part -of man, and of “Personality” in God, appear to result from -the most careful analysis of the deepest religious consciousness, -and from the requirements of the Sciences and of Life.</p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">Relations between the General and the Particular, -God and Individual Things, according -to Aristotle, the Neo-Platonists, and the -Medieval Strict Realists.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, Proclus.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) With regard to the relations between the General and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_311" id="Page_311">[311]</a></span> -Particular, we should note Aristotle’s final perplexities and -contradictions, arising from his failure to harmonize or to -transcend, by means of a new and self-consistent conception, -the two currents, the Platonic and the specifically Aristotelian, -which make up his thought. For, with him as with Plato, all -Knowledge has to do with Reality: hence Reality alone, in -the highest, primary sense of the word, can form the highest, -primary object of Knowledge; Knowledge will be busy, -primarily, with the Essence, the Substance of things. But -with him, as against Plato, every substance is unique, whence -it would follow that all knowledge refers, at bottom, to the -Individual,—individual beings would form, not only the -starting-point, but also the content and object of knowledge.—Yet -this is what Aristotle, once more at one with Plato, -stoutly denies: Science, even where it penetrates most -deeply into the Particular, is never directed to individual -things as such, but always to General Concepts; and this, not -because of our human incapacity completely to know the -Individual, as such, but because the General, in spite of the -Particular being better known to us, is more primitive and -more knowable, as alone possessing that Immutability which -must characterize all objects of true knowledge.<a name="FNanchor_373_373" id="FNanchor_373_373"></a><a href="#Footnote_373_373" class="fnanchor">[373]</a> The true -Essence of things consists only in what is thought in their -Concept, which concept is always some Universal; yet this -Universal exists only in Individual Beings, which are thus -declared true Substances: here are two contentions, the -possibility of whose co-existence he fails to explain. Indeed -at one time it is the Form, at another it is the Individual -Being, composed of Form and Matter, which appears as real; -and Matter, again, appears both as the Indefinite General and -as the Cause of Individual Particularity.<a name="FNanchor_374_374" id="FNanchor_374_374"></a><a href="#Footnote_374_374" class="fnanchor">[374]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Now Plato had indeed insisted upon ascending to even -greater abstraction, unity, and generality, as the sure process -for attaining to the truth of things; and had retained what is, -for us, a strangely unpersonal, abstract element, precisely in -his highest concept, since God here is hardly personal, but the -Idea of Good, a Substance distinct from all other things, yet -not, on this account, an Individual. Yet Plato’s profoundly -aesthetic, social, ethical, above all religious, consciousness -forced him to the inconsistency of proclaiming that, as the -Sun is higher than the light and the eye, so the Good is higher<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_312" id="Page_312">[312]</a></span> -than (mere) Being and Knowledge; and this Supreme Idea -of the Good gives to things their Being, and to the understanding -its power of Cognition, and is the Cause of all Rightness -and Beauty, the Source of all Reality and Reason, and -hence, not only a final, but also an efficient Cause,—indeed -<i>the</i> Cause, pure and simple.<a name="FNanchor_375_375" id="FNanchor_375_375"></a><a href="#Footnote_375_375" class="fnanchor">[375]</a> In the <i>Philebus</i> he tells us -explicitly that the Good and the Divine Reason are identical; -and in the <i>Timaeus</i> the Demiurge, the World-Former, looks -indeed to the Image of the World, in order to copy it: yet -the Demiurge is also himself this image which he copies.<a name="FNanchor_376_376" id="FNanchor_376_376"></a><a href="#Footnote_376_376" class="fnanchor">[376]</a> -We thus still have a supreme Multiplicity in Unity as the -characteristic of the deepest Reality; and its chief attribute, -Goodness, is not the most abstract and aloof, but the most -rich in qualities and the most boundlessly self-communicative: -“He was good, so he desired that all things should be as like -unto himself as possible.”<a name="FNanchor_377_377" id="FNanchor_377_377"></a><a href="#Footnote_377_377" class="fnanchor">[377]</a> And Aristotle, (although he places -God altogether outside the visible world, and attributes to -Him there one sole action, the thinking of his own thought, -and one quasi-emotion, intellectual joy at this thinking), still -maintains, in this shrunken form, the identity of the Good -and of the Supreme Reason, Noûs, and a certain Multiplicity -in Unity, and a true self-consciousness, within Him.</p> - -<p>(3) It is Plotinus who is the first expressly to put the Godhead,—in -strict obedience to the Abstractive scheme,—beyond -all Multiplicity, hence above the highest Reason itself, for -reason ever contains at least the duality of Subject thinking -and of Object thought; above Being, for all being has ever a -multitude of determinations; and above every part and the -totality of All Things, for it is the cause of them all. The -Cause is here ever outside the effect, the Unity outside the -Multiplicity, what is thought outside of what thinks. The -First is thus purely transcendent,—with one characteristic -exception: although above Being, Energy, Thought, and -Thinking, Beauty, Virtue, Life, It is still the Good; and because -of this, though utterly self-sufficing and without action of any -kind, It, “as it were,” overflows, and this overflow prod<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_313" id="Page_313">[313]</a></span>uces a -Second.<a name="FNanchor_378_378" id="FNanchor_378_378"></a><a href="#Footnote_378_378" class="fnanchor">[378]</a> And only this Second is here the Noûs, possessed -of what Aristotle attributes to the First: it is no sheer -Unity, “all things are together there, yet are they there -discriminated”: it is contemplative Thinking of itself; it is -pure and perfect Action.<a name="FNanchor_379_379" id="FNanchor_379_379"></a><a href="#Footnote_379_379" class="fnanchor">[379]</a></p> - -<p>(4) And Proclus who, through the Pseudo-Dionysius, is the -chief mediator between Plato and Plotinus on the one hand, -and the Medieval Mystics and Scholastics on the other, is, -with his immense thirst for Unity, necessarily absorbed by -the question as to the Law according to which all things -are conjoined to a whole. And this Law is for him the -process of the Many out of the One, and their inclination -back to the One; for this process and inclination determine -the connection of all things, and the precise place occupied by -each thing in that connection. All things move in the circle -of procession from their cause, and of return to it; the -simplest beings are the most perfect; the most complex are -the most imperfect.<a name="FNanchor_380_380" id="FNanchor_380_380"></a><a href="#Footnote_380_380" class="fnanchor">[380]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>The Anti-Proclian current, in the Areopagite’s view.</i></h5> - -<p>Now in the Pseudo-Dionysius we find an interesting oscillation -between genuine Neo-Platonism, which finds Beings -perfect in proportion to the fewness and universality of their -attributes, although, with it, he inconsistently holds Goodness,—the -deepest but not the most general attribute,—to be the -most perfect of all; and Aristotelianism at its richest, when it -finds Beings perfect according to the multiplicity and depth -of their attributes. Dionysius himself becomes aware of the -dead-lock thence ensuing. “The Divine name of the Good is -extended to things being and to things not being,”—a statement -forced upon him by his keeping, with Plato and -Plotinus, Goodness as the supreme attribute, and yet driving -home, more completely than they, their first principle that -Generality and Perfection rise and sink together. “The Name -of Being is extended to all things being” and stretches further -than Life. “The name of Life is extended to all things -living” and stretches further than Wisdom. “The Name of -Wisdom is extended,” only, “to all the intellectual, and -rational, and sensible.”</p> - -<p>But if so, “for what reason do we affirm,” (as he has been -doing in the previous sections), “that Life,” the less extended, -“is superior to (mere) Being,” the more extended? “an<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_314" id="Page_314">[314]</a></span>d -that Wisdom,” though less extended, “is superior to mere -Life,” the more extended? And he answers in favour of -depth and richness of attributes. “If any one assumed the -intellectual to be without being or life, the objection might -hold good. But if the Divine Minds,” the Angels, “both are -above all other beings, and live above all other living creatures, -and think and know above sensible perception and reasoning, -and aspire beyond all other existent and aspiring beings, -to … the Beautiful and Good: then they encircle the Good -more closely.” For “the things that participate more in the -one and boundless-giving God, are more … divine, than those -that come behind them in gifts.”<a name="FNanchor_381_381" id="FNanchor_381_381"></a><a href="#Footnote_381_381" class="fnanchor">[381]</a> And with abiding truth he -says: “Those who place attributes on That which is above -every attribute, should derive the affirmation from what is -more cognate to It; but those who abstract, with regard to -That which is above every abstraction, should derive the -negation from what is further removed from It. Are not, <i>e.g.</i>, -Life and Goodness more cognate to It than air and stone? -And is It not further removed from debauch and anger than -from ineffableness and incomprehensibility?”<a name="FNanchor_382_382" id="FNanchor_382_382"></a><a href="#Footnote_382_382" class="fnanchor">[382]</a></p> - -<p>But more usually Dionysius shows little or no preference for -any particular attribution or denegation; all are taken to fall -short so infinitely as to eliminate any question as to degrees -of failure. “The Deity-Above-All … is neither Soul nor -Mind, neither One nor Oneness, neither Deity nor Goodness.”<a name="FNanchor_383_383" id="FNanchor_383_383"></a><a href="#Footnote_383_383" class="fnanchor">[383]</a> -God is thus purely transcendent.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Continuators of the Proclian current.</i></h5> - -<p>The influence of the Areopagite was notoriously immense -throughout the Middle Ages,—indeed unchecked,—along its -Proclian, Emanational, Ultra-Unitive current,—among the -Pantheists from the Christian, Mohammedan and Jewish -camps.</p> - -<p>(1) Thus Scotus Eriugena (who died in about 877 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>) -insists: “In strict parlance, the Divine Nature Itself exists -alone in all things, and nothing exists which is not that Nature. -The Lord and the Creature are one and the same thing.” “It -is its own Self that the Holy Trinity loves, sees, moves within -us.” One of his fundamental ideas is the equivalence of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_315" id="Page_315">[315]</a></span> -degrees of abstraction and those of existence; he simply -hypostatizes the logical table.<a name="FNanchor_384_384" id="FNanchor_384_384"></a><a href="#Footnote_384_384" class="fnanchor">[384]</a> Eriugena was condemned.</p> - -<p>(2) But the Pseudo-Aristotelian, really Proclian, <i>Liber de -Causis</i>, written by a Mohammedan in about 850 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, became, -from its translation into Latin in about 1180 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> onwards, -an authority among the orthodox Scholastics. It takes, as “an -example of the (<i>true</i>) doctrine as to Causes, Being, Living-Being, -and Man. Here it is necessary that the thing Being -should exist first of all, and next Living-Being, and last Man. -Living-Being is the proximate, Being is the remote cause of -Man; hence Being is in a higher degree the cause of Man -than is Living-Being, since Being is the cause of Living-Being, -which latter again is the cause of Man.” … “Being, -(of the kind) which is before Eternity, is the first cause.… -Being is more general than Eternity.… Being of the kind -which is with and after Eternity, is the first of created things.… -It is above Sense, and Soul, and Intelligence.”<a name="FNanchor_385_385" id="FNanchor_385_385"></a><a href="#Footnote_385_385" class="fnanchor">[385]</a></p> - -<p>(3) The Mohammedan Avicenna, who died in 1037 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, is -mostly Aristotelian in philosophy and Orthodox in religious -intention, and, translated into Latin, was much used by St. -Thomas. Yet he has lapses into pure Pantheism, such as: -“The true Being that belongs to God, is not His only, but is -the Being of all things, and comes forth abundantly from His -Being. That which all things desire is Being: Being is -Goodness; the perfection of Being is the perfection of -Goodness.”<a name="FNanchor_386_386" id="FNanchor_386_386"></a><a href="#Footnote_386_386" class="fnanchor">[386]</a></p> - -<p>(4) And the Spanish Jew, Ibn Gebirol (Avicebron), who died -about 1070 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>, is predominantly Proclian, but with a form -of Pantheism which, in parts, strikingly foreshadows Spinoza. -His masterly <i>Fons Vitae</i>, as translated into Latin, exercised -a profound influence upon Duns Scotus. “Below the first -Maker there is nothing but what is both matter and form.” -“All things are resolvable into Matter and Form. If all -things were resolvable into a single root,” (that is, into -Form alone), “there would be no difference between that one -root and the one Maker.” There exists a universal Matter -and a universal Form. The first, or universal Matter, is a -substance existing by itself, which sustains diversity, and is -one in number: it is capable of receiving all the different -kinds of forms. The universal Form is a substance whi<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_316" id="Page_316">[316]</a></span>ch -constitutes the essence of all the different kinds of forms.… -By means of the knowledge of this universal Form, the -knowledge of every (less general) form is acquired,—is -deduced from it and resolved into it.” “Being falls under four -categories, answering to: whether it is, what it is, what is its -quality, and why it is: but, of these, the first in order of -dignity is the category which inquires whether it is at all.”<a name="FNanchor_387_387" id="FNanchor_387_387"></a><a href="#Footnote_387_387" class="fnanchor">[387]</a> We -thus get again the degree of worth strictly identical with the -degree of generality.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Inconsistencies of Aquinas and Scotus.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) St. Thomas, the chief of the orthodox Scholastics, has -embodied the entire Dionysian writings in his own works, but -labours assiduously—and successfully, as far as his own -statements are concerned—to guard against the Pantheistic -tendencies special to strict Realism. Yet it is clear, from his -frequent warnings and difficult distinctions regarding the -double sense of the proposition, “God is sheer Being,” and -from the ease with which we find Eckhart, an entirely consistent -Realist, lapse into the Pantheistic sense, how -immanent is the danger to any severe form of the system.<a name="FNanchor_388_388" id="FNanchor_388_388"></a><a href="#Footnote_388_388" class="fnanchor">[388]</a> -And he fails to give us a thoroughly understandable and -consistent account as to the relations between the General -and the Particular, between Form and Matter, and between -these two pairs of conceptions. Thus “Materia signata,” -matter, as bearing certain dimensions, “is the principle of -individuation”:<a name="FNanchor_389_389" id="FNanchor_389_389"></a><a href="#Footnote_389_389" class="fnanchor">[389]</a> yet this <i>quantum</i> is already an individually -determined quantity, and <i>this</i> determination remains unexplained. -And certain forms exist separately, without matter, -in which case each single form is a separate species; as with -the Angels and, pre-eminently, with God.—Yet, as already -Duns Scotus insisted, Aquinas’ general principle seems to -require the non-existence of pure forms as distinct beings, -and the partial materiality of all individual beings.<a name="FNanchor_390_390" id="FNanchor_390_390"></a><a href="#Footnote_390_390" class="fnanchor">[390]</a></p> - -<p>(2) And Duns Scotus teaches, in explicit return to Avicebron, -that every created substance consists of matter as well as of -form, and that there is but one, First Matter, which is identical -in every particular and derivative kind of matter. Th<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_317" id="Page_317">[317]</a></span>e world -appears to him as a gigantic tree, whose root is this indeterminate -matter; whose branches are the transitory substances; -whose leaves the changeable accidents; whose flowers, the -rational souls; whose fruit are the Angels: and which God -has planted and which He tends. Here again the order of -Efficacity,—with the tell-tale exception of God,—is identical -with that of Generality.<a name="FNanchor_391_391" id="FNanchor_391_391"></a><a href="#Footnote_391_391" class="fnanchor">[391]</a></p> - -<h5>5. <i>Eckhart’s Pantheistic trend.</i></h5> - -<p>But it is Eckhart who consistently develops the Pantheistic -trend of a rigorous Intellectualism. The very competent -and strongly Thomistic Father Denifle shows how Eckhart -strictly followed the general scholastic doctrine, as enunciated -by Avicenna: “In every creature its Being is one thing, and -is from another, its Essence is another thing, and is not -from another”; whereas in God, Being and Essence are -identical. And Denifle adds: “Eckhart will have been -unable to answer for himself the question as to what, in -strictness, the ‘Esse’ is, in distinction from the ‘Essentia’; -indeed no one could have told him, with precision.… -Eckhart leaves intact the distinction between the Essence -of God and that of the creature; but, doubtless in part -because of this, he feels himself free,—in starting from an -ambiguous text of Boetius,—to break down the careful discriminations -established by St. Thomas, in view of this same -text, between Universal Being, Common to all things extant, -and Divine Being, reserved by Aquinas for God alone.”<a name="FNanchor_392_392" id="FNanchor_392_392"></a><a href="#Footnote_392_392" class="fnanchor">[392]</a> -“What things are nearer to each other, than anything that -<i>is</i> and Being? There is nothing between them.” “Very -Being,” the Being of God, “is the actualizing Form of every -form, everywhere.” “In one word,” adds Denifle, “the Being -of God constitutes the formal Being of all things.”<a name="FNanchor_393_393" id="FNanchor_393_393"></a><a href="#Footnote_393_393" class="fnanchor">[393]</a> The -degrees of Generality and Abstract Thinkableness are again -also the degrees of Reality and Worth: “the Eternal Word -assumed to Itself, not this or that human being, but a human -nature which existed bare, unparticularized.” “Being and -Knowableness are identical.”</p> - -<p>When speaking systematically Eckhart is strictly Plotinian: -“God and Godhead are as distinct as earth is from heaven.” -“The Godhead has left all things to God: It owns nought<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_318" id="Page_318">[318]</a></span>, -wills nought, requires nought, effects nought, produces nought.” -“Thou shalt love the Godhead as It truly is: a non-God, -non-Spirit, non-Person … a sheer, pure, clear One, severed -from all duality: let us sink down into that One, throughout -eternity, from Nothing unto Nothing, so help us God.” “The -Godhead Itself remains unknown to Itself.” “It is God who -energizes and speaks one single thing,—His Son, the Holy -Ghost, and all creatures.… Where God speaks it, there it -is all God; here, where man understands it, it is God and -creature.”<a name="FNanchor_394_394" id="FNanchor_394_394"></a><a href="#Footnote_394_394" class="fnanchor">[394]</a> No wonder that the following are among the -propositions condemned by Pope John XXII in 1329: “God -produces me as His own Being, a Being identical, not merely -similar”; and, “I speak as falsely when I call God (the Godhead) -good, as if I call white, black.”<a name="FNanchor_395_395" id="FNanchor_395_395"></a><a href="#Footnote_395_395" class="fnanchor">[395]</a></p> - -<h5>6. <i>The logical goal of strict Realism.</i></h5> - -<p>This series of facts, which could be indefinitely extended, -well illustrates the persistence of “the fundamental doctrine -common to all forms of Realism,—of the species as an entity -in the individuals, common to all and <i>identical</i> in each, an -entity to which individual differences adhere as accidents,” as -Prof. Seth-Pattison accurately defines the matter. “Yet when -existence is in question, it is the individual, not the universal, -that is real; and the real individual is not a compound of -species and accidents, but is individual to the inmost fibre -of his being.” Not as though Nominalism were in the right. -For “each finite individual has its” special “place in the one -real universe, with all the parts of which it is inseparably -connected. But the universe is itself an individual or real -whole, containing all its parts within itself, and not a universal -of the logical order, containing its exemplifications under it.”<a name="FNanchor_396_396" id="FNanchor_396_396"></a><a href="#Footnote_396_396" class="fnanchor">[396]</a> -And, above all, minds, spirits, persons,—however truly they -may approximate more and more to certain great types of -rationality, virtue, and religion, which types are thus increasingly -expressive of God’s self-revealing purpose and nature,—are -ever, not merely numerically different, as between one -individual and the other, but, both in its potentialities and -especially in its spiritual actualization, no one soul can or -does take the place of any other.</p> - -<p>And if we ask what there is in any strict Realism to att<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_319" id="Page_319">[319]</a></span>ract -the Mystical sense, we shall find it, I think, in the insistence -of such Realism upon Unity, Universality, and Stability. -Yet in so far as Mysticism, in such a case Exclusive -Mysticism, tends to oust the Outgoing movement of the -soul, it empties these forms of their Multiple, Individual, -and Energizing content. Inclusive Mysticism may be truly -said alone to attain to the true Mystic’s desires; for only by -the interaction of both movements, and of all the powers of -the soul, will the said soul escape the ever-increasing poverty -of content characteristic of the strict Realist’s pyramid of -conceptions; a poverty undoubtedly antagonistic to the secret -aspiration of Mysticism, which is essentially an apprehension, -admiration, and love of the infinite depths and riches of -Reality—of this Reality no doubt present everywhere, yet in -indefinitely various, and mutually complementary and stimulative -forms and degrees. And the readiness with which -Mysticism expressed itself in the Nominalist Categories,—distinctly -less adequate to a healthy, Partial Mysticism than -the more moderate forms of Realism,—shows how little -intrinsic was the link which seemed to bind it to a Realism -of the most rigorous kind.</p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">Relations between God and the Human Soul.</span></h4> - -<p>In taking next the question as to the relations between -God and the Human Soul, we shall find our difficulties -increased, because, here especially, the Philosophers and even -the Biblical Writers have, with regard to religious experience, -used expressions and furnished stimulations of a generally -complex and unclarified, intermittent, and unharmonized kind; -and especially because certain specifically religious experiences -and requirements have operated here with a unique intensity, -at one time in a Pantheistic, at another in a more or less -Deistic direction. The reader will specially note the points -in the following doctrines which helped on the conception -that a certain centre or highest part of the soul is God, or a -part of God, Himself.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Plato and Aristotle. “The Noûs.”</i></h5> - -<p>(1) Plato teaches the pre-existence and the post-existence -(immortality) of the soul, as two interdependent truths. In -his earlier stage, <i>e.g.</i> the <i>Phaedrus</i>, he so little discriminates, -in his argument for immortality, between the individual soul<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_320" id="Page_320">[320]</a></span> -and the World-Soul, as to argue that “the Self-Moving” -Soul generally “is the beginning of motion, and this motion,” -(specially here in connection with the human soul), “can neither -be destroyed nor begotten, since, in that case, the heavens and -all generation would collapse.” Yet individual souls are not, -according to him, emanations of the World-Soul; but, as the -particular ideas stand beside the Supreme Idea, so do the -particular souls stand beside the Soul of the Whole, in a -distinct peculiarity of their own.<a name="FNanchor_397_397" id="FNanchor_397_397"></a><a href="#Footnote_397_397" class="fnanchor">[397]</a>—And again, since the soul -has lapsed from a purer, its appropriate, life into the body, -and has thus no original, intrinsic relation to this body, the -activity of the senses, indeed in strictness even that of the -emotions, cannot form part of its essential nature. Only the -highest part of the soul, the Reason, <i>Noûs</i>, which, as “sun-like, -God-like,” can apprehend the sun, God, is one and simple, as -are all the ideas, immortal; whereas the soul’s lower part -consists of two elements,—the nobler, the irascible, and the -ignobler, the concupiscible passions. But how the unity of -the soul’s life can co-exist with this psychical tritomy, is a -question no doubt never formulated even to himself by Plato: -we certainly have only three beings bound together, not one -being active in different directions.<a name="FNanchor_398_398" id="FNanchor_398_398"></a><a href="#Footnote_398_398" class="fnanchor">[398]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Aristotle, if more sober in his general doctrine, brings -some special obscurities and contradictions. For whilst the -pre-existence of the soul, taken as a whole, is formally denied, -and indeed its very origin is linked to that of the body, its -rational part, the Noûs, comes into the physical organism -from outside of the matter altogether, and an impersonal -pre-existence is distinctly predicated of it,—in strict conformity -with his doctrine that the Supreme Noûs does not -directly act upon, or produce things in, the world.<a name="FNanchor_399_399" id="FNanchor_399_399"></a><a href="#Footnote_399_399" class="fnanchor">[399]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>St. Paul. The “Spirit.”</i></h5> - -<p>But it is St. Paul who, in his Mystical outbursts and in the -systematic parts of his doctrine, as against the simply hortatory -level of his teaching, gives us the earliest, one of the deepest, -and to this hour by far the most influential, among the at all -detailed experiences and schemes, accepted by and opera<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_321" id="Page_321">[321]</a></span>tive -among Christians, as to the relations of the human soul to -God. And here again, and with characteristic intensity, -certain overlapping double meanings and conceptions, and -some vivid descriptions of experiences readily suggestive of -the divinity of the soul’s highest part, repeatedly appear.</p> - -<p>(1) In the systematic passages we not only find the terms -<i>Psyche</i>, “Soul,” for the vital force of the body; and <i>Noûs</i>, -(“Mind,”) “Heart,” and “Conscience,” for various aspects -and functions of man’s rational and volitional nature: but -a special insistence upon <i>Pneuma</i>, “Spirit,” mostly in a quite -special sense of the word. Thus in 1 Cor. ii, 14, 15, we get -an absolute contrast between the psychic or sarkic, the simply -natural man, and the Pneumatic, the Spiritual one, all capacity -for understanding the Spirit of God being denied to the -former. The Spiritual thus appears as itself already the -Divine, and the Spirit as the exclusive, characteristic property -of God, something which is foreign to man, apart from his -Christian renovation and elevation to a higher form of existence. -Only with the entrance of faith and its consequences into the -mind and will of man, does this transcendent Spirit become an -immanent principle: “through His Spirit dwelling in you.”<a name="FNanchor_400_400" id="FNanchor_400_400"></a><a href="#Footnote_400_400" class="fnanchor">[400]</a>—Hence, -in the more systematic Pauline Anthropology, <i>Pneuma</i> -cannot be taken as belonging to man’s original endowment. -Certainly in 1 Cor. ii, 11, the term “the spirit of a man” -appears simply because the whole passage is dominated by -a comparison between the Divine and the human consciousness, -which allows simultaneously of the use of the conversely -incorrect term, “the mind of God,”—here, v. 16, and in Rom. -xi, 34. And the term “the spirit of the world,” 1 Cor. ii, 12, -is used in contrast with “the Spirit of God,” and as loosely -as the term “the God of this world,” is applied, in 2 Cor. -iv, 4, to Satan.—Only some four passages are difficult to -interpret thus: <i>e.g.</i> “Every defilement of flesh and of spirit” -(2 Cor. vii, 1); for how can God, Spirit, be defiled? Yet -we can “forget that our body is a temple of the Holy Spirit,” -1 Cor. vi, 19; and its defilement can “grieve the Holy Spirit” -(Eph. iv, 30).<a name="FNanchor_401_401" id="FNanchor_401_401"></a><a href="#Footnote_401_401" class="fnanchor">[401]</a></p> - -<p>And note how parallel to his conception of this immanence -of the transcendent Spirit is St. Paul’s conception, base<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_322" id="Page_322">[322]</a></span>d -upon his personal, mystical experience, of the indwelling of -Christ in the regenerate human soul. Saul had indeed been -won to Jesus Christ, not by the history of Jesus’ earthly life, -but by the direct manifestation of the heavenly Spirit-Christ, -on the way to Damascus: whence he teaches that only those -who know Him as Spirit, can truly “be in Christ,”—an expression -formed on the model of “to be in the Spirit,” as in -Mark xii, 36, and Apoc. 1, 10.</p> - -<p>(2) And then these terms take on, in specifically Pauline -Mystical passages, a suggestion of a local extension and -environment, and express, like the corresponding formulae -“in God,” “in the Spirit,” the conception of an abiding within -as it were an element,—that of the exalted Christ and His -Divine glory. Or Christ is within us, as the Spirit also is -said to be, so that the regenerate personality, by its closeness -of intercourse with the personality of Christ, can become one -single Spirit with Him, 1 Cor. vi, 17. “As the air is the -element in which man moves, and yet again the element of -life which is present within the man: so the Pneuma-Christ -is for St. Paul both the Ocean of the Divine Being, -into which the Christian, since his reception of the Spirit, is -plunged,” and in which he disports himself, “and a stream -which, derived from that Ocean, is specially introduced within -his individual life.”<a name="FNanchor_402_402" id="FNanchor_402_402"></a><a href="#Footnote_402_402" class="fnanchor">[402]</a> Catherine’s profound indebtedness to this -Mystical Pauline doctrine has already been studied; here we -are but considering this doctrine in so far as suggestive, to the -Mystics, of the identity between the true self and God,—an -identity readily reached, if we press such passages as -“Christ, our life”; “to live is Christ”; “I live, not I, but -Christ liveth in me.”<a name="FNanchor_403_403" id="FNanchor_403_403"></a><a href="#Footnote_403_403" class="fnanchor">[403]</a></p> - -<h5>3. <i>Plotinus.</i></h5> - -<p>Some two centuries later, Plotinus brings his profound -influence to bear in the direction of such identification. For -as the First, the One, which, as we saw, possesses, for him, no -Self-consciousness, Life, or Being, produces the Second, the -Noûs, which, possessed of all these attributes, exercises them -directly in self-contemplation alone; and yet this Second is -so closely like that First as to be “light from light”: so does -the Second produce the Third, the Human Psyche, which, -though “a thing by itself,” is a “godlike (divine) thing,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_323" id="Page_323">[323]</a></span>” -since it possesses “a more divine part, the part which is -neighbour to what is above, the Noûs, with which and from -which Noûs the Psyche exists.”—The Psyche is “an image of -the Noûs”: “as outward speech expresses inward thought, -so is the Psyche a concept of the Noûs,—a certain energy of -the Noûs, as the Noûs itself is an energy of the First Cause.” -“As with fire, where we distinguish the heat that abides within -the fire and the heat that is emitted by it … so must we -conceive the Psyche not as wholly flowing forth from, but as -in part abiding in, in part proceeding from the Noûs.”<a name="FNanchor_404_404" id="FNanchor_404_404"></a><a href="#Footnote_404_404" class="fnanchor">[404]</a></p> - -<p>And towards the end of the great Ninth Book of the Sixth -Ennead, he tells how in Ecstasy “the soul sees the Source of -Life … the Ground of Goodness, the Root of the Soul.… -For we are not cut off from or outside of It … but we -breathe and consist in It: since It does not give and then -retire, but ever lifts and bears us, so long as It is what It is.” -“We must stand alone in It and must become It alone, after -stripping off all the rest that hangs about us.… There we -can behold both Him and our own selves,—ourselves, full of -intellectual light, or rather as Pure Light Itself, having become -God, or rather as being simply He … abiding altogether -unmoved, having become as it were Stability Itself.” “When -man has moved out of himself away to God, like the image -to its Prototype, he has reached his journey’s end.” “And -this is the life of the Gods and of divine and blessed men … -a flight of the alone to the Alone.”<a name="FNanchor_405_405" id="FNanchor_405_405"></a><a href="#Footnote_405_405" class="fnanchor">[405]</a></p> - -<h5>4. <i>Eckhart’s position. Ruysbroek.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) Eckhart gives us both Plotinian positions—the God-likeness -and the downright Divinity of the soul. “The Spark -(<i>das Fünkelein</i>) of the Soul … is a light impressed upon its -uppermost part, and an image of the Divine Nature, which is -ever at war with all that is not divine. It is not one of the -several powers of the soul.… Its name is Synteresis,”—<i>i.e.</i> -conscience. “The nine powers of the soul are all servants of -that man of the soul, and help him on to the soul’s Source.”<a name="FNanchor_406_406" id="FNanchor_406_406"></a><a href="#Footnote_406_406" class="fnanchor">[406]</a>—But -in one of the condemned propositions he says: “There is -something in the soul which is Increate and Uncreatable; if -the whole soul were such, it would be (entirely) Increate and -Uncreatable. And this is the Intellect,”—standing here -exactly for Plotinus’s Noûs.<a name="FNanchor_407_407" id="FNanchor_407_407"></a><a href="#Footnote_407_407" class="fnanchor">[407]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_324" id="Page_324">[324]</a></span></p> - -<p>(2) Ruysbroek (who died in 1381) combines a considerable -fundamental sobriety with much of St. Paul’s daring and -many echoes of Plotinus. “The unity of our spirit with God -is of two kinds,—essential and actual. According to its -essence, our spirit receives, in its innermost highest part, the -visit of Christ, without means and without intermission; for -the life which we are in God, in our Eternal Image, and that -which we have and are in ourselves, according to the essence -of our being … are without distinction.—But this essential -unity of our spirit with God has no consistency in itself, but -abides in God and flows out from and depends on Him.” The -actual unity of our spirit with God, caused by Grace, confers -upon us not His Image, but His Likeness, “and though we -cannot lose the Image of God, nor our natural unity with -Him,—if we lose His Likeness, His Grace, Christ, who, in -this case, comes to us with mediations and intermissions, we -shall be damned.”<a name="FNanchor_408_408" id="FNanchor_408_408"></a><a href="#Footnote_408_408" class="fnanchor">[408]</a></p> - -<h5>5. <i>St. Teresa’s mediating view.</i></h5> - -<p>St. Teresa’s teachings contain interesting faint echoes of the -old perplexities and daring doctrines concerning the nature of -the Spirit; but articulate a strikingly persistent conviction -that the soul holds God Himself as distinct from His graces, -possessing thus some direct experience of this His presence. -“I cannot understand what the mind is, nor how it differs -from the soul or the spirit either: all three seem to me to be but -one, though the soul sometimes leaps forth out of itself, like a -fire which has become a flame: the flame ascends high above -the fire, but it is still the same flame of the same fire.” -“Something subtle and swift seems to issue from the soul, to -ascend to its highest part and to go whither Our Lord will -… it seems a flight. This little bird of the spirit seems to -have escaped out of the prison of the body.” Indeed “the -soul is then not in itself … it seems to me to have its dwelling -higher than even the highest part of itself.”<a name="FNanchor_409_409" id="FNanchor_409_409"></a><a href="#Footnote_409_409" class="fnanchor">[409]</a>—“In the beginning -I did not know that God is present in all things.… -Unlearned men used to tell me that He was present only by -His grace. I could not believe that.… A most learned -Dominican told me He was present Himself … this was a -great comfort to me.” “To look upon Our Lord as bein<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_325" id="Page_325">[325]</a></span>g in -the innermost parts of the soul … is a much more profitable -method, than that of looking upon Him as external to -us.” “The living God was in my soul.” And even, “hitherto” -up to 1555, “my life was my own; my life, since then, is the -life which God lived in me.”<a name="FNanchor_410_410" id="FNanchor_410_410"></a><a href="#Footnote_410_410" class="fnanchor">[410]</a></p> - -<h5>6. <i>Immanence, not Pantheism.</i></h5> - -<p>St. Teresa’s teaching as to God’s own presence in the soul -points plainly, I think, to the truth insisted on by the Catholic -theologian Schwab, in his admirable monograph on Gerson. -“Neither speculation nor feeling are satisfied with a Pure -Transcendence of God; and hence the whole effort of true -Mysticism is directed, whilst not abolishing His Transcendence, -to embrace and experience God, His living presence, -in the innermost soul,—that is, to insist, in some way or other, -upon the Immanence of God. Reject all such endeavours as -Pantheistic, insist sharply upon the specific eternal difference -between God and the Creature: and the Speculative, Mystical -depths fade away, with all their fascination.”<a name="FNanchor_411_411" id="FNanchor_411_411"></a><a href="#Footnote_411_411" class="fnanchor">[411]</a> Not in finding -Pantheism already here, with the imminent risk of falling into -a cold Deism, but in a rigorous insistence, with all the great -Inclusive Mystics, upon the spiritual and moral effects, as the -tests of the reality and worth of such experiences, and, with -the Ascetical and Historical souls, upon also the other movement—an -outgoing in some kind of contact with, and labour -at, the contingencies and particularities of life and mind—will -the true safeguard for this element of the soul’s life be found.<a name="FNanchor_412_412" id="FNanchor_412_412"></a><a href="#Footnote_412_412" class="fnanchor">[412]</a></p> - -<h4>III. <span class="smcap">Mysticism and Pantheism: their Differences -and Points of Likeness.</span></h4> - -<p>But does not Mysticism, not only find God in the soul, but -the soul to be God? Is it not, as such, already Pantheism? -Or, if not, what is their difference?</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Plotinus and Spinoza compared.</i></h5> - -<p>Now Dr. Edward Caird, in his fine book, <i>The Evolution -of Theology in the Greek Philosophers</i>, 1904, tells us that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_326" id="Page_326">[326]</a></span> -“Mysticism is religion in its most concentrated and exclusive -form; it is that attitude of mind in which all other relations -are swallowed up in the relation of the soul to God”; and -that “Plotinus is the Mystic <i>par excellence</i>.”<a name="FNanchor_413_413" id="FNanchor_413_413"></a><a href="#Footnote_413_413" class="fnanchor">[413]</a> And he then -proceeds to contrast Plotinus, the typical Mystic, with Spinoza, -the true Pantheist.</p> - -<p>“Whether” or not “Spinoza, in his negation of the limits -of the finite, still leaves it open to himself to admit a reality -in finite things which is <i>not</i> negated,” and “to conceive of the -absolute substance as manifesting itself in attributes and -modes”: “it is very clear that he does so conceive it, and -that, for all those finite things which he treats as negative -and illusory in themselves, he finds in God a ground of reality<br /> -<span style="margin-left: 0.5em;">… which can be as little destroyed as the divine substance</span><br /> -itself.” “God, <i>Deus sive Natura</i>, is conceived as the immanent -principle of the universe, or perhaps rather the -universe is conceived as immanent in God.”—Thus to him -“the movement by which he dissolves the finite in the infinite, -and the movement by which he finds the finite again in the -infinite, are equally essential. If for him the world is nothing -apart from God, God is nothing apart from His realization in -the world.” This is true Pantheism.<a name="FNanchor_414_414" id="FNanchor_414_414"></a><a href="#Footnote_414_414" class="fnanchor">[414]</a></p> - -<p>But in Plotinus the <i>via negativa</i> involves a negation of the -finite and determinate in all its forms; hence here it is impossible -to find the finite again in the infinite. The Absolute -One is here not immanent but transcendent.<a name="FNanchor_415_415" id="FNanchor_415_415"></a><a href="#Footnote_415_415" class="fnanchor">[415]</a> “While the -lower always has need of the higher, the higher is regarded as -having no need” for any purpose “of the lower”; and “the -Highest has no need of anything but Itself.” “Such a process -cannot be reversed”: “in ascending, Plotinus has drawn -the ladder after him, and left himself no possibility of descending -again. The movement, in which he is guided by definite -and explicit thought, is always upwards; while, in describing -the movement downwards, he has to take refuge in metaphors -and analogies,” for the purpose of indicating a purely self-occupied -activity which only accidentally produces an external -effect, <i>e.g.</i>, “the One as it were overflows, and produces another -than itself.”<a name="FNanchor_416_416" id="FNanchor_416_416"></a><a href="#Footnote_416_416" class="fnanchor">[416]</a> “Thus we have the strange paradox that the -Being who is absolute, is yet conceived as in a sense external<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_327" id="Page_327">[327]</a></span> to -the relative and finite, and that He leaves the relative and finite -in a kind of unreal independence.” “On the one side, we have a -life which is nothing apart from God, and which, nevertheless, -can never be united to him, except as it loses itself altogether; -and, on the other side, an Absolute, which yet is not -immanent in the life it originates, but abides in transcendent -isolation from it.… It is this contradiction which … -makes the writings of Plotinus the supreme expression of -Mysticism.”<a name="FNanchor_417_417" id="FNanchor_417_417"></a><a href="#Footnote_417_417" class="fnanchor">[417]</a></p> - -<p>Now I think, with this admirable critic, that we cannot but -take Spinoza as the classical representative of that parallelistic -Pantheism to which most of our contemporary systems -of psycho-physical parallelism belong. As Prof. Troeltsch -well puts it, “we have here a complete parallelism between -every single event in the physical world, which event is already -entirely explicable from its own antecedents within that physical -world, and every event of a psychical kind, which, nevertheless, -is itself also entirely explicable from its own psychical -antecedents alone.” And “this parallelism again is but two -sides of the one World-Substance, Which is neither Nature -nor Spirit, and Whose law is neither natural nor spiritual law, -but Which is Being in general and Law in general.” In this -one World-Substance, with its parallel self-manifestations as -extension and as thought, Spinoza finds the ultimate truth -of Religion, as against the Indeterminist, Anthropomorphic -elements of all the popular religions,—errors which have -sprung, the Anthropomorphic from man’s natural inclination -to interpret Ultimate Reality, with its complete neutrality -towards the distinctions of Psychical and Physical, by the -Psychic side, as the one nearest to our own selves; and the -Indeterminist from the attribution of that indetermination to -the World-Substance which, even in Psychology, is already -a simple illusion and analytical blunder.</p> - -<p>“It is in the combination,” concludes Professor Troeltsch, -“of such a recognition of the strict determination of all -natural causation, and of such a rejection of materialism -(with its denial of the independence of the psychic world), that -rests the immense power of Pantheism at the present time.”<a name="FNanchor_418_418" id="FNanchor_418_418"></a><a href="#Footnote_418_418" class="fnanchor">[418]</a> -On the other hand, the supposed Pantheistic positions of the -later Lessing, of Herder, Goethe and many another predominantl<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_328" id="Page_328">[328]</a></span>y -aesthetic thinker, must, although far richer and -more nearly adequate conceptions of full reality, be assigned, -<i>qua</i> Pantheism, a secondary place, as inconsistent, because -already largely Teleological, indeed Theistic Philosophies.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Complete Pantheism non-religious; why approached by -Mysticism.</i></h5> - -<p>Now the former, the full Pantheism, must, I think, be -declared, with Rauwenhoff, to be only in name a religious -position at all. “In its essence it is simply a complete -Monism, a recognition of the <i>Pan</i> in its unity and indivisibility, -and hence a simple view of the world, not a religious conception.”<a name="FNanchor_419_419" id="FNanchor_419_419"></a><a href="#Footnote_419_419" class="fnanchor">[419]</a>—Yet -deeply religious souls can be more or less, indeed -profoundly, influenced by such a Monism, so that we can get -Mystics with an outlook considerably more Spinozist than -Plotinian. There can, <i>e.g.</i>, be no doubt as to both the deeply -religious temper and the strongly Pantheistic conceptions of -Eckhart in the Middle Ages, and of Schleiermacher in modern -times; and indeed Spinoza himself is, apart from all questions -as to the logical implications and results of his intellectual -system, and as to the justice of his attacks upon the historical -religions, a soul of massive religious intuition and aspiration.</p> - -<p>But further: Mystically tempered souls,—and the typical -and complete religious soul will ever possess a mystical -element in its composition,—have three special <i>attraits</i> which -necessarily bring them into an at least apparent proximity to -Pantheism.</p> - -<p>(1) For one thing Mysticism, like Pantheism, has a great, -indeed (if left unchecked by the out-going-movement) an -excessive, thirst for Unity, for a Unity less and less possessed -of Multiplicity; and the transition from holding the Pure -Transcendence of this Unity to a conviction of its Exclusive -Immanence becomes easy and insignificant, in proportion -to the emptiness of content increasingly characterizing -this Oneness.</p> - -<p>(2) Then again, like Pantheists, Mystics dwell much upon -the strict call to abandon all self-centredness, upon the death -to self, the loss of self; and in proportion as they dwell upon -this self to be thus rejected, and as they enlarge the range of -this petty self, do they approach each other more and more.</p> - -<p>(3) And lastly, there is a peculiarity about the Mystical habit -of mind, which inevitably approximates it to the Pantheistic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_329" id="Page_329">[329]</a></span> -mode of thought, and which, if not continuously taken by the -Mystic soul itself as an inevitable, but most demonstrable, inadequacy, -will react upon the substance of this soul’s thought -in a truly Pantheistic sense. This peculiarity results from the -Mystic’s ever-present double tendency of absorbing himself, -away from the Successive and Temporal, in the Simultaneity -and Eternity of God, conceiving thus all reality as partaking, -in proportion to its depth and greater likeness to Him, in -this <i>Totum Simul</i> character of its ultimate Author and End; -and of clinging to such vivid picturings of this reality as are -within his, this Mystic’s reach. Now such a Simultaneity -can be pictorially represented to the mind only by the Spacial -imagery of co-existent Extensions,—say of air, water, light, -or fire: and these representations, if dwelt on as at all -adequate, will necessarily suggest a Determinism of a -Mathematico-Physical, Extensional type, <i>i.e.</i> one, and the -dominant, side of Spinozistic Pantheism.—It is here, I think, -that we get the double cause for the Pantheistic-seeming -trend of almost all the Mystical imagery. For even the -marked Emanationism of much in Plotinus, and of still more -in Proclus,—the latter still showing through many a phrase -in Dionysius,—appears in their images as operating upon a -fixed Extensional foundation: and indeed these very overflowings, -owing to the self-centredness and emptiness of -content of their Source, the One, and to their accidental yet -automatic character, help still further to give to the whole -outlook a strikingly materialistic, mechanical, in so far -Pantheistic, character.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Points on which Mysticism has usefully approximated to -Pantheism.</i></h5> - -<p>And yet we must not overlook the profound, irreplaceable -services that are rendered by Mysticism,—provided always it -remains but one of two great movements of the living soul,—even -on the points in which it thus approximates to Pantheism. -These services, I think, are three.</p> - -<p>(1) The first of these services has been interestingly illustrated -by Prof. A. S. Pringle Pattison, from the case of Dr. -James Martineau’s writings, and the largely unmediated co-existence -there of two different modes of conceiving God. -“The first mode represents God simply as another, higher -Person; the second represents Him as the soul of souls. -The former, Deistic and Hebraic, rests upon an inferential -knowledge of God, derived either from the experience of His<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_330" id="Page_330">[330]</a></span> -resistance to our will through the forces of Nature, or from -that of His restraint upon us in the voice of Conscience,—God, -in both cases, being regarded as completely separated -from the human soul, and His existence and character apprehended -and demonstrated by a process of reasoning.—The -second mode is distinctly and intensely Christian, and consists -in the apprehension of God as the Infinite including all -finite existences, as the immanent Absolute who progressively -manifests His character in the Ideals of Truth, Beauty, -Righteousness, and Love.” And Professor Pattison points -out, with Professor Upton, that it was Dr. Martineau’s almost -morbid dread of Pantheism which was responsible for the -inadequate expression given to this Mystical, or “Speculative” -element in his religious philosophy. For only if we do not -resist such Mysticism, do we gain and retain a vivid experience -of how “Consciousness of imperfection and the pursuit of -perfection are alike possible to man only through the -universal life of thought and goodness in which he shares, -and which, at once an indwelling presence and an unattainable -ideal, draws him on and always on.” “Personality is” -thus “not ‘unitary’ in Martineau’s sense, as occupying one -side of a relation, and unable to be also on the other. The -very capacity of knowledge and morality implies that the -person … is capable of regarding himself and all other beings -from what Martineau well names ‘the station of the Father -of Spirits.’”<a name="FNanchor_420_420" id="FNanchor_420_420"></a><a href="#Footnote_420_420" class="fnanchor">[420]</a></p> - -<p>I would, however, guard here against any exclusion of a -seeking or finding of God in Nature and in Conscience: only -the contrary exclusion of the finding of God within the soul, -and the insistence upon a complete separation of Him from -that soul, are inacceptable in the “Hebraic” mood. For a -coming and a going, a movement inwards and outwards, -checks and counter-checks, friction, contrast, battle and storm, -are necessary conditions and ingredients of the soul’s growth -in its sense of appurtenance to Spirit and to Peace.</p> - -<p>(2) A further service rendered by this Pantheistic-seeming -Mysticism,—though always only so long as it remains not -the only or last word of Religion,—is that it alone discovers -the truly spiritual function and fruitfulness of Deterministic -Science. For only if Man deeply requires a profound desubjectivizing, -a great shifting of the centre of his interest,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_331" id="Page_331">[331]</a></span> -away from the petty, claimful, animal self, with its “I against -all the world,” to a great kingdom of souls, in which Man -gains his larger, spiritual, unique personality, with its “I as -part of, and for all the world,” by accepting to be but one -amongst thousands of similar constituents in a system -expressive of the thoughts of God; and only if Mathematico-Physical -Science is specially fitted to provide such a bath, -and hence is so taken, with all its apparently ruinous -Determinism and seeming Godlessness: is such Science -really safe from apologetic emasculation; or from running, a -mere unrelated dilettantism, alongside of the deepest interests -of the soul; or from, in its turn, crushing or at least -hampering the deepest, the spiritual life of man. Hence all the -greater Partial Mystics have got a something about them -which indicates that they have indeed passed through fire -and water, that their poor selfishness has been purified in a -bath of painfully-bracing spiritual air and light, through which -they have emerged into a larger, fuller life. And Nicolas of -Coes, Pascal, Malebranche are but three men out of many -whose Mysticism and whose Mathematico-Physical Science -thus interstimulated each other and jointly deepened their -souls.</p> - -<p>We shall find, further on, that this purificatory power of -such Science has been distinctly heightened for us now. Yet, -both then and now, there could and can be such purification -only for those who realize and practise religion as sufficiently -ultimate and wide and deep to englobe, (as one of religion’s -necessary stimulants), an unweakened, utterly alien-seeming -Determinism in the middle regions of the soul’s experience -and outlook. Such an englobement can most justly be -declared to be Christianity driven fully home. For thus is -Man purified and saved,—if he already possesses the dominant -religious motive and conviction,—by a close contact -with Matter; and the Cross is plunged into the very centre -of his soul’s life, operating there a sure division between -the perishing animal Individual and the abiding spiritual -Personality: the deathless Incarnational and Redemptive -religion becomes thus truly operative there.</p> - -<p>(3) And the last service, rendered by such Mysticism, is to -keep alive in the soul the profoundly important consciousness -of the prerequisites, elements and affinities of a Universally -Human kind, which are necessary to, and present in, all -Religion, however definitely Concrete, Historical and Insti<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_332" id="Page_332">[332]</a></span>tutional -it may have become. Such special, characteristic -Revelations, Doctrines and Institutions, as we find them in -all the great Historical Religions, and in their full normative -substance and form in Christianity and Catholicism, can -indeed alone completely develop, preserve and spread -Religion in its depth and truth; yet they ever presuppose -a general, usually dim but most real, religious sense and -experience, indeed a real presence and operation of the -Infinite and of God in all men.</p> - -<p>It is, then, not an indifferentist blindness to the profound -differences, in their degree of truth, between the religions of -the world, nor an insufficient realization of man’s strict need of -historical and institutional lights and aids for the development -and direction of that general religious sense and experience, -which make the mind revolt from sayings such as those we -have already quoted from the strongly Protestant Prof. -Wilhelm Hermann, and to which we can add the following. -“Everywhere, outside of Christianity, Mysticism will arise, -as the very flower of the religious development. But the -Christian must declare such Mystical experience of God to be -a delusion.” For “what is truly Christian is <i>ipso facto</i> not -Mystical.” “We are Christians because, in the Humanity of -Jesus, we have struck upon a fact which is of incomparably -richer content, than are the feelings that arise within our own -selves.” Indeed, “I should have failed to recognize the hand -of God even in what my own dead father did for me, had not, -by means of my Christian education, God appeared to me, in -the Historic Christ.”<a name="FNanchor_421_421" id="FNanchor_421_421"></a><a href="#Footnote_421_421" class="fnanchor">[421]</a>—As if it were possible to consider -Plato and Plotinus, in those religious intuitions and feelings -of theirs which helped to win an Augustine from crass -Manichaeism to a deep Spiritualism, and which continue to -breathe and burn as part-elements in countless sayings of -Christian philosophers and saints, to have been simply -deluded, or mere idle subjectivists! As if we could apprehend -even Christ, without some most real, however dim and -general, sense of religion and presence of God within us to -which He could appeal! And as if Jeremiah, Ezekiel and -the Maccabaean Martyrs, and many a devoted soul within -Mohammedanism or in Brahmanic India, could not and did -not apprehend something of God’s providence in their earthly -father’s love towards them!</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_333" id="Page_333">[333]</a></span></p> -<p>No wonder that, after all this, Hermann can,—as against -Richard Rothe who, in spite of more than one fantastic if not -fanatical aberration, had, on some of the deepest religious -matters, a rarely penetrating perception,—write in a thoroughly -patronizing manner concerning Catholic Mysticism. For this -Mysticism necessarily appears to him not as, at its best, the -most massive and profound development of one type of the -ultimate religion,—a type in which one necessary element of -all balanced religious life is at the fullest expansion compatible -with a still sufficient amount and healthiness of the other -necessary elements of such a life,—but only as “a form of -religion which has brought out and rendered visible such a -content of interior life as is capable of being produced within -the limits of Catholic piety.”<a name="FNanchor_422_422" id="FNanchor_422_422"></a><a href="#Footnote_422_422" class="fnanchor">[422]</a> The true, pure Protestant -possesses, according to Hermann, apparently much less, in -reality much more,—the Categorical Imperative of Conscience -and the Jesus of History, as the double one-and-all of his, the -only spiritual religion.—Yet if Christianity is indeed the -religion of the Divine Founder, Who declared that he that is -not against Him is for Him; or of Paul, who could appeal to -the heathen Athenians and to all men for the truth and -experience that in God “we live and move and have our -being”; or of the great Fourth Gospel, which tells us that -Christ, the True Light, enlighteneth every man that cometh -into the world, a light which to this hour cannot, for the great -majority, be through historic knowledge of the Historic Christ -at all; or of Clement of Alexandria and of Justin Martyr, -who loved to find deep apprehensions and operations of God -scattered about among the Heathen; or of Aquinas, who, in -the wake of the Areopagite and others, so warmly dwells -upon how Grace does not destroy, but presupposes and -perfects Nature: then such an exclusive amalgam of -Moralism and History, though doubtless a most honest and -intelligible reaction against opposite excesses, is a sad -impoverishment of Christianity, in its essential, world-wide, -Catholic character.</p> - -<p>Indeed, to be fair, there have never been wanting richer and -more balanced Protestant thinkers strongly to emphasize -this profound many-sidedness and universality of Christianity: -so, at present, in Germany, Profs. Eucken, Troeltsch, -Class, Siebeck and others; and, in England, Prof. A. S. P.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_334" id="Page_334">[334]</a></span> -Pattison and Mr. J. R. Illingworth. In all these cases there is -ever a strong sympathy with Mysticism properly understood, -as the surest safeguard against such distressing contractions -as is this of Hermann, and that of Albrecht Ritschl before -him.</p> - -<h5>4.<i> Christianity excludes complete and final Pantheism.</i></h5> - -<p>And yet, as we have repeatedly found, Christianity has, in -its fundamental Revelation and Experience, ever implied and -affirmed such a conception of Unity, of Self-Surrender, and of -the Divine Action, as to render any Pantheistic interpretation -of these things ever incomplete and transitional.</p> - -<p>(1) The Unity here is nowhere, even ultimately, the sheer -Oneness of a simply identical Substance, but a Unity deriving -its very close-knitness from its perfect organization of not -simply identical elements or relations.</p> - -<p>The Self-Surrender here is not a simply final resolution, of -laboriously constituted centres of human spiritual consciousness -and personality, back into a morally indifferent All, but a -means and passage, for the soul, from a spiritually worthless -self-entrenchment within a merely psycho-physical apartness -and lust to live, on to a spiritual devotedness, an incorporation, -as one necessary subject, into the Kingdom of souls,—the -abiding, living expression of the abiding, living God.</p> - -<p>And, above all, God’s Action is not a mechanico-physical, -determinist, simultaneous Extension, nor even an automatic, -accidental, unconscious Emanation, but, as already Plato -divined,—an intuition lost again by Aristotle, and, in his logic, -denied by Plotinus,—a voluntary outgoing and self-communication -of the supreme self-conscious Spirit, God. For Plato -tells us that “the reason why Nature and this Universe of -things was framed by Him Who framed it, is that God is -good … and desired that all things should be as like -Himself as it was possible for them to be.”<a name="FNanchor_423_423" id="FNanchor_423_423"></a><a href="#Footnote_423_423" class="fnanchor">[423]</a> Yet this -pregnant apprehension never attains here to its full significance, -because the Divine Intelligence is conceived only as -manifesting itself in relation to something given from without,—the -pre-existing, chaotic Matter. And for Aristotle God -does not love this Givenness; for “the first Mover moves” (all -things) only “as desired” by them: He Himself desires, -loves, wills nothing whatsoever, and thinks and knows -nothing but His own self alone.<a name="FNanchor_424_424" id="FNanchor_424_424"></a><a href="#Footnote_424_424" class="fnanchor">[424]</a> And in Plotinus this sa<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_335" id="Page_335">[335]</a></span>me -transcendence is still further emphasized, for the Absolute -One here transcends even all thought and self-consciousness.</p> - -<p>(2) It is in Christianity, after noble preludings in Judaism, -that we get the full deliberate proclamation, in the great Life -and Teaching, of the profound fact,—the Self-Manifestation -of the Loving God, the Spirit-God moving out to the spirit-man, -and spirit-man only thus capable of a return movement -to the Spirit-God. As Schelling said, “God can only give -Himself to His creatures as He gives a self to them,” and, -with it, the capacity of participating in His life. We thus get -a relation begun and rendered possible by God’s utterly -prevenient, pure, <i>ecstatic</i> love of Man, a relation which, in its -essence spiritual, personal and libertarian, leaves behind it, as -but vain travesties of such ultimate Realities, all Emanational -or Parallelistic Pantheism, useful though these latter systems -are as symbols of the Mathematico-Physical level and kind of -reality and apprehension. Yet this spiritual relation is here, -unlike Plotinus’s more or less Emanational conception of it, -not indeed simply invertible, as Spinoza would have it, (for -Man is ontologically dependent upon God, whereas God is -not thus dependent upon Man), but nevertheless largely one -of true mutuality. And this mutuality of the relation is not -simply a positive enactment of God, but is expressive, in its -degree and mode, of God’s intrinsic moral nature. For God -is here the Source as well as the Object of all love; hence -He Himself possesses the supreme equivalent for this our -noblest emotion, and is moved to free acts of outgoing, in -the creation and preservation, the revelation to, and the -redemption of finite spirits, as so many successive, mutually -supplementary, and increasingly fuller expressions and objects -of this His nature. “God is Love”; “God so loved the -world, as to give His only-begotten Son”; “Let us love God, -for God hath first loved us”; “if any man will do the will of -God, he shall know of the doctrine if it be from God”: God’s -Infinity is here, not the negation of the relatively independent -life of His creatures, but the very reason and source of their -freedom.<a name="FNanchor_425_425" id="FNanchor_425_425"></a><a href="#Footnote_425_425" class="fnanchor">[425]</a></p> - -<p>In the concluding chapter I hope to give a sketch of the -actual operation of the true correctives to any excessive, -Plotinian or Spinozistic, tendencies in the Mystical trend, -especially when utilizing M<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_336" id="Page_336">[336]</a></span>athematico-Physical Science at -the soul’s middle level; and of History at the ultimate -reaches of the soul’s life.</p> - -<h4>IV. <span class="smcap">The Divine Immanence; Spiritual Personality.</span></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>Panentheism.</i></h5> - -<p>As to our fourth question, the Divine Immanence and -Personality, our last quotations from St. Teresa give us, I -think, our true starting-point. For it is evident that, between -affirming the simple Divinity of the innermost centre of the -soul, and declaring that the soul ever experiences only the -Grace of God, <i>i.e.</i> certain created effects, sent by Him from -the far-away seat of His own full presence, there is room for -a middle position which, whilst ever holding the definite -creatureliness of the soul, in all its reaches, puts God Himself -into the soul and the soul into God, in degrees and with -results which vary indeed indefinitely according to its good-will -and its call, yet which all involve and constitute a presence -ever profoundly real, ever operative before and beyond all -the soul’s own operations. These latter operations are, indeed, -even possible only through all this Divine anticipation, origination, -preservation, stimulation, and, at bottom,—in so far as -man is enabled and required by God to reach a certain real -self-constitution,—through a mysterious Self-Limitation of -God’s own Action,—a Divine Self-Restraint.</p> - -<p>There can be little doubt that such a <i>Panentheism</i> is all -that many a daring, in strictness Pantheistic, saying of the -Christian, perhaps also of the Jewish and Mohammedan, -Mystics aimed at. Only the soul’s ineradicable capacity, -need and desire for its Divine Lodger and Sustainer would -constitute, in this conception, the intrinsic characteristic of -human nature; and it is rather the too close identification, -in feeling and emotional expression, of the desire and the -Desired, of the hunger and the Food, and the too exclusive -realization of the deep truth that this desire and hunger do -not cause, but are themselves preceded and caused by, their -Object,—it is the over-vivid perception of this real dynamism, -rather than any <i>a priori</i> theory of static substances and -identities—which, certainly in many cases, has produced the -appearance of Pantheism.</p> - -<p>And again it is certain that we have to beware of taking -the apparent irruption or ingrafting,—in the case of the -operations of Grace,—of an entirely heterogeneous Force -and Reality into what seems the already completely closed<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_337" id="Page_337">[337]</a></span> -circle of our natural functions and aspirations, as the complete -and ultimate truth of the situation. However utterly different -that Force may feel to all else that we are aware of within -ourselves, however entirely unmeditated may seem its manifestations: -it is clear that we should be unable to recognize -even this Its difference, to welcome or resist It, above all to -find It a response to our deepest cravings, unless we had -some natural true affinity to It, and some dim but most real -experience of It from the first. Only with such a general -religiosity and vague sense, from a certain contact, of the -Infinite, is the recognition of definite, historical Religious -Facts and Figures as true, significant, binding upon my will -and conscience, explicable at all.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Aquinas on our direct semi-consciousness of God’s indwelling.</i></h5> - -<p>St. Thomas, along one line of doctrine, has some excellent -teachings about all this group of questions. For though he -tells us that “the names which we give to God and creatures, -are predicated of God” only “according to a certain relation -of the creature to God, as its Principle and Cause, in which -latter the perfections of all things pre-exist in an excellent -manner”: yet he explicitly admits, in one place, that we -necessarily have some real, immediate experience of the -Nature of God, for that “it is impossible, with regard to -anything, to know whether it exists,”—and he has admitted -that natural reason can attain to a knowledge of God’s bare -existence,—“unless we somehow know what is its nature,” -at least “with a confused knowledge”; whence “also with -regard to God, we could not know whether He exists, unless -we somehow knew, even though confusedly, what He is.”<a name="FNanchor_426_426" id="FNanchor_426_426"></a><a href="#Footnote_426_426" class="fnanchor">[426]</a>—God, -though transcendent, is also truly immanent in the -human soul: “God is in all things, as the agent is present -in that wherein it acts. Created Being is as true an effect of -God’s Being, as to burn is the true effect of fire. God is -above all things,—by the excellence of His nature, and yet -He is intimately present within all things, as the cause of the -Being of all.”—And man has a natural exigency of the face-to-face -Vision of God, hence of the Order of Grace, however -entirely its attainment may be beyond his natural powers:<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_338" id="Page_338">[338]</a></span> -“There is in man a natural longing to know the cause, when -he sees an effect: whence if the intellect of the rational -creature could not attain to the First Cause of things,”—here -in the highest form, that of the Beatific vision of God—“the -longing of its nature would remain void and vain.”<a name="FNanchor_427_427" id="FNanchor_427_427"></a><a href="#Footnote_427_427" class="fnanchor">[427]</a></p> - -<p>But it is the great Mystical Saints and writers who continuously -have, in the very forefront of their consciousness -and assumptions, not a simply moral and aspirational, but -an Ontological and Pre-established relation between the soul -and God; and not a simply discursive apprehension, but a -direct though dim Experience of the Infinite and of God. -And these positions really underlie even their most complete-seeming -negations, as we have already seen in the case of the -Areopagite.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Gradual recognition of the function of subconsciousness.</i></h5> - -<p>Indeed, we can safely affirm that the last four centuries, and -even the last four decades, have more and more confirmed the -reality and indirect demonstrableness of such a presence and -sense of the Infinite; ever more or less obscurely, but none -the less profoundly, operative in the innermost normal consciousness -of mankind: a presence and sense which, though -they can be starved and verbally denied, cannot be completely -suppressed; and which, though they do not, if unendorsed, -constitute even the most elementary faith, far less -a developed Historical or Mystical Religion, are simply -necessary prerequisites to all these latter stimulations and -consolidations.</p> - -<p>(1) As we have already found, it is only since Leibniz that -we know, systematically, how great is the range of every man’s -Obscure Presentations, his dim Experience as against his -Clear or distinct Presentations, his explicit Knowledge; and -how the Clear depends even more upon the Dim, than the -Dim upon the Clear. And further discoveries and proofs in -this direction are no older than 1888.<a name="FNanchor_428_428" id="FNanchor_428_428"></a><a href="#Footnote_428_428" class="fnanchor">[428]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Again, it is the growing experience of the difficulties -and complexities of Psychology, History, Epistemology, and -of the apparent unescapableness and yet pain of man’s mere<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_339" id="Page_339">[339]</a></span> -anthropomorphisms, that makes the persistence of his search -for, and sense of, Objective Truth and Reality, and the keenness -of his suffering when he appears to himself as imprisoned -in mere subjectivity, deeply impressive. For the more man -feels, and suffers from feeling himself purely subjective, the -more is it clear that he is not merely subjective: he could -never be conscious of the fact, if he were. “Suppose that all -your objects in life were realized … would this be a great -joy and happiness to you?” John Stuart Mill asked himself; -and “an irrepressible self-consciousness distinctly answered -‘No.’”<a name="FNanchor_429_429" id="FNanchor_429_429"></a><a href="#Footnote_429_429" class="fnanchor">[429]</a> Whether in bad health just then or not, Mill was -here touching the very depths of the characteristically human -sense. In all such cases only a certain profound apprehension -of Abiding Reality, the Infinite, adequately explains the keen, -operative sense of contrast and disappointment.</p> - -<p>(3) And further, we have before us, with a fulness and -delicate discrimination undreamed of in other ages, the -immense variety, within a certain general psychological -unity, of the great and small Historical Religions, past and -present, of the world. Facing all this mass of evidence, -Prof. Troeltsch can ask, more confidently than ever: “Are -not our religious requirements, requirements of Something -that one must have somehow first experienced in order -to require It? Are they not founded upon some kind of -Experience as to the Object, Which Itself first awakens the -thought of an ultimate infinite meaning attaching to existence, -and Which, in the conflict with selfishness, sensuality -and self-will, draws the nobler part of the human will, -with ever new force, to Itself?” “All deep and energetic -religion is in a certain state of tension towards Culture, for -the simple reason that it is seeking something else and something -higher.”<a name="FNanchor_430_430" id="FNanchor_430_430"></a><a href="#Footnote_430_430" class="fnanchor">[430]</a> And Prof. C. P. Tiele, so massively learned in -all the great religions, concludes: “‘Religion,’ says Feuerbach, -‘proceeds from man’s wishes’ …; according to others, it is -the outcome of man’s dissatisfaction with the external world.… -But why should man torment himself with wishes -which he never sees fulfilled around him, and which the -rationalistic philosopher declares to be illusions? Why? -surely, because he cannot help it.… The Infinite, very -Being as opposed to continual becoming and perishing,—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_340" id="Page_340">[340]</a></span>or -call It what you will,—<i>that</i> is the Principle which gives -him constant unrest, because It dwells within him.” And -against Prof. Max Müller,—who had, however, on this point, -arrived at a position very like Tiele’s own,—he impressively -insists that “the origin of religion consists,” not in a “perception -of the Infinite,” but “in the fact that Man <i>has</i> the -Infinite within him.”—I would only contend further that the -instinct of the Infinite awakens simultaneously with our -sense-perceptions and categories of thinking, and passes, -together with them and with the deeper, more volitional -experiences, through every degree and stage of obscurity -and relative clearness. “Whatever name we give it,—instinct; -innate, original, or unconscious form of thought; or form of -conception,—it is the specifically human element in man.”<a name="FNanchor_431_431" id="FNanchor_431_431"></a><a href="#Footnote_431_431" class="fnanchor">[431]</a> -But if all this be true, then the Mystics are amongst the -great benefactors of our race: for it is especially this presence -of the Infinite in Man, and man’s universal subjection to an -operative consciousness of it, which are th<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_341" id="Page_341">[341]</a></span>e deepest cause -and the constant object of the adoring awe of all truly -spiritual Mystics, in all times and places.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> -<h3><a name="CHAPTER_XV" id="CHAPTER_XV"></a>CHAPTER XV<br /> -<span class="smaller">SUMMING UP OF THE WHOLE BOOK. BACK THROUGH -ASCETICISM, SOCIAL RELIGION, AND THE SCIENTIFIC -HABIT OF MIND, TO THE MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF -RELIGION.</span></h3> - -<p>I now propose to conclude, by getting, through three -successively easier matters, back to the starting-point of this -whole book, and, in doing so, to sum up and delimitate, more -and more clearly, the practical lessons learnt during its long -course. These three last matters and points of observation -shall be Asceticism, Institutionalism, and Mental Activity -and Discipline, or the Scientific Habit—all three in their -relation to the Mystical Element of Religion.</p> - -<h4>I. <span class="smcap">Asceticism and Mysticism.</span></h4> - -<p>Now in the matter of Asceticism, we can again conveniently -consider three points.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Ordinary Asceticism practised by Mystics.</i></h5> - -<p>There is, first, the (generally severe) Asceticism which is -ever connected with at least some one phase, an early one, -of every genuine Mystic’s history, yet which does not differ -essentially from the direct training in self-conquest to which -practically all pre-Protestant, and most of the old Protestant -earnest Christians considered themselves obliged.</p> - -<p>(1) Now it is deeply interesting to note how marked has been, -off and on throughout the last century and now again quite -recently, the renewal of comprehension and respect for the -general principle of Asceticism, in quarters certainly free from -all preliminary bias in favour of Medieval Christianity. -Schopenhauer wrote in 1843: “Not only the religions of -the East but also genuine Christianity shows, throughout<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_342" id="Page_342">[342]</a></span> its -systems, that fundamental characteristic of Asceticism which -my philosophy elucidates.… Precisely in its doctrines of -renunciation, self-denial, complete chastity, in a word, of -general mortification of the will, lie the deepest truth, the high -value, the sublime character of Christianity. It thus belongs to -the old, true, and lofty ideal of mankind, in opposition to the -false, shallow, and ruinous optimism of Greek Paganism, -Judaism and Islam.” “Protestantism, by eliminating Asceticism -and its central point, the meritoriousness of celibacy, -has, by this alone, already abandoned the innermost kernel -of Christianity.… For Christianity is the doctrine of the -deep guilt of the human race … and of the heart’s thirst -after redemption from it, a redemption which can be acquired -only through the abnegation of self,—that is, through a complete -conversion of human nature.”<a name="FNanchor_432_432" id="FNanchor_432_432"></a><a href="#Footnote_432_432" class="fnanchor">[432]</a>—And the optimistically -tempered American Unitarian, the deeply versed Psychologist, -Prof. William James, tells us in 1902: “In its spiritual -meaning, Asceticism stands for nothing less than for the -essence of the twice-born philosophy.” “The Metaphysical -mystery, that he who feeds on death, that feeds on men, -possesses life supereminently, and meets best the secret demands -of the Universe, is the truth of which Asceticism has -been the faithful champion. The folly of the cross, so -inexplicable by the intellect, has, yet, its indestructible, vital -meaning.… Naturalistic optimism is mere syllabub and -sponge-cake in comparison.”<a name="FNanchor_433_433" id="FNanchor_433_433"></a><a href="#Footnote_433_433" class="fnanchor">[433]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Indeed, the only thing at all special to Mysticism, in its -attitude towards this general principle and practice of -Asceticism, is that it ever practises Asceticism as a means -towards, or at least as the make-weight and safeguard of, -Contemplation, which latter is as essentially Synthetic, and, -in so far, peaceful and delightful, as the former is Analytic, -polemical and painful; whereas non-Mystical souls will practise -Asceticism directly with a view to greater aloofness from -sin, and greater readiness and strength to perform the various -calls of duty. And hence, if we but grant the legitimacy -of the general principle of ordinary Asceticism, we shall find -the Mystical form of this Asceticism to be the more easily -comprehensible variety of that principle. For the Mystic’s -practice, as concerns this point, is more varied and inclusive<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_343" id="Page_343">[343]</a></span> -than that of others, since he does not even tend to make the -whole of his inner life into a system of checks and of tension. -The expansive, reconciling movement operates in him most -strongly also, and, where of the right kind, this expansive -movement helps, even more than the restrictive one, to purify, -humble, and deepen his heart and soul.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>God’s Transcendence a source of suffering.</i></h5> - -<p>There is, however, a second, essentially different source -and kind of suffering in some sorts and degrees of Mysticism, -and indeed in other <i>attraits</i> of the spiritual life, which is -deeply interesting, because based upon a profound Metaphysical -apprehension. Although, at bottom, the opposite -extreme to Pantheism, it readily expresses itself, for reasons -that will presently appear, in terms that have a curiously -Pantheistic colour.</p> - -<p>(1) St. John of the Cross writes in 1578: “It is a principle -of philosophy, that all means must … have a certain resemblance -to the end, such as shall be sufficient for the object in -view. If therefore the understanding is to be united to -God, … it must make use of those means which can effect -that union, that is, means which are most like unto God.… -But there is no essential likeness or communion between -creatures and Him, the distance between His divine nature -and their nature is infinite. No creature therefore … -nothing that the imagination may conceive or the understanding -comprehend … in this life … can be a proximate -means of union with God,” for “it is all most unlike -God, and most disproportionate to Him.” “The understanding -… must be pure and empty of all sensible objects, all -clear intellectual perceptions, resting on faith: for faith is the -sole proximate and proportionate means of the soul’s union -with God.”<a name="FNanchor_434_434" id="FNanchor_434_434"></a><a href="#Footnote_434_434" class="fnanchor">[434]</a></p> - -<p>Now it is certain, as we have already found, that the -awakened human soul ever possesses a dim but real experience -of the Infinite, and that, in proportion as it is called to the -Mystical way, this sense will be deepened into various degrees -of the Prayer of Quiet and of Union, and that here, -more plainly than elsewhere, will appear the universal -necessity of the soul’s own response, by acts and the habit of -Faith, to all and every experience which otherwise remains -but so much unused material for the soul’s advance. And it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_344" id="Page_344">[344]</a></span> -is equally certain that St. John of the Cross is one of the -greatest of such contemplatives, and that neither his intuition -and actual practice, nor even his sayings, (so long as any one -saying belonging to one trend is set off against another -belonging to the other trend), contravenes the Christian and -Catholic positions.—Yet it cannot be denied that, were we to -press his “negative way” into becoming the only one; and -especially were we to take, without discount, such a virtual -repudiation, as is furnished by any insistence upon the above -words, of any essential, objective difference in value between -our various apprehensions of Him and approaches to Him: -the whole system and <i>rationale</i> of External, Sacramental and -Historical Religion, indeed of the Incarnation, in any degree -and form, would have to go, as so many stumbling-blocks to -the soul’s advance. For the whole principle of all such -Religion implies the profound importance of the Here and -the Now, the Contingent and the Finite, and of the Immanence -of God, in various degrees and ways, within them.</p> - -<p>Indications of this incompatibility, as little systematically -realized here as in the Areopagite, are afforded by various -remarks of his, belonging in reality to another trend. Thus, -immediately before his denial of any essential likeness or -communion between any creature and God, he says: “It is -true that all creatures bear a certain relation to God and are -tokens of His being, some more, some less, according to the -greater perfection of their nature.” And of Our Lord’s sacred -Humanity he says: “What a perfect living image was Our -Saviour upon earth: yet those who had no faith, though they -were constantly about Him, and saw His wonderful works, -were not benefited by His presence.”<a name="FNanchor_435_435" id="FNanchor_435_435"></a><a href="#Footnote_435_435" class="fnanchor">[435]</a> But even here the -immense importance, indeed downright necessity for Faith, of -such external and historical stimuli, objects and materials,—in -the latter instance all this at its very deepest,—remains -unemphasized, through his engrossment in the necessity of -Faith for the fructification of all these things.</p> - -<p>In other places this Faith appears as though working so -outside of all things imageable, as to have to turn rapidly -away from all picturings, as, at best, only momentary starting-points -for the advanced soul. “Let the faithful soul take -care that, whilst contemplating an image, the senses be not -absorbed in it, whether it be material or in the im<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_345" id="Page_345">[345]</a></span>agination, -and whether the devotion it excites be spiritual or sensible. -Let him … venerate the image as the Church commands -and lift up his mind at once from the material image to those -whom it represents. He who shall do this, will never be deluded.”<a name="FNanchor_436_436" id="FNanchor_436_436"></a><a href="#Footnote_436_436" class="fnanchor">[436]</a> -Here, again, along the line of argument absorbing -the saint in this book, there is no fully logical ground left for -the Incarnational, Historical, Sacramental scheme of the Infinite -immanent in the finite, and of spirit stimulated in -contact with matter, with everywhere the need of the condescensions -of God and of our ascensions by means of careful -attention to them.</p> - -<p>Sören Kierkegaard, that deep solitary Dane, with so much -about him like to Pascal the Frenchman, and Hurrell Froude -the Englishman, and who, though Lutheran in all his bringing -up, was so deeply attracted by Catholic Asceticism, has, in -recent times (he died in 1855), pushed the doctrine of the -qualitative, absolute difference between God and all that we -ourselves can think, feel, will or be, to lengths beyond even -the transcendental element,—we must admit this to be the -greatly preponderant one,—in the great Spaniard’s formal -teaching. And it is especially in this non-Mystical Ascetic -that we get an impressive picture of the peculiar kind of -suffering and asceticism, which results from such a conviction -to a profoundly sensitive, absorbedly religious soul; and here -too we can, I think, discover the precise excess and one-sidedness -involved in this whole tendency. Professor Höffding, -in his most interesting monograph on his friend, tells us how -“for Kierkegaard, … the will gets monopolized by religious -Ethics from the very first; there is no time for Contemplation -or Mysticism.” “To tear the will away,” Kierkegaard himself -says, “from all finite aims and conditions … requires a -painful effort and this effort’s ceaseless repetition. And if, in -addition to this, the soul has, in spite of all its striving, to be -as though it simply were not, it becomes clear that the religious -life signifies a dedication to suffering and to self-destruction. -What wonder, then, that, for the Jew, death was -the price of seeing God; or that, for the Gentile, the soul’s -entering into closer relations with the Deity meant the beginning -of madness?” For “the soul’s relation to God is a -relation to a Being absolutely different from Man, who cannot -confront him as his Superlative or Ideal, and who, nevertheles<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_346" id="Page_346">[346]</a></span>s, -is to rule in his inmost soul. Hence a necessary division, -ever productive of new pains, is operative within man, as long -as he perseveres in this spiritual endeavour.… A finite -being, he is to live in the Infinite and Absolute: he is there -like a fish upon dry land.”<a name="FNanchor_437_437" id="FNanchor_437_437"></a><a href="#Footnote_437_437" class="fnanchor">[437]</a></p> - -<p>Now Prof. Höffding applies a double, most cogent criticism -to this position.—The one is religious, and has already been -quoted. “A God Who is not Ideal and Pattern is no God. -Hence the contention that the Nature of the Godhead is, of -necessity, qualitatively different from that of Man, has ever -occasioned ethical and religious misgivings.”—And the other -is psychological. “Tension can indeed be necessary for the -truth and the force of life. But tension, taken by itself, -cannot furnish the true measure of life. For the general -nature of consciousness is a synthesis, a comprehensive unity: -not only contrast, but also concentration, must make itself -felt, as long as the life of consciousness endures.”<a name="FNanchor_438_438" id="FNanchor_438_438"></a><a href="#Footnote_438_438" class="fnanchor">[438]</a></p> - -<p>It is deeply interesting to note how Catherine, and at -bottom St. John of the Cross and the Exclusive Mystics -generally, escape, through their practice and in some of their -most emphatic teachings, from Kierkegaard’s excess, no doubt -in part precisely because they <i>are</i> Mystics, since the exclusive -Mystic’s contemplative habit is, at bottom, a Synthetic one. -Yet we should realize the deep truth which underlies the very -exaggerations of this one-sidedly Analytic and Ascetical view. -For if God is the deepest ideal, the ultimate driving force and -the true congenital element and environment of Man, such -as Man cannot but secretly wish to will deliberately, and -which, at his best, Man truly wills to hold and serve: yet -God remains ever simply incompatible with that part of each -man’s condition and volition which does not correspond to -the best and deepest which that Man himself sees or could -see to be the better, <i>hic et nunc</i>; and, again, He is ever, -even as compared with any man’s potential best, infinitely -more and nobler, and, though here not in simple contradiction, -yet at a degree of perfection which enables Him, the -Supreme Spirit, to penetrate, as Immanent Sustainer or -Stimulator, and to confront, as Transcendent Ideal and End, -the little human spirit, so great in precisely this its keen -sense of experienced contrast.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_347" id="Page_347">[347]</a></span></p> -<p>Catherine exhibits well this double relation, of true contradiction, -and of contrast, both based upon a certain genuine -affinity between the human soul and God. On one side of -herself she is indeed a veritable fish out of water; but, on the -other side of her, she is a fish happily disporting itself in its -very element, in the boundless ocean of God. On the one -side, snapping after air, in that seemingly over-rarified atmosphere -in which the animal man, the mere selfish individual, -cannot live; on the other side, expanding her soul’s lungs -and drinking in light, life, and love, in that same truly rich -atmosphere, which, Itself Spirit, feeds and sustains her growing -spiritual personality. And the <i>Dialogo</i>, in spite of its -frequently painful abstractness and empty unity, has, upon -the whole, a profound hold upon this great doctrine.</p> - -<p>Yet it is in Catherine’s own culminating intuition,—of the -soul’s free choice of Purgatory, as a joyful relief from the -piercing pain of what otherwise would last for ever,—the -vividly perceived contrast between God’s purity and her -soul’s impurity, that we get, in the closest combination, indeed -mutual causation, this double sense of Man’s nearness to -and distance from, of his likeness and unlikeness to God. For -only if man is, in the deepest instincts of his soul, truly related -to God, and is capable of feeling, (indeed he ever actually, -though mostly dimly, experiences,) God’s presence and this, -man’s own, in great part but potential, affinity to Him: can -suffering be conceived to arise from the keen realization of -the contrast between God and man’s own actual condition at -any one moment; and can any expectation, indeed a swift -vivid instinct, arise within man’s soul that the painful, directly -contradictory, discrepancy can and will, gradually though -never simply automatically, be removed. And though, even -eventually, the creature cannot, doubtless, ever become simply -God, yet it can attain, in an indefinitely higher degree, to -that affinity and union of will with God, which, in its highest -reaches and moments, it already now substantially possesses; -and hence to that full creaturely self-constitution and joy in -which, utterly trusting, giving itself to, and willing God, it -will, through and in Him, form an abidingly specific, unique -constituent and link of His invisible kingdom of souls, on -and on.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Discipline of fleeing and of facing the Multiple and -Contingent.</i></h5> - -<p>But there is a third attitude, peculiar (because of its prepo<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_348" id="Page_348">[348]</a></span>nderance) -to the Mystics as such, an attitude in a manner -intermediate between that of ordinary Asceticism, and that of -the Suffering just described. The implications and effects -of, and the correctives for, this third attitude will occupy us -up to the end of this book. I refer to the careful turning-away -from all Multiplicity and Contingency, from the Visible -and Successive, from all that does or can distract and dissipate, -which is so essential and prevailing a feature in all -Mysticism, which indeed, in Exclusive Mysticism, is frankly -made into the one sole movement towards, and measure of, -the soul’s perfection.</p> - -<p>(1) It is true that to this tendency, when and in so far as it has -come so deeply to permeate the habits of a soul as to form a -kind of second nature, the name Asceticism cannot, in strictness, -be any more applied; since now the pain will lie, not in -this turning away from all that dust and friction, but, on the -contrary, in any forcing of the soul back into that turmoil. -And doubtless many, perhaps most, souls with a pronouncedly -mystical <i>attrait</i>, are particularly sensitive to all, even partial -and momentary, conflict. Yet we can nevertheless appropriately -discuss the matter under the general heading of Asceticism, -since, as a rule, much practice and sacrifice go to build -up this habit; since, in every case, this Abstractive Habit -shares with Ordinary Asceticism a pronounced hostility to -many influences and forces ever actually operative within -and around the undisciplined natural man; and since, above -all, the very complements and correctives for this Abstractiveness -will have to come from a further, deeper and wider -Asceticism, to be described presently.</p> - -<p>(2) As to Ordinary Asceticism and this Abstractiveness, the -former fights the world and the self directly, and then only in -so far as they are discovered to be positively evil or definitely -to hinder positive good; it is directly attracted by the clash -and friction involved in such fighting; and it has no special -desire for even a transitory intense unification of the soul’s -life: whereas the Abstractiveness turns away from, and rises -above, the world and the phenomenal self; their very existence, -their contingency, the struggles alive within them, and -their (as it seems) inevitably disturbing effect upon the soul,—are -all felt as purely dissatisfying; and an innermost longing -for a perfect and continuous unification and overflowing -harmony of its inner life here possess the spirit.</p> - -<p>(3) Now we have just seen how a movement of integration, of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_349" id="Page_349">[349]</a></span> -synthesizing all the soul’s piecemeal, inter-jostling acquisitions, -of restful healing of its wounds and rents, of sinking back, -(from the glare and glitter of clear, and then ever fragmentary -perception, and from the hurry, strain and rapidly ensuing -distraction involved in all lengthy external action), into a -peaceful, dim rumination and unification, is absolutely necessary, -though in very various degrees and forms, for all in any -way complete and mature souls.—And we have, further back, -realized that a certain, obscure but profoundly powerful, direct -instinct and impression of God in the soul is doubtless at -work here, and, indeed, throughout all the deeper and nobler -movements of our wondrously various inner life. But what -concerns us here, is the question whether the <i>complete</i> action of -the soul, (if man would grow in accordance with his ineradicable -nature, environment, and specific grace and call), does -not as truly involve a corresponding counter-movement to this -intensely unitive and intuitive movement which, with most -men, and in most moments of even the minority of men, -forms but an indirectly willed condition and spontaneous -background of the soul.</p> - -<p>(4) We have been finding, further, that all the Contingencies, -Multiplicities and Mediations which, one and all, -tend to appear to the Mystic as so many resistances and -distractions, can roughly be grouped under two ultimate -heads. These intruders are fellow-souls, or groups of fellow-souls,—some -social organism, the Family, Society, the State, -the Church, who provoke, in numberless degrees and ways, -individual affection, devotion, distraction, jealousy, as from -person towards person. Or else the intruders are Things -and Mechanical Laws, and these usually leave the Mystic -indifferent or irritate or distract him; but they can become -for him great opportunities of rest, and occasions for self-discipline.</p> - -<p>Yet this distinction between Persons and Things, (although -vital for the true apprehension of all deeper, above all of -the deepest Reality, and for the delicate discrimination -between what are but the means and what are the ends in -a truly spiritual life), does not prevent various gradations -within, and continuous interaction between, each of these two -great groups. For in proportion as, in the Personal group, -the Individual appears as but parcel and expression of one of -the social organisms, does the impression of determinist Law, -of an impersonal Thing or blind Force, begin to mix with<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_350" id="Page_350">[350]</a></span>, -and gradually to prevail over, that of Personality. And in -proportion as, in the Impersonal group, Science comes to -include all careful and methodical study, according to the -most appropriate methods, of any and every kind of truth -and reality; and as it moves away from the conceptions of -purely quantitative matter, and of the merely numerically -different, entirely interchangeable, physical happenings, (all -so many mere automatic illustrations of mechanical Law), -on, through the lowly organisms of plant-life, and the ever -higher interiority and richer consciousness of animal life, up -to Man, with his ever qualitative Mind, and his ever non-interchangeable, -ever “effortful,” achievements and elaborations -of types of beauty, truth and goodness in Human -History,—does Science itself come back, in its very method -and subject-matter, ever more nearly, to the great personal -starting-point, standard and ultimate motive of all our -specifically human activity and worth.</p> - -<p>(5) Indeed, the two great continuous facts of man’s life, first -that he thinks, feels, wills, and acts, in and with the help or -hindrance of that profoundly material Thing, his physical -body, and on occasion of, and with regard to, the materials -furnished by the stimulations and impressions of his senses; -and again, that these latter awaken within him those, in themselves, -highly abstract and Thing-like categories of his mind -which penetrate and give form to these materials; are enough -to show how close is the pressure, and how continuous the -effect, of Things upon the slow upbuilding of Personality.</p> - -<p>(6) Fair approximations to these two kinds of Things, with -their quite irreplaceable specific functions within the economy -of the human mental life,—the intensely concrete and particular -Sense-Impressions, and the intensely abstract and -general Mental Categories,—reappear within the economy of -Characteristic Religion, in its Sacraments and its Doctrine. -And conversely, there exists, <i>in rerum natura</i>, no Science -worth having which is not, ultimately, the resultant of, and -which does not require and call forth, on and on, certain -special qualities, and combinations of qualities, of the truly -ethical, spiritual Personality. Courage, patience, perseverance, -candour, simplicity, self-oblivion, continuous generosity towards -others and willing correction of even one’s own most -cherished views,—these things and their like are not the -quantitative determinations of Matter, but the qualitative -characteristics of Mind.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_351" id="Page_351">[351]</a></span></p> -<p>(7) I shall now, therefore, successively take Mysticism in its -attitude towards these two great groups of claimants upon -its attention, the Personal and the Impersonal, even though -any strictly separate discussion of elements which, in practice, -ever appear together, cannot but have some artificiality. And -an apparent further complication will be caused by our having, -in each case, to contrast what Mysticism would do, if it -became Exclusive, with what it must be restricted to doing, if -it is to remain Inclusive, <i>i.e.</i> if it is to be but one element in -the constitution of that multiplicity in unity, the deep spiritual -Personality. The larger Asceticism will thus turn out to be -a wider and deeper means towards perfection than even -genuine Mysticism itself, since this Asceticism will have to -include both this Mysticism and the counter movement -within the one single, disciplined and purified life of the soul.</p> - -<h4>II. <span class="smcap">Social Religion and Mysticism.</span></h4> - -<h5><i>Introductory: the ruinousness of Exclusive Mysticism.</i></h5> - -<p>Prof. Harnack says in his <i>Dogmengeschichte</i>: “An old -fairy tale tells of a man who lived in ignorance, dirt and -wretchedness; and whom God invited, on a certain day, to -wish whatsoever he might fancy, and it should be given him. -And the man began to wish things, and ever more things, and -ever higher things, and all these things were given him. At -last he became presumptuous, and desired to become as the -great God Himself: when lo, instantly he was sitting there -again, in his dirt and misery. Now the history of Religion,—especially -amongst the Greeks and Orientals,—closely resembles -this fairy tale. For they began by wishing for themselves -certain sensible goods, and then political, aesthetic, -moral and intellectual goods: and they were given them all. -And then they became Christians and desired perfect knowledge -and a super-moral life: they even wished to become, -already here below, as God Himself, in insight, beatitude and -life. And behold, they fell, not at once indeed, but with a -fall that could not be arrested, down to the lowest level, back -into ignorance, dirt and barbarism.… Like unto their -near spiritual relations, the Neo-Platonists, they were at first -over-stimulated, and soon became jaded, and hence required -ever stronger <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_352" id="Page_352">[352]</a></span>stimulants. And in the end, all these exquisite -aspirations and enjoyments turned into their opposite -extreme.”<a name="FNanchor_439_439" id="FNanchor_439_439"></a><a href="#Footnote_439_439" class="fnanchor">[439]</a></p> - -<p>However much may want discounting or supplementing -here, there is, surely, a formidable amount of truth in this -picture. And, if so, is Mysticism, at least in its Dionysian -type, not deeply to blame? And where is the safeguard -against such terrible abuses?</p> - -<p>Now Prof. Harnack has himself shown us elsewhere -that there is a sense in which Monasticism should be considered -eternal, even among and for Protestants. “Monasticism,” -he says plaintively, in his account of the first three -centuries of Protestantism, “even as it is conceivable and -necessary among Evangelical Christians, disappeared altogether. -And yet every community requires persons, who live -<i>exclusively</i> for its purposes; hence the Church too requires -volunteers who shall renounce ‘the world’ and shall dedicate -themselves entirely to the service of their neighbour.”<a name="FNanchor_440_440" id="FNanchor_440_440"></a><a href="#Footnote_440_440" class="fnanchor">[440]</a>—And -again, scholars of such breadth of knowledge and independence -of judgement as Professor Tiele and his school, insist -strongly upon the necessity of Ecclesiastical Institutions and -Doctrines. The day of belief in the normality, indeed in the -possibility for mankind in general, of a would-be quite individual, -entirely spiritual, quite “pure” religion, is certainly -over and gone, presumably for good and all, amongst all -competent workers.—Nor, once more, can the general Mystical -sense of the unsatisfying character of all things finite, and of -the Immanence of the Infinite in our poor lives, be, in itself, -to blame: for we have found these experiences to mingle -with, and to characterize, all the noblest, most fully human -acts and personalities.—But, if so, what are the peculiarities -in the religion of those times and races, which helped to -produce the result pictured in the <i>Dogmengeschichte?</i></p> - -<p>Now here, to get a fairly final answer, we must throw together -the question of the ordinary Christian Asceticism and -that of the Abstraction peculiar to the Mystics; and we must -ask whether the general emotive-volitional attitude towards -Man and Life,—the theory and practice as to Transcendence -and Immanence, Detachment and Attachment, which, from -about 500 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> to, say, 1450 <i>A.D.</i>, predominantly preceded, -accompanied, and both expanded and deflected the specific -ally Christian and normally human experience in Eastern<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_353" id="Page_353">[353]</a></span> -Christendom, were not (however natural, indeed inevitable, -and in part useful for those times and races), the chief of the -causes which turned so much of the good of Mysticism into -downright harm. At bottom this is once more the question -as to the one-sided character of Neo-Platonism,—its incapacity -to find any descending movement of the Divine into Human -life.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>True relation of the soul to its fellows. God’s “jealousy.”</i></h5> - -<p>Let us take first the relation of the single human soul to its -fellow-souls.</p> - -<p>(1) Now Kierkegaard tells us: “the Absolute is cruel, for it -demands <i>all</i>, whilst the Relative ever continues to demand -<i>some</i> attention from us.”<a name="FNanchor_441_441" id="FNanchor_441_441"></a><a href="#Footnote_441_441" class="fnanchor">[441]</a> And the Reverend George Tyrrell, -in his stimulating paper, <i>Poet and Mystic</i>, shows us that, as -regards the relations between man’s love for man and man’s -love for God, there are two conceptions and answers in reply -to the question as to the precise sense in which God is -“a jealous God,” and demands to be loved alone. In the -first, easier, more popular conception, He is practically -thought of as the First of Creatures, competing with the rest -for Man’s love, and is here placed alongside of them. Hence -the inference that whatever love they win from us by reason -of their inherent goodness, is taken from Him: He is not -loved perfectly, till He is loved alone. But in the second, -more difficult and rarer conception, God is placed, not alongside -of creatures but behind them, as the light which shines -through a crystal and lends it whatever lustre it may have. -He is loved here, not apart from, but through and in them. -Hence if only the affection be of the right kind as to mode -and object, the more the better. The love of Him is the -“form,” the principle of order and harmony; our natural -affections are the “matter” harmonized and set in order; it is -the soul, they are the body, of that one Divine Love whose -adequate object is God in, and not apart from, His creatures.<a name="FNanchor_442_442" id="FNanchor_442_442"></a><a href="#Footnote_442_442" class="fnanchor">[442]</a> -Thus we have already found that even the immensely abstractive -and austere St. John of the Cross tells us: “No one -desires to be loved except for his goodness; and when we -love in this way, our love is pleasing unto God and in great -liberty; and if there be attachment in it, there is greater -attachment to God.” And this doctrine he continuously, -deliberately practises, half-a-century after his Professio<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_354" id="Page_354">[354]</a></span>n, for -he writes to his penitent, Donna Juana de Pedrazas in 1589: -“All that is wanting now, is that I should forget you; but -consider how that is to be forgotten which is ever present to -the soul.”<a name="FNanchor_443_443" id="FNanchor_443_443"></a><a href="#Footnote_443_443" class="fnanchor">[443]</a></p> - -<p>But Father Tyrrell rightly observes: “To square this view -with the general ascetic tradition of the faithful at large is -exceedingly difficult.”<a name="FNanchor_444_444" id="FNanchor_444_444"></a><a href="#Footnote_444_444" class="fnanchor">[444]</a> Yet I cannot help thinking that a -somewhat different reconciliation, than the one attempted by -him,<a name="FNanchor_445_445" id="FNanchor_445_445"></a><a href="#Footnote_445_445" class="fnanchor">[445]</a> really meets all the substantial requirements of the -case.</p> - -<p>(2) I take it, then, that an all-important double law or twin -fact, or rather a single law and fact whose unity is composed -of two elements, is, to some extent, present throughout all -characteristically human life, although its full and balanced -realization, even in theory and still more in practice, is ever, -necessarily, a more or less unfulfilled ideal: viz. that not -only there exist certain objects, acts, and affections that are -simply wrong, and others that are simply right or perfect, -either for all men or for some men: but that there exist -simply no acts and affections which, however right, however -obligatory, however essential to the perfection of us all or of -some of us, that do not require, on our own part, a certain -alternation of interior reserve and detachment away from, -and of familiarity and attachment to, them and their objects. -This general law applies as truly to Contemplation as it does -to Marriage.</p> - -<p>And next, the element of detachment which has to penetrate -and purify simply all attachments,—even the attachment -to detachment itself,—is the more difficult, the less obvious, -the more profoundly spiritual and human element and movement, -although only on condition that ever some amount of -the other, of the outgoing element and movement, and of -attachment, remains. For here, as everywhere, there is no -good and operative yeast except with and in flour; there can -be no purification and unity without a material and a multiplicity -to purify and to unite.</p> - -<p>And again, given the very limited power of attention and -articulation possessed by individual man, and the importance -to the human community of having impressive embodiments -and examples of this, in various degrees and ways, univer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_355" id="Page_355">[355]</a></span>sally -ever all-but-forgotten, universally difficult, universally -necessary, universally ennobling renunciation: we get the -reason and justification for the setting apart of men specially -drawn and devoted to a maximum, or to the most difficult -kinds, of this renunciation. As the practically universal -instinct, or rudimentary capacity, for Art, Science, and -Philanthropy finds its full expression in artists, scientists, -philanthropists, whose specific glory and ever necessary -corrective it is that they but articulate clearly, embody massively -and, as it were, precipitate what is dimly and intermittingly -present, as it were in solution, throughout the -consciousness and requirements of Mankind; and neither the -inarticulate instinct, diffused among all, would completely -suffice for any one of the majority, without the full articulation -by a few, nor the full articulation by this minority could -thrive, even for this minority itself, were it not environed by, -and did it not voice, that dumb yearning of the race at large: -so, and far more, does the general religiosity and sense of the -Infinite, and even its ever-present element and requirement of -Transcendence and Detachment, seek and call forth some -typical, wholesomely provocative incorporation,—yet, here, -with an even subtler and stronger interdependence, between -the general demand and the particular supply.</p> - -<p>And note that, if the minority will thus represent a -maximum of “form,” with a minimum of “matter,” and the -majority a maximum of “matter,” with a minimum of “form”: -yet some form as well as some matter must be held by each; -and the ideal to which, by their mutual supplementations, -antagonisms, and corrections, they will have more and more -to approximate our corporate humanity will be a maximum -of “matter,” permeated and spiritualized by a maximum of -“form.” If it is easy for the soul to let itself be invaded and -choked by the wrong kind of “matter,” or even simply by an -excess of the right kind, so that it will be unable to stamp the -“matter” with spiritual “form”; the opposite extreme also, -where the spiritual forces have not left to them a sufficiency -of material to penetrate or of life-giving friction to overcome, -is ever a most real abuse.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Ordinary Ascesis corrected by Social Christianity.</i></h5> - -<p>Now it is very certain that Ordinary Asceticism and Social -Christianity are, in their conjunction, far less open to this -latter danger than is the Mystical and Contemplative Detachment. -For the former combination possesses the priceless<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_356" id="Page_356">[356]</a></span> -conception of the soul’s personality being constituted in and -through the organism of the religious society,—the visible and -invisible Church. This Society is no mere congeries of -severally self-sufficing units, each exclusively and directly -dependent upon God alone; but, as in St. Paul’s grand figure -of the body, an organism, giving their place and dignity to -each several organ, each different, each necessary, and each -influencing and influenced by all the others. We have here, -as it were, a great living Cloth of Gold, with, not only the -woof going from God to Man and from Man to God, but also -the warp going from Man to Man,—the greatest to the least, -and the least back to the greatest. And thus here the primary -and full Bride of Christ never is, nor can be, any individual -soul, but only this complete organism of all faithful souls -throughout time and space; and the single soul is such a -Bride only in so far as it forms an operative constituent of this -larger whole.—And hence the soul of a Mystical habit will -escape the danger of emptiness and inflation if it keeps up -some,—as much indeed as it can, without permanent distraction -or real violation of its special helps and call,—of that -outgoing, social, co-operative action and spirit, which, in the -more ordinary Christian life, has to form the all but exclusive -occupation of the soul, and which here, indeed, runs the risk -of degenerating into mere feverish, distracted “activity.”</p> - -<p>I take the right scheme for this complex matter to have -been all but completely outlined by Plato, in the first plan of -his <i>Republic</i>, and indeed to have been largely derived by -Christian thinkers from this source; and the excessive and -one-sided conception to have been largely determined by his -later additions and changes in that great book, especially as -these have been all but exclusively enforced, and still further -exaggerated, by Plotinus and Proclus. As Erwin Rhode -finely says of this later teaching of Plato: “It was at the -zenith of his life and thinking that Plato completed his ideal -picture of the State, according to the requirements of his -wisdom. Over the broad foundation of a population discriminated -according to classes, (a foundation which, in its -totality and organization, was to embody the virtue of justice -in a form visible even from afar, and which formerly had -seemed to him to fulfil the whole function of the perfect -State), there now soars, pointing up into the super-mundane -ether, a highest crown and pinnacle, to which all the lower -serves but as a substructure to render possible this life <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_357" id="Page_357">[357]</a></span>in the -highest air. A small handful of citizens, the Philosophers, -form this final point of the pyramid of the State. In this -State, ordered throughout according to the ends of ethics, -these Philosophers will, it is true, take part in the Government, -not joyously, but for duty’s sake; as soon, however, as duty -permits, they will eagerly return to that super-mundane contemplation, -which is the end and true content of their life’s -activity. Indeed, in reality, the Ideal State is now built up, -step by step, for the ‘one ultimate’ purpose of preparing an -abode for these Contemplatives, of training them in their -vocation, the highest extant, and of providing a means for the -insertion of Dialectic, as a special form of life and the highest -aim of human endeavour, into the general organism of the -earthly, civilized life. ‘The so-called virtues’ all here sink -into the shade before the highest force of the soul, the mystic -Contemplation of the Eternal.… To bring his own life to -ripeness for its own redemption, <i>that</i> is now the perfect sage’s -true, his immediate duty. If, nevertheless, he has still to -bethink himself of acting upon and of moulding the world -the virtues will spontaneously present themselves to him: for -he now possesses Virtue itself; it has become his essential -condition.”<a name="FNanchor_446_446" id="FNanchor_446_446"></a><a href="#Footnote_446_446" class="fnanchor">[446]</a></p> - -<p>It is truly impressive to find here, in its most perfect and -most influential form, that ruinously untrue doctrine of the -separation of any one set of men from the mass of their -fellows, and of Contemplation from interest in other souls, -taking the place, (in the same great mind, in the same great -book), of the beautifully humble, rich, and true view of a -constant, necessary interchange of gifts and duties between -the various constituents of a highly articulated organism, a -whole which is indefinitely greater than, and is alone the full -means, end and measure of, all its several, even its noblest, -parts.—Yet the Christian, indeed every at all specifically -religious, reader, will have strongly felt that the second scheme -possesses, nevertheless, at least one point of advantage over -the earlier one. For it alone brings out clearly that element -of Transcendence, that sense and thirst of the Infinite, which -we have agreed upon as the deepest characteristic of man. -And if this point be thus true and important, then another,—the -making of Contemplation into a special vocation,—can -hardly be altogether incorrect.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_358" id="Page_358">[358]</a></span></p> -<p>But if this is our judgment, how are we to harmonize -these two points of Plato’s later scheme with the general -positions of the earlier one. Or, rather, how are we to actuate -and to synthesize our complex present-day requirements and -duties, Christian and yet also Modern, Transcendental and -yet Immanental too? For if we have any delicately vivid -sense of, and sympathy with, the original, very simple, intensely -transcendental, form and emphasis of the Christian teaching, -and any substantial share in the present complex sense of -obligation to various laws and conceptions immanent in -different this-world organizations and systems: we shall -readily feel how indefinitely more difficult and deep the question -has become since Plato’s, and indeed since the Schoolmen’s -time.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Preliminary Pessimism and ultimate Optimism of -Christianity.</i></h5> - -<p>Now I think it is Prof. Ernst Troeltsch who has most -fully explicitated the precise centre of this difficulty, which, -in its acuteness, is a distinctly modern one, and the direction -in which alone the problem’s true solution should be sought.</p> - -<p>(1) “The chief problem of Christian Ethics,” he says, “is -busy,” not with the relation between certain subjective means -and dispositions, but “with the relation between certain -objective ends, which have, in some way, to be thought -together by the same mind as so many several objects, and -to be brought by it and within it to the greatest possible -unity. And the difficulty here lies in the fact, that the -sublunar among these ends are none the less moral ends, -bearing the full specific character of moral values,—that they -are ends-in-themselves, and necessary for their own sakes, -even at the cost of man’s natural happiness; and yet that -they operate in the visible world, and adhere to historical -formations which proceed from man’s natural constitution, -and dominate his earthly horizon; whilst the Super-worldly -End cannot share its rule with any other end. Yet the -special characteristic of modern civilization resides precisely -in such a simultaneous insistence upon the Inner-worldly -Ends, as possessing the nature of ends-in-themselves, and -upon the Religious, Super-worldly End: it is indeed from -just this combination that this civilization derives its peculiar -richness, power, and freedom, but also its painful, interior -tension and its difficult problems.”</p> - -<p>(2) The true solution of the difficulty surely is that “Ethi<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_359" id="Page_359">[359]</a></span>cal -life is not, in its beginnings, a unity but a multiplicity: man -grows up amidst a number of moral ends, whose unification is -not his starting-point but his problem. And this multiplicity -can be still further defined as the polarity of two poles, -inherent in man’s nature, of which the two chief types proceed -respectively from the religious and from the inner-worldly -self-determination of the soul,—the polarity of Religious, and -that of Humane Ethics, neither of which can be dispensed -with without moral damage, yet which cannot be brought -completely under a common formula. On this polarity -depends the richness, but also the difficulty, of our life, since -the sublunar ends remain, to a large extent, conditioned by -the necessities and prerequisites of their own special subject-matters, -and since only on condition of being thus recognized -as ends in themselves, can they attain to their morally -educative power.”<a name="FNanchor_447_447" id="FNanchor_447_447"></a><a href="#Footnote_447_447" class="fnanchor">[447]</a></p> - -<p>(3) Or, to put the same matter from the point of view of -definitely Christian experience and conviction: “The formula, -for the specific nature of Christianity, can only be a complex -conception,—the special Christian form,” articulation and -correction, “of the fundamental thoughts concerning God, -World, Man and Redemption which,” with indefinite variations -of fulness and worth, “are found existing together in all -the religions. And the tension present in this multiplicity of -elements thus brought together is of an importance equal to -that of the multiplicity itself; indeed in this tension resides -the main driving-force of Religion. Christianity” in particular -“embraces a polarity within itself, and its formula must be -dualistic; it resembles, not a circle with one centre, but an -ellipse with two focuses. For Christianity is,” unchangeably, -“an Ethics of Redemption, with a conception of the world -both optimistic and pessimistic, both transcendental and -immanental, and an apprehension both of a severe antagonism -and of a close interior union between the world and God. It -is, in principle, a Dualism, and yet a Dualism which is ever in -process of abolition by Faith and Action. It is a purely -Religious Ethic, which concentrates man’s soul, with abrupt -exclusiveness, upon the values of the interior life; and yet, -again, it is a Humane Ethic, busy with the moulding and -transforming of nature, and through love bringing about an -eventual reconciliation with it. At one time the one, at<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_360" id="Page_360">[360]</a></span> -another time the other, of these poles is prominent: but -neither of them may be completely absent, if the Christian -outlook is to be maintained.—And yet the original germ of -the whole vast growth and movement ever remains an intensely, -abruptly Transcendent Ethic, and can never simply pass over -into a purely Immanental Ethic. The Gospel ever remains, -with all possible clearness and keenness, a Promise of Redemption, -leading us, away from the world, from nature and -from sin, from earthly sorrow and earthly error, on and on to -God; and which cannot allow the last word to be spoken in -this life. Great as are its incentives to Reconciliation, it is -never entirely resolvable into them. And the importance of -that classical beginning ever consists in continuously calling -back the human heart, away from all Culture and Immanence, -to that which lies above both.”<a name="FNanchor_448_448" id="FNanchor_448_448"></a><a href="#Footnote_448_448" class="fnanchor">[448]</a></p> - -<p>(4) We thus get at last a conception which really covers, I -think, all the chief elements of this complex matter. But the -reader will have noted that it does so by treating the whole -problem as one of Spiritual Dynamics, and not of Intellectual -Statics. For the conception holds and requires the existence -and cultivation of three kinds of action and movement in the -soul. There are, first, the various centres of human energy -and duty of a primarily This-world character, each of which -possesses its own kind and degree of autonomy, laws, and -obligations. There is, next, the attempt at organizing an -increasing interaction between, and at harmonizing, (whilst -never emasculating or eliminating), these various, severally -characteristic, systems of life and production into an ever -larger ultimate unity. And, lastly, there is as strong a turning -away from all this occupation with the Contingent and -Finite, to the sense and apprehension of the Infinite and -Abiding. And this dynamic system is so rich, even in the -amount of it which can claim the practice of the majority of -souls, as to require definite alternations in the occupations of -such souls, ranging thus, in more or less rhythmic succession, -from earth to Heaven and from Heaven back again to earth.</p> - -<p>(5) And so great and so inexhaustible is this living system, -even by mankind at large, that it has to be more or less -parcelled out amongst various groups of men, each group -possessing its own predominant <i>attrait</i>,—either to work out<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_361" id="Page_361">[361]</a></span> -one of those immanental interests, say Art, Natural Science, -Politics; or to fructify one or more of these relatively independent -interests, by crossing it with one or more of the others; -or to attempt to embrace the whole of these intra-mundane -interests in one preliminary final system; or to turn away from -this whole system and its contents to the Transcendent and -Infinite; or finally to strive to combine, as far as possible, -this latter Fleeing to the Infinite with all that former Seeking -of the Finite.—We shall thus get specialists within one single -domain; and more many-sided workers who fertilize one -Science by another; and philosophers of Science or of History, -or of both, who strive to reach the <i>rationale</i> of all knowledge -of the Finite and Contingent; and Ascetics and Contemplatives -who, respectively, call forth and dwell upon the sense and -presence of the Infinite and Abiding, underlying and accompanying -all the definite apprehensions of things contingent; -and finally, the minds and wills that feel called to attempt as -complete a development and organization as possible of all -these movements.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Subdivision of spiritual labour: its necessity and its -dangers.</i></h5> - -<p>And yet all the subdivision of labour we have just required -can avoid doing harm, directly or indirectly, (by leading to -Materialism, Rationalism, or Fanaticism, to one or other of -the frequent but ever mischievous “Atomisms”), only on condition -that it is felt and worked <i>as</i> such a subdivision. In -other words, every soul must retain and cultivate some sense -of, and respect for, the other chief human activities not -primarily its own. For, as a matter of fact, even the least -rich or developed individual requires and practises a certain -amount, in an inchoate form, of each and all of these energizings; -and he can, fruitfully for himself and others, exercise -a maximum amount of any one of them, only if he does not -altogether and deliberately neglect and exclude the others; -and, above all, if, in imagination and in actual practice, he -habitually turns to his fellow-men, of the other types and -centres, to supplement, and to be supplemented by, them.</p> - -<p>It will be found, I think, that the quite undeniable abuses -that have been special to the Ascetic and Contemplative -methods and states, have all primarily sprung from that most -plausible error that, if these energizings are, in a sense, the -highest in and for man, then they can, at least in man’s ideal -action and condition, dispense with other and lower energizings<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_362" id="Page_362">[362]</a></span> -and objects altogether. Yet both for man’s practice here and -even for his ideal state in the hereafter, this is not so. There -is no such thing,—either in human experience or in the -human ideal, when both are adequately analyzed and formulated,—as -discursive reasoning, without intuitive reason; or -clear analysis and sense of contrast, without dim synthesis and -a deep consciousness of similarity or continuity; or detachment -of the will from evil, without attachment of the higher -feelings to things good; or the apprehension and requirements -of Multiplicity, without those of Unity; or the vivid -experience of Contingency, Mutation, and the Worthlessly -Subjective, without the, if obscure yet most powerful, instinct -of the Infinite and Abiding, of the true Objective and Valuable -Subjective. Thus, for humanity at large entirely, and -for each human individual more or less, each member of -these couples requires, and is occasioned by, the other, and -<i>vice versa</i>.</p> - -<p>The maxims that follow from this great fact are as plain -in reason, and as immensely fruitful in practice, as they are -difficult, though ever freshly interesting, to carry out, at all -consistently, even in theory and still more in act. For the -object of a wise living will now consist in introducing an ever -greater unity into the multiplicity of our lives,—up to the -point where this unity’s constituents would, like the opposing -metals in an electric battery, become too much alike still to -produce a fruitful interaction, and where the unity would, -thus and otherwise, become empty and mechanical; and an -ever greater multiplicity into the unity,—up to the point -where that multiplicity would, seriously and permanently, -break up or weaken true recollection; and in more and more -expanding this whole individual organism, by its insertion, as -a constituent part, into larger groups and systems of interests. -The Family, the Nation, Human Society, the Church,—these -are the chief of the larger organizations into which the -inchoate, largely only potential, organism of the individual -man is at first simply passively born, yet which, if he would -grow, (not in spite of them, a hopeless task, but by them), -he will have deliberately to endorse and will, as though they -were his own creations.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Mystics and Spiritual Direction.</i></h5> - -<p>It is interesting to note the special characteristics attaching -to the one social relation emphasized by the medieval and -modern varieties of Western Catholic Mysticism; and the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_363" id="Page_363">[363]</a></span> -effect which a larger development of the other chief forces -and modalities of the Catholic spiritual life necessarily has -upon this relation. I am thinking of the part played by the -Director, the soul’s leader and adviser, in the lives of these -Mystics,—a part which differs, in three respects, from that of -the ordinary Confessor in the life of the more active or -“mixed” type of Catholic.</p> - -<p>(1) For one thing, there is here a striking variety and -range, in the ecclesiastical and social position of the persons -thus providentially given and deliberately chosen. The early -German Franciscan Preacher, Berthold of Regensburg, owes -his initiation into the Interior Life to his Franciscan Novice-Master, -the Partial Mystic, David of Augsburg, whose -writings still give forth for us their steady light and genial -warmth; the French widowed noblewoman and Religious -Foundress, St. Jane Frances de Chantal, is helped on her -course to high contemplation by the Secular Priest and -Bishop, St. Francis de Sales; the French Jesuit, Jean -Nicolas Grou, is initiated, after twenty-four years’ life and -training in his Order, by the Visitation Nun, Soeur Pélagie, -into that more Mystical spirituality, which constitutes the -special characteristic of his chief spiritual books; the great -Spaniard, St. Teresa herself, tells us how “a saintly nobleman -… a married layman, who had spent nearly forty years -in prayer, seems to me to have been, by the pains he took, -the beginning of salvation to my soul”—“his power was great”; -and the English Anchorite, Mother Juliana of Norwich, “a -simple, unlettered creature,” seems to have found no special -leader on to her rarely deep, wide, and tender teachings, -but to have been led and stimulated, beyond and after her -first general Benedictine training, by God’s Providence alone, -working through the few and quite ordinary surroundings -and influences of her Anchorage at Norwich.<a name="FNanchor_449_449" id="FNanchor_449_449"></a><a href="#Footnote_449_449" class="fnanchor">[449]</a> It would be -difficult to find anything to improve in this noble liberty of -these great children of God; nor would a larger influence of -the other modalities necessarily restrict this ample range.</p> - -<p>(2) Again, the souls of this type seem, for the most part, to -realize more fully and continuously than those of the ordinar<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_364" id="Page_364">[364]</a></span>y, -simply active and ascetical kind, that the “blind obedience” -towards such leaders, so often praised in their disciples and -penitents, is, where wholesome and strengthening, essentially -a simple, tenacious adherence, during the inevitable times of -darkness and perplexity, to the encouragements given by the -guide to persevere along the course and towards the truths -which this soul itself saw clearly, often through the instrumentality -of this leader, when it was in light and capable of a -peaceful, deliberate decision. For however much the light -may have been given it through this human mediation, (and -the most numerous, and generally the most important, of our -lights, have been acquired thus through the spoken, written, -or acted instrumentality of fellow-souls),—yet the light was -seen, and had (in the first instance), to be seen, by the -disciple’s own spiritual eye; and it is but to help it in -keeping faithful to this light (which, in the first and last -instance, is God’s light and its own) that the leader stands -by and helps. But, given this important condition, there -remains the simple, experimental fact that, not only can -and do others often see our spiritual whereabouts and God’s -<i>attrait</i> for us more clearly than we do ourselves, but such -unselfseeking transmission and such humbly simple reception -of light between man and man adds a moral and spiritual -security and beauty to the illumination, (all other conditions -being equal and appropriate), not to be found otherwise. -It is interesting to note the courageous, balanced, and -certainly quite unprejudiced, testimony borne to these important -points, by so widely read, and yet upon the whole -strongly Protestant, a pair of scholars, as Miss Alice Gardner -and her very distinguished brother, Professor Percy Gardner.<a name="FNanchor_450_450" id="FNanchor_450_450"></a><a href="#Footnote_450_450" class="fnanchor">[450]</a></p> - -<p>(3) And finally, the souls of this type have, (at least for -the two purposes of the suscitation of actual insight, and for -bearing witness to this, now past, experience during the soul’s -periods of gloom), often tended,—in Western Christendom -and during Medieval and still more in Modern times,—to -exalt the office and power of the Director, in the life of the -soul of the Mystical type, very markedly beyond the functions, -rights and duties of the ordinary Confessor in the spiritual -life of the ordinary Catholic.</p> - -<p>Indeed they and their interpreters have, in those times -and places, often insisted upon the guarantee<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_365" id="Page_365">[365]</a></span> of safety thus -afforded, and upon the necessity of such formal and systematic -mediation, with an absoluteness and vehemence -impossible to conciliate with any full and balanced, especially -with any at all orthodox, reading of Church History. For -this feature is as marked in the condemned book of Molinos -and of most of the other Quietists, as it is in such thoroughly -approved Partial Mysticism as that of Père Lallemant and -Père Grou: hence it alone cannot, surely, render a soul completely -safe against excesses and delusions. And this feature -was markedly in abeyance, often indeed, for aught we know, -completely wanting, at least in any frequent and methodic -form, in the numerous cases of the Egyptian and other -Fathers of the Desert: hence it cannot be strictly essential -to all genuine Contemplation in all times and places.</p> - -<p>(4) The dominant and quite certain fact here seems to be -that, in proportion as the Abstractive movement of the soul is -taken as self-sufficient, and a Contemplative life is attempted -as something substantially independent of any concrete, social, -and devotional helps and duties, the soul gets into a state -of danger, which no amount of predominance of the Director -can really render safe; whereas, in proportion as the soul -takes care to practise, in its own special degree and manner, -the outgoing movement towards Multiplicity and Contingency, -(particular attention to particular religious facts and -particular service of particular persons), does such right, quite -ordinary-seeming, active subordination to, and incorporation -within, the great sacred organisms of the Family, Society, -and the Church, or of any wise and helpful subdivision of -these, furnish material, purgation and check for the other -movement, and render superfluous any great or universal -predominance of Direction. St. Teresa is, here also, -wonderfully many-sided and balanced. Just as she comes -to regret having ever turned aside from Christ’s Sacred -Humanity, so too she possesses, indeed she never loses, the -sense of the profoundly social character of Christianity: she -dies as she had lived, full of an explicit and deep love for the -Kingdom of God and the Church.</p> - -<h5>6. <i>Mysticism predominantly Individualistic.</i></h5> - -<p>Yet it is clear that the strong point of the Mystics, as such, -does not lie in the direction of the great social spirituality -which finds God in our neighbour and in the great human -organizations, through and in which, after all, man in great -part becomes and is truly man. They are, as such, Individual<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_366" id="Page_366">[366]</a></span>istic; -the relation between God and the individual soul -here ever tends to appear as constituted by these two forces -alone. A fresh proof, if one were still wanting, that Mysticism -is but one of the elements of Religion,—for Religion -requires both the Social and the Individual, the Corporate -and the Lonely movement and life.</p> - -<p>It is truly inspiring to note how emphatic is the concurrence -of all the deepest and most circumspect contemporary -Psychology, Epistemology, Ethics, and History and Philosophy -of the Sciences and of Religion, in these general -conclusions, which find, within the slow and many-sided -growth and upbuilding of the spiritual personality, a true and -necessary place and function for all the great and permanent -capabilities, aspirations and energizings of the human soul. -Thus no system of religion can be complete and deeply -fruitful which does not embrace, (in every possible kind of -healthy development, proportion and combination), the several -souls and the several types of souls who, between them, -will afford a maximum of clear apprehension and precise -reasoning, <i>and</i> of dim experience and intuitive reason; of -particular attention to the Contingent (Historical Events and -Persons, and Institutional Acts and Means) <i>and</i> of General -Recollection and Contemplation and Hungering after the -Infinite; and of reproductive Admiration and Loving -Intellection, <i>and</i> of quasi-creative, truly productive Action -upon and within Nature and other souls, attaining, by such -Action, most nearly to the supreme attribute, the Pure -Energizing of God.</p> - -<p>Thus Pseudo-Dionysius and St. John of the Cross will, -even in their most Negative doctrines, remain right and -necessary in all stages of the Church’s life,—on condition, -however, of being taken as but one of two great movements, -of which the other, the Positive movement, must also ever -receive careful attention: since only between them is attained -that all-important oscillation of the religious pendulum, that -interaction between the soul’s meal and the soul’s yeast, that -furnishing of friction for force to overcome, and of force to -overcome the friction, that material for the soul to mould, and -in moulding which to develop itself, that <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_367" id="Page_367">[367]</a></span>alternate expiration -and inspiration, upon which the soul’s mysterious death-in-life -and life-in-death so continuously depends.</p> - -<h4>III. <span class="smcap">The Scientific Habit and Mysticism.</span></h4> - -<h5><i>Introductory. Difficulty yet Necessity of finding a True -Place and Function for Science in the Spiritual Life.</i></h5> - -<p>Now it is certain that such an oscillatory movement, such -a give-and-take, such a larger Asceticism, built up out of the -alternate engrossment in and abstraction from variously, yet -in each case really, attractive levels, functions and objects of -human life and experience, is still comparatively easy, as long -as we restrict it to two out of the three great groups of energizings -which are ever, at least potentially, present in the soul, -and which ever inevitably help to make or mar, to develop or -to stunt, the totality of the soul’s life, and hence also of the -strictly spiritual life. The Historical-Institutional, and the -Mystical-Volitional groups and forces, the High-Church and -the Low-Church trend, the Memory- and the Will-energies, -do indeed coalesce, in times of peace, with the Reason-energy, -though, even then, with some difficulty. But in times -of war,—on occasion of any special or excessive action on the -part of this third group, the Critical-Speculative, the Broad-Church -trend, and the energizing of the Understanding,—they -readily combine against every degree of the latter. It is as -though the fundamental vowels A and U could not but -combine to oust the fundamental vowel I; or as if the -primary colours Red and Blue <i>must</i> join to crush out the -primary colour Yellow.</p> - -<p>Indeed, it is undoubtedly just this matter of the full and -continuous recognition of, and allocation of a special function -to, this third element within the same great spiritual -organism which englobes the other two, which is now the -great central difficulty and pressing problem of more or less -every degree and kind of religious life. For the admission -of this third element appears frequently to be ruinous to the -other two; yet the other two, when kept away from it, seem -to lose their vigour and persuasive power.—And yet it is, I -think, exactly at this crucial point that the conception of the -spiritual life as essentially a Dynamism, a slow constitution -of an ever fuller, deeper, more close-knit unity in, and by -means of, the soul’s ineradicable trinity of forces, shows all -its fruitfulness, if we but work down to a sufficientl<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_368" id="Page_368">[368]</a></span>y large -apprehension of the capacities and requirements of human -nature, moved and aided by divine grace, and to a very -precise delimitation of the special object and function of -Mysticism.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Science and Religion: each autonomous at its own level; -and, thus, each helpful to the other.</i></h5> - -<p>Erwin Rhode has well described Plato’s attitude towards -Science and Mysticism respectively, and towards the question -of their inter-relation. “The flight from the things of this -World is, for Plato, already in itself an acquisition of those of -the Beyond, and an assimilation to the Divine. For this -poor world, that solicits our senses, the philosopher has, at -bottom, nothing but negation. Incapable as it is of furnishing -a material that can be truly known, the whole domain of the -Transitory and Becoming has no intrinsic significance for -Science as understood by him. The perception of things -which are ever merely relative, and which simultaneously -manifest contradictory qualities, has its sole use in stimulating -and inviting the soul to press on to the Absolute.”<a name="FNanchor_451_451" id="FNanchor_451_451"></a><a href="#Footnote_451_451" class="fnanchor">[451]</a></p> - -<p>Here we should frankly admit that the soul’s hunger for -the Infinite is, as the great Athenian so deeply realized, the -very mainspring of Religion; and yet we must maintain that -it is precisely this single bound away, instead of the ever-repeated -double movement of a coming and a going, which -not only helped to suppress, or at least gravely to stunt, the -growth of the sciences of external observation and experiment, -but (and this is the special point,—the demonstrable other -side of the medal,) also, in its degree, prevented religion from -attaining to its true depth, by thus cutting off, as far as -Plato’s conviction prevailed, the very material, stimulation, -and in part the instruments, for the soul’s outgoing, spiritualizing -work, together with this work’s profound reflex effect -upon the worker, as a unique occasion for the growth and -self-detachment of the soul.</p> - -<p>Now the necessity for such a first stage and movement, -which, as far as possible both immanental and phenomenalist, -shall be applied and restricted to the special methods, direct -objects, and precise range of each particular Science, and -the importance of the safeguarding of this scientific liberty, -are now clearly perceived, by the leading men of Religion, -Philosophy, Psychology and Physics, in connection with th<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_369" id="Page_369">[369]</a></span>e -maintenance and acquisition of sincere and fruitful Science.—It -is also increasingly seen that, even short of Religion, a -second, an interpretative, an at least Philosophical stage and -movement is necessary for the full explicitation of Science’s -own assumptions and affinities. And the keeping of these -two movements clearly distinct or even strongly contrasted, -is felt, by some far-sighted Theologians, to be a help towards -securing, not only a candid attitude of Science towards its -own subject matters, but also a right independence of -Philosophy and Theology towards the other Sciences. Thus -Cardinal Newman has brought out, with startling force, the -necessarily non-moral, non-religious character of Physico-Mathematical -Science, taken simply within its direct subject-matter -and method. “Physical science never travels beyond -the examination of cause and effect. Its object is to resolve -the complexity of phenomena into simple elements and -principles; but when it has reached those first elements, -principles and laws, its mission is at an end; it keeps within -that material system with which it began, and never ventures -beyond the ‘flammantia moenia mundi.’ The physicist as -such will never ask himself by what influence, external to the -universe, the universe is sustained; simply because he is a -physicist. If, indeed, he be a religious man, he will, of course, -have a very different view of the subject; … and this, not -because physical science says anything different, but simply -because it says nothing at all on the subject, nor can do by -the very undertaking with which it set out.” Or, as he elsewhere -sympathetically sums up Bacon’s method of proceeding: -“The inquiry into physical causes passes over for -the moment the existence of God. In other words, physical -science is, in a certain sense, atheistic, for the very reason -that it is not theology.”<a name="FNanchor_452_452" id="FNanchor_452_452"></a><a href="#Footnote_452_452" class="fnanchor">[452]</a></p> - -<h5>2. <i>Science builds up a preliminary world that has to be -corrected by Philosophy and Religion, at and for their deeper -levels.</i></h5> - -<p>The additional experience and analysis of the last half-century -apparently forces us, however, to maintain not only -that Physico-Mathematical Science, and all knowledge -brought strictly to the type of that Science, does not itself<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_370" id="Page_370">[370]</a></span> -pronounce on the Ultimate Questions; but that this Science, -as such, actually presents us with a picture of reality which, -at the deeper level even of Epistemology and of the more -ultimate Psychology, and still more at that of Religion, -requires to be taken as more or less artificial, and as -demanding, not simply completion, but, except for its own -special purposes, correction as well. Thus we have seen how -M. Bergson finds Clock-Time to be an artificial, compound -concept, which seriously travesties Duration, the reality -actually experienced by us; and Space appears as in even a -worse predicament. M. Emil Boutroux in France, Dottore -Igino Petrone in Italy, Profs. Eucken and Troeltsch in -Germany, Profs. James Ward and Pringle Pattison in -Great Britain, and Profs. William James, Hugo Münsterberg -and Josiah Royce in America are, in spite of differences -on other points, united in insistence upon, or have even -worked out in much detail, such a distinction between the -first stage and level of Determinist, Atomistic, Inorganic -Nature and our concepts of it, and the second stage and level -of Libertarian, Synthetic, and Organic Spiritual Reality, -and our experience of it. And the penetrating labours of -Profs. Windelband, Rickert, and others, towards building up a -veritable <i>Organon</i> of the Historical Sciences, are bringing into -the clearest relief these two several degrees of Reality and -types of Knowledge, the Historical being the indefinitely -deeper and more adequate, and the one which ultimately -englobes the other.<a name="FNanchor_453_453" id="FNanchor_453_453"></a><a href="#Footnote_453_453" class="fnanchor">[453]</a></p> - -<p>A profoundly significant current in modern philosophy -will thus be brought, in part at least, to articulate expression -and application. This current is well described by Prof. -Volkelt. “German philosophy since Kant reveals, in manifold -forms and under various disguises, the attempt to -recognize, in Epistemology, Metaphysics, and Ethics, such -kinds of Certainty, such domains of Being, such human -Volitions and Values, as lie beyond reason, constitute a something -that it cannot grasp, and are rooted in some other kind -of foundation. In variously struggling, indeed stammering -utterances, expression is given to the assurance that not -everything in the world is resolvable into Logic and Thought, -but that mighty resisting remainders are extant, w<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_371" id="Page_371">[371]</a></span>hich -perhaps even constitute the most important thing in the -world.… Such a longing after such a Reality can be -traced in Hamann, Jacobi, Herder, in Novalis, Friedrich -Schlegel, the youthful Schleiermacher, and Jean Paul. Indeed, -even in Hegel, the adorer of Reason, the movement of -Negation, which is the very soul of his philosophy, is, at -bottom, nothing but the Irrational,” the Super-Rational, -“element violently pressed into the form of Reason; and -again the single Thing, the This, the Here and the Now, are -felt by him as … a something beyond Reason. And has -not the Irrational found expression in Kant, in his doctrines -of the unconditional Liberty of the Will and of Radical Evil? -In the later Schelling and his spiritual relatives the Irrational -has found far more explicit recognition; whilst Schopenhauer -brings the point to its fullest expression. Yet even Nietzsche -still possesses such an element, in his doctrine of the ‘Over-Man.’”<a name="FNanchor_454_454" id="FNanchor_454_454"></a><a href="#Footnote_454_454" class="fnanchor">[454]</a> -And in England we find this same element, in -various degrees and in two chief divergent forms, in the -Cambridge Platonists, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and Thomas -Hill Green on the one hand; and in Bishop Butler and -Cardinal Newman on the other hand.</p> - -<p>We can thus point to much clear recognition, or at least -to a considerable influence, of the profound truth that Science -and Wisdom can each prosper and help and supplement the -other, only if each possesses a certain real autonomy, a power -fully to become and to remain itself, and, in various degrees -and ways, to stimulate, check and thwart the other. And -this truth ever presupposes, what human experience, in the -long run, proves to be a fact,—that the different kinds, spheres, -and levels of man’s apprehension, and of the total reality -thus apprehended by him, are already immanently planned -each for the other, within a great, largely dormant system of -the world. Thus Man can and should call this congenital -inter-relatedness into ever more vigorous and more fruitful -play; whereas, if it were not already present deep within -the very nature of things, no amount of human effort or -ingenuity could ever evoke or insert it. Prof. Volkelt has, -as we have seen, illustrated this great fact very strikingly, -with regard to the relation extant between the apparently -sheer contingencies of human History and the requirements -of Philosophy, of normative thought and ideal truth. Yet -a similar inter-connection can be traced elsewhere, betwee<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_372" id="Page_372">[372]</a></span>n -any other two or more levels and spheres of wholesome and -permanent human apprehension and action, in their relation -to various degrees and kinds of reality, as this environs man -or inheres in him.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Necessity of the “Thing-element” in Religion.</i></h5> - -<p>But let us note that the recognition, of an at all emphatic, -systematic kind, of such inter-relatedness is, so far, almost -limited to the moods and persons preoccupied with the right -claims of Science or of Philosophy upon each other or upon -the remainder of Life; and is, as yet, all but wanting, when -Life is approached from the side of the specifically Religious -requirements and of the Spiritual consolidation of man’s soul. -Yet here especially, at by far the most important point of -the whole matter, the unique place and significance of Science -can now be very clearly grasped.</p> - -<p>Indeed it is deeply interesting to note how largely the -fundamental characteristics of Catholicism really meet, or -rather how they strictly require, some such vivid conception -and vigorous use of the Determinist Thing and of its level for -the full constitution of our true depth, our Spiritual Personality -itself. If we take, <i>e.g.</i>, the criticisms addressed, by so -earnest and acute a mind as the intensely Protestant Emile -Sulze, to the whole Thing-Element and -Concept, as these -are at work in the Catholic practice and position, we shall -find his sense of the difference between Thing and Spirit to -be as enviably keen, and his idea of the end and ultimate -measure of Religion to be as sound and deep, as his conception -of the means towards developing Religion and the -Spirit is curiously inadequate.</p> - -<p>(1) “Personality,” says Sulze, “is, for Religion and Morality, -the supreme Good, of which the source is in God, and the -end, the fruit, and the manifestation is in Man.”<a name="FNanchor_455_455" id="FNanchor_455_455"></a><a href="#Footnote_455_455" class="fnanchor">[455]</a> This I -take to be profoundly true, especially if we insist upon -Perfect Personality being Supreme and Perfect Spirit; and, -again, upon our imperfect personality and spirit as possessed -of certain profound affinities to, and as penetrable and -actually moved by, that Perfect Spirit.</p> - -<p>(2) “The value of Personality nowhere finds a full recognition -in Catholicism; Catholicism indeed is Pantheism.” Now -this harsh judgment is based upon two sets of allegations, -which, though treated by Sulze as of the same nature, are, I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_373" id="Page_373">[373]</a></span> -would submit, essentially different, and this because of their -definitely different places and functions in the Catholic system.</p> - -<p>“The Impersonal Godhead, the bond which unites the -three Persons, stands above the Persons. Hence those who -took religion seriously had to lose themselves, pantheistically, -in the abyss of the Divinity. And in Christ the Person was -even looked upon as the product of two Natures, the Divine -and the Human, hence of two Impersonal Forces.”<a name="FNanchor_456_456" id="FNanchor_456_456"></a><a href="#Footnote_456_456" class="fnanchor">[456]</a> Here -two peculiarities in the early Conciliar Definitions are -emphasized, which were doubtless as helpful, indeed necessary, -for the apprehension of the great abiding truths thus conveyed -to the Graeco-Roman mind, as they are now in need of -reinterpretation in the light of our greater sensitiveness to the -difference, in character and in value, which obtains between -the concept of Spirit and Personality and that of Substances -and Things.</p> - -<p>But Sulze continues, without any change in the kind or -degree of his criticism: “Impersonal miraculous means, -created by the Hierarchy, are put by it in the place of the -sanctifying mutual intercourse of the children of God.” -“Christianity, torn away from the religious and moral life, -became thus a special, technical apparatus, without any -religious or spiritual worth. Ecclesiastical Christianity has -become a Pantheism, Materialism, indeed Atheism.”<a name="FNanchor_457_457" id="FNanchor_457_457"></a><a href="#Footnote_457_457" class="fnanchor">[457]</a> We -have so continuously ourselves insisted upon the profound -danger, and frequently operative abuse, of any and all complete -apartness between any one means, function, or <i>attrait</i> of -the spiritual life and the others, that we can, without any -unfairness, restrict ourselves here to the attack upon the -general acceptation of Impersonal means as helps towards -the constitution of Personality. Now Sulze’s principle here,—that -only directly personal means can help to achieve the -end of Personality,—is most undoubtedly false, unless Mathematico-Physical -Science is also to be ruled out of life, as -necessarily destructive of, or at least as necessarily non-conductive -to, Personality.</p> - -<p>(3) Indeed Sulze himself tells us, most truly, that, “for -Religion also, Science is a bath of purification”; and that -“Doctrine and the Sacraments are aids, in the hands of Christ -and of the Community, towards representing the riches of thei<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_374" id="Page_374">[374]</a></span>r -interior life and offering these to believing hearts.”<a name="FNanchor_458_458" id="FNanchor_458_458"></a><a href="#Footnote_458_458" class="fnanchor">[458]</a> This -latter pronouncement is, however, still clearly insufficient. -For if there is a double truth which, at the end of well-nigh -five centuries, ought to have burnt itself indelibly into the -mind and conscience of us all, it is, surely, the following. -On the one hand, Man, unless he develops a vigorous alternating -counter-movement, ever grows like to the instruments -of his labour and self-development, and hence, whilst busy -with Things, (whether these be Natural Happenings and their -Sciences, or Religious Institutions and Doctrines), he inclines -to become, quite unawares, limited and assimilated to them,—himself -thus a Thing among Things, instead of, through -such various Things, winning an ever fuller apprehension of -and growth in Spiritual Personality. Yet, on the other hand, -without such a movement of close contact with the Thing, -(both the intensely concrete, the Here and Now Contingency, -and the profoundly Abstract, the stringent Universal Law) -and without the pleasure and pain derived from the accompanying -sense of contraction and of expansion, of contrast, -conflict, supplementation and renovation,—there is no fullest -discipline or most solid growth of the true spiritual Personality.</p> - -<p>(4) Thus Science, as Sulze himself clearly sees, not merely -aids us to represent and to communicate our personality -acquired elsewhere, but the shock, friction, contrast, the slow, -continuous discipline, far more, beyond doubt, than any -positive content furnished by such science, can and should -constitute an essential part of the soul’s spiritual fertilization. -And similarly, if we move on into the directly religious life, -the Sacramental contacts and Doctrinal systems (the former -so intensely concrete, the latter often so abstract,) are not -simply means towards representing and transmitting spirituality -acquired elsewhere: but they are amongst the means, -and, in some form and degree, the necessary, indeed actually -universal means, towards the awakening and developing and -fulfilling of this our spiritual personality.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Three possible relations between Thing and Thought, -Determinism and Spirit.</i></h5> - -<p>It remains no doubt profoundly true that, with the awakening -of the Mystical sense, will come a more or less acute -consciousness of an at least superficial and preliminary, -difference between this sense, with its specific habits and -informations, and those means and forms, in part so contingent -and external, in part so intensely abstract and yet so<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_375" id="Page_375">[375]</a></span> -precise. But it is equally certain that such a soul, and at such -a stage, even as it continues to require, in some respects more -than ever, for its general balanced development, some of the -irreplaceable discipline and manly, bracing humiliation of the -close external observation and severe abstract generalization -of Science: so also does it continue to require, for the deepening -of the spirit and for the growth of creatureliness, the -contact with religious Things,—the profoundly concrete -Sacraments and the intensely abstract Doctrines of the -religious community.</p> - -<p>(1) In one of Trendelenburg’s most penetrating essays, he -shows us how, between blind Force and conscious Thought,—if -we presuppose any tendency towards unity to exist between -them,—there can be but three possible relations. “Either -Force stands before Thought, so that Thought is not the -primitive reality, but the result and accident of blind Force; -or Thought stands before Force, so that blind Force is not -itself the primitive reality, but the effluence of Thought; -or finally, Thought and Force are, at bottom, only one and -the same thing, and differ only in our mind’s conception of -them.” And only one of these three positions can, by any -possibility, be the true one: hence their internecine conflict.<a name="FNanchor_459_459" id="FNanchor_459_459"></a><a href="#Footnote_459_459" class="fnanchor">[459]</a></p> - -<p>(2) Now Religion, in its normal, central stream, stands most -undoubtedly for Thought before Force, the second, the Theistic -view. And yet it would be profoundly impoverishing for our -outlook and practice, and would but prepare a dangerous -reaction in ourselves or others, were we ever to ignore the -immense influence, in the history, not only of philosophical -speculation, but even of religious feeling and aspiration, not -indeed of the first, the Materialist, view, (which owes all its -strength to non-religious causes or to a rebound against -religious excesses), but of the third, the Pantheistic, Monistic, -view, whose classical exponent Spinoza will probably remain -unto all time.</p> - -<p>(3) If we examine into what constitutes the religious -plausibility and power of this view, we shall find, I think, that -it proceeds, above all, from the fact that, only too often, the -second, the Theistic view and practice, leaves almost or quite -out of sight the purification and slow constitution of the -Individual into a Person, by means of the Thing-element, the -apparently blind Determinism of Natural Law and Natural<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_376" id="Page_376">[376]</a></span> -Happenings. Yet nothing can be more certain than that we -must admit and place this undeniable, increasingly obtrusive, -element and power <i>somewhere</i> in our lives: if we will not own -it as a means, it will grip us as our end. The unpurified, all -but merely natural, animal, lustful and selfish individual man, -is far too like to the brutes and plants, indeed even to the -inorganic substances that so palpably surround him, for it not -to be a fantastic thought to such thinkers as Spinoza, (and -indeed it would be an excessive effort to himself,) to believe -that he is likely, taken simply in this condition, to outlast, and -is capable of dominating, the huge framework of the visible -world, into which his whole bodily and psychical mechanism -is placed, and to which it is bound by a thousand ties and -closest similarities: his little selfish thinkings cannot but -seem mere bubbles on a boundless expanse of mere matter; -all creation cannot, surely, originate in, depend from, and -move up to, a Mind and Spirit in any way like unto this -trivial ingenuity.</p> - -<p>(4) It is true, of course, that Spinoza ended,—as far as the -logic of his system went,—by “purifying” away not only this -animal Individualism, but Spiritual Personality as well, and -this because he takes Mathematico-Physical concepts to be -as directly applicable and as adequate to Ultimate Reality -as are the Ethico-Spiritual categories. We have then to -admit that even so rich and rare, so deeply religious a spirit -as Spinoza could insist upon purification by the “preliminary -Pantheism,” and yet could remain, in theory, the eager exponent -of an ultimate Pantheism. Like the Greeks, he not only -passes through a middle distance, a range of experience which -appears dominated by austere Fate and blind Fortune, but -finds Fate even in ultimate Reality. Whilst, however, the -Greeks often thought of Fate as superior even to the Gods, -Spinoza finds Ultimate Reality to be neither Nature nor -Spirit, but simply Being in General, with a Law which is -neither Natural nor Spiritual Law, but Law in general. This -General Being and General Law then bifurcate, with the -most rigorous determinism and complete impartiality, step -by step, into parallel and ever co-present manifestations -of Nature and of Spirit, and of their respective laws, which, -though different, are also each strictly determined within -their own series.<a name="FNanchor_460_460" id="FNanchor_460_460"></a><a href="#Footnote_460_460" class="fnanchor">[460]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_377" id="Page_377">[377]</a></span></p> - -<p>(5) But Spinoza’s error here undoubtedly lies in his <i>de facto</i> -violent bending (in spite of this theoretical Parallelism) of -all Knowledge, Reality, and Life, under the sole Mathematico-Physical -categories and method; and in the insistence upon -attaining to ultimate Truth by one single bound and with complete -adequacy and clearness. And the greatness here consists -in the keen and massive sense of three profound truths. He -never forgets that Mathematico-Physical Science is rigidly -determinist, and that it stands for a certain important truth -and penetrates to a certain depth of reality. He never ceases -to feel how impure, selfish, petty is the natural man, and how -pure, disinterested, noble, can and should be the spiritual -personality. And he never lets go the sense that, somehow, -that science must be able to help towards this purification.</p> - -<p>(6) Now these three truths must be preserved, whilst the -Mathematico-Physical one-sidedness and the “one-step” error -must be carefully eliminated. And indeed it is plain that -only by such elimination can those truths operate within a -fully congenial system. For only thus, with a dissimilarity -between the Ultimate, Libertarian, Spiritual Reality, and the -Intermediate, Determinist, Physico-Mathematical Range, can -we explain and maintain the pain, not only of the selfish but -also of the true self, in face the Mere Thing; and only thus -is all such pain and trouble worth having, since only thus it -leads to the fuller development and the solid constitution of -an abiding, interior, mental and volitional Personality.</p> - -<h5>5. <i>Purification of the Personality by the impersonal.</i></h5> - -<p>Prof. H. J. Holtzmann has got an eloquent page concerning -the kind of Dualism which is more than ever -desirable for souls, if they would achieve a full and virile -personality in this our day. “It would appear to be the wiser -course for us to recognize the incompatibility between merely -natural existence and truly personal life, just as it is, in its -whole acute non-reconciliation; to insert this conflict into our -complete outlook on to Life in its full breadth and depth, and -to find the harmonization in God the Infinite, in whom alone -such parallels can meet, and not deliberately to blind our right -eye or our left, in order to force that outlook into one single -aspect,—a degree of unification which, when achieved in this -violent manner, would mean for us, at the same time, a point -of absolute inertia, of eternal stagnation.” And he then shows -how it is precisely the interaction within our minds, feelings,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_378" id="Page_378">[378]</a></span> -and volitions, of, on the one hand, the boundless world of -nature, with its majestic impersonality, and on the other hand, -the inexhaustible, indefinitely deeper realm of personal life, -as it appears within the stream of human history, which is -best adapted to give us some fuller glimpses of the greatness -of God and of the specific character of religion.<a name="FNanchor_461_461" id="FNanchor_461_461"></a><a href="#Footnote_461_461" class="fnanchor">[461]</a></p> - -<p>The religious imagination, mind, heart, and will,—that is to -say, the complete, fully normal human being at his deepest,—has -thus been more and more forced, by an increasingly -articulated experience of the forces and requirements of actual -life, to hold and to practise, with ever-renewed attempts at their -most perfect inter-stimulation and mutual supplementation, a -profoundly costing, yet immensely fruitful, trinity in unity of -convictions on this point.</p> - -<p>In every time, place, and race, man will continue to be or -to become religious, in proportion to his efficacious faith in, -and love of, the overflowing reality and worth of the great -direct objects of religion,—God and the soul, and their inter-relation -in and through the Kingdom of God, the Church, -and its Divine-Human Head,—the whole constituting God’s -condescension towards and immanence in man, and man’s -response and orientation towards the transcendent God.</p> - -<p>And again, in every age, place, and race, man will be or -will become deeply religious, in proportion to the keenness -with which he realizes the immense need of spiritual growth -and purification for his, at best, but inchoate personality.</p> - -<p>But,—and this third point we must admit, in the precise -extension and application given to it here, to be characteristically -modern,—man will, (if he belongs to our time and -to our Western races, and is determined fully to utilize our -special circumstances, lights and trials, as so many means -towards his own spiritualization), have carefully to keep in -living touch with that secondary and preliminary reality, -the Thing-world, the Impersonal Element, Physical Science -and Determinist Law. He will have to pass and repass -beneath these Caudine forks; to plunge and to replunge into -and through this fiery torrent; and, almost a merely animal -individual at the beginning and on this side of such docile -bendings and such courageous plungings, he will, (if he combines -them with, and effects them through, those two other, -abiding and ultimate, directly religious convictions), st<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_379" id="Page_379">[379]</a></span>raighten -himself up again to greater heights, and will come forth from -the torrent each time a somewhat purer and more developed -spiritual person than he was before such contraction and -purgation.</p> - -<h5>6. <i>This position new for Science, not for Religion.</i></h5> - -<p>Yet even this third point has, if we will but look to its -substantial significance and religious function, been equivalently -held and practised ever since the Twice-Born life, the -deeper religion, has been lived at all.</p> - -<p>(1) The Ascetic’s self-thwarting, and the Mystic’s self-oblivion -and seeking after Pure Love, what are they but the -expressions of the very same necessities and motives which -we would wish to see fully operative here? For we are not, -of course, here thinking of anything simply intellectual, and -fit only for the educated few. Any poor laundry-girl, who -carefully studies and carries out the laws of successful -washing, who moves, in alternation, away from this concentration -on the Thing, to recollection and increasingly affective -prayer and rudimentary contemplation, and who seeks the -fuller growth of her spirit and of its union with God, in this -coming and going, to and from the Visible and Contingent, to -and from the Spiritual and Infinite, and in what these several -levels have of contrast and of conflict; or any lowly farm-labourer -or blacksmith or miner, who would proceed similarly -with his external determinist mechanical work, and with his -deeply internal requirements and spiritual growth and consolidation: -would all be carrying out precisely what is here -intended.</p> - -<p>(2) As a matter of fact, the source of such novelty, as may -be found here, is not on the side of religion, but on that of -science. For the conception of Nature of the ancient Greek -Physicists, and indeed that of Aristotle, required to be profoundly -de-humanized, de-sentimentalized: a rigorous mathematical -Determinism and soulless Mechanism became the -right and necessary ideal of Physical Science. But, long -before the elaboration of this concept of the ruthless Thing, -and of its blind Force, Our Lord had, by His Life and -Teaching, brought to man, with abidingly unforgettable, -divine depth and vividness, the sense of Spirit and Personality, -with its liberty and interiority, its far-looking wisdom and -its regenerating, creative power of love. And for some -thirteen centuries after this supreme spiritual revelation and -discovery, that old anthropomorphic and anthropocentric<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_380" id="Page_380">[380]</a></span> -conception of the Physical Universe continued, well-nigh -unchanged, even among the earlier and middle schoolmen, -and was readily harmonized with that Spiritual world. Yet -they were harmonized, upon the whole, by a juxtaposition -which, in proportion as the conception of Nature became -Determinist and Mechanical, has turned out more and more -untenable; and which, like all simple juxtapositions, could -not, as such, have any spiritually educative force. But Spiritual -Reality has now,—for those who have become thoroughly -awake to the great changes operated, for good and all, in -man’s conception of the Physical Universe during now three -centuries,—to be found under, behind, across these Physical -Phenomena and Laws, which both check and beckon on the -mind and soul of man, in quest of their ultimate mainstay -and motivation.</p> - -<p>(3) And let us note how much some such discipline and -asceticism is required by the whole Christian temper and -tradition, and the weakening of some older forms of it.</p> - -<p>During the first three generations Christians were profoundly -sobered by the keen expectation of Our Lord’s -proximate Second Coming, and of the end of the entire -earthly order of things, to which all their natural affections -spontaneously clung; and again and again, up to well-nigh -the Crusading Age, this poignant and yet exultant -expectation seized upon the hearts of Christians. And then, -especially from St. Augustine’s teaching onwards, an all-pervading, -frequently very severe, conviction as to the -profound effects of Original Sin, a pessimistic turning away -from the future of this sublunar world, as leading up to the -great Apostacy, and a concentration upon Man’s prehistoric -beginnings, as incomparably eclipsing all that mankind would -ever achieve here below, came and largely took the place, as -the sobering, detaching element in Christianity, of the vivid -expectation of the Parousia which had characterized the -earlier Christian times.</p> - -<p>Clearly, the Parousia and the Original Sin conception have -ceased to exercise their old, poignantly detaching power upon -us. Yet we much require some such special channel and -instrument for the preservation and acquisition of the absolutely -essential temper of Detachment and Other-Worldiness. -I think that this instrument and channel of purification and -detachment—if we have that thirst for the More and the -Other than all things visible can give to our souls, (a th<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_381" id="Page_381">[381]</a></span>irst -which the religious sense alone can supply and without -which we are religiously but half-awake)—is offered to us -now by Science, in the sense and for the reasons already -described.</p> - -<h5>7. <i>Three kinds of occupation with Science.</i></h5> - -<p>Let the reader note that thus, and, I submit, thus only, we -can and do enlist the religious passion itself on the side of -disinterested, rightly autonomous science. For thus the -harmony between the different aspects and levels of life is -not, (except for our general faith in its already present -latent reality, and in its capacity for ultimate full realization -and manifestation), the static starting-point or automatically -persisting fact in man’s life; but it is, on the contrary, his -ever difficult, never completely realized goal,—a goal which -can be reached only by an even greater transformation within -the worker than within the materials worked upon by him,—a -transformation in great part effected by the enlargement -and purification, incidental to the inclusion of that large -range of Determinist Thing-laws and experiences within the -Spirit’s Libertarian, Personal life.</p> - -<p>It is plain that there are three kinds and degrees of occupation -with Things and Science, and with their special level -of truth and reality; and that in proportion as their practice -within, and in aid of, the spiritual life is difficult, in the -same proportion, (given the soul’s adequacy to this particular -amount of differentiation and pressure)—is this practice -purifying. And though but few souls will be called to any -appreciable amount of activity within the third degree, all -souls can be proved, I think, to require a considerable amount -of the first two kinds, whilst mankind at large most undoubtedly -demands careful, thorough work of all three -sorts.</p> - -<p>The first kind is that of the man with a hobby. His -directly religious acts and his toilsome bread-winning will -thus get relieved and alternated by, say, a little Botany or a -little Numismatics, or by any other “safe” science, taken -in a “safe” dose, in an easy, <i>dilettante</i> fashion, for purposes -of such recreation. This kind is already in fairly general -operation, and is clearly useful in its degree and way, but -it has, of course, no purificatory force at all.</p> - -<p>The second kind is that of the man whose profession is -some kind of science which has, by now, achieved a more -or less secure place alongside of, or even within,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_382" id="Page_382">[382]</a></span> religious -doctrines and feelings,—such as Astronomy or Greek Archaeology. -Here the purification will be in proportion to the -loyal thoroughness with which he fully maintains, indeed -develops, the special characteristics and autonomy both of these -Sciences, as the foreground, part-material and stimulation, -and of Religion, as the groundwork, background and ultimate -interpreter and moulder of his complete and organized life; -and with which he makes each contribute to the development -of the other and of the entire personality, its apprehensions -and its work. This second kind is still comparatively rare, -doubtless, in great part, because of the considerable cost and -the lifelong practice and training involved in what readily -looks like a deliberate complicating and endangering of -things, otherwise, each severally, simple and safe.</p> - -<p>And the third kind is that of him whose systematic mental -activity is devoted to some science or research, which is still -in process of winning full and peaceful recognition by official -Theology,—say, Biological Evolution or Biblical Criticism. -Here the purification will, for a soul capable of such a strain, -be at its fullest, provided such a soul is deeply moved by, and -keeps devotedly faithful to, the love of God and of man, of -humble labour and of self-renouncing purification, and, within -this great ideal and determination, maintains and ameliorates -with care the methods, categories and tests special both to -these sciences and investigations, and to their ultimate -interpretation and utilization in the philosophy and life of -religion. For here there will, as yet, be no possibility of so -shunting the scientific activity on to one side, or of limiting -it to a carefully pegged-out region, as to let Religion and -Science energize as forces of the same kind and same level, -the same clearness and same finality; but the Science will -here have to be passed through, as the surface-level, on the -way to Religion as underlying all. What would otherwise -readily tend to become, as it were, a mental Geography, -would thus here give way to what might be pictured as a -spiritual Geology.</p> - -<h5>8. <i>Historical Science, Religion’s present, but not ultimate, -problem.</i></h5> - -<p>The reader will have noted that, for each of these three -stages, I have taken an Historico-Cultural as well as a -Mathematico-Physical Science, though I am well aware of -the profound difference between them, both as to their -prerequisites and method, and their aim and depth. And,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_383" id="Page_383">[383]</a></span> -again, I know well that, for the present, the chief intellectual -difficulty of Religion, or at least the main conflict or friction -between the Sciences and Theology, seems to proceed, not -from Physical Science but from Historical Criticism, especially -as applied to the New Testament, so that, on this ground -also, I ought, apparently, to keep these two types of Science -separate.—Yet it is clear, I think, that, however distinct, -indeed different, should be the methods of these two sorts -of Science, they are in so far alike, if taken as a means of -purification for the soul bent upon its own deepening, that -both require a slow, orderly, disinterested procedure, capable -of fruitfulness only by the recurring sacrifice of endless petty -self-seekings and obstinate fancies, and this in face of that -natural eagerness and absoluteness of mind which strong -religious emotions will, unless they too be disciplined and -purified, only tend to increase and stereotype.</p> - -<p>The matters brought up by Historical Criticism for the -study and readjustment of Theology, and for utilization by -Religion, are indeed numerous and in part difficult. Yet the -still more general and fundamental alternatives lie not here, -but with the questions as to the nature and range of Science -taken in its narrower sense,—as concerned with Quantity, -Mechanism, and Determinism alone.</p> - -<p>If Science of this Thing-type be all that, in any manner -or degree, we can apprehend in conformity with reality or -can live by fruitfully: then History and Religion of every -kind must be capable of a strict assimilation to it, or they -must go. But if such Science constitute only one kind, and, -though the clearest and most easily transferable, yet the least -deep, and the least adequate to the ultimate and spiritual -reality, among the chief levels of apprehension and of life -which can be truly experienced and fruitfully lived by man; -and if the Historical and Spiritual level can be shown to find -room for, indeed to require, the Natural and Mechanical level, -whilst this latter, taken as ultimate, cannot accommodate, but -is forced to crush or to deny, the former: then a refusal to -accept more than can be expressed and analyzed by such -Physico-Mathematical Science would be an uprooting and a -discrowning of the fuller life, and would ignore the complete -human personality, from one of whose wants the entire impulse -to such Science took its rise.</p> - -<p>As a matter of fact, we find the following three alternatives.</p> - -<p>Level all down to Mathematico-Physical Science, and you<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_384" id="Page_384">[384]</a></span> -deny the specific constituents of Spirituality, and you render -impossible the growth of the Person out of, and at the expense -of, the Individual. Proclaim the Person and its Religion, as -though they were static substances adequately present from -the first, and ignore, evade or thwart that Thing-level and -method as far as ever you can, and you will, in so far, keep -back the all but simply animal Individual from attaining to -his full spiritual Personality. But let grace wake up, in such -an Individual, the sense of the specific characteristics of -Spirituality and the thirst to become a full and ever fuller -Person, and this in contact and conflict with, as well as in -recollective abstraction from, the apparently chance contingencies -of History and Criticism, and the seemingly fatalistic -mechanisms of Physics and Mathematics: and you will be -able, by humility, generosity, and an ever-renewed alternation -of such outgoing, dispersive efforts and of such incoming recollection -and affective prayer, gradually to push out and to -fill in the outlines of your better nature, and to reorganize it -all according to the Spirit and to Grace, becoming thus a -deep man, a true personality.</p> - -<p>Once again: take the intermediate, the Thing-level as final, -and you yourself sink down more and more into a casual -Thing, a soulless Law; Materialism, or, at best, some kind of -Pantheism, must become your practice and your creed.—Take -the anterior, the Individual-level as final, and you will remain -something all but stationary, and if not merely a Thing yet -not fully a Person; and if brought face to face with many an -Agnostic or Pantheist of the nobler sort, who is in process of -purification from such childish self-centredness by means of -the persistently frank and vivid apprehension of the Mechanical, -Determinist, Thing-and-Fate level of experience and -degree of truth, you will, even if you have acquired certain -fragmentary convictions and practices of religion, appear -strangely less, instead of more, than your adversary, to any -one capable of equitably comparing that Agnostic and yourself—you -who, if Faith be right, ought surely to be not less -but more of a personality than that non-believing soul.</p> - -<p>But take the last, the Spiritual, Personal level as alone ultimate, -and yet as necessarily requiring, to be truly reached and -maintained, that the little, selfish, predominantly animal-minded, -human being should ever pass and repass from this, -his Individualistic plane and attitude, through the Thing-and-Fate -region, out and on to the “shining table-land, whereo<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_385" id="Page_385">[385]</a></span>f -our God Himself is sun and moon”: and you will, in time, -gain a depth and an expansion, a persuasive force, an -harmoniousness and intelligibleness with which, everything else -being equal, the Pantheistic or Agnostic self-renunciation -cannot truly compare. For, in these circumstances, the latter -type will, at best, but prophesy and prepare the consummation -actually reached by the integrational, dynamic religiousness, -the Individual transformed more and more into Spirit and -Person, by the help of the Thing and of Determinist Law. -Freedom, Interiority, Intelligence, Will, Grace, and Love, the -profoundest Personality, a reality out of all proportion more -worthy and more ultimate than the most utterly unbounded -universe of a simply material kind could ever be, thus appear -here, in full contradiction of Pantheism, as ultimate and -abiding; and yet all that is great and legitimate in Pantheism -has been retained, as an intermediate element and stage, of a -deeply purifying kind.</p> - -<h5>9. <i>Return to Saints John of the Cross and Catherine of -Genoa.</i></h5> - -<p>And thus we come back to the old, sublime wisdom of St. -John of the Cross, in all that it has of continuous thirst after -the soul’s purification and expansion, and of a longing to lose -itself, its every pettiness and egoistic separateness, in an -abstract, universal, quasi-impersonal disposition and reality, -such as God here seems to require and to offer as the means -to Himself. Only that now we have been furnished, by -the ever-clearer self-differentiation of Mathematico-Physical -Science, with a zone of pure, sheer Thing, mere soulless Law, -a zone capable of absorbing all those elements from out of -our thought and feeling which, if left freely to mingle with -the deeper level of the growing Spiritual Personality, would -give to this an unmistakably Pantheistic tinge and trend. -Hence, now the soul will have, in one of its two latter -movements, to give a close attention to contingent facts and -happenings and to abstract laws, possessed of no direct -religious significance or interpretableness which, precisely -because of this, will, if practised as part of the larger whole -of the purificatory, spiritual upbuilding of the soul, in no -way weaken, but stimulate and furnish materials for the -other movement, the one specially propounded by the great -Spaniard, in which the soul turns away, from all this -particularity, to a general recollection and contemplative -prayer.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_386" id="Page_386">[386]</a></span></p> -<p>And we are thus, perhaps, in even closer touch with -Catherine’s central idea,—the soul’s voluntary plunge into -a painful yet joyous purgation, into a state, and as it were -an element, which purges away, (since the soul itself freely -accepts the process), all that deflects, stunts, or weakens the -realization of the soul’s deepest longings,—the hard self-centredness, -petty self-mirrorings, and jealous claimfulness, -above all. For though, in Catherine’s conception, this at first -both painful and joyful, and then more and more, and at last -entirely, joyful, ocean of light and fire is directly God and -His effects upon the increasingly responsive and unresisting -soul: yet the apparent Thing-quality here, the seemingly -ruthless Determinism of Law, in which the little individual is -lost for good and all, and which only the spiritual personality -can survive, are impressively prominent throughout this great -scheme. And though we cannot, of course, take the element -and zone of the sheer Thing and of Determinist Law as God, -or as directly expressive of His nature, yet we can and must -hold it, (in what it is in itself, in what it is as a construction -of our minds, and in its purificatory function and influence -upon our unpurified but purifiable souls), to come from God -and to lead to Him. And thus here also we escape any touch -of ultimate Pantheism, without falling into any cold Deism -or shallow Optimism. For just because we retain, at the -shallower level, the ruthlessly impersonal element, can we, by -freely willed, repeated passing through such fatalistic-seeming -law, become, from individuals, persons; from semi-things, -spirits,—spirits more and more penetrated by and apprehensive -of the Spirit, God, the source and sustainer of all this growth -and reality.</p> - -<p>And yet, let us remember once more, the foreground and -preliminary stage to even the sublimest of such lives will never, -here below at least, be abidingly transcended, or completely -harmonized with the groundwork and ultimate stage, by the -human personality. Indeed our whole contention has been -that, with every conceivable variation of degree, of kind, and -of mutual relation, these two stages, and some sort of friction -between them, are necessary, throughout this life, for the full -development, the self-disciplin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_387" id="Page_387">[387]</a></span>e, and the adequate consolidation, -at the expense of the childish, sophistic individual, of -the true spiritual Personality.</p> - -<h4>IV. <span class="smcap">Final Summary and Return to the Starting-point -of the Whole Inquiry: the Necessity, -and yet the Almost Inevitable Mutual Hostility, -of the Three Great Forces of the Soul -and of the Three Corresponding Elements of -Religion.</span></h4> - -<p>Our introductory position as to the three great forces of -the soul, with the corresponding three great elements of -religion, appears, then, to have stood the test of our detailed -investigation. For each of these forces and corresponding -elements has turned out to be necessary to religion, and yet -to become destructive of itself and of religion in general -where this soul-force and religious element is allowed gravely -to cripple, or all but to exclude, the other forces and elements, -and their vigorous and normal action and influence.</p> - -<h5>1. <i>Each of these three forces and elements is indeed necessary, -but ruinously destructive where it more or less ousts the other -two.</i></h5> - -<p>(1) The psychic force or faculty by which we remember -and picture things and scenes; the law of our being which -requires that sense-impressions should stimulate our thinking -and feeling into action, and that symbols, woven by the -picturing faculty out of these impressions, should then express -these our thoughts and feelings; and the need we have, for -the due awakening, discipline and supplementation of every -kind and degree of experience and action, that social tradition, -social environment, social succession should ever be before -and around and after our single lives: correspond to and -demand the Institutional and Historical Element of Religion. -This element is as strictly necessary as are that force and -that law.</p> - -<p>Yet if this force and need of the soul, and this religious -element are allowed to emasculate the other two primary -soul-forces and needs and the religious elements corresponding -to them, it will inevitably degenerate into more or less of a -Superstition,—an oppressive materialization and dangerous -would-be absolute fixation of even quite secondary and temporary -expressions and analyses of religion; a ruinous belief -in the direct transferableness of religious conviction; and <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_388" id="Page_388">[388]</a></span>a -predominance of political, legal, physically coercive concepts -and practices with regard to those most interior, strong yet -delicate, readily thwarted or weakened, springs of all moral -and religious character,—spiritual sincerity and spontaneity -and the liberty of the children of God. We thus get too -great a preponderance of the “Objective,” of Law and Thing, -as against Conviction and Person; of Priest as against -Prophet; of the movement from without inwards, as against -the movements from within outwards.</p> - -<p>The Spanish Inquisition we found to be probably the most -striking example and warning here. Yet the Eastern Christian -Churches have doubtless exhibited these symptoms, if less -acutely, yet more extensively and persistently. And the -Protestant Reformation-Movement, (even in the later lives -of its protagonists, Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin), much of -orthodox Lutheranism and Calvinism, and some forms and -phases of Anglican Highchurchism and of Scotch Presbyterianism, -show various degrees and forms of a similar one-sidedness. -In Judaism the excesses in the Priestly type of -Old Testament religion, especially as traceable after the Exile, -and their partial continuation in Rabbinism, furnish other, -instructive instances of such more or less partial growth,—the -Pharisees and the Jerusalem Sanhedrin being here the -fullest representatives of the spirit in question. The classical -Heathen Roman religion was, throughout, too Naturalistic -for its, all but exclusive, externalism and legalism to be felt -as seriously oppressive of any other, considerable element -of that religion. And much the same could doubtless be -said of Indian Brahmanism to this day. But in orthodox -Mohammedanism we get the truly classical instance of such -a predominance, in all its imposing strength and terrible, -because all but irremediable, weakness—with its utterly -unanalytic, unspeculative, unmystical, thing-like, rock-solid -faith; its detailed rigidity and exhaustive fixity; its stringent -unity of organization and military spirit of entirely blind -obedience; its direct, quite unambiguous intolerance, and -ever ready appeal to the sword, as the normal and chief -instrument for the propagation of the spirit; and its entirely -inadequate apprehension of man’s need of purification and -regeneration in all his untutored loves, fears, hopes and -hates.</p> - -<p>(2) Then there is the soul-force by which we analyze and -synthesize, and the law of our being which requires us t<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_389" id="Page_389">[389]</a></span>o -weigh, compare, combine, transfer, or ignore the details and -the evidential worth of what has been brought home to us -through the stimulation of our senses, by our picturing -faculty and memory, and by means of our Social, Historical, -and Institutional environment, and which orders us to -harmonize all these findings into as much as may be of an -intelligible whole of religion, and to integrate this religious -whole within some kind of, at least rough, general conception -as to our entire life’s experience. And this force and law -are answered by the Critical-Historical and Synthetic-Philosophical -element of religion. We thus get Positive -and Dogmatic Theology. And this element is as humanly -inevitable and religiously necessary as is that soul-force and -law.</p> - -<p>Yet here again, if this force, law, and element are allowed -superciliously to ignore, or violently to explain away, the -other kinds of approaches and contributions to religious -truth and experience, special to the other two soul-forces and -religious elements, we shall get another destructive one-sidedness, -a Rationalistic Fanaticism, only too often followed -by a lengthy Agnosticism and Indifference. Whilst the -Rationalist Fanaticism lasts, everything will doubtless appear -clear and simple to the soul, but then this “everything” will -but represent the merest skimmings upon the face of the -mighty deep of living, complete religion,—a petty, artificial -arrangement by the human mind of the little which, there -and then, it can easily harmonize into a whole, or even -simply a direct hypostatizing of the mind’s own bare -categories.</p> - -<p>The worship of the Goddess of Reason at Notre-Dame of -Paris we found to be here, perhaps, the most striking instance. -Yet Rationalist excesses, varying from a cold Deism down to -an ever short-lived formal Atheism, and the lassitude of a -worldly-wise Indifferentism, are traceable within all the great -religions. Thus a large proportion of the educated members -of the ancient Graeco-Roman world were, from the Sophists -and the Second Punic War onward, stricken with such a -blight. The Sadducees are typical of this tendency among -the Jews for some two centuries. The tough persistence of -a mostly obscure current of destructive free-thought throughout -Western Europe in the Middle Ages shows well the -difficulty and importance of a mental and spiritual victory -over these forces of radical negation, and of not simply<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_390" id="Page_390">[390]</a></span> -driving them beneath the surface of society. And the ready -lapse of the most daring and intense of the Medieval, Jewish -and Christian, Scholastics into a thoroughly Pantheistic -Panlogism, points to the prevalence, among these circles, of -a certain tyranny of the abstractive and logical faculty over -the other powers and intimations of the soul.—Unitarianism -again is, in its origins and older form, notwithstanding its -even excessive anti-Pantheism, strongly Scholastic in its -whole temper and method, and this without the important -correctives and supplementations brought to that method by -the largely Mystical and Immanental Angel of the Schools. -The greater part of the “Aufklärung”-Movement was vitiated -by an often even severer, impoverishment of the whole -conception of religion. And, in our day, the Liberal movements -within the various Christian bodies, and again among -Brahmanic religionists in India, rarely escape altogether from -ignoring or explaining away the dark and toilsome aspects of -life, and the inevitable excess of all deep reality, and indeed -of our very experience of it, above our clear, methodical, -intellectual analysis and synthesis of it. Too often and for -too long all such groups have inclined to assimilate all -Experience to clear Knowledge, all clear Knowledge to -Physico-Mathematical Science, all Religion to Ethics, and -all Ethics to a simple belief in the ultimacy of Determinist, -Atomistic Science. The situation is decidedly improving -now; History and Culture are being found to have other, -more ultimate categories, than are those of Mathematics and -Physics, and to bring us a larger amount of reality, and -Ethics and Religion are discovered to be as truly distinct as -they are closely allied and necessary, each to the deepest -development of the other.</p> - -<p>(3) The faculty and action of the soul, finally, by which we -have an however dim yet direct and (in its general effects) -immensely potent, sense and feeling, an immediate experience -of Objective Reality, of the Infinite and Abiding, of a Spirit -not all unlike yet distinct from our own, Which penetrates -and works within these our finite spirits and in the world -at large, especially in human history; and by which we -will, and give a definite result and expression to, our various -memories, thinkings, feelings, and intuitions, as waked up -by their various special stimulants and by the influence of -each upon all the others: is met by the Mystical and the -directly Operative element of Religion. And here again we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_391" id="Page_391">[391]</a></span> -have a force and law of the human spirit, and a corresponding -element of religion, which can indeed be starved or driven -into a most dangerous isolation and revolt, but which are -simply indestructible.</p> - -<p>The Apocalyptic Orgies of the Münster Anabaptists we -found to be perhaps the most striking illustration of the dire -mischief that can spring from this third group of elemental -soul-forces, when they ignore or dominate the other two. -Yet some such Emotional Fanaticism can be traced, in -various degrees and forms, throughout all such religious -groups, schools, and individuals as seriously attempt to -practise Pure Mysticism,—that is, religious Intuition and -Emotion unchecked by the other two soul-forces and religious -elements, or by the alternation of external action and careful -contact with human Society and its needs and helps, Art and -Science, and the rest.</p> - -<p>Thus we find that, after the immense, luxuriant prevalence -of an intensely intuitive, emotional, tumultuously various -apprehension and manifestation of religion during the first -two generations of Christians, and even after the deep, wise -supplementation and spiritualization of this element by -St. Paul, who in his own person so strikingly combined the -Institutional, Rational and Intuitive-Emotional forces and -elements, this whole force and element rapidly all but disappeared -for long from Western Christian orthodoxy. And -Montanism in still early times, and, during the very height -of the Middle Ages, the Waldensian and Albigensian movements—all -predominantly intuitive, enthusiastic, individualist—appear -as so many revolutionary explosions, threatening -the whole fabric of Christendom with dissolution. The -“Eternal Gospel” movement of Abbot Joachim, on the -other hand, gives us the intuitional-emotive element in a -more purified, institutionally and rationally supplemented -form.</p> - -<p>Again we find that, for a while, in reaction from an all -but hopelessly corrupt civilization, the Fathers of the Desert -attained in many cases, by means of an all but Exclusive -Mysticism, to a type of sanctity and to the inculcation of -a lesson which the Church has gratefully recognized. We -have to admit that many of the Italian, French and Spanish -Quietists of the Seventeenth Century were no doubt excessively, -or even quite unjustly, suspected or pursued, as far at -least as their own personal motives and the effect of their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_392" id="Page_392">[392]</a></span> -doctrines upon their own characters were concerned; and that -the general reaction against even the proved, grave excesses -of some of these men and women, went often dangerously far -in the contrary direction. Indeed even the fierce fanaticism -of the Dutch-Westphalian Apocalyptic Intuitionists can but -excuse, not justify, the policy of quite indiscriminately ruthless -extermination pursued by Luther, Zwingli and Calvin, and by -their official churches after their deaths, towards any and all -Illuminism, however ethically pure and socially operative. -The “Society of Friends” which, measured by the smallness -of its numbers, has given to the world an astonishingly large -band of devoted lovers of humankind, is a living witness to -the possibility of such an Illuminism.</p> - -<p>And we can note how the sane and solid, deep and delicate -constituents, which had existed, mixed up with all kinds of -fantastic, often hysterical and anti-moral exaltations, within -most of those all but purely Intuitionist circles, gradually -found their escape away into all sorts of unlikely quarters, -helping to give much of their interiority and religious warmth, -not only to various, now fairly sober-minded, Nonconformist -Protestant bodies on the Continent, in England and America, -but also to the more religious-tempered and more spiritually -perceptive among modern philosophers—such as Spinoza, -Kant, Fichte, Schleiermacher, Schelling and Fechner.</p> - -<p>Within the Jewish world, we get much of this element at -its noblest and at its worst, in the true and false Prophets -respectively; then among the Essenes, for the times between -the Maccabean resistance and the revolt of Bar Cochba; and -later on in the Kabbala. The Mohammedans still furnish the -example of the Sufi-movement. The Classical Heathen world -produced the Neo-Platonist and the Mithraic movements; -and we can still study, as a living thing, the Buddhist -Mysticism of Thibet.</p> - -<p>We have then, here too, something thoroughly elemental, -which requires both persistent operative recognition and a -continuous and profound purification and supplementation -by becoming incorporated within a large living system of -all the fundamental forces of the soul, each operating and -operated upon according to the intrinsic nature and legitimate -range of each.</p> - -<h5>2. <i>Each element double; endless combinations and conflicts.</i></h5> - -<p>We have also found that these three forces and elements -are each double, and that collisions, but also mos<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_393" id="Page_393">[393]</a></span>t fruitful -interactions, can and do obtain between even these yoke-fellows: -between Institutionalise and History,—the Present -and the Past, a direct Sense-Impression and Picture and a -Memory; between Criticism and Construction,—Analysis -and acuteness of mind, and Synthesis and richness and balance -of imagination, head, heart, and will; and between Mysticism -and Action, as respectively Intuitive and quiescent and -Volitional and effortful.</p> - -<p>And both the three forces and elements as a whole, and the -single members of each pair, can and do appear in every -possible variety of combination with, and of opposition against, -the others, although there is a special affinity between the -Critical-Speculative and the Intuitive-Volitional pairs (in -combination against the Sense-and-Memory pair); between -the Sense-and-Memory pair and the single member of Action; -and between the single members of Speculation and of -Intuition. Yet, ultimately, not any one pair or member can -bear its fullest fruit, without the aid of all the others; and -there is not one that, in actual human nature, does not tend -to emasculate, or to oust as much as possible from the soul, -the other pairs or single members.</p> - -<h5>3. <i>Our entire religious activity but one element of our complete -spirit-life.</i></h5> - -<p>And we have noted further, how even the fullest development -in any one soul of all these three couples of specifically -religious activities—even supposing that they could be -developed to their fullest, without any participation in and -conflict with other degrees and kinds of life and reality—do -not, by any means, exhaust the range of even the simplest -soul’s actual energizings.</p> - -<p>(1) For over and beyond the specifically religious life—though -this, where genuine, is ever the deepest, the central life—every -soul lives, and has to live, various other lives. And indeed—and -this is the point which specially concerns religion—the -soul cannot attain to its fullest possible spiritual development, -without the vigorous specific action and differentiation of -forces and functions of a not directly religious character, which -will have to energize, each according to its own intrinsic -nature, within the ever ampler, and ever more closely-knit, -organization of the complete life of the soul.</p> - -<p>(2) And within this complete life, the three pairs of religious -forces and elements each possess their own special affinities -and antipathies for certain of the forces and elements w<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_394" id="Page_394">[394]</a></span>hich -constitute the other, less central organizations of man’s -marvellously rich activity. The Historical-Institutional -element of Religion has necessarily a special affinity for, -and borrows much of its form from, social, legal, political -history and institutions of a general kind. The Critical-Speculative -element of religion is necessarily cognate to, and -in a state of interchange with, the general historical criticism -and philosophical insight attained during the ages and -amongst the races in which any particular religion is intellectually -systematized. And the Mystical-Operative element -is necessarily influenced by, and largely utilizes the general -emotive and volitional gifts and habits, peculiar to the various -ages and peoples within which this double religious element -is in operation.</p> - -<p>(3) It is thus abundantly clear how greatly a work so -manifold in its means, and so harmonious in its end, requires, -if it is to come to a considerable degree of realization, that -single souls, and single classes and types of souls, should -have around them a large and varied Historical and -Institutional, a Social life both of a specifically religious and -of a general kind, and that, within this large ambit of the -actualized religion of others and of the still largely potential -religion of their own souls, they shall develop and be helped -to realize their own deepest spiritual capacities and <i>attrait</i>. -They will have to develop these special capabilities to the -utmost degree compatible with some practice of the other -chief elements of religion, with a continuous respect for and -belief in the necessity of the other types of soul, and with a -profound belief in, and love of, the full, organized community -of all devoted souls, which builds up, and is built up by, all -this variety in unity. The Kingdom of God, the Church, will -thus be more and more found and made to be the means of -an ever more distinct articulation, within an ever more fruitful -interaction, of the various <i>attraits</i>, gifts, vocations, and types -of souls which constitute its society. And these souls in -return will, precisely by this their articulation within this -ampler system, bring to this society an ever richer content of -variety in harmony, of action and warfare within an ever -deeper fruitfulness and peace.</p> - -<h5>4. <i>Two conditions of the fruitfulness of the entire process.</i></h5> - -<p>Yet even the simplest effort, within this innumerable -sequence and simultaneity of activities, will lack the fullest -truth and religious depth and fruitfulness, unless two expe<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_395" id="Page_395">[395]</a></span>riences, -convictions and motives are in operation throughout -the whole, and penetrate its every part, as salt and yeast, -atmosphere and light penetrate, and purify and preserve our -physical food and bodily senses.</p> - -<p>The vivid, continuous sense that God, the Spirit upholding -our poor little spirits, is the true originator and the true end -of the whole movement, in all it may have of spiritual beauty, -truth, goodness and vitality; that all the various levels and -kinds of reality and action are, in whatever they have of -worth, already immanently fitted to stimulate, supplement -and purify each other by Him Who, an Infinite Spiritual -Interiority Himself, gives thus to each one of us indefinite -opportunities for actualizing our own degree and kind of -spiritual possibility and ideal; and that He it is Who, however -dimly yet directly, touches our souls and awakens them, in -and through all those minor stimulations and apprehensions, -to that noblest, incurable discontent with our own petty self -and to that sense of and thirst for the Infinite and Abiding, -which articulates man’s deepest requirement and characteristic: -this is the first experience and conviction, without which all -life, and life’s centre, religion, are flat and dreary, vain and -philistine.</p> - -<p>And the second conviction is the continuous sense of the -ever necessary, ever fruitful, ever bliss-producing Cross of -Christ—the great law and fact that only through self-renunciation -and suffering can the soul win its true self, its -abiding joy in union with the Source of Life, with God Who -has left to us, human souls, the choice between two things -alone: the noble pangs of spiritual child-birth, of painful-joyous -expansion and growth; and the shameful ache of -spiritual death, of dreary contraction and decay.</p> - -<p>Now it is especially these two, ever primary and supreme, -ever deepest and simplest yet most easily forgotten, bracing -yet costing, supremely virile truths and experiences—facts -which increasingly can and ever should waken up, and -themselves be vivified by, all the other activities and gifts -of God which we have studied—these two eyes of religion -and twin pulse-beats of its very heart, that have been realized, -with magnificent persistence and intensity, by the greatest -of the Inclusive Mystics.</p> - -<p>And amongst these Mystics, Caterinetta Fiesca Adorna, -the Saint of Genoa, has appeared to us as one who, in spite -of not a little obscurity and uncertainty and vagueness in <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_396" id="Page_396">[396]</a></span>the -historical evidences for her life and teaching, of not a few -limitations of natural character and of opportunity, and of -several peculiarities which, wonderful to her <i>entourage</i>, can but -perplex or repel us now, shines forth, in precisely these two -central matters, with a penetrating attractiveness, rarely -matched, hardly surpassed, by Saints and Heroes of far more -varied, humorous, readily understandable, massive gifts and -actions. And these very limits and defects of her natural -character and opportunities, of her contemporary disciples -and later panegyrists, and of our means for studying and -ascertaining the facts and precise value of the life she lived, -and of the legend which it occasioned, may, we can hope, but -help to give a richer articulation and wider appli<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_397" id="Page_397">[397]</a></span>cability to -our study of the character and necessity, the limits, dangers -and helpfulness of the Mystic Element of Religion.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<h2><a name="INDEX" id="INDEX"></a>INDEX</h2> - -<p>(<i>Some corrections of mistakes in names and references, as given in the foregoing work, -have been silently effected in the following Index</i>)</p> - -<h3>I. OF SUBJECT-MATTERS</h3> - -<ul> -<li class="ifrst">Abelard, I. 61</li> -<li class="indx">Absorptions of St. Catherine, I. 226-229</li> -<li class="indx">Acarie, Madame, I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Acquasola, Genoa, I. 144, 145 <i>n.</i> 1, 168</li> -<li class="indx">Action (reflex), its three elements, I. 57-58</li> -<li class="indx">Adorni Family, I. 96, <b>101</b>, 102</li> -<li class="isub1">various, I. 102, 145 <i>n.</i> 1, 151, 153-155, 173, 300, 327, 377</li> -<li class="indx">Adorno, Giuliano, I. <b>101</b>, <b>102</b>, 103, 138, 145 <i>n.</i> 1, <b>149</b>, 153, 173, 187, 225, 296, 297 <i>n.</i> 1, 300, 307, 308, 309, 311, 313, 325 <i>n.</i> 1, 377, 378, 379, 382, 386, 388, 394, 454, 455; II. <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> -<li class="isub1">he becomes a Tertiary of the Order of St. Francis, I. 130</li> -<li class="isub1">his bankruptcy, I. 128-129</li> -<li class="isub1">character, I. 102</li> -<li class="isub1">conversion, I. 129</li> -<li class="isub1">his death, I. 149-156, 379</li> -<li class="isub1">his illness, I. 149 <i>n.</i> 1.</li> -<li class="isub1">his life in the little house within the Hospital, I. 129-131</li> -<li class="isub1">his monument, I. 297 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">his natural daughter, I. 129</li> -<li class="isub1">his will, I. <b>151-152</b>, 378-379</li> -<li class="isub1">moves into the Hospital, I. 141, 142</li> -<li class="isub1">sells his palace, I. 148 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Adorno Palazzo, I. 108, 128, 148, 327, 377, 379, 403</li> -<li class="indx">Aeschylus, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Afer, Victorinus, I. 266 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Affinities, human, furthered by Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_331">331-335</a></li> -<li class="indx">After-life beliefs, in Asiatic countries, II. <a href="#Page_183">183-185</a></li> -<li class="isub1">in Greece, II. <a href="#Page_185">185-189</a></li> -<li class="isub1">of the Jews, II. <a href="#Page_189">189-191</a></li> -<li class="isub1">problems, ethico-practical difficulties of, II. <a href="#Page_197">197-199</a></li> -<li class="isub2">historical difficulties of, II. <a href="#Page_182">182-194</a></li> -<li class="isub2">philosophical difficulties of, II. <a href="#Page_194">194-197</a></li> -<li class="indx">After-life, its forecasts in St. Catherine, II. <a href="#Page_200">200-203</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Plato’s influence on them, II. <a href="#Page_203">203-211</a></li> -<li class="indx">Agnosticism (Mystical), criticism of, II. <a href="#Page_287">287-296</a></li> -<li class="indx">Agrigentum, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="indx">Aix, Cathedral of, and triptych, I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Akiba, Rabbi, II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> -<li class="indx">Alacoque, St. Marie Marguerite, II. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> -<li class="indx">Albigensian movement, II. <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> -<li class="indx">Alcantara, St. Peter of, II. <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> -<li class="indx">Alexander VI, Pope (Borgia), I. 95</li> -<li class="isub1">VII, Pope (Chigi), II. <a href="#Page_168">168</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Alexandrian School, I. 61</li> -<li class="indx">Alfred, King, II. <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> -<li class="indx">Aloysius, St. Gonzaga, I. 88</li> -<li class="indx">Alvarez, Venerable Balthazar, S.J., I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Ambrosian Library, Milan, I. 411 <i>n.</i> 1, 466</li> -<li class="indx">America, II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Amos, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Anabaptists, I. 9, 63; II. <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> -<li class="isub1">their orgies, I. 10, 340; II. <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> -<li class="indx">Anaxagoras, I. 12</li> -<li class="indx">Andrew, Monastery of St., Genoa, I. 325 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Andrewes, Anglican Bp. Lancelot, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Angelica Library, Rome, I. 411 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Angelo, Castel S., Rome, I. 327</li> -<li class="isub1">of Chiavasso, Blessed, O.S.F., I. 116</li> -<li class="indx">Anglican Highchurchism, II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="indx">Anglicanism, its three elements, I. 8, 9, 63</li> -<li class="indx">Anguisola, Donna Andronica, I. 359, 361, 363, 364, 403, 413, 416</li> -<li class="indx">Animal-life, St. Catherine’s sympathy with, I. 163, 164</li> -<li class="indx">Anjou, Charles I. of, I. 96</li> -<li class="isub1">Margaret of, I. 96</li> -<li class="isub1">René of, King of Naples, I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Annunciation, Church of the, Sturla, I. 451</li> -<li class="indx">Annunziata in Portorio, Church of Sma., Genoa, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1 (99), 130, 201 <i>n.</i> 3, 297 <i>n.</i> 1, 313, 325 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Monastery of, I. 319, 325</li> -<li class="indx">Annunziata, Piazza della Sma., Genoa, I. 102</li> -<li class="indx">Anselm, St., Archbishop, I. 78; II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="indx">Anthony, St., I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Antiochene School, I. 61</li> -<li class="indx">Antiochus Epiphanes, II. <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> -<li class="indx">Antonietta (servant), I. 149, 153, 226</li> -<li class="indx">Apocalypse, II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="indx">Apollo Katharsios, II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="indx">Apostles, I. 27, 389</li> -<li class="indx">Apprehension, Mystical, no distinct faculty of, II. <a href="#Page_283"><b>283-284</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Arc, Jeanne d’, Ven., II. <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> -<li class="indx">Archives, Archiepiscopal, of Genoa, I. 411 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">of the Cathedral Chapter, Genoa, I. 384</li> -<li class="indx">Archivio di Stato in Genoa, I. 153 <i>n.</i> 1, 172, 176 <i>n.</i> 1, 2, 378 <i>n.</i> 1, 379 <i>n.</i> 1, 381 <i>n.</i> 1, 203 <i>n.</i> 1, 213; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a> <i>n.</i> 1.</li> -<li class="indx">Argentina, del Sale (de Ripalta), I. 149, 151, 162 <i>n.</i> 2 (163), <b>169-171</b>, 173, 175, 197 <i>n.</i> 4 (198), 210 <i>n.</i> 1, 213 <i>n.</i> 1, <b>215-219</b>, 223, 226, 297 <i>n.</i> 1, 298, 299, 367, 310-312, <b>313</b>, <b>314</b>, 387-389, 402, <b>452</b>, <b>453</b>, 464; II. <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> -<li class="isub1">adopted by St. Catherine, I. 170, 171</li> -<li class="isub1">her fate, I. 313, 314</li> -<li class="isub1">much alone with St. Catherine in 1510, she helps on growth of legends, I. 203; II. <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a> <i>n.</i> 4 (<a href="#Page_198">198</a>), <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, 452, 453</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_398" id="Page_398">[398]</a></span>wills of, I. 313, 381</li> -<li class="indx">Arias, Francisco, S.J., I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Aristotle, I. 7, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 41, 42; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his conception of “Unmoving Energy,” II. <a href="#Page_131"><b>131</b></a>, <a href="#Page_132"><b>132</b></a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> -<li class="isub2">of the Noûs, II. <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> -<li class="isub2">of God as sheer abstract Thought, II. <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his general doctrine, I. 19-23</li> -<li class="indx">Arnold, Dr. Thomas, of Rugby, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Ars, Curé d’, the Bl. J. B. Vianney, II. <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> -<li class="indx">Arvenza, on the Riviera, I. 318</li> -<li class="indx">Asceticism and Mystical abstractiveness, II. <a href="#Page_348">348-349</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ordinary and social Christianity, II. <a href="#Page_355">355-358</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ordinary, as practised by Mystics, II. <a href="#Page_341">341-343</a></li> -<li class="indx">Asia Minor, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="indx">Assyria, II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> -<li class="indx">Atman, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Augsburg, David of, O. S. F., II. <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="indx">Augustine, St., I. 61, 100; II. <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a> <i>n.</i> 3, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Evil as negative, II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on fire of Hell, II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on mitigation of sufferings of the Lost, II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Purgatory, II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on soul’s Rest between death and resurrection, II. <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Original Sin, II. <a href="#Page_298">298-301</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God and the soul as out of Space, II. <a href="#Page_212"><b>212</b></a>, <a href="#Page_213"><b>213</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Time and Eternity, II. <a href="#Page_165">165</a> <i>n.</i>, <a href="#Page_248"><b>248</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Augustinian Canonesses, I. 103 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Canons, I. 103 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Augustinianesses, Chapel of the, Genoa, I. 109, 170</li> -<li class="indx">Avicebron, <i>see</i> <a href="#gebirol">Gebirol Ibn</a></li> -<li class="indx">Avicenna, II. <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="indx">Avignon exile, I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Azzolini, Cardinal, I. 305</li> -<li class="isub1">dei Manfredi, cavaliere, I. 99 <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="ifrst">Babylonia, II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bacon, Francis, II. <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> -<li class="indx">Baius, condemnation of, II. <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> -<li class="indx">Balilla, via, Genoa, I. 129</li> -<li class="indx">Ballerini, Father Antonio, S. J., I. 121</li> -<li class="indx">Bar Cochba, revolt of, II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Barnabites, I. 340</li> -<li class="indx">Baronius, Cardinal, I. 318</li> -<li class="indx">Basil, St., II. <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="indx">Beethoven, L. von, II. <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> -<li class="indx">Beguards, II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Bellarmine, Cardinal, S.J., I. 88</li> -<li class="indx">Bell’Huomo, G., S.J., II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="indx">Benedetta Lombarda, servant, I. 130, 149, 153, 172, 176, 226, <b>311</b>, <b>312</b>, 317, 379</li> -<li class="indx">Benedict XIV, Pope (Lambertini), I. 136, 253</li> -<li class="isub1">St., I. 104, 127, 240, 460</li> -<li class="indx">Benedictines, I. <b>63</b>, <b>64</b>, 103 <i>n.</i> 1, 373; II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bentham, Jeremy, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bergson, Henri, Professor, II. <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bernard, St., of Clairvaux, I. 7, 61, 69; II. <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Claude, II. <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bernières-Louvigny, Jean de, II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bernouilli, Dr. C. A., I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Berulle, Venerable Cardinal de, I. 88, 317</li> -<li class="indx">Bible, Catherine’s love of the, I. 258</li> -<li class="indx">Biographies, religious, the three attitudes possible concerning, I. <b>374-375</b></li> -<li class="indx">Biography, religious, laws regulating its growth, I. <b>371</b></li> -<li class="indx">Bismarck, Otto von, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bliss, its “pain”-element, II. <a href="#Page_255"><b>255</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Blondel, Prof. Maurice, II. <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> -<li class="indx">Body, Catherine’s view concerning it, and the elements of this view, II. <a href="#Page_123">123-126</a></li> -<li class="isub1">dualistic view concerning it, ever only pragmatic, II. <a href="#Page_126"><b>126-129</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">dualistic view, un-Catholic, II. <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its valuation in the N. T., II. <a href="#Page_122">122-123</a></li> -<li class="indx">Boerio, Maestro G. B., I. 200, 201 <i>n.</i> 3, 202, 208, 217, 218, 389, 451, 464; II. <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Don Giovanni, I. 201 <i>n.</i> 3 (202), 208, 451</li> -<li class="indx">Boetius, II. <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bollandists, I. 372</li> -<li class="indx">Bona, Cardinal, Cistercian, I. 88</li> -<li class="indx">Boniface VIII, Pope (Gaetani), II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his Bull “Unam Sanctam,” I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Bosco Bartolomeo, I. 130</li> -<li class="indx">Bossuet, Bishop J. B., I. 64, 89; II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> -<li class="indx">Boudon, Archdeacon H. M., II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bousset, Prof. W., on individual experience and traditional form, II. <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> -<li class="indx">Brahman, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Brahmanism, II. <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its three elements, I. 60</li> -<li class="indx">Brescia, Hospital in, I. 322</li> -<li class="isub1">Vincenzo da, painter, I. 99</li> -<li class="indx">Bridgettines, Convent of the, Genoa, I. 312</li> -<li class="indx">Browning, Robert, II. <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Buddha, Gautama, I. 71; II. <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Buddhism, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its three elements, I. 60</li> -<li class="indx">Buddhist Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bunyan, John, his works, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Burke, Edmund, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Burmah, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Burnet, Anglican Bishop Gilbert, II. <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> -<li class="indx">Busenbaum, Hermann, S. J., I. 121</li> -<li class="indx">Butler, Anglican Bishop Joseph, II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Caesar, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Caird, Professor Edward, II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> -<li class="indx">Cajetanus, Thomas de Vio, Cardinal, O.P., II. <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="indx">Callisto da Piacenza, Padre, I. 323, 324</li> -<li class="indx">Calvin, I. 341, 414, 415; II. <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Institutio Religionis Christianæ</i> I. 340</li> -<li class="isub1">Calvinism, I. 9, 63</li> -<li class="isub1">early stages of, I. 339-341</li> -<li class="indx">Cambridge Platonists, the, II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Camillus of Lellis, St., I. 129 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Campanaro Family, of Genoa, I. 101</li> -<li class="indx">Campion, Blessed Edmund, S.J., I. 64; II. <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> -<li class="indx">Campofregoso, Paolo, of Genoa, I. 101</li> -<li class="indx">Canada, II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Canticle of Canticles</i>, I. 258, 356</li> -<li class="isub1">its imagery dear to V. Battista Vernazza, I. 111, 356, 432</li> -<li class="isub2">remote from St. Catherine’s mind, I. 229, 258, 432; II. <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> -<li class="indx">Capuchins, I. 311, 340, 341</li> -<li class="indx">Caraccioli, Cardinal, Archbishop of Naples, II. <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="indx">Caraffa, Cardinal, <i>see</i> also <a href="#pauliv">Paul IV. (Pope)</a>, I. 327, 340</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_399" id="Page_399">[399]</a></span>Carenzio, Don Jacobo, 155 <i>n.</i> 1, 175, 202, 204 <i>n.</i> 1, 213, 216, 217, 295, 299, 301, <b>307-309</b>, 310 <i>n.</i> 1, 384, 464; II. <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his fate, I. 307-309</li> -<li class="indx">Carenzio, Don Jacobo, his funeral, I. 381</li> -<li class="indx">Carlyle, Thomas, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Cassian, I. 78</li> -<li class="indx">Cassino, Monte, I. 103 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Castagneto, Brigidina, I. 175</li> -<li class="indx">Catherine, of Alexandria, St., I. 97, 348</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="catherine" id="catherine"></a>Catherine of Genoa, St. (Caterinetta Fieschi Adorno), I. 86, 95, 97, 98 <i>n.</i> 1, 100, 101, 102, 103, 103 <i>n.</i> 1, 104, 105, 111, 112, 113, 123, 151, 168, 169, 170, 171, 338, 339, 376, 382, 387, 388, 389; II. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> -<li class="indx">Catherine, St., her <span class="smcapuc">AFTER-LIFE CONCEPTIONS</span>, II. <a href="#Page_199">199-218</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her apparitions after death, I. 216, 218</li> -<li class="isub1">her external appearance, I. 97</li> -<li class="isub1">ecclesiastical approbation of her doctrine, I. 255, 256, 413, <b>448</b>, <b>449</b>, 464</li> -<li class="isub1">and Argentina del Sale, I. 170, 171, 203, 209, 210, 213, 217, 298</li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Baptism</span>, I. 97</li> -<li class="isub1">and Baptism, I. 436; II. <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her birth, I. 93, 97</li> -<li class="isub1">her breadth of sympathy and unsuspiciousness, II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her brothers, I. 97, 167, 172, 176</li> -<li class="isub1">her burial, I. 296, 297</li> -<li class="isub1">her burial-place, shifting of, I. 152, <b>185-187</b>, 213</li> -<li class="isub1">and business, I. 154, 186</li> -<li class="isub1">the three <span class="smcap">Categories</span> of her teaching, ‘In,’ ‘Out,’ ‘Over,’ I. 273-276</li> -<li class="isub1">her codicils of 1503, I. 168, 169, 380</li> -<li class="isub2"> of 1508, I. 175, 176, 380</li> -<li class="isub2"> of 1510, I. 212-214, 380</li> -<li class="isub1">colours, her sensitiveness to, I. 208, 210, 298; II. <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> -<li class="isub1">compared with St. Augustine, II. <a href="#Page_211">211-214</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with Clement and Origen of Alexandria, II. <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234-236</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with Pseudo-Dionysius, II. <a href="#Page_90">90-101</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with the Joannine writings, II. <a href="#Page_79">79-90</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with St. John of the Cross, II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with the Pauline writings, I. 140; II. <a href="#Page_63">63-79</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with Plato, II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201-211</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with Plotinus, II. <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with Proclus, II. <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with the Synoptic Gospels, II. <a href="#Page_122">122-124</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153-158</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with St. Teresa, II. <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with St. Thomas Aquinas, I. 120; II. <a href="#Page_162">162-164</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222-224</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> -<li class="isub2">with Ven. Battista Vernazza, I. <b>332-366</b>, 408, 409, 423, 429-433</li> -<li class="isub2">with Ettore Vernazza, I. 317-323, 328, 329, 331-335</li> -<li class="isub1">and Confession, I. 109, <b>117-121</b>, 158, 159, <b>424-427</b></li> -<li class="isub1">and her Confessor (Don Marabotto), I. 155-158, 184, 185, 193-196, 455-457</li> -<li class="isub1">her Conversion, I. 104-109, 403-406, 458-462; II. <a href="#Page_29">29-31</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cross and Passion, her attitude towards, I. 108, 109, 205, 209, 210, <b>403-406</b>, 409, <b>411-413</b>, 452, 453</li> -<li class="isub1">Cultus, her popular, I. 301-303, 332, 335, 394</li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Death</span>, I. 215, 216</li> -<li class="isub1">her Deed of Cession, 1456, I. 376, 377</li> -<li class="isub1">her <i>Deposito</i>, I. 98 <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1">her desire for death, I. 183, 184, 192, 210</li> -<li class="isub2">for life, I. 200-202</li> -<li class="isub2">for human sympathy, I. 195</li> -<li class="isub1">and the Devil, I. 124, 125, 205, 206, 264; II. <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> -<li class="isub1">men devoted to her spirit, I. 89, 90</li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Dialogo</span>, <i>see</i> <a href="#vitad">Vita (D)</a> in Index II</li> -<li class="isub1">her <i>Dicchiarazione, see</i> <a href="#vitat">Vita (T)</a> in Index II</li> -<li class="isub1">her doctrine presented in theological order, I. 257, 260-294</li> -<li class="isub1">dualistic tendencies in, considered, II. <a href="#Page_121">121-129</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Ecstatic</span> states, I. 161, 162, 226, 229; II. <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the H. Eucharist, I. 113, 114, 116, 204, 208, 214, 240, 241, 288, 289, 263; II. <a href="#Page_87"><b>87</b></a>, <a href="#Page_88"><b>88</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">her attitude towards Evil, I. 266-270; II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Fasts</span>, I. 135-139, 155; II. <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her Father, I. 96, 97, 101</li> -<li class="isub1">and Tommasa Fiesca, I. 131, 132, 168, 169, 174</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="smcap">Growth</span>, her spiritual, I. 112, 113, <b>236-239</b></li> -<li class="isub1">and <span class="smcap">Heaven</span>, I. 159-161; II. <a href="#Page_246"><b>246-258</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Hell, I. 281-288; II. <a href="#Page_218"><b>218-230</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">her attitude towards historical and institutional religion, I. 190, 204, 206, <b>239-241</b></li> -<li class="isub1">and the Hospital <i>Chronici</i>, I. 173, 174</li> -<li class="isub1">and the Hospital <i>Pammatone</i>, I. 129-131, 141-143, 175, 202</li> -<li class="isub1">and her husband, I. 102-104, 129, 152, 153</li> -<li class="isub1">hysteriform appearances in her health, II. <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23-25</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her fundamental difference from hysteria-patients, II. <a href="#Page_25"><b>25-27</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Illness</span>, during last days, I. 207, 214; II. <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isub1">during last months, I. 193; II. <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Indulgences, I. 123-126, 202</li> -<li class="isub1">and intercessory prayer, I. 127</li> -<li class="isub1">and invocation of saints, I. 104, 127</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="smcap">Lessons</span> of her life, I. 244-246</li> -<li class="isub1">Life, conceptions of, in, II. <a href="#Page_88">88-90</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her literary obligations, I. 234-238; II. <a href="#Page_62">62-110</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203-211</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Pure Love, her doctrine of, I, 108, <b>139-141</b>, <b>159-161</b>, 262, 263, 265, 266</li> -<li class="isub2">her practice of, I. 116, 144, 170, 184, 185, 187, 197</li> -<li class="isub1">and <span class="smcap">Marriage</span>, I. 101, 223-225, 246, 248, 249</li> -<li class="isub1">her Marriage-settlement, I. 377</li> -<li class="isub1">materialization of her experiences and ideas, I. 218, 219</li> -<li class="isub1">matron of Hospital, I. 143, 147, 148</li> -<li class="isub1">and her <span class="smcap">Nephews</span>, I. 154, 167, 171, 176, 213</li> -<li class="isub1">and her Nieces, I. 154, 167, 172, 173</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="smcap">Originality</span> of her doctrine, I. <b>246-250</b>, 347</li> -<li class="isub1">and <span class="smcap">Pain</span>, physical and psycho-physical, 196-198, 198-200; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her penitence, I. 109-112, 131-134</li> -<li class="isub1">the periods of her convert life, I. 111, 112, 112 <i>n.</i> 1, 118, 119, 138, 390-393</li> -<li class="isub2">first period, I. 128-131</li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_400" id="Page_400">[400]</a></span>second period, I. 128-140</li> -<li class="isub2">third period, I. 157-159, 175, 176</li> -<li class="isub1">and physicians, I. 200, 201, 208, 211, 212</li> -<li class="isub1">pictures, her care for religious, I. 99, <b>168</b>, <b>169</b>, 188, 189, 191; II. <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> -<li class="isub1">portraits of, I. 98 <i>n.</i> i, 301</li> -<li class="isub1">her possessions at time of her death, I. 297-299</li> -<li class="isub1">her psycho-physical peculiarities, in themselves, I. 176-181, 193, 196-200; II. <a href="#Page_10">10-13</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17-21</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her attitude towards them, I. 164, 165, 211, 212; II. <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_35"><b>35-39</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Purgatory, I. 283-294; II. <a href="#Page_230"><b>230-246</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and prayer of <span class="smcapuc">QUIET</span>, I. 227</li> -<li class="isub1">her quietistic-sounding sayings, I. <b>236</b>, <b>237</b>, 265, 266, 271, 279</li> -<li class="isub1">causes of her apparent quietism, II. <a href="#Page_34"><b>34-36</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcapuc">RELICS</span>, I. 98, <i>n.</i> 1, 300-304</li> -<li class="isub1">her Rigoristic trend, I. 342</li> -<li class="isub1">her “<span class="smcap">Scintilla</span>”-experience, I. 187-191, 451</li> -<li class="isub1">and Holy Scripture, I. 258</li> -<li class="isub1">her self-knowledge, I. 164, 165, <b>206</b>, <b>207</b>, 247; II. <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her extreme sensitiveness, I. 176-181, 207-209</li> -<li class="isub1">“Serafina,” I. 161, 262</li> -<li class="isub1">and her servants, I. 148, 149, 161, 162, 169, 171, 172, 175, 176, 217; II. <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and her sister, I. 100, 105, 167</li> -<li class="isub1">social interests in 1506, I. 172-174</li> -<li class="isub2">in 1506-1510, I. 175-176</li> -<li class="isub1">Spirit, the, her conception of, II. <a href="#Page_67"><b>67-69</b></a>, <a href="#Page_84"><b>84</b></a>, <a href="#Page_320">320-322</a></li> -<li class="isub1">symbols used by,: air and flying, I. 189; II. <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> -<li class="isub2">arrow and wounding, I. 97; II. <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isub2">bread and eating or being devoured, I. 288, 289, <b>270</b></li> -<li class="isub2">cork under water, I. 275</li> -<li class="isub2">dog and his master, I. 263</li> -<li class="isub2">drops, liquid, I. 159, 160, 189; II. <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> -<li class="isub2">fountain, I. 189, 260, 261</li> -<li class="isub2">fragments and table, I. 277</li> -<li class="isub2">heat and cold, I. 194, 197; II. <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isub2">light, rays of the sun, and fire, sparks of, I. 178-180, 187, 188, 269, 276, <b>290-292</b>; II. <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub2">motes, spots, stains, rust, I. 189, 267; II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_238"><b>238</b></a>, <a href="#Page_239"><b>239</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">nakedness and garments, I. <b>275</b>, <b>276</b>, 290-292, 428, 432; II. <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_209"><b>209</b></a>, <a href="#Page_210"><b>210</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">places and abiding in them, I. <b>277</b>, <b>278</b>; II. <a href="#Page_69"><b>69</b></a>, <a href="#Page_70"><b>70</b></a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_80"><b>80</b></a>, <a href="#Page_81"><b>81</b></a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub2">the plunge, I. 268, <b>284</b>, <b>285</b>, 332; II. <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_207"><b>207</b></a>, <a href="#Page_208"><b>208</b></a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> -<li class="isub2">prison, exile, I. 273, 274; II. <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -<li class="isub2">the (golden) rope, I. 432; II. <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub2">water (the sea) and drowning, I. <b>274</b>, <b>275</b>; II. <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_108"><b>108</b></a>, <a href="#Page_109"><b>109</b></a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub1">symbols used by her, why material and extensional, not personal and successive, I. 237-239, <b>245-247</b>; II. <a href="#Page_39"><b>39</b></a>, <a href="#Page_40"><b>40</b></a>, <a href="#Page_100"><b>100</b></a>, <a href="#Page_101"><b>101</b></a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Teaching</span>, general character of, I. 229-234</li> -<li class="isub1">fortunate circumstances of, I. 255, 256</li> -<li class="isub1">her special temperament, I. 220-223</li> -<li class="isub1">and Thobia, I. 129, 153, 169</li> -<li class="isub1">her times, I. 94, 95</li> -<li class="isub1">and Transcendence, I. 274-277; II. <a href="#Page_100"><b>100</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and <span class="smcap">Unction</span>, Extreme, I. 195, 197, 204, 206</li> -<li class="isub1">Union, her thirst for absolute, I. 116, 159-161, 263, <b>265</b>, <b>266</b>, 269-271, 280</li> -<li class="isub1">and Battista <span class="smcap">Vernazza</span>, I. 149, 337</li> -<li class="isub1">and Ettore Vernazza, I. 145-147, 191-193, 203, 204, 226, 331-335, <b>453-455</b></li> -<li class="isub1">veracity of her mind, I. 119</li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcap">Vision</span> of the Bleeding Christ, I. <b>107-109</b>, 181, 209, 239, 403, 405, 418, <b>460-462</b>, 466 <i>n.</i> 2; II. <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="smcapuc">WARFARE</span>, method of her spiritual, II. <a href="#Page_34"><b>34-39</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the two ways, negative and positive, I. 276-280</li> -<li class="isub1">words, her last, I. 216, 465</li> -<li class="isub1">her Wills, i, I. 152, 153, 377-378</li> -<li class="isub2">ii, I. 152-154, 380</li> -<li class="isub2">iii, I. 172-174, 380</li> -<li class="isub2">iv, I. 172-173, 174, 176, 185-187, 202, 203, 308, 380</li> -<li class="isub1">her wills in general, I. 297-299; II. <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her “writings” not her composition, I. 87, 407, 433, 447, 448, <b>466</b></li> -<li class="isub1">her <span class="smcapuc">YOUTH</span>, I. 99-101</li> -<li class="isub1">of Siena, I. 87, 94, 306, 341, 382; II. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Catholicism, its three elements, I. 63-64</li> -<li class="indx">Catholic mind, its characteristics, I. <b>122-123</b></li> -<li class="indx">Caussade, Père de, S.J., II. <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> -<li class="indx">Censor, Dominican, the, of the <i>Vita</i>, I. 372, <b>413</b>, 464</li> -<li class="indx">Centurione, Adam, Lord, I. 385</li> -<li class="isub1">Ginetta, Lady, I. 385</li> -<li class="isub1">Orientina, Donna, I. 385, 391</li> -<li class="indx">Cesarini, Cardinal, I. 305</li> -<li class="indx">Chantal, St. Jane Frances de, II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="indx">Child, the, its apprehension of religion, I. 51</li> -<li class="indx">China, II. <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Chios, Isle of, I. 101, 151; II. <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="indx">Christian conception of life, I. 48-49</li> -<li class="isub1">doctrine (survey of), I. <b>25-28</b></li> -<li class="isub2">its three N. T. presentations, I. <b>28-39</b></li> -<li class="indx">Christianity, conflicts between its Intuitive-Emotional and its other elements, I. <b>70-77</b></li> -<li class="isub1">excludes Pantheism, II. <a href="#Page_334">334-335</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its preliminary Pessimism and ultimate Optimism, II. <a href="#Page_358">358-361</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its three elements, II. <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> -<li class="isub2">in the Humanist Renaissance, I. 62</li> -<li class="isub2">the Middle Ages, I. 61-62</li> -<li class="isub2">the Protestant Reformation, I. 62-63</li> -<li class="indx">Christina, Queen of Sweden, I. 305, 305 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Christofero of Chiavari, I. 168, 298</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Chronici</i>, Spedale dei, Genoa, I. <b>173</b>, <b>174</b>, 317, 319, 326, 327, 333; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Protectors of, I. 318, 326</li> -<li class="isub1">Sindaco of, I. 319</li> -<li class="indx">Chroniclers of St. Catherine, rivalry between them, I. 216</li> -<li class="indx">Chronicles, Books of, David in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Church, the, her life and spirit, I. 123</li> -<li class="indx">Cibo Donna Maddalena (born Vernazza), I. 322</li> -<li class="indx">Cicero, Don Blasio, I. 152</li> -<li class="indx">Clement of Alexandria, I. 61, 78; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_166"><b>166</b></a>, <a href="#Page_219"><b>219</b></a>, <a href="#Page_235"><b>235</b></a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> -<li class="indx">Clement XI, Pope (Albani), II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Fénelon’s letter to, I. 69</li> -<li class="isub1">X, Pope (Altieri), I. 305</li> -<li class="isub1">XII, Pope (Orsini), I. 306</li> -<li class="isub1">his Bull of Catherine’s Canonization, I. 466</li> -<li class="indx">Cogoleto, on Riviera, I. 318</li> -<li class="indx">Coleridge, Samuel Taylor, II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_401" id="Page_401">[401]</a></span>Collino, Padre Serafino, C.R.L., I. 364, 366</li> -<li class="indx">Colonna, Vittoria, I. 341, 342 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Chrysostom, St. John, II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> -<li class="indx">Columbus, Christopher, I. 94, 146</li> -<li class="indx">Confucianism, II. <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Confucius, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Constance, Council of, I. 94, 342</li> -<li class="indx">Constantinople, I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Contarini, Gaspar, Cardinal, I. 342 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Contemplation and Social Christianity, II. <a href="#Page_355"><b>355-358</b></a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Conversione</i>-booklet, I. 449, 464</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Convertite</i> the, Genoa, I. 327</li> -<li class="indx">Corsica, I. 156</li> -<li class="indx">Counter-reformation, I. 62</li> -<li class="indx">Covenant, Book of the, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Criticism, of the writings of Saints, how far allowed, I. 254 and foll.</li> -<li class="indx">Croton, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="indx">Crusading Age, the, II. <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> -<li class="indx">Cynic school, I. 23</li> -<li class="indx">Cyprian, St., II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="indx">Cyrenaic school, I. 23</li> -<li class="ifrst">Dante, II. <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> -<li class="indx">Darwin, Charles, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">David, three stages of his biography, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Delphi, II. <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> -<li class="indx">Demeter, II. <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="indx">Democritus, II. <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> -<li class="indx">Descartes, René, I. 7, 40, 317</li> -<li class="isub1">his apprehension of law, I. 40</li> -<li class="indx">Determinism, its place in the spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_369"><b>369-379</b></a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> -<li class="indx">Deuteronomy, Book of, Moses in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Developments, partial, of the Gospel-Ideal, II. <a href="#Page_116">116-120</a></li> -<li class="indx">de Vere, Aubrey, paraphrases the <i>Trattato</i>, I. 89</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Dialogo</i> of St. Catherine, see <a href="#vitae"><i>Vita e Dottrina</i></a></li> -<li class="indx">Diano, Castello of, on Riviera, I. 308, 309</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Dicchiarazione</i>-booklet, I. 464, and see <a href="#vitat"><i>Vita</i> (T)</a></li> -<li class="indx">Dionysiac sect, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="indx">Dionysius (Pseudo-) Areopagite, I. 163 <i>n.</i>, 177, 256, 259, 266 <i>n.</i> 3; II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Catherine, II. <a href="#Page_90"><b>90-101</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Catherine’s direct knowledge of, II. <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his conception of God’s general action, II. <a href="#Page_91">91-94</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Deification, II. <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> -<li class="isub2">the soul’s reaction, II. <a href="#Page_94">94-99</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his influence in Middle Ages, II. <a href="#Page_314">314-317</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Neo-Platonism in, II. <a href="#Page_91">91-99</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Platonism, in, II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> -<li class="indx">Diotima, in Plato’s <i>Symposium</i>, St. Catherine compared to, I. 257</li> -<li class="indx">Direction, spiritual, its advantages, II. <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> -<li class="indx">Disciple, the Beloved, symbol of, I. 111</li> -<li class="indx">Domenico, Monastero Nuovo di S., Genoa, I. 132, 168, 174, 451</li> -<li class="isub1">de Ponzo, Padre, O.S.F., I. 140 <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="indx">Dominicans, I. <b>63</b>, <b>64</b>, 253, 413, 464; II. <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> -<li class="indx">Doria, Andrea, Admiral, I. 93, 104-146</li> -<li class="isub1">other members of family, I. 96, 376</li> -<li class="indx">Draco, laws of, II. <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> -<li class="indx">Drexel, Jeremias, S.J., I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Droysen, J. G., II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Dualism, as regards body, II. <a href="#Page_121">121-129</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and question of Evil, II. <a href="#Page_290"><b>290-308</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">unconscious, in Kant’s Epistemology, II. <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Eberhard, Father, O.P., II. <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ecclesiastes, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Eckhart, Meister, his Deistic tendencies, II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Evil as purely negative, II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Godhead as distinct from God, II. <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Father Denifle, on, II. <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ecstasies, difficulty in testing them, I. 161, 162; II. <a href="#Page_49">49-51</a></li> -<li class="isub1">of St. Catherine, I, 139-140, 226-229; II. <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ecstasy, in Dionysius, II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isub1">in Plotinus and Proclus, I. 24; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ecstatics, their psycho-physical organisation, II. <a href="#Page_40"><b>40-47</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Egypt, II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a></li> -<li class="indx">Eleatic philosophers, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="indx">Eleazar, Rabbi, II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> -<li class="indx">Eleusinian Mysteries, II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Elijah, II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Eliot, George, II. <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> -<li class="indx">Elohist, the, writer, and figure of Moses, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Embriaco, Guilielmo, I. 100</li> -<li class="indx">Emmerich, Anne Catherine, I. 334, 335</li> -<li class="indx">Emotional-intuitive element in Religion, I. 8-10</li> -<li class="isub1">in the various Churches, I. 8-10</li> -<li class="isub1">in Christian Religion, its exclusiveness, I. <b>73-79</b></li> -<li class="isub1">its danger and yet necessity, I. 6, 59, 60; II. <a href="#Page_260"><b>260-263</b></a>, <a href="#Page_387"><b>387-393</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Emotional-intuitive personalities, movements and races, I. 6-7</li> -<li class="indx">Empedocles, I. 11; II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Energeia</i>, Aristotle’s great contribution, II. <a href="#Page_250">250-251</a></li> -<li class="indx">England, I. 62, 63, 65, 200; II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Epictetus, II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Epicurean school, I. 23</li> -<li class="indx">Epistles, Pastoral, II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="indx">Epopteia, the Eleusinian, II. <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="indx">Erasmus of Rotterdam, I. 311, 340; II. <a href="#Page_119">119</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Eschatology, Catherine’s simplifications of it, II. <a href="#Page_211"><b>211-218</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Esparta, Father Martin, S.J., II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Essays and Reviews</i>, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Essenes, I. 61; II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Este, Eleonora d’, I. 341</li> -<li class="indx">Estius, William, II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Eucken, Prof. R., II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a> <i>n.</i> 2, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Evil as positive, II. <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> -<li class="isub1">hyper-empirical processes as a <i>sine qua non</i> for religion, II. <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“universal” religion and “characteristic” religion, II. <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> -<li class="indx">Euripides, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Evangelicalism, I. 8-10; II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Evil denied by extreme Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_292">292-293</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its origin and Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_279"><b>279-302</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Mysticism and the warfare against, II. <a href="#Page_302">302-308</a></li> -<li class="isub1">positive but not supreme, II. <a href="#Page_291"><b>291-297</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">positive conceptions of, II. <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> -<li class="indx">Experience not directly transmissible, I. 4-5</li> -<li class="isub1">of the human race, I. 6-7</li> -<li class="isub1">personal, its influence upon our convictions, I. 4</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_402" id="Page_402">[402]</a></span>Experiences, distinguished from their expression, and their analysis, II. <a href="#Page_130"><b>130-134</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Experimental matter and theoretical form, II. <a href="#Page_308">308-309</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ezekiel, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his ecstasies and psycho-physical peculiarities, II. <a href="#Page_45"><b>45-46</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">his individualistic trend, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Faber, Frederick, Father, I. 65</li> -<li class="indx">Falconi, Juan, II. <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his <i>Alfabeto</i> and <i>Lettera</i> II. <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="indx">Falconieri, St. Juliana, I. 306; II. <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> -<li class="indx">Fasts, Catherine’s, II. <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> -<li class="isub1">end of, II. <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> -<li class="indx">Fechner, G. T., II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Felicitas, St., I. 361</li> -<li class="indx">Fénelon, I. 64, 68, 89; II. <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_160"><b>160-162</b></a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his condemnation, the questions to which it applies, II. <a href="#Page_165"><b>165-169</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on need of Metaphysics in Theology, II. <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on “Passivity,” II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> -<li class="isub1">works of, distinction between them, II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ferrara, Duchess of (Renée de Valois), I. 340, 341</li> -<li class="indx">Ferretto, Dottore Augusto, I. 125 <i>n.</i> 1, 152 <i>n.</i> 1, 155 <i>n.</i> 1, 172 <i>n.</i> 2, 176 <i>n.</i> 1, 2; 203 <i>n.</i> 1, 213 <i>n.</i> 1, 378 <i>n.</i> 1, 381 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Feuerbach, Ludwig, II. <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> -<li class="indx">Fichte, J. G., II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ficino Marsilio, his translation of Dionysius’ works, I. 259</li> -<li class="indx">Fiesca, Adorna Caterinetta, <i>see</i> <a href="#catherine">Catherine, St.</a></li> -<li class="indx">Fiesca, Francesca, I. 376, 377</li> -<li class="isub1">Maria, B., I. 176, 302</li> -<li class="isub1">Tommasa Suor, I. <b>131</b>, <b>132</b>, 143, 217, 259, 384, 387, 457, 464; II. <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> -<li class="isub2">possible contributions to the <i>Vita</i>, by, I. 457</li> -<li class="isub2">death of, I. 381</li> -<li class="isub2">life and works (upon the Areopagite and the Apocalypse), I. 132</li> -<li class="indx">Fieschi, Battista, I. 153, 154, 172</li> -<li class="isub1">Family, I. 95-97, 101, 157, 303</li> -<li class="isub1">Francesco, I. 125, 213, 315</li> -<li class="isub1">Giorgio, Cardinal, I. 102</li> -<li class="isub1">Giovanni, I. 97, 153, 154, 377, 378</li> -<li class="isub2">death of, I. 167 <i>n.</i> 3 (168), 172</li> -<li class="isub2">sons of, I. 167</li> -<li class="isub2">Cardinal, I. 125, 126</li> -<li class="isub1">Jacobo, I. 149 <i>n.</i> 1; 153, 167 <i>n.</i> 3 (168), 376, 384</li> -<li class="isub2">death of, I. 172</li> -<li class="isub2">his daughters, I. 167, 379</li> -<li class="isub1">Limbania, I. 97, 100, 105, 153, 167, 172, 186, 321, 379; II. <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Lorenzo, I. 97, 153, 154, 167 <i>n.</i> 3 (168), 172, 187, 215, 299, 370, 377</li> -<li class="isub2">Cardinal, I. 302</li> -<li class="isub1">Luca, Cardinal, I. 96</li> -<li class="isub1">Maria, I. 153, 154, 167, 172</li> -<li class="isub1">Marietta, I. 146</li> -<li class="isub1">Napoleone, Cardinal, I. 102</li> -<li class="isub1">Nicolò, Cardinal, I. 96</li> -<li class="isub1">Roberto dei, I. 95</li> -<li class="indx">Fieschi, Sinibaldo de, <i>see</i> <a href="#innocentiv">Innocent IV, Pope</a></li> -<li class="indx">Fiesco, Emmanuele, I. 175</li> -<li class="indx">Fisher, Bishop John, Blessed, I. 340</li> -<li class="indx">Florence, Council of, II. <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> -<li class="isub1">decisions concerning Purgatory, II. <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> -<li class="indx">Fontana, Padre, Barnabite, II. <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> -<li class="indx">France, I. 64, 94; II. <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> -<li class="indx">Franchi, de’, Archbishop, I. 306</li> -<li class="isub1">Tobia dei, I. 102</li> -<li class="indx">Francis, St., of Assisi, I. 8, 65, 389; II. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his life and legend, I. 372</li> -<li class="indx">Franciscans, I. <b>61</b>, <b>64</b>, 130, 140 <i>n.</i> 4, 385, 386, 389, 390; II. <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="indx">Francis, St., de Sales, I. 88; II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="indx">Frank, Sebastian, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Fregosi Family, Genoa, I. 96, 101</li> -<li class="isub1">Ottaviano, Doge, I. 327, 329, 330</li> -<li class="indx">Friendship, St. Catherine’s attitude concerning, I. 225, 226</li> -<li class="indx">Fust, Printer, I. 94</li> -<li class="ifrst">Galilei, Galileo, I. 7</li> -<li class="indx">Gamaliel, II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ganymede, II. <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gardner, Prof. P. and Miss A. on Confession and Direction, II. <a href="#Page_364">364</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Gemiluth Chasadim, II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> -<li class="indx">General, its relation to Particular according to Greek philosophy, I. 10-25; II. <a href="#Page_310"><b>310-319</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Geneva, I. 9</li> -<li class="indx">Genoa, I. 96, 100-102, and <i>passim</i></li> -<li class="isub1">position and climate, I. 93</li> -<li class="isub1">Republic of, I. 303, 305, 306, 449</li> -<li class="indx">Genoese Republic, I. 203</li> -<li class="isub1">the people, their character, I. 93-94</li> -<li class="indx">George, Bank of Saint, I. 125, 152, 153, 169, 172, 318, 326 <i>n.</i> 1, 330, 365, 376, 379</li> -<li class="isub2">cartulary of the, I. 149 <i>n.</i> 1, 365, 379</li> -<li class="indx">Germano, Borgo San, Genoa, I. 145 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Germany, I. 62, 94; II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Geronimo of Genoa, Fra, O.P., I. 253, 413, 464</li> -<li class="indx">Gerson, John, Chancellor of Paris, I. 62, 94, 342</li> -<li class="indx">Gertrude, Saint, I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Giovo, Angelo L., Prot. Ap., I. 93, 172 <i>n.</i> 1, 208 <i>n.</i> 2, 297 <i>n.</i> 1, 395, 396</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Giuseppine</i>, Genoa, I. 327</li> -<li class="indx">Giustiniano, Agostino, Bishop, his account of St. Catherine’s life, remains and biography, I. 382-384</li> -<li class="indx">Gnosticism, approximations and antagonisms to, in Fourth Gospel, II. <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> -<li class="indx">God as supremely concrete, II. <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> -<li class="isub1">natural conformity between, and all rational creatures, I. 261</li> -<li class="isub1">hunger after, I. 263</li> -<li class="isub1">His illumination of souls, I. 270-271</li> -<li class="isub1">His way of winning souls, I. 271-272</li> -<li class="isub1">co-operation of the living, and the living soul, I. 73</li> -<li class="isub1">ever apprehended in His relation to ourselves, II. <a href="#Page_169"><b>169-170</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">as the <i>Actus Purus</i>, II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the essence of things, I. 256, 266</li> -<li class="isub1">Unity and Trinity of, I. 66-67</li> -<li class="isub1">various conceptions concerning His relations with the human soul, II. <a href="#Page_319">319-325</a></li> -<li class="indx">God’s “anger” and offendedness, I. 292; II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“ecstasy,” I. 260, 262, 352; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_254"><b>254</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">immanence, I. 276, 280; II. <a href="#Page_280">280-284</a>, <a href="#Page_287"><b>287-290</b></a>, <a href="#Page_314">324</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_336"><b>336-340</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">“jealousy,” II. <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> -<li class="isub1">transcendence, I. 276, 280</li> -<li class="indx">Goethe, II. <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gordon, Charles, General, I. 89; II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_403" id="Page_403">[403]</a></span>Görres, Joseph von, and question of true Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gospels, pre-Pauline and Pauline, apprehensions in the, II. <a href="#Page_117">117-118</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gospels, the, <i>see</i> <a href="#john">John, St., Evangelist</a>, and <a href="#synoptic">Synoptic Gospels</a></li> -<li class="indx">Grace and Free Will, I. <b>69</b>, <b>70</b>; II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_174"><b>174</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Graces, Interior, I. 263, 265</li> -<li class="indx">Grasso, Don Giacomo C., I. 299 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Greece, II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="indx">Greeks, I. <b>10-25</b>, 151, 155, 246, 259; II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90-101</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185-189</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205-211</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310-314</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325-327</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356-358</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> -<li class="indx">Green, Thomas Hill, II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gregory I, the Great, Pope, Saint, I. 64</li> -<li class="isub1">VII, Pope (Hildebrand), I. 64</li> -<li class="isub1">St., of Nazianzum, II. <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="isub1">of Nyssa, I. 61; II. <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="indx">Grimm, Jacob, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Grisell, Hartwell, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1 (99)</li> -<li class="indx">Grou, Père J. N., S.J., I. 64; II. <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> -<li class="isub1">combines deep mystical life and critical labours, II. <a href="#Page_138"><b>138</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Gutenberg (John Gensfleisch), I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Guyon, Madame la Mothe, II. <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Hadrian, Emperor, II. <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> -<li class="isub1">V, Pope (Fieschi), I. 95</li> -<li class="isub1">VI, Pope (Dedel), I. 340</li> -<li class="indx">Hamann, J. C., II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hannibal, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Heaven and Pure Love according to St. Catherine’s conception, I. <b>159-160</b></li> -<li class="isub1">and Time; concreteness; and pain, II. <a href="#Page_247"><b>247-258</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Hecker, Father Isaac, I. 89; II. <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hedley, Bishop J. C., O.S.B., on the condemnation of Fènelon, II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hegel, G. W. F., II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hegelian school, II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hell, St. Catherine and, II. <a href="#Page_218"><b>218-230</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">disposition of souls in, II. <a href="#Page_221">221-225</a></li> -<li class="isub1">endlessness of, II. <a href="#Page_227">227-230</a></li> -<li class="isub1">fire of, II. <a href="#Page_215">215-218</a></li> -<li class="isub1">mitigation of its pains, II. <a href="#Page_225">225-227</a></li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine’s doctrine concerning, I. <b>281-283</b></li> -<li class="indx">Hellenism, I. <b>11-25</b></li> -<li class="isub1">its qualities, I. 48</li> -<li class="isub1">its three religious elements, I. 60</li> -<li class="indx">Henry VI, of England, I. 96</li> -<li class="isub1">VII, of England, I. 200, 201, and <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">VIII, of England, I. 311</li> -<li class="indx">Hensel, Luise, I. 334</li> -<li class="indx">Heraclitus, I. 11, 12; II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his doctrine, I. 4, 11</li> -<li class="indx">Herder, J. G., II. <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hermann, Prof. Wilhelm, II. <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> -<li class="isub1">impossible simplification of religion, II. <a href="#Page_269"><b>269-272</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Panchristism of, II. <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> -<li class="indx">Heroes, Cultus of, II. <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hezekiah, II. <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hildegard of Bingen, St., I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Hindooism, II. <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> -<li class="indx">Historical element of Religion, its division, I. 85</li> -<li class="isub1">science, <i>see</i> <a href="#science">Science</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hobbes, Thomas, I. 7</li> -<li class="indx">Höffding, Prof. Harald, on religious “Agnosticism,” II. <a href="#Page_287"><b>287</b></a>, <a href="#Page_288"><b>288</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Holtzmann, Prof. H., on retaining vivid sense both of determinist physical law and of libertarian spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_377"><b>377</b></a>, <a href="#Page_378"><b>378</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Conditional Immortality, II. <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Metaphysical factors in N. T. writings, II. <a href="#Page_269"><b>269</b></a>, <a href="#Page_270"><b>270</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Holtzmann, Prof. H., on category of time, as secondary in man’s spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_247"><b>247</b></a>, <a href="#Page_248"><b>248</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Hume, David, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hus, John, I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Huxley, Prof. Thomas, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Huysmans, J. K., II. <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hylozoism, I. 12</li> -<li class="indx">Hysteria, St. Catherine’s condition only superficially like, II. <a href="#Page_22"><b>22-27</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">three popular errors concerning, II. <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Ignatius, of Antioch, St., I. 219 <i>n.</i> 2; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1">of Loyola, St., I. <b>68, 80</b>; II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> -<li class="indx">Illingworth, Rev. J. B., II. <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> -<li class="indx">Illuminists, I. 9</li> -<li class="indx">Imagery, Battista Vernazza’s, I. 409, 432</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine dominates her own imagery, I. 237, 238</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine’s imagery, I. 266-268, 270, 277, 284-285, 287-293</li> -<li class="isub2">compared to B. Vernazzas, I. 409, 432</li> -<li class="indx">Immanence, Divine, II. <a href="#Page_287">287-290</a>, <a href="#Page_336"><b>336-340</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">facts indicative of the, II. <a href="#Page_280"><b>280-284</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">in V. Battista Vernazza, I. 352; II. <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Catherine, I. 261-263; II. <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Plotinus, II. <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Teresa, II. <a href="#Page_324"><b>324</b></a>, <a href="#Page_325"><b>325</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Thomas, II. <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_337"><b>337</b></a>, <a href="#Page_338"><b>338</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">recent thinkers, I. 270, 271, <b>339-340</b></li> -<li class="indx">Immortality, belief in, among great Eastern religions, II. <a href="#Page_181">181-185</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its beginnings amongst Greeks and Jews, II. <a href="#Page_185">185-191</a></li> -<li class="isub1">morbid, character of the Greek beginnings, II. <a href="#Page_191">191-194</a></li> -<li class="isub1">philosophical and ethical difficulties of, II. <a href="#Page_194"><b>194-199</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Imperiali, Cardinal, I. 305</li> -<li class="indx">Incarnational doctrine, I. 369; II. <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_253"><b>253-255</b></a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>, <a href="#Page_355"><b>355-357</b></a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a>, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> -<li class="indx">Incorruption of St. Catherine’s body, I. 302 and <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">India, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> -<li class="indx">Individual, the, its apparent power over the emotions and the will, I. 3-6;</li> -<li class="isub1">its power derived from expressing the Abiding and Personal, <b>I. 367-370</b></li> -<li class="indx">Individuality, right, of every soul, II. <a href="#Page_255"><b>255</b></a>, <a href="#Page_256"><b>256</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Indulgences, St. Catherine’s assertions about them, I. 123-124</li> -<li class="isub2">authenticity of, I. 124</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine’s attitude towards them, I. 124-125</li> -<li class="isub1">the Congregation of Rites on St. Catherine’s attitude towards indulgences, I. 125-126</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="innocentiv" id="innocentiv"></a>Innocent IV, Pope (Fieschi), I. 95</li> -<li class="isub1">XI. Pope (Odescalchi), I, 253, 305; II. <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Inquisition, Roman, I. 341</li> -<li class="isub1">Spanish, I. 72; II. <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> -<li class="indx">Intellectual element of Religion, its division, I. 85-86</li> -<li class="isub1">personalities, movements and races, I. 6-7</li> -<li class="isub2">gaps in, stopped by the Emotional-volitional element, I. 7</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_404" id="Page_404">[404]</a></span>Intercommunication, will-moving, between men, its conditions, I. 367-370</li> -<li class="indx">Interiorization, the soul’s, of God, I. 263</li> -<li class="indx">Intuitionists, Dutch-Westphalian Apocalyptic, I. 63; II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Invocation of Saints, by St. Catherine, I. 240</li> -<li class="isub2">her attitude concerning it, I. 126-127</li> -<li class="indx">Isolation, moral and spiritual, I. 5-6</li> -<li class="indx">Isaiah, I. 258; II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Italy, I. 65, 94, 259, 311, 315, 341; II. <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Quietism in, II. <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Jacobi, F. H., II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jacopone, da Todi, I. 130, 163 <i>n.</i>, 177, 234, 235, 255, 258, 259, 275, 386; II. <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his <i>Lode</i>, their influence upon Catherine’s conceptions, II. <a href="#Page_102"><b>102-110</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Neo-Platonism in, II. <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Platonism in, II. <a href="#Page_103">103-105</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jahvist and Elohist writings, Moses in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Jamblichus, I. 6</li> -<li class="indx">James, Saint, <i>Epistle of</i>, II. <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Prof. William, II. <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on psychical normality and fruitfulness of formless recollection, II. <a href="#Page_266"><b>266</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on pace of conversion, as primarily a temperamental matter, II. <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> -<li class="indx">Janet, Pierre, Professor, II. <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on three popular errors concerning Hysteria, II. <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> -<li class="isub1">hysterical peculiarities registered by him, II. <a href="#Page_23">23-25</a></li> -<li class="indx">Japan, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jean Baptiste de la Salle, St., I. 78</li> -<li class="indx">Jean, François St. Regis, S.J., I. 306</li> -<li class="indx">Jean Paul Friedrich Richter, II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jeremiah, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jerome, St., I. 78</li> -<li class="indx">Jesuits, I. <b>63</b>, <b>64</b>, 121; II. <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a> <i>n.</i>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jesus Christ, compared with Buddha and Mohamed, I. 71</li> -<li class="isub1">His Cross, its necessity for the soul’s fullest life, I. 82; II. <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_360"><b>360</b></a>, <a href="#Page_361"><b>361</b></a>, <a href="#Page_395">395</a></li> -<li class="isub1">multiplicity within unity of His action and interests, I. <b>25-28</b></li> -<li class="isub1">His place in teaching of V. Battista Vernazzo, I. 359, 360, 405, 406, 413</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine, I. 108, 109, 209, <b>239-241</b>, 360, 412, 413; II. <a href="#Page_70">70-74</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79-83</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Joannine writings, II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> -<li class="isub1">St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76-79</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub1">in conception of Prof. W. Hermann, II. <a href="#Page_263">263-268</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> -<li class="isub1">His teaching, primarily not moral, but religious, II. <a href="#Page_274"><b>274</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">on Pure Love, II. <a href="#Page_153">153-158</a></li> -<li class="isub2">its Petrine, Pauline, Joannine presentations, II. <a href="#Page_28">28-39</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jews, II. <a href="#Page_189"><b>189-191</b></a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> -<li class="indx">Joachim, Abbot, II. <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> -<li class="indx">Job, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">John, St. Damascene, II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><a name="john" id="john"></a>St., Evangelist; the Joannine writings, I. 223, 234, 235, 258, 353, 374; II. <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and organized Ecclesiastical Christianity, II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the Synoptic Gospels, II. <a href="#Page_81"><b>81-86</b></a>, <a href="#Page_116"><b>116</b></a>, <a href="#Page_117"><b>117</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and other systems, II. <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81-83</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God, Salvation, Sacraments, Last Things, compared with St. Catherine’s teachings, II. <a href="#Page_84"><b>84-90</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">John, St., on Pure Love, II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the Baptist, St., I. 65, 97</li> -<li class="isub1">chapel of, Cathedral, Genoa, I. 77, 161</li> -<li class="isub1">the Beheaded, Company of, I. 327, 328, 430</li> -<li class="isub1">XXII, Pope (Duèse), II. <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> -<li class="isub1">St., of the Cross, I. 67, 87, 180, 247; II. <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306-308</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on right attachment, II. <a href="#Page_353"><b>353</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on faith, as sole proportionate means of union with God, II. <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on a loving knowledge producible by God’s aid alone, II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on perception of God’s incomprehensibleness, II. <a href="#Page_257"><b>257</b></a>, <a href="#Page_258"><b>258</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the true test of perfection, II. <a href="#Page_51"><b>51</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">his helpfulness towards finding place for temper of determinist science within the spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his predominant theory requires continuous remembrance of his practice and occasional description of the soul’s other movement, II. <a href="#Page_343"><b>343-345</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Josephus, II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jowett, Benjamin, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Judaism, II. <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its three elements, I. <b>61</b>; II. <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Judas Maccabaeus, II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> -<li class="indx">Juliana, Mother, of Norwich, on Eternal Punishment, II. <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on negative character of Evil, II. <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Direction, II. <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her Christian optimism, II. <a href="#Page_305"><b>305</b></a>, <a href="#Page_306"><b>306</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Julianus, Monk, Pelagianizer, II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> -<li class="indx">Julius II, Pope (Rovere), I. 94, 146, 155</li> -<li class="indx">Justina, Benedictine, Congregation of St., Padua, I. 103 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Justin, St., Martyr, II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Kabbala, II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Kant, Immanuel, I. 43; II. <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="isub1">deepens contrast between quantitative science and qualitative spiritual life, I. 43</li> -<li class="isub1">his defective religious sense, II. <a href="#Page_260"><b>260-262</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on disinterested religion, II. <a href="#Page_177">177-179</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his dualistic assumption in epistemology, II. <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Evil as positive and radical, II. <a href="#Page_295"><b>295</b></a>, <a href="#Page_296"><b>296</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on obscure apprehensions, II. <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> -<li class="indx">Keble, Rev. John, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Kempen, Thomas of, I. 62</li> -<li class="indx">Kepler, Johann, I. 7; II. <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> -<li class="indx">Kierkegaard Sören, his radical Asceticism, II. <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God’s utter difference from Man, II. <a href="#Page_287"><b>287</b></a>, <a href="#Page_288"><b>288</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on “Repetition,” II. <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> -<li class="indx">Knowledge, its three constituents, I. 54-57</li> -<li class="ifrst">Laberthonnière, Abbé L., <i>Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne</i>, 1905, 1906, II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lallemant, Louis, Pére, S.J., I. 64; II. <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lancisius, Nicolas, S.J., I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Laplace, P. S. de, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lateran, Fourth Council of, I. 120, 121</li> -<li class="indx">Laud, William, Anglican Archbishop, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Laurence, St., quarter of, Genoa, I. 377</li> -<li class="indx">Lavagna, on Riviera, I. 95</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_405" id="Page_405">[405]</a></span>Lazaretto, Genoa, I. 332</li> -<li class="indx">Lazzaro, S., Genoa, I. 406</li> -<li class="isub1">poor of, I. 145 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Leibniz, I. 42, 113; II. <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on dim Presentations, II. <a href="#Page_338"><b>338</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Pure Love, II. <a href="#Page_176"><b>176</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">his share in development of modern scientific spirit, I. <b>42</b>, <b>43</b></li> -<li class="indx">Leo X (Medici), Pope, I. 259, 311, 321, 322</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Bull “Exurge Domine,”</i> I. 340, 448</li> -<li class="indx">Lessing, G. E., II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on soul’s incapacity for any unmixed emotion, II. <a href="#Page_256"><b>256</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Purgatory, II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> -<li class="indx">Leucippus, I. 11</li> -<li class="indx">Library, University, of Genoa, I. 171 <i>n.</i> 1, 172 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Life, Spiritual, three stages of, I. <b>241-244</b></li> -<li class="indx">Liguria, I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Ligurians, I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Limbania, Beata, of Genoa, I. 97, 100</li> -<li class="indx">Littré, Emil, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Locke, John, II. <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> -<li class="indx">Loisy, Alfred, Abbé, II. <a href="#Page_360">360</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Lombard, Peter, I. 120; II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a> <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Lomellini family, Genoa, I. 327</li> -<li class="indx">Lorenzo, Cathedral of S., Genoa, I. 97, 101, 320</li> -<li class="isub1">Piazza S., I. 97</li> -<li class="indx">Lost, mitigation of sufferings of the, II. <a href="#Page_225">225-227</a></li> -<li class="isub1">perversion, their total moral, II. <a href="#Page_221"><b>221-225</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Lotze, Hermann, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Louis XII, King of France, I. 340</li> -<li class="isub1">XIV, King of France, I. 305</li> -<li class="isub1">St., King of France, I. 361</li> -<li class="indx">Love, of God and of oneself, I. 262-263</li> -<li class="isub1"><a name="love" id="love"></a>Pure, I. 261</li> -<li class="isub2">according to St. Catherine’s conception, I. 159-160</li> -<li class="isub2">according to the New Testament, I. <b>153-159</b></li> -<li class="isub2">acts, single, of, II. <a href="#Page_163"><b>163-164</b></a></li> -<li class="isub3">pleasurableness that follows them, II. <a href="#Page_170"><b>170-172</b></a></li> -<li class="isub3">relation of, to Contemplative Prayer, II. <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> -<li class="isub2">and its cognate problems, II. <a href="#Page_169"><b>169-174</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">Catherine’s, I. 140-141</li> -<li class="isub2">controversy concerning, II. <a href="#Page_160"><b>160-169</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">distinction from Quietism, II. <a href="#Page_151">151-181</a></li> -<li class="isub2">exactingness of, I. 268-269</li> -<li class="isub2">Fénelon on, II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="isub2">the Joannine writings on, II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Kant on, II. <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Leibniz on, II. <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Our Lord’s teaching concerning, II. <a href="#Page_153"><b>153-158</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Paul on, II. <a href="#Page_158"><b>158-160</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">three rules of, according to St. Catherine, I. 138-139</li> -<li class="isub2">Spinoza’s view concerning, II. <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isub2">state of, II. <a href="#Page_165"><b>165-169</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Thomas Aquinas on, II. <a href="#Page_162"><b>162-165</b></a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li> -<li class="indx">Loyola, St. Ignatius of, I. 68, 80; II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lucretius, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lugo, John Cardinal de, S.J., I. 121</li> -<li class="indx">Lukardis, Venerable Sister, Cistercian, II. <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> -<li class="indx">Luke, St., I. 351, 374</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Acts of the Apostles</i>, I. 162, 374; II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Gospel according to</i>, I. 223</li> -<li class="isub2">and St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lunga, Signora, I. 329</li> -<li class="indx">Luther, I. 9, 62, 63, 95, 340, 412, 448; II. <a href="#Page_117"><b>117-119</b></a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Theses of, I. 252, 311, <b>448</b></li> -<li class="indx">Lutheranism, I. 9; II. <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="isub1">early stages of, I. 339-341</li> -<li class="indx">Lyell, Sir Charles, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Maccabean Heroes, I. 373</li> -<li class="isub1">resistance, I. 392</li> -<li class="indx">Maccabees, First and Second Books of, the, the Maccabean heroes in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">“Maestà” (triptych), I. <b>168</b>, 172, 181, 239, 298</li> -<li class="indx">Magdalen, Mary, St., I. 110, 170</li> -<li class="indx">Maldonatus, Juan, S.J., I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Malebranche, Nicholas, Père, I. 63; II. <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Mandiletto</i>, Compagnia del, I. 154, 332</li> -<li class="indx">Manichaeans, II. <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> -<li class="indx">Manichaeism, II. <a href="#Page_230">230</a></li> -<li class="indx">Manning, H. E., Cardinal, I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Manuscripts, Genoese, of the <i>Vita</i>, I. 93</li> -<li class="indx">Manuscript “A” (University Library), I. 112 <i>n.</i> 1, 159 <i>n.</i> 1, 162 <i>n.</i> 3 (163), 166, 188 <i>n.</i> 1, 197 <i>n.</i> 2, 214, 304, 434, 435, 442, 451</li> -<li class="isub1">additions and variations of, as compared with Printed <i>Vita</i>, I. <b>384-394</b></li> -<li class="isub1">and Argentina del Sale, I. 387</li> -<li class="isub1">characteristics of, I. 396</li> -<li class="isub1">authentic contributions of, I. <b>387-388</b></li> -<li class="isub1">date and scribe of, I. 385</li> -<li class="isub1">modification from a tripartite to a quadripartite scheme, I. <b>390-394</b></li> -<li class="indx">Manuscript “B” (Archives of the Cathedral-chapter), I. 162 <i>n.</i> 3 (163), 166, 188, 197 <i>n.</i> 2, 214, 396, 412, 415, 442</li> -<li class="isub1">dependence from MS. “A”, I. 394</li> -<li class="isub1">its divisions, I. 394-395</li> -<li class="isub1">its very primitive heading, I. <b>394</b></li> -<li class="indx">Manuscript “C” (University Library), differences from MSS. A and B, origin and attribution, I. 395-396</li> -<li class="indx">“Maona” Company, Genoa, I. 151</li> -<li class="indx">Marabotti, various, I. 156, 157</li> -<li class="indx">Marabotto Cattaneo, Don, I. 90, 98 <i>n.</i> 1, 110, 117 <i>n.</i> 2, 118, 119, 120, 121 <i>n.</i> 3, 135 <i>n.</i> 1, 140 <i>n.</i> 4, 147 <i>n.</i> 1, <b>156-159</b>, 162 <i>n.</i> 3 (163), 166, 172, 173, 175, 176, <b>185</b>, <b>186</b>, 187, 191, 193, 204 <i>n.</i> 1, 207, 213, 216, 217, 218, 225, 252, 256, 264, 296, 299, 300, 301, 308, 309, 313, 314, 356, 371, 384, 390, 393, <b>415</b>, <b>416</b>, <b>419</b>, <b>421</b>, 431, 432, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 454, 455, <b>463</b>, <b>464</b>; II. <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_15"><b>15</b></a>, <a href="#Page_17"><b>17</b></a>, <a href="#Page_25"><b>25</b></a>, <a href="#Page_26"><b>26</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">attitude concerning Catherine, I. 218</li> -<li class="isub1">character of, I. <b>157</b></li> -<li class="isub1">Catherine’s confessor, I. <b>157-158</b></li> -<li class="isub1">contributions to <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 392-394, <b>455-457</b></li> -<li class="isub1">contributions to <i>Dicchiarazione</i> (<i>Trattato</i>), I. 447-448</li> -<li class="isub1">death of, I. 381</li> -<li class="isub1">family, I. 156-157</li> -<li class="isub1">fate of, I. 310-311</li> -<li class="isub1">first relations with Catherine, I. 155-156</li> -<li class="isub1">influence and work concerning Catherine, I. 193-196</li> -<li class="isub1">misunderstandings, I. 120 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">scruples, I. 194-195</li> -<li class="isub1">scent-impression from his hand, I. 184-185</li> -<li class="isub1">will of, I. 381</li> -<li class="indx">Marco del Sale, I. 127, 203, 388, 402</li> -<li class="isub1">story of his death, I. <b>169-171</b></li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_406" id="Page_406">[406]</a></span>Marcus Aurelius, Emperor, II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Maria delle Grazie, Santa, Genoa, church and convent of, I. <b>99-101</b>, 132, 143, 170, 186, 319, 321, 325, 339, 365, 366 n. 2, <b>395</b>, 460; II. <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> -<li class="indx">Maria delle Grazie Vecchia, S., church of, Genoa, I. 170</li> -<li class="indx">Maria di Castello, church of S., Genoa, I. 100, 101, 366 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Marie de l’Incarnation, the Ven., Ursuline, II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mariola Bastarda, servant, I. 149, 153, 161, 162 <i>n.</i> 3 (163), 172, 175, 176, 216, 217, 226, <b>310-313</b>, 379, 381, 384, 457</li> -<li class="indx">Mark, Bishop of Ephesus, II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mark, St., Gospel according to, I. 67, 257, 374</li> -<li class="indx">Marriage, Catherine’s attitude concerning, I, 223-225; II. <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li> -<li class="isub1">settlement, Catherine’s, I. 337</li> -<li class="isub1">Church teaching concerning, II. <a href="#Page_128"><b>128-129</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Martineau, Dr. James, II. <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> -<li class="indx">Martin St., of Tours, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Mary, Blessed Virgin, I. 99, 127, 168, 338, 426, 432</li> -<li class="isub1">(Tudor), Queen of England, I. 95</li> -<li class="isub1">(Stuart), Queen of Scots, I. 366</li> -<li class="indx">Matthew, St., Gospel according to, I. 374</li> -<li class="isub1">Levi, Apostle, I. 374</li> -<li class="indx">Maurice, Frederic Denison, II. <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mazone, Giovanni, painter, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1 (99)</li> -<li class="indx">Mazzini, Giuseppe, I. 97</li> -<li class="indx">Megaric School, I. 23</li> -<li class="indx">Melanchthon, and his <i>Loci</i>, I. 341</li> -<li class="indx">Menelaus, II. <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mercier, D. Cardinal, <i>Critériologie Générale</i>, II. <a href="#Page_7">7</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Merovingian Saints, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Metaphysics and Religion, II. <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>, <a href="#Page_269"><b>269-272</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Micah, Prophet, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Michael Angelo Buonarotti, I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Milan, Dukes of, I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Milano, Carlo da, painter, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1 (99)</li> -<li class="indx">Mill, John Stuart, I. 51; II. <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Misericordia, Donne della, Genoa, I. 130, 131, 401, 402</li> -<li class="isub1">Office of, Genoa, I. 152, 154, 319</li> -<li class="indx">Missione Urbana, Biblioteca della, Genoa, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1, 125 <i>n.</i> 1, 167 <i>n.</i> 3 (168), 171 <i>n.</i> 1 (172), 202 <i>n.</i> 2, 203 <i>n.</i> 1, 208 <i>n.</i> 2, 3; 296 <i>n.</i> 1, 297 <i>n.</i> 1, 299 <i>n.</i> 1, 301 <i>n.</i> 1, 308 <i>n.</i> 1, 309 <i>n.</i> 1, 312 <i>n.</i> 1, 313 <i>n.</i> 1, 381 <i>n.</i> 1, 2</li> -<li class="indx">Mithraic movement, II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mohamed, compared with Christ, I. 71</li> -<li class="indx">Mohammedanism, II. <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its three elements, I. <b>60-61</b></li> -<li class="indx">Mohammedans, II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Molinos, Miguel de, I. 253; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his condemnation, its history, motives, limits, II. <a href="#Page_136"><b>136-148</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Guida Spirituale</i>, II. <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Breve Trattato</i>, II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="indx">Moltke, Field-Marshal von, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mommsen, Theodor, II. <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Monasticism, the abiding needs met by, II. <a href="#Page_352"><b>352-355</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Monica, St., I. 361</li> -<li class="indx">Monism, I. 40; II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_377"><b>377-379</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Montanism, II. <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> -<li class="indx">Morality, relations to Mysticism, Philosophy and Religion, II. <a href="#Page_259"><b>259-275</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">More, Sir Thomas, Blessed, I. 62, 340; II. <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> -<li class="indx">Moro, Dottore Tommaso, I. 149, 252, 337, 341, 358, 364, 414, 415; II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="isub1">becomes a Calvinist, I. 341-342</li> -<li class="indx">Moro, Dottore Tommaso, his letter to Battista Vernazza; and her letter to him, I. 341-342, <b>342-344</b></li> -<li class="isub1">his return to the Catholic Church, I. 344</li> -<li class="isub1">Morone, Giovanni, Cardinal, I. 327, 342 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Moses, I. <b>373</b>; II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mühlhausen, Father Henry of, O.P., II. <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> -<li class="indx">Multiplicity, within every living Unity, I. <b>66-70</b></li> -<li class="isub1">difficulty of its maintenance, I. 65, <b>70-77</b>; II. <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_273"><b>273-275</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">needful for all spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_150"><b>150-152</b></a>, <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_284">284</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> -<li class="indx">Münsterberg, Prof. Hugo, II. <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mysteries, Eleusynian, I. 60; II. <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mystical Element, its apparent worthlessness but essential importance, I. 6-10, 48, 49, 50-53, 58-65; II. <a href="#Page_260"><b>260-269</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Mysticism and Pantheism, II. <a href="#Page_325">325-340</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the limits of human knowledge, II. <a href="#Page_275">275-290</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the question of Evil, II. <a href="#Page_290">290-308</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and historical religion, II. <a href="#Page_263">263-269</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Christian, II. <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“exclusive” or pseudo-mysticism and “inclusive” or true mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, <a href="#Page_290"><b>290-291</b></a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ruinousness of exclusive, II. <a href="#Page_304">304-308</a>, <a href="#Page_351"><b>351-353</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">its place in complete Religion, II. <a href="#Page_272"><b>272-275</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the scientific habit of mind, II. <a href="#Page_367"><b>367-372</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">points on which it approaches Pantheism, II. <a href="#Page_329"><b>329-334</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">predominantly individualistic, II. <a href="#Page_365">365-366</a></li> -<li class="isub1">tends to neglect the sensible, the successive, and spiritual self-excitation, II. <a href="#Page_284"><b>284-287</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Mystic Saints, II. <a href="#Page_142">142-143</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mystics, I. 61, 247</li> -<li class="isub1">and spiritual Direction, II. <a href="#Page_362">362-363</a></li> -<li class="isub1">their special weaknesses and strengths, II. <a href="#Page_284"><b>284-289</b></a>, <a href="#Page_289"><b>289-295</b></a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>, <a href="#Page_343"><b>343-346</b></a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Naples, I. 97</li> -<li class="isub1">Hospital in, I. 323, 329</li> -<li class="isub1">Kingdom of, I. 96</li> -<li class="isub1">Society for escorting culprits to death, I. 323-324</li> -<li class="indx">Napoleon, II. <a href="#Page_41">41-42</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> -<li class="indx">Negri Family, Genoa, various members of, I. 97, 100, 377</li> -<li class="indx">Nelson, Admiral Lord, II. <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> -<li class="indx">Neo-Platonism, in general, I. <b>23-25</b>, 61</li> -<li class="isub1">its direct influence with St. Augustine, II. <a href="#Page_212"><b>212</b></a>, <a href="#Page_213"><b>213</b></a>, <a href="#Page_248"><b>248</b></a>, <a href="#Page_293"><b>293</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">Pseudo-Dionysius, II. <a href="#Page_91"><b>91-99</b></a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_312"><b>312</b></a>, <a href="#Page_313"><b>313</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Its influence, through Dionysius, with V. Battista Vernazza, I. <b>352-354</b>, 356, 358, 428</li> -<li class="isub2">St. Catherine, II. <a href="#Page_91"><b>91-99</b></a>, <a href="#Page_123"><b>123-126</b></a>, <a href="#Page_234"><b>234-239</b></a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Jacopone da Todi, II. <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_407" id="Page_407">[407]</a></span>Medieval Mystics and Pantheists, II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Thomas Aquinas, II. <a href="#Page_249"><b>249-252</b></a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its truth, II. <a href="#Page_92"><b>92</b></a>, <a href="#Page_248"><b>248</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">its weaknesses and errors, II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_287"><b>287</b></a>, <a href="#Page_288"><b>288</b></a>, <a href="#Page_293"><b>293</b></a>, <a href="#Page_294"><b>294</b></a>, <a href="#Page_351"><b>351-353</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Neri, St. Philip, I. 318</li> -<li class="isub1">Church of, Genoa, I. 102</li> -<li class="indx">Nero, Emperor, II. <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> -<li class="indx">Nervous system, late realization of, II. <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="indx">“Nettezza,” I. 266 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Newman, John Henry, Cardinal, I. 65, 78; II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Dream of Gerontius</i>, I. 89; II. <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Eternal Punishment, II. <a href="#Page_230">230</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Physical Science, its limited scope and its autonomy, II. <a href="#Page_369"><b>369</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Newton, John, I. 63</li> -<li class="isub1">Sir Isaac, II. <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Nicolas of Coes (Cusanus), Cardinal, I. 62, 78, 96; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> -<li class="indx">Nicolas V, Pope (Parentucelli), I. 103 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Nicolo in Boschelto, S., near Genoa, church and monastery of, I. 103, 189, 213, 313, 319, 321, 325; II. <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> -<li class="indx">Nietzsche, Friedrich, II. <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> -<li class="indx">Nominalism, I. 61, 62</li> -<li class="indx">Nonconformists, I. 63; II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Nonconformity, I. 8, 9</li> -<li class="indx">Novara, Luca da, painter, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1 (99)</li> -<li class="ifrst">Occam, William of, O.S.F., I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Occhino, Bernardino, I. 341, 342</li> -<li class="indx">Oldenberg, H., on <i>Nirvana</i>, II. <a href="#Page_183">183-185</a></li> -<li class="indx">Oratory (French), I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Orders, Catholic, religious, their three tendencies, I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Organic life, the successive stages of, II. <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> -<li class="indx">Origen, I. 6; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his <i>Apocatastasis</i>—doctrine, II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on fire of Hell, II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on an ameliorative Purgatory, II. <a href="#Page_234">234-237</a></li> -<li class="indx">Originality, treble, of St. Catherine, I. 246-249</li> -<li class="indx">Orphic belief, II. <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> -<li class="isub1">influence, through Plato, upon Christian thought, II. <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_235"><b>235-238</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">literature, II. <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> -<li class="isub1">mysteries, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="isub1">sect, II. <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Palaeologus, Michael, his confession of faith, II. <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> -<li class="indx">Palladius, <i>Historia Monachorum</i>, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Pammatone, Hospital of, I. <b>129-132</b>, 142, 145 <i>n.</i> 1, 148-153, 169, 170, 213, 226, 300, 303, 310 <i>n.</i> 1, 311, 317, 325-327, 377, 380, 395, 401, 407; II. <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Books, of the, I. 143 <i>n.</i> 2, 208</li> -<li class="isub1">Cartulary, of, I. 202 <i>n.</i> 2, 313</li> -<li class="isub1">Church, of the, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1, 152, 202 and <i>n.</i> 3, 296, 297 <i>n.</i> 1, 300, 302, 309, 321, 332, 382</li> -<li class="isub1">House surgeon, of the, I. 200; II. <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Protectors, of the, I. 175, 187, 216, 297, 299, 307</li> -<li class="isub1">Book of the Acts of the, I. 172 <i>n.</i> 1, 175 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Pantheism in Middle Ages, II. <a href="#Page_314">314-318</a></li> -<li class="isub1">useful preliminary, of Inclusive Mystics, II. <a href="#Page_329"><b>329-334</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">escaped by full development of scientific habit within shallower level of a deep spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_374"><b>374-386</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">in Spinoza, secret of its power, II. <a href="#Page_326"><b>326-329</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">ultimate, not Christian, nor generally religious, II. <a href="#Page_334"><b>334</b></a>, <a href="#Page_335"><b>335</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Paracelsus, I. 7</li> -<li class="indx">Paris, II. <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> -<li class="isub1">University of, I. 62</li> -<li class="indx">Parker, Rev. James, I. 250, 266 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Parmenides, I. 11; II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his doctrine, I. 11</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Parousia</i>, the, II. <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> -<li class="indx">Parpera, Giacinto, P., Oratorian, I. 92, 390</li> -<li class="indx">Pascal, I. 78; II. <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pascoli, Giovanni, II. <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> -<li class="indx">Passivity, <i>see</i> <a href="#quietism">Quietism</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pattison, A. S. Pringle, II. <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Paul, Saint, I. 111, 256, 265, 320, 363, 361, 373, 453; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Joannine writings, II. <a href="#Page_84">84-88</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Synoptic Gospels, II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_122"><b>122-125</b></a>, <a href="#Page_157"><b>157</b></a>, <a href="#Page_158"><b>158</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">anthropology of, II. <a href="#Page_64"><b>64-67</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">his conceptions of God, II. <a href="#Page_69"><b>69-71</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">of Spirit, II. <a href="#Page_67"><b>67-69</b></a>, <a href="#Page_320"><b>320-322</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">of reconciliation, justification and sanctification, II. <a href="#Page_71">71-74</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ecstasies and psycho-physical peculiarities of, II. <a href="#Page_43">43-44</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Epistles of, I. 162, 234, 235, 258, 353, 374; II. <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Eschatology of, II. <a href="#Page_76">76-79</a>, <a href="#Page_209"><b>209</b></a>, <a href="#Page_210"><b>210</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Judaic conceptions of, II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Platonic influences in, II. <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_66"><b>66</b></a>, <a href="#Page_67"><b>67</b></a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the Risen Christ, II. <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Sacramental teachings of, II. <a href="#Page_75">75-76</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Social ethics of, II. <a href="#Page_74"><b>74-75</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1"><a name="pauliv" id="pauliv"></a>IV, Pope (Caraffa), I. 322, 327</li> -<li class="indx">Pazzi, Maria Magdalena dei, St., II. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> -<li class="indx">Peasants’ War, I. 10, 311, 340</li> -<li class="indx">Personality, its purification, II. <a href="#Page_377"><b>377-387</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Spiritual, II. <a href="#Page_336"><b>336-340</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Petau, Denys, S.J., II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> -<li class="indx">Peter, St., I. 67, 374</li> -<li class="isub1">Epistles of, II. <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> -<li class="indx">Peters, Margarethe, Lutheran Quietist, II. <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> -<li class="indx">Petrone, Igino, Prof., II. <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Petrucci, Pietro M., Cardinal, II. <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his writings, II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pharisees, I. 61, 68; II. <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="indx">Philo, I. 61; II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the Joannine writings, II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> -<li class="indx">Physicians, and St. Catherine, I. 200, 201, 208, 211, 212</li> -<li class="indx">Physicists, the ancient Greek, II. <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pico della Mirandoia, I. 7</li> -<li class="indx">“Pietà,” picture, I. 181, 209, 239, 460; II. <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pietism, Protestant, I. 10</li> -<li class="indx">Pindar, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pius IV, Pope (Medici), I. 123</li> -<li class="isub1">VII, Pope (Chiaramonti), II. <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> -<li class="indx">Plague, in Genoa, 1493, I. 143</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine and the, I. 143-145</li> -<li class="isub1">Ettore Vernazza and the, I. 330-332</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_408" id="Page_408">[408]</a></span>Plant-life, Catherine’s sympathy for, I. 163, 164</li> -<li class="isub1">probably dimly conscious, II. <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> -<li class="indx">Plato, I. 12, 14, 19, 20, 21, 23, 28, 234, 257, 266 <i>n.</i> 3, 353; II. <a href="#Page_66"><b>66</b></a>, <a href="#Page_124"><b>124</b></a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a> <i>n.</i> 2, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_202"><b>202</b></a>, <a href="#Page_203"><b>203</b></a>, <a href="#Page_204"><b>204</b></a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on amelioration by suffering, II. <a href="#Page_208">208</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his earlier and later beliefs as to place of contemplation in complete life, II. <a href="#Page_306"><b>306-309</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">Immortality, II. <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his abidingly fruitful combination of four characteristics, I. <b>17-19</b></li> -<li class="isub1">on the Heavenly Eros, I. 17; II. <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> -<li class="isub1">God, how far concrete and ethical in, II. <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God’s goodness as cause of His framing this universe, I. 24; II. <a href="#Page_334"><b>334</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the Noûs, II. <a href="#Page_319">319-320</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the Orphic strain in, II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_123"><b>123-126</b></a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his five preformations of St. Catherine’s <i>Trattato</i> teachings, II. <a href="#Page_205"><b>205-211</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">his <i>Republic</i>, Catherine’s purgatorial picturings compared with, II. <a href="#Page_200">200</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the soul’s determinedness and liberty, II. <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the soul’s nakedness, II. <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the soul’s “places,” II. <a href="#Page_205">205-207</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the soul’s plunge, II. <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Science and Mysticism, respectively, II. <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on <i>Thumos</i>, II. <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> -<li class="indx">Plotinus, I. 6, 234, 257, 266 <i>n.</i> 3; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his doctrine generally, I. <b>23-25</b></li> -<li class="isub1">on Ecstasy, II. <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub1">places Godhead above all multiplicity, II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the Henad, the Noûs and the Soul, II. <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Spinoza, II. <a href="#Page_325">325-328</a></li> -<li class="indx">Plunge, voluntary of the Soul, I. 249, 250, <b>284</b>, <b>285</b>; II. <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_207"><b>207</b></a>, <a href="#Page_208"><b>208</b></a>, <a href="#Page_385"><b>385-386</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Plutarch, II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="indx">Poor, Catherine’s love for the, I. 225-226</li> -<li class="indx">Positivist, Epistemology, II. <a href="#Page_275"><b>275-283</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Possession, Persons in state of, I. 161, 162 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Possessions, Catherine’s, at her death, I. 297-299</li> -<li class="indx">Poveri, Albergo dei, Genoa, I. 332</li> -<li class="indx">Prà, near Genoa, I. 102, 103, 128, 129, 186, 313</li> -<li class="indx">Prayers for the Dead, Jewish, II. <a href="#Page_233">233-234</a></li> -<li class="indx">Presbyterianism, II. <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pre-Socratics, their doctrines, I. 11-12</li> -<li class="indx">Priestly code, Moses in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Proclus, I. 234, 257; II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> -<li class="isub1">doctrine of, I. <b>23-25</b>; II. <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the Areopagite reproduces directly, not Plotinus but, II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96-101</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> -<li class="indx">Prophets, Hebrew, I. 353</li> -<li class="indx">Protestantism, II. <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> -<li class="isub1">continental, I. 8, <b>62</b>, <b>63</b></li> -<li class="isub1">English, I. <b>8-9</b></li> -<li class="isub1">German, I. 9</li> -<li class="indx">Proverbs, Book of, Individual retribution in, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Psalms, Book of, St. Catherine and, I. 258</li> -<li class="isub1">Future life in, II. <a href="#Page_189">189-191</a></li> -<li class="isub1">David in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Psycho-physical and temperamental characteristics of St. Catherine during 1447-1477, II. <a href="#Page_28">28-32</a></li> -<li class="isub1">1477-1499, II. <a href="#Page_32">32-40</a></li> -<li class="isub1">1497-1510, II. <a href="#Page_9">9-21</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Aug. 10-27, 1510, I. 204-209</li> -<li class="isub1">occasions or expressions, not causes, of Catherine’s doctrine, I. 211, 212, 260; II. <a href="#Page_14"><b>14-20</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Psycho-physical and temperamental characteristics of St. Catherine, inquiry into, difficulty of, II. <a href="#Page_7">7-9</a></li> -<li class="isub1">organism, of St. Catherine, I. 176-181</li> -<li class="isub1">peculiarities of great men, II. <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> -<li class="isub1">peculiarities of ecstatic saints, II. <a href="#Page_42"><b>42-47</b></a>, <a href="#Page_52"><b>52-56</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">abidingly sure spiritual tests of, applied by great mystical saints, II. <a href="#Page_48"><b>48-51</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">theory, defects and value of ancient, II. <a href="#Page_3">3-6</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> -<li class="indx">Purgatory, I. 190, 249, 382</li> -<li class="isub1">Alexandrine Fathers on, II. <a href="#Page_234">234-236</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Catherine’s conceptions of, harbour two currents of thought, II. <a href="#Page_232">232</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Catherine’s doctrine concerning, I. 179. 189, <b>283-294</b>; II. <a href="#Page_230"><b>230-246</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">the three sets of theological “corrections” of, traceable in Trattato’s text, I. <b>434-449</b></li> -<li class="isub1">and the New Testament, II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> -<li class="isub1">initial experience and act of the soul in, I. 283-285</li> -<li class="isub1">subsequent state of the soul in, I. 285-294</li> -<li class="isub1">change of feeling among Protestant thinkers concerning, II. <a href="#Page_230">230-232</a></li> -<li class="isub1">fire of, II. <a href="#Page_215">215-218</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Judaeo-Roman conceptions of, II. <a href="#Page_239">239-245</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Luther’s theses concerning, I. 311, 448</li> -<li class="isub1">Orphic conception and, II. <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Platonic conception of, II. <a href="#Page_206"><b>206-211</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">a truly purging, and Suarez’ simple <i>Satisfactorium</i>, II. <a href="#Page_240"><b>240-245</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">“Purità,” I. 266 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Puritan excesses, I. 10</li> -<li class="indx">Pusey, Dr. Edward B., I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Pythagoras, II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="ifrst"><a name="quietism" id="quietism"></a>Quietism, II. <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> -<li class="isub1">four aberrations of, II. <a href="#Page_136"><b>136-139</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Rome’s condemnation of, II. <a href="#Page_139">139-143</a></li> -<li class="isub1">distinct from Pure Love question, II. <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> -<li class="isub1">four needs recognized by, II. <a href="#Page_148"><b>148-150</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Rome’s alleged change of front concerning, II. <a href="#Page_143">143-148</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Rabbinism, II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rafael Sanzio, the painter, II. <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ranke, Leopold von, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rationalism, I. 8, 9; II. <a href="#Page_260"><b>260-263</b></a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_382"><b>382-387</b></a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rauwenhoff, Prof. L. W. E., on Mysticism as a necessary form of religion, II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="indx">Realism, I. 61, 62</li> -<li class="isub1">advantages of, II. <a href="#Page_318"><b>318-319</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Pantheistic trend of strict, II. <a href="#Page_314"><b>314-319</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Reason, goddess of, II. <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> -<li class="indx">Redactor of <i>Conversione</i>-booklet, I. 464</li> -<li class="isub1">of <i>Dicchiarazione</i>-booklet, I. 464</li> -<li class="isub1">1 of <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 162 <i>n.</i> 3, 188 <i>n.</i> 1, 372, 414</li> -<li class="isub1">2 of <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 159, 162 <i>n.</i> 3, 372</li> -<li class="isub1">of <i>Vita-Dicchiarazione-Dialogo</i>, I. 464</li> -<li class="indx">Reformation, Protestant, I. 62, 282, 339-341, 448; II. <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="indx">Reform, Franciscan, I. 341</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_409" id="Page_409">[409]</a></span>Regio, Clerk Regular, criticizes Molinos, II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="indx">Reinach Salomon, on beginnings of Jewish prayers for the dead, II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> -<li class="indx">Religion and morality, II. <a href="#Page_272"><b>272-275</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">apprehension by man of, I. <b>50-55</b></li> -<li class="isub2">through sense and memory, I. 51</li> -<li class="isub2">through Mysticism, I. 53</li> -<li class="isub2">through speculation, I. 51-52</li> -<li class="isub2">apprehension by St. Catherine of, I. 247</li> -<li class="isub1">conflicts between its elements, I. <b>70-77</b>; II. <a href="#Page_392">392-393</a></li> -<li class="isub1">difficulties of the subjective element of, II. <a href="#Page_112">112-114</a></li> -<li class="isub1">disinterested, <i>see</i> <a href="#love">Love, Pure</a></li> -<li class="isub1">emotional-volitional element, its exclusiveness, I. 73-77</li> -<li class="isub1">historical, relations with Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_266">266-268</a></li> -<li class="isub1">institutional element, its exclusiveness, I. 71-73</li> -<li class="isub1">relation to Science of, I. 45-48; II. <a href="#Page_367"><b>367-386</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Social, and Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_351">351-366</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Subjective and Objective elements of, II. <a href="#Page_118">118-120</a>, <a href="#Page_263"><b>263-266</b></a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the three elements of, I. 50-55; II. <a href="#Page_387"><b>387-396</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">and their due proportions, II. <a href="#Page_387">387-388</a></li> -<li class="isub2">continuous concomitance of, I. 53-55</li> -<li class="isub2">distribution among men of, I. 58-59</li> -<li class="isub2">distribution among religions of, I. 60-65</li> -<li class="isub2">multiplicity of each of them, I. 85, 86</li> -<li class="isub2">succession in history of, I. 59-60</li> -<li class="indx">Religious temper, its longing for simplification, I. 65-66</li> -<li class="indx">Renaissance, humanist, I. 62</li> -<li class="indx">Renté, Baron de, I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Rhode, Erwin, on the Dionysian and Orphic movements, II. <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Plato’s later teaching as to contemplation, II. <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ribet, Abbé, and question as to true Mysticism, II. <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> -<li class="indx">Riccordo, Padre, da Lucca, I. 136</li> -<li class="indx">Richelieu, Cardinal, II. <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rickert, H., his building up an Organon of the Historical Sciences, II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rig-Veda, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rigorism among pre-Reformation devoted Catholics, I. 339-342</li> -<li class="isub1">touches of, in V. Battista Vernazza, I. 400-407, 422, 431</li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine, I. 342</li> -<li class="indx">Rites, Sacred Congregation of, Rome, I. 126, 253, 305, 306</li> -<li class="indx">Ritschl, Albrecht, and his school; their excessive reaction against Hegel, II. <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ritschlian school, II. <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> -<li class="indx">Robespierre, II. <a href="#Page_292">292</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rodriguez, Alfonso, Fr., S.J., I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Romans, the ancient, I. 93; II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rome, I. 98, 99 <i>n.</i> ; 156, 203, 305, 322; II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Arch-Hospital in, I. 322</li> -<li class="isub1">Church of, I. 8, 9, 10, 63; II. <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> -<li class="isub1">condemns some propositions of Fénelon, II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="isub1">condemns Quietism, II. <a href="#Page_139"><b>139-143</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">sack of, I. 311</li> -<li class="indx">Rosmini, Antonio, I. 65, 78</li> -<li class="indx">Rothe, Richard, II. <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> -<li class="indx">Royce, Josiah, Professor, II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ruysbroek, Johannes, Augustinian Canon-Regular, on the two-fold unity of our spirit with God, II. <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Sabatier, Paul, his critical labours in early Franciscan history, I. 372</li> -<li class="indx">Saccheri, Notary, Genoa, I. 213</li> -<li class="indx">Sacraments and St. Catherine:</li> -<li class="isub1">Baptism, I. 436; II. <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Holy Eucharist, I. 113-116, 204, 208, 240, 241; II. <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Penance, I. 117-123</li> -<li class="isub1">Extreme Unction, I. 195, 197, 204, 206</li> -<li class="indx">Sadducees, I. 61; II. <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> -<li class="indx">Saint-Jure, de, S.J., I. 89</li> -<li class="indx">Saint-Simon, Duc de, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Saints, canonized, Catholic principles concerning the teaching of, I. 253-255</li> -<li class="isub1">invocation of, Catherine’s, I. 240</li> -<li class="indx">Samaria, Woman of, I. 188, 189, 406; II. <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> -<li class="indx">Samaritans, I. 27, 38</li> -<li class="indx">Samuel, Books of, David in, I. 373</li> -<li class="indx">Sandreau, Abbé A., his sober Mystical doctrine, II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sauli, Cardinal, of Genoa, I. 322, 327</li> -<li class="indx">Savonarola, Fra Girolamo, contrasted with Luther and Calvin, II. <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sceptical schools, the, of ancient Greece, I. 23</li> -<li class="indx">Schelling, W. S. von, II. <a href="#Page_335">335</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schiller, Friedrich, his “Fiesco,” I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Schism, Papal, I. 95</li> -<li class="indx">Schlegel, Friedrich von, I. 89, 424; II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schleiermacher, Friedrich, II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Scholastics, the, I. 61, 62; II. <a href="#Page_162">162-168</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_222">222-225</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_252"><b>252-254</b></a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_316"><b>316</b></a>, <a href="#Page_317"><b>317</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Schopenhauer, Arthur, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his appreciation of Asceticism, II. <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schram, Dom, <i>Institutiones Theologiae Mysticae</i>, the Preternatural in, II. <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schwab, J. B., on Mysticism requiring the Immanence of God, II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> -<li class="indx"><a name="science" id="science"></a>Science, character and motives of spirit’s occupation with, I. 40-43</li> -<li class="isub1">historical and physical sciences have each their specific method and level, II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_382">382</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> -<li class="isub1">historical, Religion’s present, but not ultimate, problem, II. <a href="#Page_382"><b>382-385</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">occupation with, three kinds, II. <a href="#Page_381">381-382</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its place and function in man’s spiritual life, I. 43-45, 369, 370; II. <a href="#Page_330"><b>330</b></a>, <a href="#Page_331"><b>331</b></a>, <a href="#Page_376"><b>376</b></a>, <a href="#Page_377"><b>377</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Religion, each autonomous at its own level, I. 45-48; II. <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Religion and Metaphysics, I. 39-40</li> -<li class="isub1">Religion, and Philosophy, their respective functions, II. <a href="#Page_369">369-372</a></li> -<li class="isub1">to be taken throughout life in a double sense and way, I. 45-47; II. <a href="#Page_374"><b>374-379</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Things, and Religious Doctrine and Sacraments, as variously deep, parallel helps and necessities in man’s spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_372"><b>372-379</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">novelty of this position very limited, II. <a href="#Page_379"><b>379-381</b></a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> -<li class="indx">“Scintilla,” experience of St Catherine, I. 187-190, 451; II. <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li> -<li class="indx">Scotland, I. 72</li> -<li class="indx">Scott, Thomas, the Evangelical, I. 63</li> -<li class="isub1">Walter, Sir, his <i>Anne of Geierstein</i>, I. 96</li> -<li class="indx">Scotus, John Duns, I. 64, 78</li> -<li class="isub1">Proclus’ indirect influence upon, II. <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> -<li class="indx">Scotus, John, Eriugena, II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_410" id="Page_410">[410]</a></span>Proclus’ influence upon, II. <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> -<li class="indx">Segneri, Paolo, S.J., I. 89; II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his critiques of Molinos, II. <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> -<li class="indx">Self-knowledge, persistent in St. Catherine, I. 206-207; II. <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="indx">Semeria, —, <i>Secoli Cristiani della Liguria</i>, I. 337</li> -<li class="indx">Sensitiveness, extreme, of Catherine, I. 176-181</li> -<li class="indx">Sensuousness, lack of, in Catherine, I. 246</li> -<li class="indx">Shakespeare, <i>Romeo and Juliet</i>, I. 101</li> -<li class="indx">Siegwart, Professor Christian, II. <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sight, Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 181</li> -<li class="indx">Silvestro, Convent of S., Genoa, I. 457</li> -<li class="indx">Simmel, Georg, Dr., on the specifically religious sense, II. <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on religion as <i>requiring</i> that man should seek his own beatitude, II. <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> -<li class="indx">Simon, the Just, Rabbi, II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> -<li class="indx">Simon, Richard, I. 63, 64</li> -<li class="indx">Simplicity, causes of, Quietists’ inadequate analysis of, II. <a href="#Page_134">134-136</a></li> -<li class="isub1">longing of religious temper for, I. 65-66</li> -<li class="isub1">all living, ever constituted in multiplicity, I. <b>66-70</b></li> -<li class="indx">Sin, and the body, according to St. Catherine, I. 230, 235, 236, 264, 265, 298; II. <a href="#Page_123"><b>123-125</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">the Orphics, II. <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68"><b>68</b></a>, <a href="#Page_69"><b>69</b></a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Proclus, II. <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> -<li class="isub2">the Synoptists, II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_122"><b>122</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">as purely negative, in Ps.-Dionysius, Eckhart, Spinoza, II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub1">as positive in Kant, Eucken, II. <a href="#Page_294">294-296</a></li> -<li class="isub1">as positive and negative in St. Augustine, St. Thomas, Mother Juliana, II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">in St. Catherine, II. <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub1">original, according to Neo-Platonists, II. <a href="#Page_298"><b>298</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Augustine, II. <a href="#Page_298">298</a>, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Tridentine definition concerning, II. <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li> -<li class="isub2">difficulty in doctrine of, and Tennant’s interpretation, II. <a href="#Page_298"><b>298-300</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">value of Mystics’ attitude towards, II. <a href="#Page_301"><b>301</b></a>, <a href="#Page_302"><b>302</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Sixtus IV. (Della Rovere), Pope, I. 94</li> -<li class="indx">Sixtus V. (Peretti), Pope, I. 366</li> -<li class="indx">Smell, Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 180-181</li> -<li class="indx">Socinianism, I. 9, 342; II. <a href="#Page_390">390</a></li> -<li class="indx">Socino, Fausto and Lelio, I. 63, 342</li> -<li class="indx">Socrates, I. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 41, 60; II. <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isub1">doctrine of, I. <b>12-13</b></li> -<li class="indx">Socratic school, I. 23</li> -<li class="indx">Sophists, I. 12</li> -<li class="indx">Sophocles, II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sorbonne, the, Paris, II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a> <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="soul" id="soul"></a>Soul, according to Aristotle, I. 20, 22</li> -<li class="isub2">Plato, I. 16, 17</li> -<li class="isub2">Plotinus, I. 24</li> -<li class="isub1">and the <i>Noûs</i> in Eckhart, II. <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Plotinus, II. <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and the spirit in V. Battista, I. 353, 354, 399, 431</li> -<li class="isub2">St. Catherine, I. 189; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_67"><b>67-69</b></a>, <a href="#Page_320"><b>320-322</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Teresa, II. <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the three forces of, I. 50-53; II. <a href="#Page_387">387-396</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Immanence of God in the, II. <a href="#Page_324">324-325</a>, <a href="#Page_336"><b>336-338</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">life of, according to St. Catherine, I. 266-270</li> -<li class="isub2">usual succession in, I. 50-55</li> -<li class="isub1">its relation to its fellows, II. <a href="#Page_353"><b>353-355</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Soul, its unity in multiplicity, I. 66</li> -<li class="indx">Sources, literary of Catherine’s conceptions I. 254, 255, 258-260; II. <a href="#Page_62"><b>62-110</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">difficulties in their utilization, I. 251-253</li> -<li class="indx">Space, and the soul and spirit, in St. Augustine, II. <a href="#Page_212"><b>212</b></a>, <a href="#Page_213"><b>213</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Catherine. I. <b>277</b>, <b>278</b>; II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77-81</a>, <a href="#Page_212"><b>212</b></a>, <a href="#Page_213"><b>213</b></a></li> -<li class="isub2">Plato, II. <a href="#Page_205">205-207</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Plotinus, II. <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub2">St. Thomas, II. <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> -<li class="isub2">recent writers, II. <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li> -<li class="indx">Spain, I. 62, 64, 72, 95, 96, 305; II. <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li> -<li class="indx">Spencer, Herbert, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Speyer, Diet of, I. 340</li> -<li class="indx">Spinola, Archbishop of Genoa, I. 305</li> -<li class="isub1">family, and members of, I. 96, 146, 175</li> -<li class="indx">Spinoza, I. 7, 40-42; II. <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="isub1">compared with Plotinus, II. <a href="#Page_325">325-328</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on disinterested Religion, II. <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isub1">doctrine of, I. 41-43</li> -<li class="isub1">errors of his speculation, greatness of his intuitions, II. <a href="#Page_376"><b>376</b></a>, <a href="#Page_377"><b>377</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">greatest Pure Pantheist, II. <a href="#Page_325">325-327</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Reality and Perfection identical for, II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="indx">Spirit, Christ as, II. <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_320"><b>320</b></a>, <a href="#Page_321"><b>321</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">God as, II. <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the soul as, <i>see</i> under <a href="#soul">Soul</a></li> -<li class="isub1">visitations of the, their suddenness and vehemence, I. 105, 107; II. <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Space, II. <a href="#Page_212">212</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Time and Duration, II. <a href="#Page_247"><b>247-249</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Stanley, Arthur P., Dean, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Stein, Freiherr von, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Stigmata “Spiritual,” legend of St. Catherine’s, the, I. 209 <i>n.</i> 1, 210 <i>n.</i> 1, <b>452</b>, <b>453</b></li> -<li class="indx">Stoics, I. 23</li> -<li class="indx">Strata, Battista, Notary, I. 155, 308, 379</li> -<li class="indx">Strauss, David F., on Purgatory, II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> -<li class="indx">Suarez, Francis, Father, S.J., I. 121; II. <a href="#Page_241"><b>241</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Subconsciousness, late full recognition of, II. <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_338"><b>338-340</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">often described by Plotinus and St. Augustine, II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub1">its deepest equivalent in St. Thomas’s “confused knowledge,” II. <a href="#Page_288"><b>288-289</b></a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sulze, Emile, fails to recognize necessity of Thing-element in religion, II. <a href="#Page_372"><b>372-374</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Surin, Jean Joseph, S.J., I. 64, 89; II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx">Suso, Henry, Blessed, Dominican, I. 64, 94</li> -<li class="indx">Sylvius, Francis, II. <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="indx"><a name="synoptic" id="synoptic"></a>Synoptic Gospels and St. Catherine, II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_122"><b>122-126</b></a>, <a href="#Page_153">153-158</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Joannine writings, II. <a href="#Page_84">84-88</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and St. Paul, II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122-125</a>, <a href="#Page_157"><b>157-158</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on forgiveness as of single acts, II. <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> -<li class="isub1">God’s direct interest in world, II. <a href="#Page_254"><b>254</b></a>, <a href="#Page_255"><b>255</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">Pure Love, II. <a href="#Page_153"><b>153-158</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">present most manifold picture of Jesus’ life and teaching, II. <a href="#Page_116"><b>116-120</b></a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Tacitus, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Taigi, Anna Maria, Venerable, I. 78</li> -<li class="indx">Tarsus, II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tasso, Torquato, I. 341</li> -<li class="indx">Taste, Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 180</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_411" id="Page_411">[411]</a></span>Tauler, John, Dominican, I. 64, 94</li> -<li class="indx">Taylor, Prof. A. E., his criticism of Kant’s doctrine of Pure Love, II. <a href="#Page_179">179-180</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tennant, Rev. F. R., on Original Sin, II. <a href="#Page_299">299</a>, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tennyson, Alfred, I. 112; II. <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li> -<li class="indx">Teresa, St., I. 64, 68, 87, 247; II. <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Direction, II. <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on occupation with our Lord’s Humanity, II. <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_365"><b>365</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">God’s immanence in the soul, II. <a href="#Page_324"><b>324</b></a>, <a href="#Page_325"><b>325</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">nerves and muscles, II. <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her psycho-physical peculiarities, II. notes to pp. <a href="#Page_14">14-18</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on soul and spirit, II. <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> -<li class="isub1">her tests for locutions and visions, <b>II. <a href="#Page_47">47</a></b>, <a href="#Page_50"><b>50</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">and social Religion, II. <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tertullian, on St. Paul’s “thorn,” “stake” in the flesh, II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isub1">prayer for the dead, II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> -<li class="indx">Thales, I. 12</li> -<li class="indx">Theatines, I. 322, 340</li> -<li class="indx">Thibet, II. <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Thing-element, its necessity in Religion, I. 245-247; II. <a href="#Page_372"><b>372-374</b></a>, <a href="#Page_377"><b>377-381</b></a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a>, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> -<li class="indx">Thing, three relations of, with thought. II. <a href="#Page_374"><b>374-377</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Thobia, I. 129, 151, 153, 154, 223, 225, 378, 380; II. <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> -<li class="indx">Thobia’s Mother, I. 151, 153, 154, 172, 176, 225; II. <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> -<li class="indx">Thomas, St., Aquinas, I. 7, 61, 78, 120, 121; II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God as <i>Actus Purus</i>, II. <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God’s Being as distinct from His Essence, II. <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the soul’s direct dim knowledge of God, II. <a href="#Page_288"><b>288</b></a>, <a href="#Page_289"><b>289</b></a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on obligation of Confession, I. 120</li> -<li class="isub1">on the dispositions of the Lost, II. <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the fire of Purgatory and Hell, II. <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on God’s <i>ecstacy</i> and creative acts, as His supreme self-expression, II. <a href="#Page_252"><b>252-254</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on every soul’s individuality, II. <a href="#Page_255"><b>255</b></a>, <a href="#Page_256"><b>256</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Pure Love, II. <a href="#Page_162"><b>162-168</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on man’s natural exigency of the vision of God, II. <a href="#Page_337"><b>337</b></a>, <a href="#Page_338"><b>338</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on term “person” as applicable to God, II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the other-world “places,” II. <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Purgatory as truly purgative, II. <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on simultaneity of soul’s vision of all things in future life, II. <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub1">St., of Canterbury, I. 372</li> -<li class="indx">Thomassin, Louis, Oratorian, I. 64</li> -<li class="indx">Thucydides, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tiele, C. P., Professor, on the Infinite as present within man, II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_339"><b>339</b></a>, <a href="#Page_340"><b>340</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">necessity for Ecclesiastical Institutions, II. <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> -<li class="isub1">for metaphysical convictions in Religion, II. <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tobit, Book of, the Eminent Good Works in, II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="indx">Toleto, Gaspare, Father, Inquisitor, I. 464</li> -<li class="indx">Toqueville, Alexis de, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Touch, St. Catherine’s impressions connected with, I. 178-180</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Tracts for the Times</i>, I. 63</li> -<li class="indx">Transcendence of God, attitude towards, of V. Battista Vennazza, II. <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine, I. 276, 280; II. <a href="#Page_346"><b>346</b></a>, <a href="#Page_347"><b>347</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Transcendence of God, attitude towards, of St. John of the Cross, II. <a href="#Page_257"><b>257</b></a>, <a href="#Page_258"><b>258</b></a>, <a href="#Page_343">343-345</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Sören Kierkegaard, II. <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_345"><b>345</b></a>, <a href="#Page_346"><b>346</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">St. Thomas, II. <a href="#Page_257"><b>257</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">recent thinkers, II. <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_358"><b>358</b></a>, <a href="#Page_359"><b>359</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Translations of St. Catherine’s relics, I. 300-302, 381 <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Trattato</i>, see <a href="#vitat"><i>Vita</i> (<i>Dic.</i> or <i>T.</i>)</a>.</li> -<li class="indx">Trendelenburg, Adolf, on blind Force and conscious Thought, their only possible relations, II. <a href="#Page_375"><b>375</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Trent, Council of, on abuses connected with purgatorial doctrines and practices, II. <a href="#Page_232">232</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Purgatory, II. <a href="#Page_242"><b>242</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Original Sin, II. <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> -<li class="indx">Troeltsch, Prof. Ernst, II. <a href="#Page_282">282</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on Christianity as Inner-worldly and Super-worldly, II. <a href="#Page_358"><b>358-360</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">abiding individuality of all things historical, II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Kant’s actual conceptions as more religious than his theory of religion, II. <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the testimony involved in our religious requirements, II. <a href="#Page_339"><b>339</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Tyrrell, Rev. G., on the possibly <i>Totum-Simul</i> consciousness of the Lost, II. <a href="#Page_230">230</a></li> -<li class="isub1">the relations between love of God and love of creatures, II. <a href="#Page_354">354</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a></li> -<li class="isub1">purely natural religion, what might have been but never was, II. <a href="#Page_288"><b>288</b></a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Unity, constituted by multiplicity, I. <b>66-70</b></li> -<li class="isub1">needful for all spiritual life, II. <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> -<li class="indx">Universe, conditions of its power upon human will, I. 3</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Upanishads</i>, the, II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Upton, Prof., II. <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> -<li class="indx">Urban VIII, Pope (Barberini), I. 98, 304</li> -<li class="isub1">Bull on Cultus of Saints, I. 98 <i>n.</i> i (99), 304, 305</li> -<li class="ifrst">Varni, Santo, sculptor, I. 332</li> -<li class="indx">Vaughan, Diana, II. <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> -<li class="indx">Venice, I. 93, 203</li> -<li class="isub1">Hospital in, I. 322</li> -<li class="indx">Vergil, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on the burning out of the soul’s stains, II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="indx">Vernaccia (Vernazza) Family, I. 146</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="vernazza" id="vernazza"></a>Vernazza, Venerable Battista (Tommasa), I. 91, 117 <i>n.</i> 1, 146 <i>n.</i> 2, 217, 252, 253, 316, 321, 322, 325, 327 <i>n.</i> 1, 328, 329, 330, 331, 372, 381, 384, 395, 403, 407, 410, 413, 414, 429, 432, 447, 451, 453, 454, 457, 461, 462; II. <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> -<li class="isub1">and Tommaso Moro, I. 339-344</li> -<li class="isub1">author of Dialogo I, I. <b>407-410</b></li> -<li class="isub2">II, III, I. <b>429-433</b></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>Preface</i> (ancient) of <i>Vita</i> (probably), I. 416</li> -<li class="isub1">birth of, I. 419</li> -<li class="isub1">character of, I. 365, 366</li> -<li class="isub1">death of, I. <b>366</b>, <b>367</b>, 366 <i>n.</i> 2, 381</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Colloquies</i>, I. <b>344-358</b>, 416, 433</li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_412" id="Page_412">[412]</a></span>compared with Catherine’s doctrine, I. 346-358</li> -<li class="isub2">the <i>Dialogo</i>, I. 399, 403, 408, 431</li> -<li class="isub1">compared to St. Catherine and E. Vernazza, I. 336, 337</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Dialogo della Beata Caterina</i> based practically throughout upon <i>Vita-Dicchiarazione</i> yet shows everywhere thought, feeling, aims, information of, I. 397-410, <b>417-433</b></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Letters of</i>, I. 345</li> -<li class="isub2">to Donna Anguisola, I. 359-364</li> -<li class="isub2">to Padre Collino (1), I. 316-318, 321-324, 327-331 (2), I. 366</li> -<li class="isub2">to Tommaso Moro, I. 342-344</li> -<li class="isub1">portrait, I. 366 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">final redactor of <i>Vita</i>, <i>Dicchiarazione</i>, <i>Dialogo</i>, I. 464</li> -<li class="isub1">her youth, I. 337-339</li> -<li class="isub1">her writings, I. 344, 345</li> -<li class="isub1">Catetta (Daniela), I. 166, 321, 325, 339</li> -<li class="isub1">Ettore, I. 90, 91, 105 <i>n.</i> 1, 114 <i>n.</i> 2, 121 <i>n.</i> 3, 127, 140 <i>n.</i> 4, 145 <i>n.</i> 1, 147 <i>n.</i> 1, 150 <i>n.</i> 1, 154, 159, 166, 167, 169, 174, 175, 183 <i>n.</i> 1, 187, 191, 193, 202, 213, 216, 217, 246, 252, 256, 279, 299, 308, 337, 338, 339, 340, 371, 384, 415, 430, 444, 449, 450, 451, 456, 463, 464; II. <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> -<li class="isub1">his philanthropic work, its character, I. 319-321, 323, 327</li> -<li class="isub2">its effects, I. 364, 365</li> -<li class="isub2">in Genoa, <i>Chronici</i>, I. 173, 316, 317</li> -<li class="isub3">Lazaretto, I. 330, 331</li> -<li class="isub3"><i>Mandiletto</i>, I. 154, 332</li> -<li class="isub3">Prisons, I. 327-329</li> -<li class="isub1">his wills, ii, I. 318-321</li> -<li class="isub2">iii, I. 166, <b>324-327</b></li> -<li class="isub1">Ven. Battista and, in general, I. 314-316, 336, 337</li> -<li class="isub2">in June 1524, I. <b>330-332</b></li> -<li class="isub2">traces of their intercourse in <i>Dialogo</i>, I. <b>406</b>, <b>407</b>, <b>429-431</b></li> -<li class="isub1">St. Catherine and his absence from her death-bed, I. 202-204, 226</li> -<li class="isub1">his authorization to write about her, I. <b>191-192</b></li> -<li class="isub1">her influence with him, I. 314, 315, 320, 321, 331, 332</li> -<li class="isub1">his influence with her, I. 159-161, 191-193</li> -<li class="isub2">upon her memory, I. 145, 146, 453-457</li> -<li class="isub1">their mutual likeness and unlikeness, I. 314, 315</li> -<li class="isub1">his character, I. <b>146</b>, <b>147</b></li> -<li class="isub1">his contributions to St. Catherine’s biography in <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 166, <b>453-455</b>, 464</li> -<li class="isub2">in <i>Trattato</i>, I. 447, 448</li> -<li class="isub3">their general character, I. 147</li> -<li class="isub1">daughters of, I. 149, 166, 299, 300, 325, 326</li> -<li class="isub1">his death, I. <b>331</b>, 381</li> -<li class="isub1">his posthumous fame, its unlikeness to Catherine’s, I. 332, 333</li> -<li class="isub1">Leo X, Pope, and, I. 322</li> -<li class="isub1">Lunga, Señora, and, I. 329, 330</li> -<li class="isub1">Manuscript C wrongly attributed to, I. 395, 396</li> -<li class="isub1">married life of, I. 316-318, 330</li> -<li class="isub1">monuments to, I. 332, 333</li> -<li class="isub1">Ginevrina (Maria Archangela), I. 166, 325, 326, 339</li> -<li class="isub1">Tommasa, <i>see</i> <a href="#vernazza">Vernazza Battista</a></li> -<li class="isub1">village, I. 318</li> -<li class="indx">Vernazzi, clan of, I. 318, 320</li> -<li class="indx">Vincent, St., de Paul, I. 306</li> -<li class="indx">Vinci, Leonardo da, School of, I. 98 <i>n.</i> 1 (99)</li> -<li class="indx">Visions of St. Catherine’s, I. 181</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="vitae" id="vitae"></a><i>Vita e Dottrina di S. Caterina</i>, as in Thirteenth, Ninth Genoese, ed., <i>Sordi Muti</i>, and its three parts, <i>Vita</i>-proper, <i>Dicchiarazione</i> or <i>Trattato</i>, <i>Dialogo</i>, I. 90, 91</li> -<li class="isub1">its additions to MSS. A and B in <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 389, 390, 394, 451-453</li> -<li class="isub2">in <i>Trattato</i>, I. 442</li> -<li class="isub2">of entire <i>Dialogo</i> I. 389, 395</li> -<li class="isub1">its additions to MS. C in <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 396</li> -<li class="isub2">of <i>Dialogo</i>, Parts II, III, I. 396, 397</li> -<li class="isub2">to MSS. A, B, C of Title, Approbation, Preface, Subscription, I. 411-417</li> -<li class="isub1">its changes since first printed edition, 1551, I. 464-466</li> -<li class="isub1">final redaction for printing of entire corpus, I. 464</li> -<li class="isub2">booklets, evidence for <i>Conversione-</i>, <i>Dicchiarazione-</i>, <i>Passione-</i>, in about 1512, I. 394, 434, <b>447-449</b>, 450, 451, 464</li> -<li class="isub3">the <i>Dialogo</i>, Part I, I. 396, 397</li> -<li class="isub4">its author (Battista Vernazza), I. 407, 410</li> -<li class="isub4">compared with <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. <b>399-407</b></li> -<li class="isub4">its authentic contributions, I. 406, 407</li> -<li class="isub3">the <i>Dialogo</i>, Parts II, III, their author and character, I. 418, 419, <b>427-433</b></li> -<li class="isub3">compared with <i>Vita</i>-proper, I. 419-424, <b>424-427</b></li> -<li class="isub3">the <i>Trattato</i> (<i>Dicchiarazione</i>), earlier and later part of, I. 439, 440</li> -<li class="isub3">earlier part, its theological glosses, I. <b>440-442</b></li> -<li class="isub3">later part, its secondary expansions, I. <b>435-440</b></li> -<li class="isub3">upbuilding of whole, and authorship (predominantly Ettore Vernazza), I. 447-449</li> -<li class="isub3">the <i>Vita</i>-proper, original tripartite scheme of, become quadripartite, I. <b>390-394</b></li> -<li class="isub3">its great divisions and secondary constituents, I. 453</li> -<li class="isub3">age and authorship of retained constituents, I. <b>453-463</b></li> -<li class="isub3">three tests for discriminating authentic from secondary sayings, I. 462, 463</li> -<li class="indx">Volkelt, Johannes, Prof., on immanental inter-relatedness of History and Philosophy, II. <a href="#Page_279"><b>279</b></a>, <a href="#Page_280"><b>280</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">dualism in Kant’s Epistemology, II. <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> -<li class="isub1">fallacy of Positivistic Epistemology, II. <a href="#Page_275"><b>275-278</b></a></li> -<li class="isub1">ultimate Power in world, alive in analogy to a willing individual, II. <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Wagner, Richard, II. <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="indx">Waldensian movement, II. <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ward, James, Prof., II. <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_287">287</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> -<li class="isub1">on receptivity as activity; experience as wider than knowledge; and our own experience, the only one immediately accessible to us, II. <a href="#Page_277"><b>277-280</b></a></li> -<li class="indx">Weinel, Heinrich, on visions and psycho-physical peculiarities in sub-apostolic times, II. <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> -<li class="indx">White, Edward, on Conditional Immortality, II. <a href="#Page_229">229</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Will, the things and conditions that move the human, I. 3, 367-370; II. <a href="#Page_375">375-385</a></li> -<li class="indx">Wilson, Archdeacon Andrew, on the Fall of Man, II. <a href="#Page_299">299-300</a></li> -<li class="indx">Windelband, W., Prof., on religion’s various elements including metaphysical life, II. <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> -<li class="indx">Wisdom, Book of, I. 61</li> -<li class="isub1">attitude towards the body in, and St. Paul, I. 234; II. <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> -<li class="indx">Wittenberg, I. 9, 95, 311</li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_413" id="Page_413">[413]</a></span>Wordsworth, William, II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="indx">Wycliffe, I. 94</li> -<li class="ifrst">Xenophon, I. 28</li> -<li class="indx">Ximenes, Cardinal Francis, O.S.F., I. 62</li> -<li class="ifrst">Youth, its apprehension of religion, I. 51-52</li> -<li class="ifrst">Zaccaria, F. A., S.J., II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Zedakah, II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> -<li class="indx">Zeller, Edward, <i>Philosophie der Griechen</i>, I. 11 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> -<li class="indx">Zeus, II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> -<li class="indx">Zwingli, I. 62, 63; II. <a href="#Page_119">119</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392</a></li> -<li class="indx">Zwinglianism, I. 9</li> -</ul> - -<h3>II. OF LITERARY REFERENCES</h3> - -<p>(<i>The more general literary references given under names of authors in Part I</i>)</p> - -<h4><span class="smcap">Holy Scripture—Old Testament</span></h4> - -<ul> -<li class="indx">Daniel ix. 24; I. 408</li> -<li class="isub1">xii. 2; II. <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ecclesiasticus vii. 17; II. <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ezekiel i. 1-28, etc.; II. <a href="#Page_45">45</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1">iv. 1-3, 7, etc.; II. <a href="#Page_45">45</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1">iv. 4-8; II. <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1">viii. i-ix. 11, etc.; II. <a href="#Page_45">45</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1">viii. 16, xi. 13, xxiv. 1; II. <a href="#Page_45">45</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="indx">Genesis i. 5, iii. 18; II. <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xv. 1; I. 348</li> -<li class="indx">Isaiah vi. 3; I. 352</li> -<li class="isub1">xxvi. 1-19; II. <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xliii. 10, xliv. 1, xlviii. 10; I. 349</li> -<li class="isub1">xlix. 6; I. 351</li> -<li class="indx">Job xix. 25, 26; II. <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="indx">Maccabees, Book of, ii. 43-45; II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a></li> -<li class="indx">Psalms lxxiii. (lxxii.) 25; II. <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ci. 13; I. 362</li> -<li class="isub1">ciii. 13, 14; II. <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> -<li class="isub1">cix. 31; I. 358</li> -<li class="indx">Solomon, Cant. v. 10; I. 349</li> -<li class="isub1">Prov. viii. 31; I. 360</li> -<li class="isub1">Wisd. of., ix. 15; II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tobit, Book of, xii. 8, 9; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -</ul> - -<h4><span class="smcap">New Testament</span></h4> - -<ul> -<li class="indx">Acts of the Apostles xxvi. 9-10; I. 33</li> -<li class="indx">John, St., Apocalypse, v. 11; I. 349</li> -<li class="isub1">vii. 9; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub1">1 Ep., i. 1; I. 36</li> -<li class="isub2">i. 2; I. 37</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 2; II. <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 14; I. 39; II. <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 10; I. 37</li> -<li class="isub2">v. 20; I. 39; II. <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Gospel according to, i. 4, 5; II. <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> -<li class="isub2">i. 9-11; II. <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> -<li class="isub2">i. 14; I. 36</li> -<li class="isub2">i. 17; II. <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> -<li class="isub2">i. 18; I. 358; II. <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> -<li class="isub2">i. 29; II. <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 11; I. 37; II. <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 23, 24; I. 38</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 2-5; I. 38</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 16; II. <a href="#Page_79">79-80</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 18; II. <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 19; II. <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 21; I. 37; II. <a href="#Page_79">79-83</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 31; II. <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 34; II. <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 36; I. 39</li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 18; II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 24; I. 37; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 31; II. <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 42; I. 38; II. <a href="#Page_79">79-80</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 6; I. 38</li> -<li class="isub2">v. 24; II. <a href="#Page_88">88-89</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 28-29; I. 36</li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 27; II. <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 35; I. 37; II. <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 44; I. 37; II. <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 61, 63; II. <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 69; II. <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 21; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 23; II. <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 44; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> -<li class="isub2">ix. 41; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> -<li class="isub2">x. 8; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> -<li class="isub2">x. 38; I. 360</li> -<li class="isub2">xiii. 23; I. 358</li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 6; I. 37</li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 10; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 11; I. 38</li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 20-21; I. 39</li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 23; I. 360</li> -<li class="isub2">xvii. 1-13; I. 210 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">xvii. 3; II. <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xvii. 6; II. <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xvii. 8, etc.; II. <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xvii. 18; I. 37</li> -<li class="isub2">xvii. 21; II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xviii. 9; I. 362</li> -<li class="isub2">xviii. 37; II. <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xix. 24; II. <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xx. 8; II. <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xx. 29; I. 38; II. <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> -<li class="indx">Luke, St., Gospel according to, ii. 32; I. 351</li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 33, 34; II. <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 38; II. <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">vii. 47; II. <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ix. 23-24; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">ix. 51-56; I. 27-28</li> -<li class="isub1">x. 7; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xii. 6; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xiv. 27; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">xvi. 23; I. 358</li> -<li class="isub1">xvii. 10; II. <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xvii. 33; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_414" id="Page_414">[414]</a></span>xx. 34-38; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub1">xxii. 3-11; I. 33</li> -<li class="isub1">xxii. 15-19; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">xxvi. 9-18; I. 33</li> -<li class="indx">Mark, St., Gospel according to, i. 13; II. <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="isub1">iv. 27-28; I. 30</li> -<li class="isub1">vii. 14, 15; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">viii. 34; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">ix. 30-32; I. 27-28</li> -<li class="isub1">ix. 35-36; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub1">ix. 38-41 (& Par.); II. <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> -<li class="isub1">ix. 41; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">x. 13-16; I. 27-28</li> -<li class="isub1">x. 14, 15; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub1">x. 21; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">x. 23; II. <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xii. 28-34 (& Par.); II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xii. 36; II. <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xiv. 22-25; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">xiv. 25; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xiv. 38 (& Par.); II. <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="indx">Matth., St., Gospel according to, iii. 13-19; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">v. 3; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">v. 5; II. <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">v. 7; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">v. 8; I. 31; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">v. 12; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">v. 17; I. 30</li> -<li class="isub1">v. 23; I. 30</li> -<li class="isub1">v. 44, 45, 48; II. <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 4, 6; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 16; I. 30</li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 14, 18, 20; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 23, 26, 28; I. 30</li> -<li class="isub1">vi. 33; II. <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isub1">x. 29; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xii. 24-27; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub1">xiii. 30-32; II. <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xvi. 24, 25; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">xvii. 12-14; II. <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xviii. 32; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxii. 3; II. <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxii. 11; II. <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxii. 12; II. <a href="#Page_155">155-156</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxii. 29-33; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub1">xxiv. 47; II. <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxv. 10; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxv. 14-30; II. <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxv. 21; II. <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxvi. 26-29; I. 31</li> -<li class="isub1">xxxiv. 42; II. <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> -<li class="isub1">xxxvi. 51, 52; II. <a href="#Page_27">27-28</a></li> -<li class="indx">Paul, St., Ep. to Col. i. 15-17; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">i. 26; I. 34</li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 2; I. 34</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 1; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 3-4; I. 34</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 4; II. <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub1">1 Ep. to Cor. i. 18; I. 33</li> -<li class="isub2">i. 22-25; I. 33</li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 6; I. 34</li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 10; I. 34</li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 11; I. 34; II. <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 14, 15; I. 33; II. <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 1; I. 34</li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 10-15; II. <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 5; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 11; II. <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 19; II. <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vii. 7; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isub2">x. 3; II. <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> -<li class="isub2">x. 4; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">xi. 7; II. <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xi. 11; I. 32; II. <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xi. 23, 26; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub2">xii.; I. 33; II. <a href="#Page_65">65-66</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xiii. 7; II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xiv.; I. 33</li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 25; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xv. 3-8; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub2">xv. 19, 32; II. <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xv. 35, 53; II. <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> -<li class="isub1">2 Ep. to Cor. i. 22; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 4; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 17; II. <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 18; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 4; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 16; II. <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 1-4; II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 4; II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 11; II. <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 14; II. <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vii. 1; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> -<li class="isub2">x. 10; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xii. 9; II. <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xiii. 4; II. <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xviii. 7-8; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ep. to Eph. i. 10; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">i. 18; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 5; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 13; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub1">Ep. to Gal. ii. 20; I. 35; II. <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 6; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 14-15; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 30; II. <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ep. to Phil. i. 23; II. <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii. 12; II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iv. 1; I. 361</li> -<li class="isub1">Ep. to Rom. ii. 5; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">ii. 6; II. <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> -<li class="isub2">iii.-xi.; I. 32</li> -<li class="isub2">v. 5; I. 360; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 15-19; I. 352</li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 6, 8; I. 35</li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 12-13; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vi. 14; II. <a href="#Page_68">68-69</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vii. 18; II. <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vii. 23; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> -<li class="isub2">vii. 24; II. <a href="#Page_123">123</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 4-13; II. <a href="#Page_68">68-69</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 10; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 11; I. 35; II. <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 16; II. <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 19; II. <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 31; II. <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub2">viii. 35, 37-39; II. <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li> -<li class="isub2">x. 9; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xii. 2; II. <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xiii. 11-14; II. <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="isub2">xiv. 14-20; II. <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> -<li class="isub1">1 Ep. to Thess. iv. 15, 16; II. <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> -<li class="isub2">v. 4-8; II. <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> -<li class="indx">Peter, St., 2 Ep. of, iii. 12; II. <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -</ul> - -<ul> -<li class="ifrst">Abbott, Dr. E. A., <i>St. Thomas of Canterbury, his Death and Miracles</i>, 2 vols., 1898; I. 372</li> -<li class="indx">Alizieri, Federico, “Vita di Suor Tommasa Fieschi,” in <i>Atti della Soc. di Storia Patria</i>, Vol. VIII., 1868; II. <a href="#Page_381">381</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Ambrose, St., <i>In Lucam</i>, VII. 205; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="indx">Anrich, G., “Clemens und Origenes als Begründer, etc.,” in <i>Theol. Abhandlungen für H. J. Holtzmann</i>, 1892; II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Aristotle, <i>de Anima</i>, III. 5, 430<i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Gen. animal</i>, II. 3, 736<i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Metaph.</i> VII. 1072<i>b</i>, IX. 1074<i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_415" id="Page_415">[415]</a></span>XII. 7-10; II. <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XII. 1072<i>b</i>-1074<i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pseudo-Aristotle, <i>Liber de Causis</i>, ed. Bardenhewer, 1882, §§ 2, 4; II. <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> -<li class="indx">Arnold, Matthew, <i>Culture and Anarchy</i>, 1869; II. <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> -<li class="indx">Atzberger, Dr. L., continuation of Dr. J. Scheeben’s <i>Dogmatik</i>, Vol. IV., 1903; II. <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> -<li class="indx">Augustine, St., ed. Ben. Reprint Gaume, <i>Confessiones</i>, I. c. 2; II. <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. c. 15, VII. c. 12, VIII. cc. 5, 11; II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> -<li class="isub2">X. c. 26, XIII. c. 17; II. <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XI. cc. 11, 20; II. <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XI. c. 23 § 1; II. <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XI. c. 27 § 3; II. <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Civitate Dei</i>, lib. xxi. c. 26 <i>n.</i> 4; II. <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Contra Julianum</i>, IV. 58 (Vol. X. col. 1073 <i>c</i>); II. <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Nuptiis et concupisc.</i>, I. 8 (Vol. X. col. 613 <i>a</i>); II. <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. 23; II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Octo Dulcitii quaest.</i>, 12, 13; II. <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Trinitate</i>, L. XV. c. 16; II. <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Enarratio</i> in Ps. xxxvi. § i <i>n.</i> 10; II. <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Enchiridion</i>, CX. CXII; II. <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Liber de Fide</i>, I. 27, 29; II. <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Opus imperfectum</i>, III. 56; II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Peccato Orginali</i>, 40 (Vol. X. col. 590 <i>b</i>); II. <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Tract in Joannis Ev.</i>, VIII. 1; II. <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XXIV. 1; II. <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> -<li class="indx">Avicenna, <i>Comm. in Arist. Metaph., Tract.</i> VIII. c. 6; II. <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Bacher, Prof. W., <i>Die Agada der Palästinensischen Amoräer</i>, Vol. I. 1892; II. <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> -<li class="indx">Baring-Gould, Rev. S., <i>Lives of the Saints</i>, 1898, Vol. X., Sept. 15; I. 92; II. <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> -<li class="indx">Baruch, <i>Apocalypse of</i>, XXX. 2; II. <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> -<li class="indx">Basil, St., <i>Prooemium in Reg. Fus. Tract</i>, <i>n.</i> 3; II. <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bellarmine, Cardinal, <i>De Gratia primi hominis</i>, XIV.; II. <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Purgat</i>, I. c. IV. 6, c. XIV. 22; II. <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Lib. II. c. 11; II. <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> -<li class="indx">Benedicti XIV., <i>De Servorum Beatificatione et Beatorum Canonizatione</i>, 1743, Vol. II. p. 239 <i>a</i>; I. 126, 253, 254</li> -<li class="indx">Bergson, H., <i>Les Données Immédiates de la Conscience</i>, ed. 1898; II. <a href="#Page_7">7</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="indx">Berkeley, George, Bp., <i>Alciphron</i>, IV. <i>nos.</i> 17-21; II. <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bernard, St., <i>Sermons on the Canticle of Cant.</i>, ch. XXVI.; I. 385</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Tract. de Gratia et Lib. Arbitrio</i>, ch. XIV. § 47; I. 69-70</li> -<li class="indx">Blondel, Maurice, Prof., <i>L’Action</i>, 1893; I. 48 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_7">7</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Bossuet, J. B., Bishop, Œuvres, ed. 1816, 1817, <i>Sermons</i>, Vol. XI. p. 376; II. <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Instruction sur les Etats d’Oraison</i>, and Documents, Vol. XXVII.; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Relation sur le Quiétism</i>, Vol. XXIX.; II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx">Boudhinon, Abbé A., “Sur l’Histoire des Indulgences,” in <i>Revue d’Hist. et de Litt. Relig.</i>, 1898; I. 121; II. <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bousset, W., <i>Die Religion des Judenthums</i>, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Boutroux, Emile, Prof., “La Psychologie du Mysticisme,” <i>Bull. de l’Inst. Psych. Internat.</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> -<li class="indx">Brieger, T., Prof., “N. Paulus’ Johann Tetzel,” in <i>Theol. Literaturzeitung</i>, 1900; II. <a href="#Page_232">232</a></li> -<li class="indx">Bugge, <i>Die Hauptparabeln Jesu</i>, 1900; II. <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> -<li class="indx">Butler, Abbot, E. Cuthbert, O.S.B., <i>The Lausiac History of Palladius</i>, 1898, 1904; II. <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Cadrès, Alphonse, S.J., <i>le Père Jean N. Grou</i>, 1866; II. <a href="#Page_363">363</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="indx">Caird, Edward, <i>Evolution of Theology in the Greek Philosophers</i>, Vol. I, Lecture XIII.; II. <a href="#Page_264">264</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. II. L. XIV.; II. <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LL. XXII. XXIII.; II. <a href="#Page_325">325-327</a></li> -<li class="isub2">L. XXV.; II. <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> -<li class="isub2">L. XXVI.; II. <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“St. Paul and the Idea of Evolution,” <i>Hibbert Journal</i>, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="indx">Cajetanus, Card, <i>Comm. in Summam</i>, II., ii., qu. 23, art. 1.; II. <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="indx">Celesia, P., Vinc., <i>Storia dell’Ospedale di Pammatone</i> (MS.); I. 155 <i>n.</i> 1, 308 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Chantepie de la Saussaye, <i>Lehrbuch der Religions-Geschichte</i>, Vol. I., ed. 1887; ed. 1905; II. <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> -<li class="indx">Charles, Dr. R. H., <i>Critical Hist. of the doctrine of Future Life</i>, 1899; II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> -<li class="indx">Class, Prof. G., <i>Phänomenologie u. Ontologie des menschl-Geistes</i>, 1896; II. <a href="#Page_229">229</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Clement, of Alexandria, <i>Paedagogus</i>, I. c. VIII.; II. <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Stromata</i>, I. c. XXVI. 168, 2 (Stählin); II. <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. c. IV. 15, 6 (St.); II. <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. c. VI. 30, 1 (St.); II. <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. c. XXIV. 154, 3 (St.); II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V. c. III. 16, 7 (St.); II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VII. c. VI.; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VII. c. XXVI.; II. <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> -<li class="indx">Coconnier, Père, M.Th., <i>L’Hypnotisme Franc</i>, 1897; II. <a href="#Page_6">6</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Corderins, Bathazar, S.J., “Quaestio Mystica,” in <i>Dionysius Areop., Migne.</i>, Vol. I. pp. 1050-1058; II. <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li> -<li class="indx">Crusius, O., <i>Erwin Rhode</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Dante, <i>Purgatorio</i>, II. 40-42; II. <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> -<li class="indx">Deharbe, Joseph, S.J., <i>Die Volkommene Liebe Gottes</i>; II. <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Denifle, H. S., Father, “Meister Eckharts Lateinische Schriften,” in <i>Arch f. Litt. u. Kirchengesch. des M. A.</i>, 1886; II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="indx">Denzinger, H., <i>Enchiridion Definitionum</i>, ed. 1888, No. 38; I. 448 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">No. 73; I. 217</li> -<li class="isub2">Nos. 387, 588, 859; II. <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> -<li class="isub2">No. 363; I. 120, 121</li> -<li class="isub2">No. 454; II. <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Nos. 437, 455; II. <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> -<li class="indx">Dilthey, W., Prof., “Auffassung d. Menschen, i. 15 <i>u.</i> 16, Jahrh.,” in <i>Arch. f. Gesh. der Philosophie</i>, 1892; II. <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li> -<li class="indx">Dionysius, the Areopagite (tr. Parker, Oxford, 1897, 1899), <i>Divine Names</i>, I. i; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. 5; II. <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. 6; II. <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> -<li class="isub2">III. i; II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 1; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 2; II. <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 5; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 6; II. <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_416" id="Page_416">[416]</a></span>IV. 8-10; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 13; II. <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 13, 4, 16; I. 353</li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 22; II. <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 23; II. <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV. 24; II. <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V. 1; II. <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VII. 1, 3; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VIII. 3, 5; II. <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VIII. 7; II. <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IX. 4; II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IX. 5; II. <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XI. 1; II. <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Eccl. Hierarchy</i>, I. 2; II. <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> -<li class="isub2">III. 3, 7; II. <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Heavenly Hierarchy</i>, XV. 2; II. <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XV. 3; II. <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Mystic Theology</i>, I.; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> -<li class="isub2">III.; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289-290</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> -<li class="isub2">IV.; II. <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V.; II. <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Documenti su S. Caterina</i> (Bibl-Univ. Genoa), I. 115 <i>n.</i> 1, 149 <i>n.</i> 1, 171 <i>n.</i> 1, 172 <i>n.</i> 1, 179 <i>n.</i> 1, 310 <i>n.</i> 2, 376-379</li> -<li class="indx">Dubors, F., Abbé, “Le feu du Purgatoire, est-il un feu corporal?” <i>Revue du Clergé Français</i>, 1902, II. <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> -<li class="indx">Duhm, B., Prof., <i>das Geheinniss in der Religion</i>, 1896; II. <a href="#Page_6">6</a> <i>n.</i> 3, <a href="#Page_159">159</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="ifrst">Eckhart, Meister, <i>Werke</i>, ed. Pfeiffer, 1857; II. <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="indx">Elliott, Walter, <i>The Life of Father Hecker</i>, 1894; II. <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> -<li class="indx">Emery, Abbé J. A., <i>Sur la Mitigation des Peines des Damnés</i>; II. <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> -<li class="indx">Enoch, Book of; II. <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -<li class="indx">Esra, IV. iv. 35; II. <a href="#Page_213">213-214</a></li> -<li class="indx">Eucken, R., Prof., <i>Der Kampf um einen geistig. Lebensinhalt</i>, 1896; II. <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Der Wahrheitsgehalt der Religion</i>, 1901; II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Die Lebensanschaungen der grossen Denker</i>; I. 39 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Euripides, <i>Orestes</i>, XXX.; II. <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Faber, Rev. F. W., <i>All for Jesus</i>, ed. 1889, ch. IX., § 3-5; I. 89; II. <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> -<li class="indx">Federici, F., <i>Famiglie Nobili di Genova</i>, MS., I. 157 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="indx">Fechner, G. T., <i>Die Drei Gründe u. Motive des Glaubens</i>, 1863; II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Fénelon, Fr. de S., Archbishop; Œuvres, Versailles, 1817-1821, <i>Epistle II to Pope Clement XI</i>, Vol. IX; I. 68, 69; II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Explication … des Propositions de Molinos</i>, Vol. IV.; II. <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Existence de Dieu</i>, Vol. I; I. 1, 31; II. <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Instruction pastorale</i>, 1697, Vol. IV; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Lettre sur la Charité</i>, Vol. IX; II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Lettre sur l’Oraison Passive</i>, Vol. VIII; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Première Réponse aux Difficultés de M. l’Evêque de Chartres</i>, Vol. IV; II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Seconde Lettre à M. de Paris</i>, Vol. V; II. <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> -<li class="indx">Ficino Marsilio, <i>Theologia Platonica</i>, 1482; II. <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> -<li class="indx">Francis, St., de Sales, <i>Les Controverses</i> in <i>Œuvres</i>, ed. 1892, Vol. I. pt. iii. ch. II.; II. <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> -<li class="indx">Froude, R. E., “Scientific Speculation and the Unity of Truth,” <i>Dublin Review</i>, Oct. 1900; II. <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Gardner, Percy, Prof., <i>New Chapters in Greek History</i>, 1892, pp. 333-334; II. <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Oxford at the Cross Roads</i>, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> -<li class="indx"><a name="gebirol" id="gebirol"></a>Gebirol Ibn., <i>Fons Vitae</i>, ed. 1895; II. <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> -<li class="indx">Giovo, Angelo, <i>Vita di S. Caterina</i> (MS.); I. 172 <i>n.</i>, 310 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Giustiniano, Agostino, <i>Castigatissimi Annali della Rep. di Genova</i>, 1537; I. 382-384</li> -<li class="indx">Görres, Joseph, <i>Die Christliche Mystik</i>, 1836, 1842; II. <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gosselin, Abbé, <i>Analyse raisonnée de la Controverse du Quiétisme</i> (Fénelon, Œuvres, Vol. IV.); II. <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> -<li class="isub1"> <i>Vie de M. Emery</i>, 1862, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gousset, Cardinal, <i>Théologie Dogmatique</i>, 1856, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> -<li class="indx">Grafe, E., “Verhältniss der paulinischen Schriften zur Sapientia Salomonis,” in <i>Theol. Abhandl. C. von. Weizsäcker Gewidmet</i>, 1892; II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> -<li class="indx">Grandgeorge, M. L., <i>St. Augustin et le Neo-Platonisme</i>, 1896; I. 126, 127, 130, 131; II. <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> -<li class="indx">Greg, W. E., <i>Enigmas of Life</i>; II. <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gregory, St., of Nazianzum, <i>Poema de Seipso</i>; I. 546; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1">St., of Nyssa, <i>Catecheticus</i>, VIII. c. 35; II. <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Orationes</i>, XL. 36; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="indx">Grou, Jean N., S.J., <i>Méditations sur l’Amour de Dieu</i>; II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Gunkel, Prof. H., <i>die Wirkungen des H. Geistes</i>, ed. 1899; II. <a href="#Page_6">6</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="ifrst">Harnack, Prof. A., <i>Das Wesen des Christenthums</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte</i>, ed. 1888, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hase, Carl von, <i>Handbuch der protest. Polemik</i>, ed. 1864; II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Hedley, Bishop J. C., <i>The Spiritual Letters of Fénelon</i>, 1892, Vol. I. Preface; II. <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> -<li class="indx">Heppe, Heinrich, Prof., <i>Geschichte der Quietistischen Mystik</i>, 1875; II. <a href="#Page_139">139-140</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hermann, Wilhelm, Prof., <i>Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott</i>, 1892; II. <a href="#Page_263">263-265</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hesiod, <i>Works and Days</i>, II. <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> -<li class="indx">Höffding, H., Prof., <i>Söron Kirkegaard</i>, 1896; II. <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> -<li class="indx">Holtzmann, H. J., Prof., <i>Lehrbuch der Neutestamentlichen Theologie</i>, 1897; I. 30 <i>n.</i>; II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. II., ch. i.; II. <a href="#Page_63">63</a> <i>n.</i> 2, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. II., ch. iii.; II. <a href="#Page_79">79</a> <i>n.</i>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Richard Rothe’s Speculative System</i>, 1899; II. <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> -<li class="indx">Homer, <i>Iliad</i>, VIII. 17-20; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XX. 232 <i>seq.</i>; II. <a href="#Page_186">186-187</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Od.</i> IV. 560-568; II. <a href="#Page_186">186-187</a></li> -<li class="indx">Hurter, H., Father, S.J., <i>Theologiae Dogmaticae Compendium</i>, 1893, Vol. III.; II. <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Inge, W. R., Prof., <i>Christian Mysticism</i>, 1897; I. 30 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_305">305</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="ifrst">Jacopone da Todi, <i>Laudi Spirituali</i>, ed. Florence, 1490; I. 259-260</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Lauda</i>, XIII. <i>v.</i> 1-7, 8; II. <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_417" id="Page_417">[417]</a></span>XXIII. <i>v.</i> 1-6, 10; <a href="#Page_102"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">XXV. <i>v.</i> 7, 10, 11; <a href="#Page_102"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">XLV.; II. <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LVIII. <i>a</i>, <i>v.</i> 10, 11, 12; <a href="#Page_103"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">LVIII. <i>b</i>, 1-9; II. <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LVIII. <i>v.</i> 3, 8, 11-14, 16, 19, 20-22; II. <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LVIII. <i>v.</i> 23; II. <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LVIII. <i>v.</i> 24, 26, 27, 28-30; II. <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXIV. <i>v.</i> 6; <a href="#Page_105"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXIV. <i>v.</i> 13; II. <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXIX. <i>v.</i> 3, 6, 16, 24, 26; II. <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXI. <i>v.</i> 17; II. <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXIII. <i>v.</i> 5, 15; <a href="#Page_106"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXVII. <i>v.</i> 12-20; II. <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXVIII. <i>v.</i> 5, 6, 7, 10; II. <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXVIII. <i>v.</i> 11; II. <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a> <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXVIII. <i>v.</i> 14, 21, 22, 27; II. <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXVIII. <i>v.</i> 32, 33; II. <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXIX. <i>v.</i> 12, 13, 52-54, 70, 98; <a href="#Page_108"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXX. <i>v.</i> 4, 13; <a href="#Page_108"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXX. <i>v.</i> 18; II. <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> -<li class="isub2">LXXXXIX. <i>v.</i> 6, 12, 13, 14; <a href="#Page_109"><i>ibid.</i></a></li> -<li class="indx">James, William, Prof., <i>The Principles of Psychology</i>, 1891, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_194">194</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>The Will to Believe</i>, 1897; I. 51 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Janet, Pierre, Prof., <i>l’Automatisme Psychologique</i>, ed. 1903; II. <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Etat Mental des Hysteriques</i>, 1892, 1894, Vol. I.; II. <a href="#Page_22">22-25</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jastrow, Morice, Prof., <i>The Study of Religion</i>, 1901; II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jerome, St., <i>Apol. c. Rufinum</i>, II.; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Ep.</i>, 124, 7; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>In Isa.</i> lxv. 24; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="indx">John, St., of Cross, Works, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1889:</li> -<li class="isub2"><i>Ascent of Mt. Carmel</i>, Bk. I. ch. v. (pp. 26, 27); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. II. ch. viii. (94); II. <a href="#Page_343">343</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. II. ch. viii. (95-97); II. <a href="#Page_343">343</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. II. ch. x. (102); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. II. ch. xix. (159); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. II. ch. xix. (163); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. II. ch. xxii. (195); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. III. ch. viii. (264, 265); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. III. ch. xix. (298); I. 68</li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. III. ch. xxii. (307, 308); II. <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Bk. III. ch. xxxvi. (353); II. <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>Spiritual Canticle</i>, St. VII. (206, 207); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> -<li class="isub3">St. XIII. (238); II. <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>Letters</i>, L. XIV. (541, 542); I. 68</li> -<li class="indx">John, St., Damascene, <i>De Fide Orthodoxa</i>, II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Joly, Henry, <i>Psychology of the Saints</i>, Engl. tr. 1898; II. <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jones, Henry, Prof., <i>A Critical Account of the Philosophy of Lotze</i>, 1895; II. <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li> -<li class="indx">Josephus, <i>Antiquities</i>, XI. ii. 3; II. <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -<li class="indx">Juliana, Mother, of Norwich, <i>Sixteen Revelations of Divine Love</i>, ed. 1902; II. <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Jülicher, A., <i>Gleichnissreden Jesu</i>, Th. II. 1899; II. <a href="#Page_153">153</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="ifrst">Kant, Immanuel, <i>Anthropologie</i>, Werke, Berlin, Vol. VII., 1907; II. <a href="#Page_165">165</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Briefe</i>, Werke, Berlin, Vol. I., 1900; II. <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“Der Kanon der reinen Vernunft,” in <i>Kritik der reinen Vernunft</i>, ed. Kehrbach: Werke, Berlin, Vol. III.; II. <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten</i>, Werke, Berlin, Vol. IV., 1903; II. <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft</i>, ed. Hartenstein, Werke, Berlin, Vol. VI., 1907; II. <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> -<li class="indx">Koch, Dr. Hugo, <i>Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita</i>, 1900; II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> -<li class="indx">Krätzschmar, R., Prof., <i>Das Buch Ezechiel</i>, 1900; II. <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Laberthonnière, Abbé L., in <i>Annales de Philosophic Chrétienne</i>, 1905, 1906; II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a> <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Leibniz, G. W. (Philosophische Schriften, ed. Gerhardt, 1882-1885). <i>Nouveaux Essais sur l’Entendement</i>, Vol. V.; II. <a href="#Page_265">265</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Principes de la Nature et de la Grace</i>, Vol. VI., 1885; II. <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lejeune, Abbé P., <i>Manuel de Théologie Mystique</i>, 1897; II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lessing, G. E., <i>Leibniz von den Ewigen Strafen</i>, in Lessing’s, Werke, ed. Lachmann-Muncker, Vol. XI., 1895; II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> -<li class="indx">Lightfoot, Bishop J. B., <i>St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians</i>, 1881; II. <a href="#Page_43">43-44</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Loyola, St. Ignatius of, <i>Testament</i>, 1900, p. 91, 92; II. <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Maineri, Padre, S. J., <i>Vita di S. Caterina</i>; I. 92, 302, 303 <i>n.</i> 1, 302 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Manning, H. E., Cardinal, <i>Treatise on Purgatory by St. Catherine of Genoa</i>, 1886, Appendix; II. <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> -<li class="indx">MS. “A”; I. 112 <i>n.</i> 1, 384, 392</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 7 (of MS.) p. 24; I. 136 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 10 (of MS.) 40; I. 390 <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 15 (of MS.) 87, 88; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub2">(of MS.) 92; I. 162 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 20 (of MS.) 134; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 24 (of MS.) 160; I. 386-387</li> -<li class="isub2">(of MS.) 163; I. 388</li> -<li class="isub2">(of MS.) 168; I. 387, 390 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 25 (of MS.) 169; I. 388</li> -<li class="isub2">(of MS.) 174; I. 402, <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 29 (of MS.) 193; I. 187 <i>n.</i> 1, 387-388 (no. is omitted in MS.)</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 31 (of MS) 198-200; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 42 (of MS.) 329; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub2">348; I. 452</li> -<li class="isub2">361, 363, 364; I. 386</li> -<li class="isub2">366; I. 147 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">394, 395, 396; I. 412-416</li> -<li class="indx">MS. “B,” 1 <i>v</i>; I. 396</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 5 (of MS.) f. 2 <i>r</i>, <i>v</i>; I. 394</li> -<li class="isub2">(of MS.) f. 19 <i>r</i>; I. 394</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. 24 (of MS.) f. 30 <i>r</i>, <i>v</i>; I. 395</li> -<li class="indx">MS. “F”; I. 216</li> -<li class="indx">Mercier, D., Cardinal, <i>Critériologie Générale</i>, ed. 1900; II. <a href="#Page_7">7</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Mill, J. Stuart, <i>Autobiography</i>, 1875; II. <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Three Essays on Religion</i>, 1874; II. <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_418" id="Page_418">[418]</a></span>Molinos, M. de, <i>Guida Spirituale</i>, French, tr., in Recueil de Diverses Pièces concernant le Quiétisme, Amsterdam, 1688; II. <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> -<li class="indx">Morro, Giuseppe, <i>Inaugurazione della Statua d’Ettore Vernazza</i>, 1863; I. 146 <i>n.</i> 1, 167, 317 <i>n.</i> 1, 320, 324-329, 331 <i>n.</i> 1, 333, 364, 365, 381 <i>n.</i> 2, 382 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="indx">Münsterberg, Prof., <i>Grundzüge der Psychologie</i>, Vol I., 1900; II. <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Psychology and Life</i>, 1899; II. <a href="#Page_302">302-303</a></li> -<li class="indx">Mystiker, deutsche, des Mittelalters, Vol. I., David von Augsburg, ed. Pfeiffer, 1845; II. <a href="#Page_363">363</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="ifrst">Newman, John Henry, Cardinal, <i>Grammar of Assent</i>, 1870; II. <a href="#Page_230">230</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Idea of a University</i>, ed. 1873; II. <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>The Via Media</i>, Vol. I., Preface, 1877; I. 53 <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="indx">Nicholas, of Coes (Cusanus), Cardinal, <i>Exercitationum</i>, Lib. VIII.; II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Oldenberg, <i>Buddha</i>, 1897; II. <a href="#Page_183">183-185</a></li> -<li class="indx">Origen, <i>Contra Celsum</i>, IV. 13; II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VII. 13; II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Orat.</i>, XXIX. 15 (263); II. <a href="#Page_234">234-235</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De Princ.</i>, II. 10, 4; II. <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>In Rom.</i>, T. II. i. 477; II. <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Pammatone Hospital <i>Cartulary</i>, 62; I. 98 <i>n.</i> i, 300, 312</li> -<li class="isub1">Doc. nos. 8, 14, 30; I. 125</li> -<li class="indx">Parpera, Giacinto, <i>B Caterina da Genova … illustrata</i>, 1682; I. 92, 305 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Pattison, A. S. Pringle, Prof., <i>Hegelianism and Personality</i>, ed. 1893; II. <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“Martineau’s Philosophy,” <i>Hibbert Journal</i>, Vol. I., 1902; II. <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> -<li class="indx">Pescetto, G. B., <i>Biografia Medica Ligure</i>, 1846, Vol. I.; I. 201 <i>n.</i> 3, 451 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Petavius (Petau), Denys, S.J., <i>Dogmata Theologica</i>, ed. Fournials, 1866, Vol. IV., <i>De Angelis</i>, III. viii. 16, 17; II. <a href="#Page_225">225-226</a></li> -<li class="indx">Petre, M. D., <i>The Soul’s Orbit</i>, 1904; II. <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> -<li class="indx">Philo, <i>Legg. Alleg.</i>, I. 3; II. <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li> -<li class="indx"><i>Pirke Aboth</i>, V. 23; II. <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> -<li class="indx">Plato, <i>Cratylus</i>; II. <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> -<li class="isub2">400 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Gorgias</i>, 477 <i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> -<li class="isub2">523 <i>b-e</i>, 525 <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>, 526 <i>c</i>, <i>d</i>; II. <a href="#Page_208">208-209</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Laws</i>, 904 <i>a-e</i>; II. <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Parmenides</i>, 134 <i>c</i>; I. 19</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Phaedo</i>, 64, 67 <i>c</i>, 69 <i>c</i>; I. 18</li> -<li class="isub2">81 <i>a</i>, 82 <i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> -<li class="isub2">81 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> -<li class="isub2">110 <i>b</i>-114 <i>d</i>; II. <a href="#Page_206">206-208</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Phaedrus</i>, 245 <i>d</i>; II. <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> -<li class="isub2">246 <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li> -<li class="isub2">249 <i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Philebus</i>, 22 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Republic</i>, II. 10 <i>c</i>, V. 460 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isub2">II. 364, <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>, <i>e</i>; II. <a href="#Page_235">235</a></li> -<li class="isub2">II. 364 <i>e</i>; II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V. 471 <i>c</i>-VIII.; II. <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. 508 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VII. 517 <i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VII. 518 <i>b</i>; I. 18</li> -<li class="isub2">IX 560 <i>d</i>-588 <i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isub2">X. 595 <i>a</i>-608 <i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> -<li class="isub2">X. 616 <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub2">X. 617 <i>e</i>, 619 <i>e</i>, 920 <i>e</i>; II. <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Symposium</i>, 197 <i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="isub2">216 <i>e</i>; II. <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Theaetetus</i>, 153 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> -<li class="isub2">168 <i>a</i>; I. 18</li> -<li class="isub2">176 <i>a</i>; I. 19</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Timaeus</i>, 28 <i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub2">29 <i>e</i> seq.; II. <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> -<li class="isub2">41 <i>d</i>, <i>e</i>, 42 <i>d</i>; II. <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> -<li class="isub2">92 <i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="indx">Plotinus, <i>Enneads</i>, I. vii. 1, 61 <i>d</i>; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. viii. 2, 72 <i>e</i>; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V. i. 3, 6; II. <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V. ii.; II. <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> -<li class="isub2">V. v. 8; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. viii. 16; II. <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. ix. 4; II. <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. ix. 8-9; II. <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. ix. 9; II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. ix. 9-11; II. <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. ix. 11; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> -<li class="indx">Proclus, <i>In Cratylum</i>, 103, 107; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Institutio Theologica</i>, c. 31, 35; II. <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li> -<li class="isub2">c. 129; II. <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>In Parmenidem</i>, IV. 34; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> -<li class="isub2">VI. 52; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>In Platonis Alcibidem</i>, II. 78; II. <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Platonic Theology, III. 132; II. <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Rauwenhoff, L. W. E., Prof., <i>Religions-philosophie</i>, Germ. tr., 1894; II. <a href="#Page_269">269</a> <i>n.</i> 2, <a href="#Page_291">291</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> -<li class="indx">Reinach, S., <i>Cultes, Mythes et Religions</i>, Vol. I. 1905; II. <a href="#Page_233">233</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> -<li class="indx">Reumont, Alfred von, <i>Vittoria Colonna</i>, 1881; I. 341 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Reusch, F. H., <i>Der Index der verbotenen Bücher</i>, 1885, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rhode, Erwin, <i>Psyche</i>, ed. 1898, Vol. I.; II. <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_125">125</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> -<li class="indx">Rickert, H., Prof., <i>die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a> <i>n.</i></li> -<li class="indx">Royce, Josiah, Prof., <i>The World and the Individual</i>, 1901, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a> <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="indx">Ruysbroek Johannes, “Zierde der geistlichen Hochzeit,” <i>Vier Schriften</i>, ed. Ullmann, 1848, ch. xlvi. 107, 108; II. <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Sandreau, Abbé A., <i>L’Etat Mystique</i>, 1903; <i>La Vie d’Union à Dieu</i>, 1900; II. <a href="#Page_307">307</a> <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Schiller, F. C. S., Dr., “Activity and Substance,” in <i>Humanism</i>, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">“The Desire for Immortality,” in same; II. <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schmöger, K. E., <i>Leben der gottscligen Anna Katharina Emmerich</i>, 1869-70; II. <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schopenhauer, Arthur, <i>Die Welt als Wille u. Vorstellung</i>, ed. Grisebach, Vol. I., Anhang; II. <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Vol. II., bk. iv., ch. 48; II. <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schwab, J. B., <i>Johannes Gerson</i>, 1858; II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> -<li class="indx">Schweizer, Albert, <i>Die Religions-Philosophie Kants</i>; 1899, II. <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> -<li class="indx">Scotus, John, Eriugena, <i>De divisione naturae</i>; II. <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>De rerum principio</i>; II. <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="indx">Seneca, L. Annaeus, <i>Natur. Quaest.</i>, Bk. III. ch. xx. 7, ch. xxx. 7, 8; II. <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> -<li class="indx">Seth, James, <i>A Study of Ethical Principles</i>, 1894; II. <a href="#Page_57">57</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_180">180</a> <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="indx">Simmel, Prof. Georg, <i>Kant</i>, 1904; II. <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_419" id="Page_419">[419]</a></span>Smith, W. Robertson, Prof., <i>The Prophets of Israel</i>, ed. 1882; II. <a href="#Page_267">267</a></li> -<li class="indx">Spinoza, ed. Van Vloten and Land, 1895, <i>Ethica</i>, Part II., Defin. vi., 75; II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Part IV., Prop. lxiv., Coroll., 225; II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Part V., Prop. xix., 251; II. <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Prop. xli., 264; II. <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isub3">Prop. xli., Scholion, 265; II. <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Tractatus Theologico-Politicus</i>, Cap. IV., Vol. II. 3, 4; II. <a href="#Page_175">175-176</a></li> -<li class="indx">Stade, B., Prof., <i>Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments</i>, 1905, Vol. I.; II. <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sticker, Fr., Urban, Bollandist, <i>Life of St. Catherine</i>, in Acta Sanctorum, Sept., Vol. V., ed. 1866, 123-195; I. 94, 167</li> -<li class="isub1">183 <i>b-e</i>; I. 466 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">192-196; I. 342 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Strata Battista, <i>Atti Notarili</i>, in “Archivio di Stato,” Genova; I. 379 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Suarez, Francesco, Fr., S.J., Opera, Vol. IV., Disp. XI., sec. iv., art. 2; II. <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li> -<li class="isub2">XLVII., sec. 1, art. 6; II. <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li> -<li class="indx">Sulze, Emile, <i>Wie ist der Kampf um die Bedeutung … Jesu zu beendigen?</i> 1901; II. <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Taylor, A. E., <i>The Problem of Conduct</i>, 1901; II. <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179-181</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tennant, Rev. F. R., <i>The Origin and Propagation of Sin</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_296">296</a>, <a href="#Page_299">299-300</a></li> -<li class="indx">Teresa, St., <i>Life Written by Herself</i>, Eng. tr., D. Lewis, 1888, Ch. iv. 17; II. <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. v. 23, 27, 28, 29; II. <a href="#Page_14">14</a>; <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>; <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>; <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. vi. 30, 31; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. vii. 40, 41; II. <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. ix. 57, 58; II. <a href="#Page_18">18</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xiii. 86; II. <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xviii. 124, 130; II. <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xix. 136; II. <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xx. 146, 149; II. <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxii. 162-174: II. <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxiii. 174; II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxv. 190 <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>, 192 <i>c</i>, 193 <i>a</i>, 196 <i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_48">48-49</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxvii. 206; II. <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxviii. 224; II. <a href="#Page_48">48-49</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxix. 231, 234, 235; II. <a href="#Page_18">18</a>; <a href="#Page_10">10</a>; <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxx. 247; II. <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxxi. 248, 249, 251; II. <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxxii. 263; II. <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxxv. 295; II. <a href="#Page_48">48-49</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Ch. xxxviii. 335; II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Rel. vii. 408; II. <a href="#Page_16">16</a> <i>n.</i> 1(2), <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Rel. viii. 420, 421, 423; II. <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>; <a href="#Page_324">324</a>; <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Rel. ix. 430, 431; II. <a href="#Page_325">325</a>; <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li> -<li class="indx">Thomas Aquinas, St., <i>De Beatitudine</i>, ch. iii. 3; II. <a href="#Page_151">151-152</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>De Ente et Essentia</i>, c. 11; II. <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>In libr. Boetii de Trinitate</i>, ed. Ven. 2, ch. viii. 291 <i>a</i>, 341 <i>b</i>, 342 <i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>In libros Sententiarum</i>, Sent. II., dist. 30, qu. 1, art. 2; II. <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Sent. III., dist. 30, art. 5; II. <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Summa contra Gentiles</i>, I. 1-3, c. 70 in fine; I. 81</li> -<li class="isub2">Lib. II. c. xciv. inst.; c. xciii; II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Lib. III. c. xxi. in fine; II. <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Summa Theologica</i>, I. qu. 4, art. 1 concl.; II. <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 8, art. 2; II. <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 12, art. 1 in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 12, art. 6 ad 1; II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 12, art. 7, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 12, art. 8 ad 4; II. <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 12, art. 10, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 13, art. 5, concl., et in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 14, art. 2 ad 2; II. <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 14, art. 4, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 14, art. 8, concl.; II. <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 14, art. 11 ad. 3 contra et concl.; II. <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 19, art. 1, concl.; II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 19, art. 2, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 20, art. 1 ad 1 ad 3; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 20, art. 1, concl.; II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 20, art. 2 ad 1; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 25, art. 1 ad 2, and concl.; II. <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 28, art 1, in corp. and ad 2; II. <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 29, art. 3 ad 2 ad 4, and in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. qu. 47, art. 1, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. ii. qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4; II. <a href="#Page_253">253</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. ii. qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4, and concl.; II. <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. ii. qu. 28, art. 1 ad 2, and in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. ii. qu. 86, art. 1 ad 3, and concl.; II. <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub2">I. ii. qu. 114, art. 4, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isub2">II. ii. qu. 3, art. 4 ad 4; II. <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> -<li class="isub2">II. ii. qu. 17, art. 8, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> -<li class="isub2">II. ii. qu. 23, art. 6, concl. and in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> -<li class="isub2">III. qu. 85, art. 2 ad 1; II. <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> -<li class="isub2">III. suppl., qu. 6, art. 3; I. 120, 121</li> -<li class="isub2">Suppl., qu. 62, art. 2; II. <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Suppl., qu. 69, art. 1 ad 3, and in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Suppl., qu. 69, art. 6, in corp.; <a href="#Page_214"><i>ib.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">Suppl., qu. 69, art. 7, concl.; <a href="#Page_214"><i>ib.</i></a></li> -<li class="isub2">Suppl., qu. 69, art. 7 ad 9; II. <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Append.; qu. 2, art 4, in corp. and ad 4; II. <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> -<li class="isub2"><i>App. de Purg.</i>, art. 2, in corp.; II. <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> -<li class="indx">Tiele, C. P., Prof., <i>Elements of the Science of Religion</i>, 1897, Vol. I.; II. <a href="#Page_262">262-263</a></li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_268">268-270</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> -<li class="indx">Touzard, Abbé J., “Le Développement de la Doctrine del Immortalité,” <i>Revue Biblique</i>, 1898, pp. 207-241; II. <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li> -<li class="indx">Trendelenburg, A., “Ueber den letzten Unterschied d. philos. Systeme,” <i>Beiträge z. Philos.</i> 1855, II. 10; II. <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> -<li class="indx">Troeltsch, Prof. Ernst, “Das Historische in Kant’s Religions-philosophie,” <i>Kant Studien</i>, 1904; II. <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_420" id="Page_420">[420]</a></span>“Religions-philosophie,” in <i>Die Philosophie im Beginn des XXten Jahrh.</i>, 1904, Vol. I; II. <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">“Die Selbständigkeit der Religion,” <i>Zeitschr. f. Theologie u. Kirche</i>, 1895; II. <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“Grundprobleme der Ethik,” in <i>Zeitschr. f. Theologie u. Kirche</i>, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_127">127</a> <i>n.</i> 1, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“Geschichts philosophie,” <i>Theol. Rundschau</i>, 1893, II. <a href="#Page_256">256</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“Was heisst Wesen des Christenthums?” <i>Christliche Welt</i>, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_359">359</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> -<li class="indx">Turmel, Abbé Joseph, “Le Dogme du Pêché Originel dans S. Augustin,” <i>Rev. d’Hist. et de Litt. Rel.</i>, 1901, 1902; II. <a href="#Page_29">29</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Tyrrell, Rev. George, <i>Hard Sayings</i>, 1898; I. 89; II. <a href="#Page_230">230</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Lex Orandi</i>, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>The faith of the Millions</i>, 1901, Vol. II.; II. <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Ueberweg-Heinze, <i>Grundriss d. Gesch. d. Philosophie</i>, Part II., ed. 1898; II. <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Vallebona, Sebastiano, <i>La Perla dei Fieschi</i>, ed. 1887, I. 129 <i>n.</i> 3, 144, 145 <i>n.</i> 1, 337, 338 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Vernazza Battista, Ven., <i>Opere Spirituali, Genova</i>, 1755, Vol. I. Preface; I. 100, 117, 344 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. V. 218-227, <i>Colloquii</i>; I. 346-358</li> -<li class="isub2">Vol. VI. 192-248, <i>Letters</i>; I. 343-344, 359-364, 409 <i>n.</i> 1, 2</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Vita e Dottrina di S. Caterina da Genova.</i> Nona Ed. Genovese. Sordi-Muti (no date). Preface, vii<i>c</i>; I. 413, 414</li> -<li class="isub2">viii<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; <i>ibid.</i></li> -<li class="isub2">viii<i>b</i>; I. 281</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Vita</i>-proper, Cap. I. 3; I. 104 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">3<i>c</i>; I. 127</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. II. 4<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 105</li> -<li class="isub2">4<i>a</i>-5<i>b</i>; I. 404-406</li> -<li class="isub2">4<i>a</i>-5<i>c</i>; I. 458-460</li> -<li class="isub2">4<i>c</i>-5<i>a</i>; I. 107, 108</li> -<li class="isub2">4<i>c</i>; I. 108 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">5<i>a-c</i>; <i>ibid.</i></li> -<li class="isub2">5<i>b</i>; I. 181-412</li> -<li class="isub2">5<i>b-c</i>; I. 108 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">5<i>c</i>-6; I. 112, 121 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub2">6; I. 118-119</li> -<li class="isub2">6<i>a</i>; I. 334 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">6<i>b</i>; I. 118, 412</li> -<li class="isub2">6<i>c</i>; I. 397</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. III. 7<i>a</i>; I. 114 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">7<i>b</i>; I. 116</li> -<li class="isub2">8<i>a</i>; I. 280</li> -<li class="isub2">8-9; I. 115</li> -<li class="isub2">8<i>c</i>; I. 263, 273, 280</li> -<li class="isub2">9<i>b</i>; I. 180 <i>n.</i> 3, 263, 265, 273</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. IV. 10<i>a</i>; I. 135 <i>n.</i> 1, 136 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">10<i>b</i>; I. 180 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">11<i>b</i>; I. 273</li> -<li class="isub2">11<i>b-c</i>; I. 264</li> -<li class="isub2">11<i>c</i>; I. 137 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. V. 12<i>b</i>-13<i>b</i>; I. 121 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub2">13<i>c</i>; I. 401</li> -<li class="isub2">14<i>b</i>; I. 134 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. VI. 14<i>c</i>; I. 121 <i>n.</i> 3, 393</li> -<li class="isub2">15<i>b</i>; I. 139, 267, 273, 280</li> -<li class="isub2">15<i>c</i>-16<i>a</i>; I. 140, 265</li> -<li class="isub2">16<i>b</i>; I. 118 <i>n.</i> 2, 139</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. VII. 17<i>b</i>; I. 140</li> -<li class="isub2">19<i>b</i>; I. 274</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. VIII. 20<i>a</i>; I. 401</li> -<li class="isub2">20<i>b</i>; I. 142 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">20<i>c</i>; I. 143</li> -<li class="isub2">21<i>a</i>; I. 407</li> -<li class="isub2">21<i>a-b</i>; I. 401</li> -<li class="isub2">21<i>b</i>; I. 144, 145 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">21<i>c</i>; I. 143 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">22<i>b</i>; I. 265</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. IX. 22<i>c</i>; I. 267, 277</li> -<li class="isub2">23<i>a</i>; I. 139, 279</li> -<li class="isub2">23<i>b</i>; I. 267, 274</li> -<li class="isub2">23<i>c</i>; I. 263, 277</li> -<li class="isub2">24<i>a</i>; I. 277, 279</li> -<li class="isub2">24<i>b</i>; I. 274</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. X. 25<i>c</i>-26<i>a</i>; I. 265</li> -<li class="isub2">26<i>b</i>; I. 266</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XI. 27<i>a</i>; I. 280</li> -<li class="isub2">28<i>c</i>-29<i>b</i>; I. 269</li> -<li class="isub2">29<i>c</i>; I. 262, 278</li> -<li class="isub2">30<i>a</i>; I. 278</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XII. 30<i>b</i>; I. 262</li> -<li class="isub2">31<i>b</i>; I. 271</li> -<li class="isub2">31<i>c</i>-32<i>a</i>; I. 268</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XIII. 32<i>c</i>; I. 409 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">33<i>c</i>-33<i>b</i>; I. 261</li> -<li class="isub2">33<i>b</i>; I. 283; II. <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XIV. 34<i>c</i>; I. 277</li> -<li class="isub2">36<i>b</i>; I. 263, 266</li> -<li class="isub2">36<i>c</i>; I. 266</li> -<li class="isub2">37; I. 259</li> -<li class="isub2">38<i>b</i>-39<i>a</i>; I. 282</li> -<li class="isub2">39<i>b</i>; I. 162 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XV. 39<i>b</i>-116<i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XVI. 42<i>a</i>; I. 270</li> -<li class="isub2">42<i>b</i>; I. 269</li> -<li class="isub2">43<i>c</i>; I. 269, 278</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XVII. 47<i>b</i>; I. 139, 161, 162</li> -<li class="isub2">47<i>c</i>-48<i>a</i>; II. <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XVIII. 48<i>b</i>; I. 266</li> -<li class="isub2">49<i>a</i>; I. 139, 267</li> -<li class="isub2">50<i>a</i>; I. 161, 162</li> -<li class="isub2">50<i>b</i>; I. 266</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XIX. 51-52; I. 140 <i>n.</i> 4, 141 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">51<i>a</i>-53<i>b</i>; I. 390 <i>n.</i> 2, 451</li> -<li class="isub2">51<i>b</i>; I. 279</li> -<li class="isub2">52<i>a</i>; I. 279</li> -<li class="isub2">52<i>c</i>-53<i>a</i>; I. 272</li> -<li class="isub2">53<i>b</i>; I. 265, 276</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XX. 54<i>b-c</i>; I. 272</li> -<li class="isub2">55<i>c</i>-56<i>a</i>; I. 262</li> -<li class="isub2">56<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 123, 124 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXII. 59<i>c</i>; I. 274, 275</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXIII. 60<i>c</i>; I. 280</li> -<li class="isub2">61<i>a</i>; I. 262</li> -<li class="isub2">61<i>c</i>; I. 277</li> -<li class="isub2">62<i>a</i>; I. 259, 387</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXIV. 64<i>b</i>; I. 287</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXV. 66<i>a</i>; I. 268</li> -<li class="isub2">66<i>b</i>; I. 268</li> -<li class="isub2">67<i>c</i>; I. 265</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXVI. 69<i>a</i>; I. 267</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXVII. 71<i>c</i>; I. 198 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">72<i>b</i>; I. 162, 163. 164</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXIX. 74<i>b</i>; I. 263</li> -<li class="isub2">75<i>b</i>; I. 268</li> -<li class="isub2">76; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub2">76<i>a</i>; I. 272</li> -<li class="isub2">76<i>c</i>; I. 262, 275</li> -<li class="isub2">77<i>a</i>; I. 275</li> -<li class="isub2">77<i>b</i>; I. 277; II. <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXX. 78<i>c</i>; I. 284</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXXI. 79<i>c</i>; I. 262</li> -<li class="isub2">80<i>b</i>; I. 265</li> -<li class="isub2">80<i>c</i>-81<i>a</i>; I. 263</li> -<li class="isub2">81<i>b-c</i>; I. 271</li> -<li class="isub2">82<i>a</i>: I. 271</li> -<li class="isub2">82<i>b</i>-83<i>a</i>; I. 394-395</li> -<li class="isub2">83<i>a</i>; I. 259</li> -<li class="isub1"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_421" id="Page_421">[421]</a></span>Cap. XXXII. 83<i>c</i>-84<i>a</i>; I. 270</li> -<li class="isub2">86<i>b</i>; <i>ibid.</i></li> -<li class="isub2">87<i>a</i>; <i>ibid.</i></li> -<li class="isub2">87<i>c</i>; I. 268, 276; II. <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXXIV. 91<i>c</i>; I. 262</li> -<li class="isub2">92<i>a</i>; I. 259</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXXVI. 94<i>b</i>-95<i>c</i>; I. 160</li> -<li class="isub2">94<i>a</i>; I. 276</li> -<li class="isub2">94<i>b</i>-95<i>c</i>; I. 455</li> -<li class="isub2">94<i>c</i>; I. 159 <i>n.</i> 1, 279</li> -<li class="isub2">95<i>b</i>; I. 279</li> -<li class="isub2">95<i>c</i>; I. 127, 272</li> -<li class="isub2">96<i>b</i>; I. 148 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXXVII. 97<i>b</i>; I. 140, 148 <i>n.</i> 1, 160, 161, 409 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">97<i>c</i>; I. 388</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXXVIII. 98-99; I. 166, 183 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">98<i>a-b</i>; I. 183, 454</li> -<li class="isub2">98<i>a</i>-99<i>b</i>; I. 454-455</li> -<li class="isub2">98<i>c</i>; I. 192 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">99<i>a</i>; I. 192 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XXXIX. 100<i>c</i>-101<i>b</i>; I. 455</li> -<li class="isub2">101<i>a-b</i>; I. 262</li> -<li class="isub2">103<i>b</i>; I. 271</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XL. 105<i>c</i>; I. 147 <i>n.</i> 1, 265</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLI. 106<i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 268</li> -<li class="isub2">107<i>a</i>; I. 268</li> -<li class="isub2">107<i>b</i>; I. 274</li> -<li class="isub2">108<i>b</i>; I. 270</li> -<li class="isub2">109<i>b</i>; I. 276</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLII. 113<i>b</i>; I. 164 <i>n.</i> 2; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub2">113<i>c</i>; I. 274</li> -<li class="isub2">114<i>a</i>; I. 269</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLIII. 115<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 162 <i>n.</i> 3, 457</li> -<li class="isub2">115<i>c</i>; I. 457</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLIV. 116<i>c</i>; I. 117 <i>n.</i> 2, 118 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">116<i>c</i>-121<i>b</i>; I. 390 <i>n.</i> 4, 455-456</li> -<li class="isub2">117<i>b</i>; I. 118 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">117<i>b</i>-121<i>b</i>; I. 451, 455-457</li> -<li class="isub2">118<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 158 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">119<i>b</i>; I. 185 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">119<i>c</i>; I. 118, 195 <i>n.</i> 1, 391</li> -<li class="isub2">120<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 195 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLV. 122<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>-123<i>a</i>; I. 150 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">122<i>c</i>; I. 272, 388</li> -<li class="isub2">123, 124; I. 132 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub2">123<i>b</i>; I. 167, 402</li> -<li class="isub2">123<i>b</i>-124<i>b</i>; I. 390 <i>n.</i> 3, 457</li> -<li class="isub2">124<i>b</i>; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLVI. 124<i>b</i>-125; I. 169-171</li> -<li class="isub2">124<i>c</i>; I. 388</li> -<li class="isub2">125<i>a</i>; I. 272</li> -<li class="isub2">125<i>b</i>; I. 402 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLVII. 127-132; I. 166</li> -<li class="isub2">127<i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 420</li> -<li class="isub2">129<i>b</i>; I. 119 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">129<i>c</i>; I. 164 <i>n.</i> 2; II. <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> -<li class="isub2">130<i>a</i>; I. 164 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">132<i>a</i>; I. 188 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLVIII. 132<i>b</i>; 188 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">133<i>b</i>; I. 187 <i>n.</i> 1, 188, 450</li> -<li class="isub2">134<i>a</i>; I. 164 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">135<i>a</i>; I. 189 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">135<i>c</i>-136<i>a</i>; I. 189 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">136<i>b</i>; I. 274</li> -<li class="isub2">138<i>b</i>; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub2">138<i>c</i>; I. 193</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XLIX. 139<i>a</i>; I. 388 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">139<i>a</i>-140<i>c</i>; I. 390 <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="isub2">139<i>c</i>-140<i>b</i>; I. 388 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">140<i>a</i>; I. 194 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">140<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 119-120</li> -<li class="isub2">141<i>b</i>-145<i>b</i>; I. 204 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">142<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 197 <i>n.</i> 2, 3</li> -<li class="isub2">143<i>b</i>; I. 197 n, 4; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub2">144<i>a</i>; I. 198 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">144<i>b</i>; I. 281</li> -<li class="isub2">144<i>c</i>; I. 434</li> -<li class="isub2">145<i>c</i>-146<i>a</i>; I. 198 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub2">146<i>c</i>-147<i>c</i>; I. 201 <i>n.</i> 3 (202), 390, 451</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. L. 148<i>c</i>; I. 204 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">149<i>b</i>; I. 205 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub2">149<i>c</i>; I. 205 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">151<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 205 <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="isub2">152<i>b</i>-153<i>c</i>; I. 204 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">152<i>c</i>; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub2">153<i>a</i>; I. 209 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">154<i>b</i>; I. 208 <i>n.</i> 3, 390, 451</li> -<li class="isub2">155<i>a</i>; I. 209 <i>n.</i> 1, 273; II. <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> -<li class="isub2">155<i>b</i>-156<i>a</i>; I. 210 <i>n.</i> 1, 389, 412, 452</li> -<li class="isub2">156<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 210 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">157<i>c</i>; I. 209 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">158<i>a</i>; I. 209 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">158<i>b</i>; I. 210 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub2">158<i>c</i>-159<i>a</i>; I. 211</li> -<li class="isub2">159<i>c</i>; I. 213 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">160<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 214</li> -<li class="isub2">160<i>c</i>; I. 215</li> -<li class="isub2">161; I. 387</li> -<li class="isub2">161<i>a</i>; I. 215</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. LI. 161<i>c</i>-163<i>a</i>; I. 216-218</li> -<li class="isub2">162<i>a</i>; I. 162 <i>n.</i> 3</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. LII. 163<i>b</i>-164<i>a</i>; I. 218 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub2">164<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 300</li> -<li class="isub2">165<i>a</i>; I. 454-455</li> -<li class="isub2">165<i>c</i>; I. 300, 454, 455</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="vitat" id="vitat"></a><i>Vita-Trattato</i>, Cap. I. 169<i>b</i>; I. 281</li> -<li class="isub2">169<i>b</i>-175<i>c</i>; I. 435</li> -<li class="isub2">169<i>b</i>-184<i>c</i>; I. 435-438</li> -<li class="isub2">169<i>c</i>-170<i>a</i>; I. 286</li> -<li class="isub2">169<i>c</i>-170<i>b</i>; I. 417</li> -<li class="isub2">169<i>c</i>-170<i>c</i>; I. 440-442</li> -<li class="isub2">170<i>b</i>; I. 283</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. II. 170<i>c</i>; I. 287, 291</li> -<li class="isub2">170<i>c</i>-171<i>b</i>; I. 442-444</li> -<li class="isub2">171<i>b</i>; I. 287</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. III. 171<i>c</i>; I. 278</li> -<li class="isub2">172<i>a</i>; I. 278, 288</li> -<li class="isub2">172<i>b</i>; I. 287, 444-445</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. IV. 172<i>c</i>; I. 282</li> -<li class="isub2">173<i>a</i>; I. 445</li> -<li class="isub2">173<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 283</li> -<li class="isub2">173<i>b</i>; I. 226; II. <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. V. 173<i>c</i>, 174<i>a</i>; I. 287, 446-447</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. VI. 174<i>b</i>; I. 288, 289</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. VII. 175<i>a</i>; I. 277, 285</li> -<li class="isub2">175<i>b</i>; I. 284</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. IX. 176<i>a</i>; I. 284, 285</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. X. 177<i>b</i>; I. 284, 287</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XI. 178<i>a-b</i>; I. 438-439</li> -<li class="isub2">178<i>b</i>; I. 292, 293</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XIII. 180<i>a</i>-181<i>c</i>; I. 437</li> -<li class="isub2">180<i>b</i>-181<i>c</i>; I. 438-439</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XVI. 181<i>c</i>, 182<i>b</i>; I. 438-439</li> -<li class="isub2">182<i>b</i>; I. 286, 290</li> -<li class="isub1">Cap. XVII. 183<i>c</i>; I. 274</li> -<li class="indx"><a name="vitad" id="vitad"></a><i>Vita-Dialogo</i>, Part I. 185-225; I. 396-397</li> -<li class="isub2">185<i>c</i>-190<i>c</i>, 191<i>a</i>-198<i>a</i>; I. 397 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. VI. 197<i>a</i>; I. 400</li> -<li class="isub3">198<i>b</i>-206<i>b</i>; I. 398 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. VIII. 199<i>c</i>-202<i>c</i>; I. 404</li> -<li class="isub3">201<i>b</i>; I. 409 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub3">202<i>c</i>-208<i>b</i>; I. 404-406</li> -<li class="isub3">203<i>a</i>; I. 124</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XI. 208<i>c</i>-209<i>b</i>; I. 404, 405</li> -<li class="isub2"><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_422" id="Page_422">[422]</a></span>Cap. XII. 209<i>c</i>-211<i>b</i>; I. 409 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub3">207<i>c</i>-212<i>a</i>; I. 398 <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="isub3">211<i>a</i>; I. 404-406, 409 <i>n.</i> 2</li> -<li class="isub3">211<i>b</i>; I. 400, 404-406, 409 <i>n.</i> 1, 412</li> -<li class="isub3">211<i>c</i>; I. 409 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XIII. 212<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 398 <i>n.</i> 5</li> -<li class="isub3">212<i>c</i>; I. 146, 429</li> -<li class="isub3">212<i>c</i>-213<i>a</i>; I. 406-407</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XIV. 213<i>c</i>-225<i>c</i>; I. 398 <i>n.</i> 6, 420-421</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XV. 215<i>c</i>-216<i>a</i>; I. 399 <i>n.</i> 2, 408 <i>n.</i> 5</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XVIII. 220<i>c</i>; I. 401, 406-407</li> -<li class="isub3">221<i>b</i>; I. 431</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XIX. 221<i>c</i>; 400, 406-407</li> -<li class="isub3">221, 222<i>a</i>; I. 402</li> -<li class="isub3">222<i>b</i>; I. 406-407</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XX. 222<i>c</i>; I. 401</li> -<li class="isub3">223<i>c</i>; I. 400</li> -<li class="isub1">Part II. 226<i>b</i>-242<i>b</i>; I. 419</li> -<li class="isub3">226<i>c</i>-241<i>b</i>; I. 420</li> -<li class="isub3">227<i>a</i>-241<i>b</i>; I. 420-421</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. III. 231<i>a</i>; I. 430</li> -<li class="isub3">232<i>b</i>-245<i>c</i>; I. 419</li> -<li class="isub3">232<i>b</i>; I. 431</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. V. 234<i>b</i>: I. 427</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. IX. 241<i>b</i>; I. 427-428</li> -<li class="isub3">241<i>c</i>-245<i>c</i>; I. 491</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. X. 242<i>b</i>; I. 430, 431</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XI. 245<i>c</i>; I. 417</li> -<li class="isub1">Part III. Cap. I. 247<i>b</i>; I. 432</li> -<li class="isub3">248<i>c</i>; I. 430, 432</li> -<li class="isub3">249<i>a</i>; I. 430</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. II. 250<i>a</i>, <i>b</i>; I. 160, 161</li> -<li class="isub3">250<i>a</i>-263<i>c</i>; I. 422</li> -<li class="isub3">250<i>b</i>; I. 430</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. VI. 259<i>c</i>; I. 432</li> -<li class="isub3">260<i>b</i>; I. 428</li> -<li class="isub3">264<i>a</i>-271<i>a</i>; I. 423</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. VIII. 264<i>b</i>; I. 412, 433</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. IX. 266<i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 425, 426</li> -<li class="isub3">266<i>b</i>; I. 432</li> -<li class="isub3">Cap. X. 268<i>c</i>; I. 428</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XI. 269<i>c</i>; I. 428</li> -<li class="isub3">270<i>b</i>; I. 428</li> -<li class="isub2">C. XII. XIII. 271<i>b</i>-275<i>a</i>; I. 424</li> -<li class="isub2">Cap. XIII. 273<i>a</i>; I. 429</li> -<li class="isub3">275<i>a</i>; I. 429</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Vita-Brevi Notizie</i> (Maineri), <i>Traslazione</i>, 278-282; I. 306 <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub2">278<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; I. 304</li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Miracoli</i>, 282<i>b</i>; I. 302</li> -<li class="indx"><i>Vita Venerabilis Lukardis</i>, in “Analecta Bollandiana,” XVIII. 1899; II. <a href="#Page_52">52-55</a></li> -<li class="indx">Volkelt, J., Prof., <i>Erfahrung u. Denken</i>, 1886; II. <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie</i>, 1879; I. 56 <i>n.</i> 1; II. <a href="#Page_276">276-278</a></li> -<li class="isub1"><i>Schopenhauer</i>, 1900; II. <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Ward, James, Prof., <i>Naturalism and Agnosticism</i>, ed. 1905; II. <a href="#Page_196">196</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">“Mechanism and Morals,” <i>Hibbert Journal</i>, Oct. 1905; II. <a href="#Page_197">197</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="isub1">“On the Definition of Psychology,” <i>Journal of Psych.</i>, Vol. I., 1904; II. <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> -<li class="isub1">“Present Problems of Psychology,” (American) <i>Philosophical Review</i>, 1904; II. <a href="#Page_277">277-278</a></li> -<li class="indx">Weinel, Prof. H., <i>Die Wirkungen des Geistes u. der Geister</i>, 1899, 309; II. <a href="#Page_43">43</a> <i>n.</i> 1</li> -<li class="indx">Wesley, John, <i>Journal</i>, ed. Parker, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_4">4</a> <i>n.</i> 4</li> -<li class="indx">Windelband, Prof. W., “Das Heilige,” in <i>Präludien</i>, 1903; II. <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> -<li class="ifrst">Zeller, Prof. Edward, <i>Philosophie der Griechen</i>, Part II. ed. 1879; I. 312</li> -<li class="isub1">Part III., Div. 2, ed. 1881; II. <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> -</ul> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<h2>FOOTNOTES</h2> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 143<i>b</i>; 149<i>b</i>, 159<i>b</i>; 153<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 153<i>c</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 129<i>c</i>, 134<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> I have already traced the steps in the growth of this legend. It is no -doubt this element in the biography which irritated John Wesley, the -man of absolute judgments; although he himself, with shrewd good -sense, indicates its possible secondary origin. “I am sure this was a -fool of a Saint; that is, if it was not the folly of her historian, who has -aggrandized her into a mere idiot” (<i>Journal</i>, ed. P. L. Parker, London, -1903).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 127<i>c</i>, 143<i>b</i>, 144<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> <i>Life</i>, tr. by D. Lewis, London, ed. 1888, pp. 27, 420.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> <i>Existence de Dieu</i>, I, 1, 31: <i>Œuvres</i>, ed. Versailles, 1820, Vol. I, -p. 51.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> Pierre Janet, <i>Automatisme Psychologique</i>, ed. 1903; <i>Etat Mental -des Hysteriques</i>, 2 vols., 1892, 1893. Hermann Gunkel, <i>Die Wirkungen -des heiligen Geistes</i>, Göttingen, 1899. Heinrich Weinel, <i>Die Wirkungen -des Geistes und der Geister</i>, Freiburg, 1899. William James, <i>The Varieties -of Religious Experience</i>, London, 1902.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> Pierre Janet, <i>op. cit.</i> Alfred Binet, <i>Les Altérations de la Personnalité</i>, -Paris, 1902. M. Th. Coconnier, <i>L’Hypnotisme Franc</i>, Paris, 1897.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> W. James, <i>op. cit.</i>, especially pp. 1-25. H. Weinel, <i>op. cit.</i>, especially -pp. 128-137; 161-208. Bernouilli, <i>Die Heiligen der Merowinger</i>, -Tübingen, 1900, pp. 2-6. B. Duhm, <i>Das Geheimniss in der Religion</i>, -Tübingen, 1896.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> H. Bergson, <i>Essai sur les Données Immédiates de la Conscience</i>, ed. -1898. H. Jones, <i>The Philosophy of Lotze</i>, 1895. J. Ward, <i>Naturalism -and Agnosticism</i>, 2 vols., 1899. M. Blondel, <i>l’Action</i>, 1893. J. Volkelt, -<i>Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie</i>, 1879; <i>Erfahrung und Denken</i>, 1886. H. -Münsterberg, <i>Psychology and Life</i>, 1899. D. Mercier <i>Critériologie -Générale</i>, ed. 1900.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 96<i>c</i>; 117<i>b</i>; 127<i>a</i>; 97<i>c</i>, 133<i>b</i> (dated November 11, 1509, in -MSS.); 146<i>b</i>; 148<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> From my authenticated copies of the original wills in the Archivio di -Stato, Genoa.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 113<i>b</i>, 149<i>c</i>; 143<i>b</i>, 152<i>c</i>; 138<i>b</i>, 155<i>a</i>. Note the parallels in -St. Teresa’s <i>Life</i>, written by herself, tr. D. Lewis, ed. 1888. P. 234: “When -these (spiritual) impetuosities are not very violent, the soul seeks relief -through certain penances; the painfulness of which, and even the shedding -of blood, are no more felt than if the body were dead.” P. 30: “I was -unable to move either arm or foot, or hand or head, unless others moved -me. I could move, however, I think, one finger of my right hand.” P. 31: -“I was paralytic, though getting better, for about three years.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> Hyper-aesthesia and sensation of heat: <i>Vita</i>, pp. 142<i>a</i>, 153<i>a</i>. Increase -of movement: <i>ibid.</i>, and pp. 145<i>b</i>, 143<i>a</i>, 153<i>c</i>, 141<i>a</i>. Loss of speech and -sight: pp. 141<i>b</i>, 141<i>c</i>, 159<i>c</i>. Localization of heat: p. 157<i>b</i>. Haemorrhages: -138<i>c</i>, 159<i>c</i>, 160<i>a</i>. Concavities and jaundice: pp. 144<i>a</i>, 153<i>a</i>. -Spasms: pp. 143<i>c</i>, 71<i>c</i>, 141<i>c</i>, 142<i>b</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>loc. cit.</i> p. 30: “As to -touching me, that was impossible, for I was so bruised that I could not -endure it. They used to move me in a sheet, one holding one end, and -another the other.” P. 31: “I began to crawl on my hands and feet.” -P. 263: “I felt myself on fire: this inward fire and despair.…” P. 17: -“The fainting fits began to be more frequent; and my heart was so -seriously affected, that those who saw it were alarmed.” P. 27: “It -seemed to me as if my heart had been seized by sharp teeth.” P. 235: “I -saw, in the Angel’s hand, a long spear of gold, and at the iron’s point -there seemed to be a little fire. He appeared to me to be thrusting it at -times into my heart, and to pierce my very entrails.… The pain is not -bodily, but spiritual.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> Swallow: <i>Vita</i>, pp. 149<i>c</i>, 150<i>a</i>; 159<i>b</i>; 159<i>c</i>; 150<i>a</i>. Odours and -colours: 153<i>c</i>, 154<i>b</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>loc. cit.</i> p. 27: “I could eat nothing -whatever, only drink. I had a great loathing for food.” P. 43: “I have -been suffering for twenty years from sickness every morning.” P. 30: -“There was a choking in my throat … I could not swallow even a -drop of water.” P. 263: “A sense of oppression, of stifling.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> Exclamations: <i>Vita</i>, pp. 144<i>a</i>, 148<i>b</i>, 155<i>a</i>. Laughter: <i>ibid.</i> 145<i>c</i>, -148<i>b</i>, 149<i>b</i>, 157<i>c</i>. Sudden changes of condition: 135<i>b</i>, 138<i>c</i>, 159<i>b</i>. Cf. St. -Teresa, <i>loc. cit.</i> pp. 28, 29: “That very night,” Feast of the Assumption, 1537, -“my sickness became so acute that, for about four days, I remained insensible. -For a day and a half the grave was open, waiting for my body. -But it pleased Our Lord I should come to myself. I wished to go to -confession at once. Though my sufferings were unendurable, and my -perceptions dull, yet my confession was, I believe, complete. I communicated -with many tears.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 71<i>c</i>; 145<i>c</i>; 147<i>b</i>; 159<i>c</i>, 159<i>a</i>; 127<i>a</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>loc. -cit.</i> p. 23: “I was in my sister’s house, for the purpose of undergoing -medical treatment—they took the utmost care of my comfort.” P. 27: -“In two months, so strong were the medicines, my life was nearly worn -out.” “The physicians gave me up: they said I was consumptive.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> Self-knowledge as to “quietudes”: <i>Vita</i>, pp. 153<i>b</i>, 157<i>a</i>. Marabotto’s -attitude: 139<i>b</i>; 141<i>c</i>, 143<i>c</i>, 149<i>a</i>. Relations with Boerio: 147<i>c</i>, 147<i>b</i>. -Cf. St. Teresa, <i>loc. cit.</i> p. 86: “My health has been much better since I -have ceased to look after my ease and comforts.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> Remark to Vernazza: <i>Vita</i>, pp. 98<i>c</i>, 99<i>a</i>. Persistence of intelligence: -141<i>c</i>; 159<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; 143<i>a</i>; 143<i>c</i>; 145<i>b</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>loc. cit.</i> p. 408: “She” -(Teresa herself) “never saw anything with her bodily eyes, nor heard -anything with her bodily ears.” P. 189: “The words of the divine locutions -are very distinctly formed; but by the bodily ear they are not -heard.” P. 191: “In ecstasy, the memory can hardly do anything at all, -and the imagination is, as it were, suspended.” P. 142: “You see and feel -yourself carried away, you know not whither.” P. 187: “I fell into a -trance; I was carried out of myself. It was most plain.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> Picture: <i>Vita</i>, p. 135<i>a</i>;. Red and black robes: 154<i>b</i>, 156<i>c</i>. Suggestions -of odour: 118<i>c</i>, 119<i>a</i>; 9<i>c</i>, 8<i>a</i>, 9<i>b</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>loc. cit</i>. pp. 57, 58: “One -day, I saw a picture of Christ most grievously wounded: the very sight of -it moved me.” P. 247: “I used to pray much to Our Lord for that living -water of which He spoke to the Samaritan woman: I had always a -picture of it with this inscription: ‘Domine, da mihi aquam.’” P. 231: -“Once when I was holding in my hand the cross of my rosary, He took -it from me into His own hand. He returned it; but it was then four -large stones incomparably more precious than diamonds: the five wounds -were delineated on them with the most admirable art. He said to me -that for the future that cross would appear so to me always, and so it did. -The precious stones were seen, however, only by myself.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> Synchronisms: <i>Vita</i>, pp. 148<i>b</i>; 150<i>b</i>; 152<i>a</i>, 160<i>c</i>, 161<i>b</i>. Communion -and ordinary food: 154<i>a</i>, 154<i>c</i>, 138<i>c</i>; 154<i>c</i>. Heats: “Assalto,” <i>e.g.</i> 138<i>b</i>, -<i>c</i>; 143<i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; “ferita” and “saetta,” <i>e.g.</i> 141<i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; 145<i>a</i>. Their localization: -135<i>a</i>, 141<i>c</i>; 153<i>a</i>; 142<i>a</i>, 158<i>a</i>. Their psycho-physical character: 135<i>b</i>, -144<i>b</i>. Thirst and its suggestion: 149<i>c</i>, 159<i>c</i>; 76<i>c</i>; 152<i>b</i>, 135<i>a</i>. Paralyses: -134<i>b</i>; 149<i>c</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 28: her death-swoon occurs on -evening of the Assumption. P. 235: Heat, piercing of the heart as by a -spear, and a spiritual (not bodily) pain, are all united in the experience of -the heart-piercing Angel. P. 423: “Another prayer very common is a -certain kind of wounding; for it really seems to the soul as if an arrow -were thrust through the heart or through itself. The suffering is not one -of sense, nor is the wound physical; it is in the interior of the soul.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 158<i>a</i>; 160<i>a</i>. Cf. St. Teresa, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 41: “We saw something -like a great toad crawling towards us.… The impression it made -on me was such, that I think it must have had a meaning.” Contrast, with -this naïvely sensible sight and the absence of all interior assurance, such -a spiritual vision as “Christ stood before me, stern and grave. I saw Him -with the eyes of the soul. The impression remained with me that the -vision was from God, and not an imagination” (pp. 40, 41). Another -quasi-sensible sight, with no interior assurance, or question as to its -provenance and value, is given on pp. 248, 249: “Once Satan, in an -abominable shape, appeared on my left hand. I looked at his mouth in -particular, because he spoke, and it was horrible. A huge flame seemed -to issue out of his body, perfectly bright without any shadow.” Another -such impression is recorded on p. 252: “I thought the evil spirits would -have suffocated me one night.… I saw a great troop of them rush away -as if tumbling over a precipice.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> <i>Lives of the Saints</i>, ed. 1898, Vol. X, September 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> Pierre Janet, <i>Etat Mental des Hysteriques</i>, 2 vols., Paris, 1892, 1894: -Vol. II, pp. 260, 261; 280; Vol. I, pp. 225, 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Vol. I, pp. 63, 225, 226.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> Pierre Janet, <i>Etat Mental</i>, Vol. I, pp. 226, 227.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Vol. II, pp. 253, 257.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> Pierre Janet, <i>Etat Mental</i>, Vol. I, pp. 7, 8, 11, 12, 57, 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Vol. II, pp. 82, 91; 70, 71.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Vol. II. Troubles of movement, pp. 105, 106; of nutrition, pp. 285, -70, 71; strangulation, heart palpitation, fever heats, p. 282; haemorrhages -and red patches, p. 283; jaundice (<i>ictère emotionnel</i>), p. 287; and note the -“ischurie,” p. 283, top, compared with <i>Vita</i>, p. 12<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> Pierre Janet, <i>Etat Mental</i>, Vol I, p. 140; Vol. II, pp. 14, 72, 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Vol. I, pp. 218, 219; 158, 159.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> The biographical chapters of Volume I give all the facts and -references alluded to in this paragraph. It would be easy to find parallels -for most of these peripheral disturbances and great central normalities -in St. Teresa’s life.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> Prof. W. James has got some very sensible considerations on -the pace of a conversion (as distinct from its spiritual significance, depth, -persistence, and fruitfulness) being primarily a matter of temperament: -<i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, pp. 227-240.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> By the term “visionless,” I do not mean to affirm anything as to the -presence or absence of ideas or mental images during the times so -described, but to register the simple fact, that, for her own memory after -the event, she was, at the time, without any one persistent, external-seeming -image.—Note how St. Ignatius Loyola in his <i>Testament</i>, ed. -London, 1900, pp. 91, 92, considered the profoundest spiritual experience -of his life to have been one unaccompanied or expressed by any -vision: “On his way” to a Church near Manresa, “he sat down facing -the stream, which was running deep. While he was sitting there, the eyes -of his mind were opened,” not so as to see any kind of vision, but “so as -to understand and comprehend spiritual things … with such clearness -that for him all these things were made new. If all the enlightenment -and help he had received from God in the whole course of his life … -were gathered together in one heap, these all would appear less than he -had been given at this one time.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> I would draw the reader’s attention to the very interesting parallels -to many of the above-mentioned peculiarities furnished both by St. -Teresa in her <i>Life</i>, <i>passim</i>, and by Battista Vernazza in the Autobiographical -statements which I have given here in Chapter VIII.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> The omnipresence of neural conditions and consequences for all and -every mental and volitional activity has been admirably brought out by -Prof. W. James, in his <i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, Vol. I, -pp. 1-25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> H. Weinel’s <i>Die Wirkungen des Geistes und der Geister im nachapostolischen -Zeitalter, bis auf Irenäus</i>, 1899, contains an admirably -careful investigation of these things.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> <i>Life</i>, written by herself, ed. cit. pp. 235, 423; 136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 149, 420.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. xxii, 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> It is to Dr. Lightfoot’s fine <i>Excursus in St. Paul’s Epistle to the -Galatians</i>, ed. 1881, pp. 186-191, that I owe all the Pauline texts and -most of the considerations reproduced above.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> Visions of Jahve’s glory: i, 1-28; iii, 22-27 xl, 1; xliv, 4. The five -other Ecstasies and Visions: viii, 1 foll.; xi, 1 foll.; xxiv, 1 foll.; xxxiii, -22; xxxvii, 1 foll. Second Sight: viii, 16; xi, 13; xxiv, 1. Representative -Actions: iv, 1-3, 7; iv, 4-6, 8; iv, 10; ix, 11-15; xii, 1-16; xii, 17-20; -xxi, 11, 12; xxi, 23-32; xxiv, 1-14; xxiv, 15-27; xxxiii, 22; xxxvii, -15-28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> The above translation and interpretation is based upon Krätzschmar’s -admirably psychological commentary, <i>Das Buch Ezechiel</i>, Göttingen, 1900, -pp. v, vi; 45, 49. But I think he is wrong in taking that six months’ -abnormal condition to have given rise, in Ezekiel’s mind, to a belief in a -previous divine order and to an interpretation of this order. All the -strictly analogical cases of religious ecstasy, not hysteria, point to a -strong mental impression, such as that order and belief having preceded -and occasioned the peculiar psycho-physical state.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> <i>Op. cit.</i> pp. 190<i>c</i>; 192<i>c</i>, 193<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> See Prof. W. James’s admirable account of these irruptions in his -<i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, pp. 231-237.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> <i>Life</i>, written by Herself, pp. 190<i>b</i>; 196<i>b</i>; 224<i>c</i>; 295<i>c</i>; 413<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_49_49"><span class="label">[49]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, passim; <i>Life</i>, ed. cit. pp. 40, 41; 408; 206. <i>Vita</i>, pp. 87<i>c</i>, 77<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_50_50"><span class="label">[50]</span></a> <i>Ascent of Mount Carmel</i>, ed. cit. pp. 159, 163; 264, 265, 102, 195; -<i>Spiritual Canticle</i>, ed. cit. p. 238; <i>Ascent</i>, pp. 26, 27; <i>Canticle</i>, pp. 206, -207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_51_51"><span class="label">[51]</span></a> Two Confessors of hers are mentioned by her, <i>Vita</i>, p. 352: Fathers -Henry of Mühlhausen, and Eberhard of the Friars Preachers.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_52_52"><span class="label">[52]</span></a> <i>Analecta</i>, <i>loc. cit.</i> p. 310.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_53_53"><span class="label">[53]</span></a> <i>Analecta</i>, pp. 311-313.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_54_54"><span class="label">[54]</span></a> <i>Analecta</i>, pp. 314, 315.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_55_55"><span class="label">[55]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, <i>loc. cit.</i> pp. 317, 319.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_56_56"><span class="label">[56]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 319, 320.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_57_57"><span class="label">[57]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i>, <i>loc. cit.</i> pp. 327, 334, 352.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_58_58" id="Footnote_58_58"></a><a href="#FNanchor_58_58"><span class="label">[58]</span></a> <i>The Life of Father Hecker</i>, by the Rev. Walter Elliott, New York, -1894, pp. 371, 372, 418.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_59_59" id="Footnote_59_59"></a><a href="#FNanchor_59_59"><span class="label">[59]</span></a> Robert Browning, in <i>Rabbi Ben Ezra</i>, viii; Matthew Arnold, in -<i>Culture and Anarchy</i>, 21; Prof. James Seth, in <i>A Study of Ethical -Principles</i>, 1894, pp. 260-262; and Prof. Percy Gardner, in <i>Oxford at the -Cross Roads</i>, 1903, pp. 12-14, have all admirably insisted upon this most -important point.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_60_60" id="Footnote_60_60"></a><a href="#FNanchor_60_60"><span class="label">[60]</span></a> I owe much clearness of conception as to the function of auto-suggestion -and mono-ideism to the very remarkable paper of Prof. Emil -Boutroux, “La Psychologie du Mysticisme,” in the <i>Bulletin de l’Institut -Psychologique International</i>, Paris, 1902, pp. 9-26: Engl. tr. in the -<i>International Journal of Ethics</i>, Philadelphia, Jan. 1908. There are -also many most useful facts and reflections in Prof. Henri Joly’s -<i>Psychology of the Saints</i>, Engl. tr., 1898, pp. 64-117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_61_61" id="Footnote_61_61"></a><a href="#FNanchor_61_61"><span class="label">[61]</span></a> In Chapter XII, § iv, I shall show reason for strongly suspecting -that Catherine possessed some knowledge, probably derived from an -intermediate Christian source, of certain passages in Plato’s Dialogues. -But the influence of these passages can, in any case, only be traced in -her Purgatorial doctrine, and had better be discussed together with this -doctrine itself.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_62_62" id="Footnote_62_62"></a><a href="#FNanchor_62_62"><span class="label">[62]</span></a> My chief obligations are here to Prof. H. J. Holtzmann’s <i>Lehrbuch -der Neutestamentlichen Theologie</i>, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 1-225: “Der -Paulinismus”; but I have also learnt from Estius and Dr. Lightfoot, and -from my own direct studies in St. Paul, Philo, and Plato.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_63_63" id="Footnote_63_63"></a><a href="#FNanchor_63_63"><span class="label">[63]</span></a> <i>Symposium</i>, 216<i>e</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_64_64" id="Footnote_64_64"></a><a href="#FNanchor_64_64"><span class="label">[64]</span></a> 1 Cor. xv, 35-53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_65_65" id="Footnote_65_65"></a><a href="#FNanchor_65_65"><span class="label">[65]</span></a> E. Grafe, “Verhältniss der paulinischen Schriften zur Sapientia -Salomonis,” in <i>Theol. Abhandlungen Carl von Weizsäcker Gewidmet</i>, -1892, pp. 274-276.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_66_66" id="Footnote_66_66"></a><a href="#FNanchor_66_66"><span class="label">[66]</span></a> “The love of Christ,” Rom. viii, 35, is identical with “the love of -God which is in Christ Jesus,” Rom. viii, 39. “The Spirit of God dwelleth -in you,” Rom. viii, 9; 1 Cor. iii, 16. “I live, not I: but Christ dwelleth -in me,” Gal. ii, 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_67_67" id="Footnote_67_67"></a><a href="#FNanchor_67_67"><span class="label">[67]</span></a> H. J. Holtzmann, <i>op. cit.</i> Vol. II, p. 145.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_68_68" id="Footnote_68_68"></a><a href="#FNanchor_68_68"><span class="label">[68]</span></a> Holtzmann, <i>op. cit.</i> Vol. II, pp. 151, 152.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_69_69" id="Footnote_69_69"></a><a href="#FNanchor_69_69"><span class="label">[69]</span></a> My chief obligations are here again to Dr. H. J. Holtzmann’s -<i>Neutestamentliche Theologie</i>, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 354-390; 394-396; 399-401; -426-430; 447-466; 466-521.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_70_70" id="Footnote_70_70"></a><a href="#FNanchor_70_70"><span class="label">[70]</span></a> I am much indebted to the thorough and convincing monograph of the -Catholic Priest and Professor Dr. Hugo Koch, <i>Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita -in seinen Beziehungen sum Neo-Platonismus und Mysterienwesen</i>, -Mainz, 1900, for a fuller understanding of the relations between Dionysius, -Proclus, and Plotinus. I have also found much help in H. F. Müller’s -admirable German translation of Plotinus, a translation greatly superior -to Thomas Taylor’s English or to Bouillet’s French translation. And I -have greatly benefited by the admirable study of Plotinus in Dr. Edward -Caird’s <i>Evolution of Theology in the Greek Philosophers</i>, 1904, Vol. II, -pp. 210-346.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_71_71" id="Footnote_71_71"></a><a href="#FNanchor_71_71"><span class="label">[71]</span></a> <i>The Divine Names</i>, iii, I; ix, 4: English translation by Parker, -1897, pp. 49, 50; 106.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_72_72" id="Footnote_72_72"></a><a href="#FNanchor_72_72"><span class="label">[72]</span></a> <i>Institutio Theologica</i>, c. 35; c. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_73_73" id="Footnote_73_73"></a><a href="#FNanchor_73_73"><span class="label">[73]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, vi, ch. ix, 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_74_74" id="Footnote_74_74"></a><a href="#FNanchor_74_74"><span class="label">[74]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iii, 1; ix, 4: Parker, pp. 27, 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_75_75" id="Footnote_75_75"></a><a href="#FNanchor_75_75"><span class="label">[75]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, vi, ch. ix, 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_76_76" id="Footnote_76_76"></a><a href="#FNanchor_76_76"><span class="label">[76]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, viii, 7: Parker, pp. 98, 99.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_77_77" id="Footnote_77_77"></a><a href="#FNanchor_77_77"><span class="label">[77]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 47<i>c</i>, 48<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_78_78" id="Footnote_78_78"></a><a href="#FNanchor_78_78"><span class="label">[78]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iii, 1: Parker, pp. 27, 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_79_79" id="Footnote_79_79"></a><a href="#FNanchor_79_79"><span class="label">[79]</span></a> <i>In Platonis Alcibiadem</i>, ii, 78 <i>seq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_80_80" id="Footnote_80_80"></a><a href="#FNanchor_80_80"><span class="label">[80]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iv, 1; iv, 5: Parker, pp. 32, 33; 38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_81_81" id="Footnote_81_81"></a><a href="#FNanchor_81_81"><span class="label">[81]</span></a> <i>In Parmenidem</i>, iv, 34. <i>In Cratylum</i>, pp. 103; 107.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_82_82" id="Footnote_82_82"></a><a href="#FNanchor_82_82"><span class="label">[82]</span></a> <i>Republic</i>, VI, 508<i>c</i>. <i>Theaetetus</i>, 153<i>c</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_83_83" id="Footnote_83_83"></a><a href="#FNanchor_83_83"><span class="label">[83]</span></a> <i>Heavenly Hierarchy</i>, xv, 2: Parker, pp. 56, 57.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_84_84" id="Footnote_84_84"></a><a href="#FNanchor_84_84"><span class="label">[84]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, xi, 1; iv, 2: Parker, pp. 113, 34. <i>Ad Magnesios</i>, viii, 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_85_85" id="Footnote_85_85"></a><a href="#FNanchor_85_85"><span class="label">[85]</span></a> <i>Mystic Theology</i>, iii: Parker, p. 135.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_86_86" id="Footnote_86_86"></a><a href="#FNanchor_86_86"><span class="label">[86]</span></a> <i>Platonic Theology</i>, III, p. 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_87_87" id="Footnote_87_87"></a><a href="#FNanchor_87_87"><span class="label">[87]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, v, ch. v, 8; vi, ch. ix, 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_88_88" id="Footnote_88_88"></a><a href="#FNanchor_88_88"><span class="label">[88]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iv, 8-10: Parker, pp. 42-45. <i>In Parmenidem</i>, vi, 52 -(see Koch, p. 152).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_89_89" id="Footnote_89_89"></a><a href="#FNanchor_89_89"><span class="label">[89]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, i, 1; vii, 3; vii, 1; Mystic Theology, 1; <i>Divine -Names</i>, vii, 3: Parker, pp. 2; 91, 92; 87; 130; 91, 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_90_90" id="Footnote_90_90"></a><a href="#FNanchor_90_90"><span class="label">[90]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iv, 13: Parker, p. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_91_91" id="Footnote_91_91"></a><a href="#FNanchor_91_91"><span class="label">[91]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i> vi, ch. ix, 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_92_92" id="Footnote_92_92"></a><a href="#FNanchor_92_92"><span class="label">[92]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> vi, ch. ix, 8; ch. vi, 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_93_93" id="Footnote_93_93"></a><a href="#FNanchor_93_93"><span class="label">[93]</span></a> Parker, p. 142.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_94_94" id="Footnote_94_94"></a><a href="#FNanchor_94_94"><span class="label">[94]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, vi, ch. vii, 36; v, ch. iii, 17; v, ch. v, 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_95_95" id="Footnote_95_95"></a><a href="#FNanchor_95_95"><span class="label">[95]</span></a> <i>Symposium</i>, 210 E. See the admirable elucidations in Rhode’s <i>Psyche</i>, -ed. 1898, Vol. I, p. 298; Vol. II, pp. 279; 283, 284.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_96_96" id="Footnote_96_96"></a><a href="#FNanchor_96_96"><span class="label">[96]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, i, 5: Parker, p. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_97_97" id="Footnote_97_97"></a><a href="#FNanchor_97_97"><span class="label">[97]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iv, 6; <i>Mystic Theology</i>, i, iii: Parker, pp. 39, 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_98_98" id="Footnote_98_98"></a><a href="#FNanchor_98_98"><span class="label">[98]</span></a> <i>In Alcibiadem</i>, ii, 302.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_99_99" id="Footnote_99_99"></a><a href="#FNanchor_99_99"><span class="label">[99]</span></a> <i>Mystic Theology</i>, iv, v; <i>Divine Names</i> i, 1: Parker, pp. 136, 137; -1; <i>In Alcibiadem</i>, ii, 302.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_100_100" id="Footnote_100_100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_100_100"><span class="label">[100]</span></a> <i>Heavenly Hierarchy</i>, ch. xv, s. 3: Parker, p. 60.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_101_101" id="Footnote_101_101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_101_101"><span class="label">[101]</span></a> <i>In Alcibiadem</i>, iii, 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_102_102" id="Footnote_102_102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_102_102"><span class="label">[102]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, iii, 1: Parker, pp. 27, 28. <i>In Parmenidem</i>, iv, 68.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_103_103" id="Footnote_103_103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_103_103"><span class="label">[103]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, i, 5; <i>Ecclesiastical Hierarchy</i>, i, 2; <i>Divine Names</i>, -ix, 5: Parker, pp. 8, 69, 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_104_104" id="Footnote_104_104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_104_104"><span class="label">[104]</span></a> <i>Institutio Theologica</i>, c. 129.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_105_105" id="Footnote_105_105"></a><a href="#FNanchor_105_105"><span class="label">[105]</span></a> <i>Ecclesiastical Hierarchy</i>, iii, 3, 7: Parker, p. 97.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_106_106" id="Footnote_106_106"></a><a href="#FNanchor_106_106"><span class="label">[106]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, i, 6; viii, 3; 5: Parker, pp. 10, 95, 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_107_107" id="Footnote_107_107"></a><a href="#FNanchor_107_107"><span class="label">[107]</span></a> <i>In Parmenidem</i>, iv, 34; v.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_108_108" id="Footnote_108_108"></a><a href="#FNanchor_108_108"><span class="label">[108]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i> viii, 2; iv, 4; iv, 20: Parker, pp. 95, 84, 57.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_109_109" id="Footnote_109_109"></a><a href="#FNanchor_109_109"><span class="label">[109]</span></a> <i>Laude de lo contemplativo et extatico B. F. Jacopone de lo Ordine -de lo Seraphico S. Francesco.…</i> In Firenze, per Ser Francesco -Bonaccorsi, MCCCCLXXXX. Only the sheets are numbered; and two -Lode have, by mistake, been both numbered LVIII: I have indicated -them by LVIII<i>a</i> and LVIII<i>b</i> respectively. I have much felt the -absence of any monograph on the sources and character of Jacopone’s -doctrine.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_110_110" id="Footnote_110_110"></a><a href="#FNanchor_110_110"><span class="label">[110]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, vi, ch. ix, II.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_111_111" id="Footnote_111_111"></a><a href="#FNanchor_111_111"><span class="label">[111]</span></a> <i>Rabbi Ben Ezra</i>, XXXI.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_112_112" id="Footnote_112_112"></a><a href="#FNanchor_112_112"><span class="label">[112]</span></a> E. Caird, “St. Paul and the Idea of Evolution,” <i>Hibbert Journal</i>, -Vol. II, 1904, pp. 1-19. W. Dilthey has shown this by implication, in his -studies of Erasmus, Luther, and Zwingli: <i>Archiv für Geschichte der -Philosophie</i>, Vol. V, 1892, especially, pp. 381-385.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_113_113" id="Footnote_113_113"></a><a href="#FNanchor_113_113"><span class="label">[113]</span></a> Mark i, 13, and parallels; Matt. xix, 10-12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_114_114" id="Footnote_114_114"></a><a href="#FNanchor_114_114"><span class="label">[114]</span></a> Mark vi, 8; Matt. x, 26-38; viii, 19-22; xiii, 30-32; xxxiv, 42, and -parallels.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_115_115" id="Footnote_115_115"></a><a href="#FNanchor_115_115"><span class="label">[115]</span></a> Matt. vii, 13, 14; xviii, 1-5; xvi, 24-28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_116_116" id="Footnote_116_116"></a><a href="#FNanchor_116_116"><span class="label">[116]</span></a> Mark xiv, 38, and parallels.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_117_117" id="Footnote_117_117"></a><a href="#FNanchor_117_117"><span class="label">[117]</span></a> Rom. vii, 24, 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_118_118" id="Footnote_118_118"></a><a href="#FNanchor_118_118"><span class="label">[118]</span></a> 2 Cor. v, 1-4 = Wisd. of Sol. ix, 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_119_119" id="Footnote_119_119"></a><a href="#FNanchor_119_119"><span class="label">[119]</span></a> See Erwin Rhode’s <i>Psyche</i>, ed. 1898, Vol. II, p. 101, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_120_120" id="Footnote_120_120"></a><a href="#FNanchor_120_120"><span class="label">[120]</span></a> I owe much help towards acquiring this very important conception, -and all the above similes, to Prof. Ernst Troeltsch’s admirable exposition -in his “Grundprobleme der Ethik,” <i>Zeitschrift f. Theologie und Kirche</i>, -1902, pp. 163-178.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_121_121" id="Footnote_121_121"></a><a href="#FNanchor_121_121"><span class="label">[121]</span></a> <i>St. Augustine</i>, ed. Ben., Vol. X, 590<i>b</i>, 613<i>a</i>, 1973<i>c</i>, etc. St. Thomas, -<i>Summa Theol.</i>, suppl., qu. 62, art. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_122_122" id="Footnote_122_122"></a><a href="#FNanchor_122_122"><span class="label">[122]</span></a> My chief authorities throughout this section have been Bossuet’s -<i>Instruction sur les Etats d’Oraison</i> of 1687, with the important documents -prefixed and appended to it (<i>Œuvres de Bossuet</i>, ed. Versailles, 1817, -Vol. XXVII); Fénelon’s chief apologetic works, especially his <i>Instruction -Pastorale</i>, his <i>Letteres en Réponse à Divers Ecrits ou Mémoires</i>, -his <i>Lettre sur l’Etat Passif</i>, and his two Latin Letters to Pope Clement -XI (<i>Œuvres de Fénelon</i>, ed. Versailles, 1820, Vols. IV, VI, VIII, and -IX); and Abbé Gosselin’s admirably clear, impartial, cautious, and -authoritative <i>Analyse de la Controverse du Quiétisme</i>. I have studied -these works, and the condemned propositions of the Beguards, of Molinos, -and of Fénelon, very carefully, and believe myself to have, in my text, -taken up a position identical with M. Gosselin’s.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_123_123" id="Footnote_123_123"></a><a href="#FNanchor_123_123"><span class="label">[123]</span></a> F. C. S. Schiller, Essay “Activity and Substance,” pp. 204-227,—an -admirably thorough piece of work, in <i>Humanism</i>, 1903. See his p. 208.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_124_124" id="Footnote_124_124"></a><a href="#FNanchor_124_124"><span class="label">[124]</span></a> See Heinrich Heppe, <i>Geschichte der Quietistischen Mystik</i>, Berlin, -1875, p. 521. The obviously strong partisan bias of the author against -Rome,—of which more lower down,—does not destroy the great value of -the large collection of now, in many cases, most rare and inaccessible -documents given, often <i>in extenso</i>, in this interesting book.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_125_125" id="Footnote_125_125"></a><a href="#FNanchor_125_125"><span class="label">[125]</span></a> Heppe, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 130-133.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_126_126" id="Footnote_126_126"></a><a href="#FNanchor_126_126"><span class="label">[126]</span></a> There is a good article on Petrucci in the Catholic Freiburg <i>Kirchenlexikon</i>, -2nd ed., 1895; and Heppe, in his <i>Geschichte</i>, pp. 135-144, gives -extracts from his chief book. Bossuet’s attack, <i>Œuvres</i>, ed. 1817, Vol. -XXIX.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_127_127" id="Footnote_127_127"></a><a href="#FNanchor_127_127"><span class="label">[127]</span></a> Reusch, <i>Der Index der verbotenen Bücher</i>, 1885, Vol. II, pp. 611; 622, -623; 625.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_128_128" id="Footnote_128_128"></a><a href="#FNanchor_128_128"><span class="label">[128]</span></a> Gosselin’s <i>Analyse, Œuvres de Fénelon</i>, ed. cit. Vol. IV, pp. xci-xcv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_129_129" id="Footnote_129_129"></a><a href="#FNanchor_129_129"><span class="label">[129]</span></a> Fénelon, <i>Explication … des Propositions de Molinos</i> (<i>Œuvres</i>, Vol. -IV, pp. 25-86). Gosselin, <i>Analyse</i> (<i>ibid.</i> pp. ccxvi-ccxxiii).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_130_130" id="Footnote_130_130"></a><a href="#FNanchor_130_130"><span class="label">[130]</span></a> <i>Œuvres de Fénelon</i>, Vol. VIII, pp. 6, 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_131_131" id="Footnote_131_131"></a><a href="#FNanchor_131_131"><span class="label">[131]</span></a> Heppe, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 62. Reusch, <i>op. cit.</i> Vol. II, pp. 619, 620.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_132_132" id="Footnote_132_132"></a><a href="#FNanchor_132_132"><span class="label">[132]</span></a> I write with these approbations before me, as reprinted in the <i>Recueil -de Diverses Pièces concernant le Quiétisme</i>, Amsterdam, 1688.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_133_133" id="Footnote_133_133"></a><a href="#FNanchor_133_133"><span class="label">[133]</span></a> <i>Œuvres de Bossuet</i>, ed. 1817, Vol. XXVII, pp. 497-502. Heppe, <i>op. -cit.</i> pp. 27<i>g</i> n.; 273-281. Denzinger, <i>Encheiridion</i>, ed. 1888, pp. 266-274.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_134_134" id="Footnote_134_134"></a><a href="#FNanchor_134_134"><span class="label">[134]</span></a> Reusch, <i>op. cit.</i> Vol. II, p. 618 <i>n.</i> 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_135_135" id="Footnote_135_135"></a><a href="#FNanchor_135_135"><span class="label">[135]</span></a> See Heppe, p. 264, n.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_136_136" id="Footnote_136_136"></a><a href="#FNanchor_136_136"><span class="label">[136]</span></a> <i>Recueil de Diverses Pièces</i>, pp. 61, 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_137_137" id="Footnote_137_137"></a><a href="#FNanchor_137_137"><span class="label">[137]</span></a> <i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, pp. 209, 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_138_138" id="Footnote_138_138"></a><a href="#FNanchor_138_138"><span class="label">[138]</span></a> <i>De Beatitudine</i>, c. 3, 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_139_139" id="Footnote_139_139"></a><a href="#FNanchor_139_139"><span class="label">[139]</span></a> I have been much helped in my own direct studies of the sources by -W. Bousset’s <i>Die Religion des Judenthums im Neutestamentlichen Zeitalter</i>, -1903; by H. J. Holtzmann’s <i>Neutestamentliche Theologie</i>, 1897; and A. -Jülicher’s <i>Gleichnissreden Jesu</i>, Theil 2, 1899.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_140_140" id="Footnote_140_140"></a><a href="#FNanchor_140_140"><span class="label">[140]</span></a> Bousset, pp. 395, 396.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_141_141" id="Footnote_141_141"></a><a href="#FNanchor_141_141"><span class="label">[141]</span></a> Ch. xii, 8, 9; see too ch. ii, 2, 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_142_142" id="Footnote_142_142"></a><a href="#FNanchor_142_142"><span class="label">[142]</span></a> Pirke Aboth, v, 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_143_143" id="Footnote_143_143"></a><a href="#FNanchor_143_143"><span class="label">[143]</span></a> Matt. v, 12; vi, 4, 6, 18, 20; Mark x, 21; ix, 41; Luke x, 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_144_144" id="Footnote_144_144"></a><a href="#FNanchor_144_144"><span class="label">[144]</span></a> Matt. v, 7; vi, 14; xviii, 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_145_145" id="Footnote_145_145"></a><a href="#FNanchor_145_145"><span class="label">[145]</span></a> Matt. v, 5; Luke xiv, 8-11; Matt. x, 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_146_146" id="Footnote_146_146"></a><a href="#FNanchor_146_146"><span class="label">[146]</span></a> Matt. v, 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_147_147" id="Footnote_147_147"></a><a href="#FNanchor_147_147"><span class="label">[147]</span></a> Matt. x, 41, 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_148_148" id="Footnote_148_148"></a><a href="#FNanchor_148_148"><span class="label">[148]</span></a> Matt. xix, 29; Mark x, 23; Luke vi, 38; Matt, xxii, 12; xxv, 21; -xxiv, 47; Luke xii, 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_149_149" id="Footnote_149_149"></a><a href="#FNanchor_149_149"><span class="label">[149]</span></a> Interesting reasons and parallels for holding the Wedding Garment -to have been the gift of the King, in Bugge’s <i>Die Haupt-Parabeln Jesu</i>, -1900, pp. 316, 317.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_150_150" id="Footnote_150_150"></a><a href="#FNanchor_150_150"><span class="label">[150]</span></a> Jülicher, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 467. Bugge, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 277.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_151_151" id="Footnote_151_151"></a><a href="#FNanchor_151_151"><span class="label">[151]</span></a> Matt. vi, 1, 2, 5, 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_152_152" id="Footnote_152_152"></a><a href="#FNanchor_152_152"><span class="label">[152]</span></a> Matt. vi, 11; xx, 14; Luke xvii, 10; Matt. vi, 33; v, 48, 44, 45; Luke -vii, 47. It seems plain that the Parable of the Two Debtors, which -appears in this last passage, declares how pardon awakens love; and -that the sinful woman’s act and Our Lord’s direct comment on it, which -are now made to serve as that Parable’s frame, demonstrate how love -produces pardon. In my text I have been busy only with the second of -these twin truths.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_153_153" id="Footnote_153_153"></a><a href="#FNanchor_153_153"><span class="label">[153]</span></a> Luke vi, 33, 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_154_154" id="Footnote_154_154"></a><a href="#FNanchor_154_154"><span class="label">[154]</span></a> Rom. ii, 6; 2 Cor. v, 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_155_155" id="Footnote_155_155"></a><a href="#FNanchor_155_155"><span class="label">[155]</span></a> 1 Cor. xv, 19, 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_156_156" id="Footnote_156_156"></a><a href="#FNanchor_156_156"><span class="label">[156]</span></a> Gal. iii, 19; 2 Cor. iv, 16; xii, 9; Rom. viii, 31, 35, 37-39; xiv, 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_157_157" id="Footnote_157_157"></a><a href="#FNanchor_157_157"><span class="label">[157]</span></a> Ps. lxxiii (lxii), v. 25. I follow Duhm’s restoration of the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_158_158" id="Footnote_158_158"></a><a href="#FNanchor_158_158"><span class="label">[158]</span></a> 1 Cor. xiii, 13; 8, 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_159_159" id="Footnote_159_159"></a><a href="#FNanchor_159_159"><span class="label">[159]</span></a> <i>Œuvres</i>, ed. Versailles, 1820, Vols. IV to IX.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_160_160" id="Footnote_160_160"></a><a href="#FNanchor_160_160"><span class="label">[160]</span></a> <i>Réponse: Œuvres</i>, Vol. IV, pp. 119-132; <i>Instruction: ibid.</i> pp. -181-308: <i>Lettre sur l’Oraison</i>, Vol. VIII, pp. 3-82; <i>Lettre sur la -Charité</i>, Vol IX, pp. 3-56; <i>Epistola II, ibid.</i> pp. 617-677.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_161_161" id="Footnote_161_161"></a><a href="#FNanchor_161_161"><span class="label">[161]</span></a> <i>The Spiritual Letters of Fénelon</i>, London, 1892, Vol. I, pp. xi, xii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_162_162" id="Footnote_162_162"></a><a href="#FNanchor_162_162"><span class="label">[162]</span></a> <i>Œuvres de Fénelon</i>, ed. 1820, Vol. IV, pp. lxxix-ccxxxiv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_163_163" id="Footnote_163_163"></a><a href="#FNanchor_163_163"><span class="label">[163]</span></a> <i>Summa Theologica</i>, II, ii, qu. 17, art. 8, in corp.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_164_164" id="Footnote_164_164"></a><a href="#FNanchor_164_164"><span class="label">[164]</span></a> Comment in II, ii, qu. 23, art. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_165_165" id="Footnote_165_165"></a><a href="#FNanchor_165_165"><span class="label">[165]</span></a> <i>Summa</i>, II, ii, qu. 23, art. 6, concl., et in corp.; I, ii, qu. 28, art. 1, in -corp., et ad 2. See also II, ii, qu. 17, art. 6, in corp.; qu. 28, art. 1 ad 3; -I, ii, qu. 28, art. 1, in corp., et ad 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_166_166" id="Footnote_166_166"></a><a href="#FNanchor_166_166"><span class="label">[166]</span></a> In Libr. sent. II, dist. 30, qu. 1 ad 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_167_167" id="Footnote_167_167"></a><a href="#FNanchor_167_167"><span class="label">[167]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, III, qu. 85, art. 2 ad 1; I, ii, qu. 114, art. 4, in corp. -In Libr. sent. III, dist. 30, art. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_168_168" id="Footnote_168_168"></a><a href="#FNanchor_168_168"><span class="label">[168]</span></a> Some of the finest descriptions of these profoundly organized states -common, in some degrees and forms, to all mankind, are to be found in -the tenth and eleventh books of St. Augustine’s <i>Confessions</i>, <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span> 397, and -in Henri Bergson’s <i>Essai sur les Données Immédiates de la Conscience</i>, -1898.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_169_169" id="Footnote_169_169"></a><a href="#FNanchor_169_169"><span class="label">[169]</span></a> <i>Stromata</i>, Book IV, ch. vi, 30, 1; ch. iv, 15, 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_170_170" id="Footnote_170_170"></a><a href="#FNanchor_170_170"><span class="label">[170]</span></a> Proemium in <i>Reg. Fus. Tract.</i> n. 3, Vol. II, pp. 329, 330.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_171_171" id="Footnote_171_171"></a><a href="#FNanchor_171_171"><span class="label">[171]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, II, ii, qu. 27, art. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_172_172" id="Footnote_172_172"></a><a href="#FNanchor_172_172"><span class="label">[172]</span></a> The obligation for all of acts of Pure Love is clearly taught by the -condemnations, passed by Popes Alexander VII and Innocent XI, upon -the opposite contention, in 1665 and 1679: “Homo nullo unquam vitae -suae tempore tenetur elicere actum Fidei, Spei et Charitatis, ex vi praeceptorum -divinorum ad eas virtutes pertinentium.” Note here how “Charitas” -necessarily means Pure Love, since Imperfect Love has already been -mentioned in “Spes.”—“Probabile est, ne singulis quidem rigorose quinquenniis -per se obligare praeceptum charitatis erga Deum. Tune solum -obligat, quando tenemur justificari et non habemus aliam viam qua -justificari possumus.” Here Pure Love is undoubtedly meant by -“Charitas,” since, outside of the use of the sacraments, Pure Love alone -justifies.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_173_173" id="Footnote_173_173"></a><a href="#FNanchor_173_173"><span class="label">[173]</span></a> <i>The Problem of Conduct</i>, 1901, p. 329, n.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_174_174" id="Footnote_174_174"></a><a href="#FNanchor_174_174"><span class="label">[174]</span></a> <i>Life, written by Herself</i>, ch. XXII, tr. by David Lewis, ed. 1888, -pp. 162-174.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_175_175" id="Footnote_175_175"></a><a href="#FNanchor_175_175"><span class="label">[175]</span></a> Deharbe, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 139-179, has an admirable exposition and proof -of this point, backed up by conclusive experiences and analyses of Saints -and Schoolmen.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_176_176" id="Footnote_176_176"></a><a href="#FNanchor_176_176"><span class="label">[176]</span></a> See Deharbe’s excellent remarks, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 109, 110, n.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_177_177" id="Footnote_177_177"></a><a href="#FNanchor_177_177"><span class="label">[177]</span></a> <i>Analyse</i>, <i>loc. cit.</i> pp. cxxii, cxxiii, <i>Lettre sur l’Oraison Passive</i>, -<i>Œuvres</i>, Vol. VIII, p. 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_178_178" id="Footnote_178_178"></a><a href="#FNanchor_178_178"><span class="label">[178]</span></a> <i>Analyse</i>, p. cxxiii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_179_179" id="Footnote_179_179"></a><a href="#FNanchor_179_179"><span class="label">[179]</span></a> <i>Lettre sur l’Oraison Passive</i>, <i>Œuvres</i>, Vol. VIII, pp. 10; 18, 11, 12; -14, 15; 74.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_180_180" id="Footnote_180_180"></a><a href="#FNanchor_180_180"><span class="label">[180]</span></a> <i>Tractatus Theologico-Politicus</i>, c. iv, opening of par. 4, ed. Van -Vloten et Land, 1895, Vol. II, p. 4; <i>ibid.</i> middle of par. 3, p. 3; <i>Ethica</i>, -p. v, prop. xli, <i>ibid.</i> Vol. I, p. 264; <i>ibid.</i> <i>Scholion</i>, p. 265; <i>ibid.</i> prop. -xix, p. 251; <i>ibid.</i> prop. xx, p. 251; <i>ibid.</i> prop. xlii, p. 265; <i>ibid.</i> prop. -xxxvi, p. 261.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_181_181" id="Footnote_181_181"></a><a href="#FNanchor_181_181"><span class="label">[181]</span></a> <i>Die Philosophischen Schriften von Leibniz</i>, ed. Gebhardt, Vol. VI, -1885, pp. 605, 606; and quotation in Gosselin’s <i>Analyse, Œuvres de -Fénelon</i>, 1820, Vol. IV, pp. clxxviii, clxxvii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_182_182" id="Footnote_182_182"></a><a href="#FNanchor_182_182"><span class="label">[182]</span></a> It is to Schweizer’s admirable monograph, <i>Die Religions-Philosophie -Kant’s</i>, 1899, pp. 4-70, that I owe my clear apprehension of this very -interesting doubleness in Kant’s outlook.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_183_183" id="Footnote_183_183"></a><a href="#FNanchor_183_183"><span class="label">[183]</span></a> <i>Loc. cit.</i> pp. 611, 614, 615, 616.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_184_184" id="Footnote_184_184"></a><a href="#FNanchor_184_184"><span class="label">[184]</span></a> Kant’s <i>Werke</i>, ed. Berlin Academy, Vol. IV, 1903, pp. 393, 394; 396.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_185_185" id="Footnote_185_185"></a><a href="#FNanchor_185_185"><span class="label">[185]</span></a> Kant, 1904, p. 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_186_186" id="Footnote_186_186"></a><a href="#FNanchor_186_186"><span class="label">[186]</span></a> <i>The Problem of Conduct</i>, pp. 336, 337; 329.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_187_187" id="Footnote_187_187"></a><a href="#FNanchor_187_187"><span class="label">[187]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 327.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_188_188" id="Footnote_188_188"></a><a href="#FNanchor_188_188"><span class="label">[188]</span></a> See James Seth, <i>A Study of Ethical Principles</i>, 1894, pp. 193-236, -where this position, denominated there “Eudaemonism,” is contrasted with -“Hedonism,” uniquely or at least predominantly occupied with the act’s -sensational materials or concomitances, and “Rigorism,” with its one-sided -insistence upon the rational form and end of action.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_189_189" id="Footnote_189_189"></a><a href="#FNanchor_189_189"><span class="label">[189]</span></a> Taylor, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 901.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_190_190" id="Footnote_190_190"></a><a href="#FNanchor_190_190"><span class="label">[190]</span></a> <i>Seconde Lettre à Monsieur de Paris, Œuvres</i>, Vol. V, pp. 268, 269. -<i>Lettres de M. de Cambrai à un de ses Amis, ibid.</i>, Vol. IV, p. 168.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_191_191" id="Footnote_191_191"></a><a href="#FNanchor_191_191"><span class="label">[191]</span></a> Chantepie de la Saussaye, <i>Lehrbuch der Religions-Geschichte</i>, ed. -1905, Vol. I, pp. 69, 73-83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_192_192" id="Footnote_192_192"></a><a href="#FNanchor_192_192"><span class="label">[192]</span></a> Chantepie de la Saussaye, <i>Lehrbuch der Religions-Geschichte</i>, ed. -1887, Vol. I, pp. 248, 249.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_193_193" id="Footnote_193_193"></a><a href="#FNanchor_193_193"><span class="label">[193]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 358, 373.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_194_194" id="Footnote_194_194"></a><a href="#FNanchor_194_194"><span class="label">[194]</span></a> Oldenberg, <i>Buddha</i>, ed. 1897, pp. 310-328; especially 313, 314; 316, -317; 327, 328.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_195_195" id="Footnote_195_195"></a><a href="#FNanchor_195_195"><span class="label">[195]</span></a> My chief authority here has been that astonishingly living and many-sided -book, Erwin Rhode’s <i>Psyche</i>, ed. 1898, especially Vol. II, pp. 263-295 -(Plato); Vol. I, pp. 14-90 (Homer); 91-110 (Hesiod); pp. 146-199 -(the Heroes); pp. 279-319, and Vol. II, pp. 1-136 (Eleusinian Mysteries, -Dionysian Religion, the Orphics). The culminating interest of this great -work lies in this last treble section and in the Plato part.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_196_196" id="Footnote_196_196"></a><a href="#FNanchor_196_196"><span class="label">[196]</span></a> <i>Psyche</i>, Vol. I, pp. 308, 312. <i>New Chapters in Greek History</i>, 1892, -pp. 333, 334.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_197_197" id="Footnote_197_197"></a><a href="#FNanchor_197_197"><span class="label">[197]</span></a> See also the important study of the Abbé Touzard, <i>Le Développement -de la Doctrine de l’Immortalité, Revue Biblique</i>, 1898, pp. 207-241.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_198_198" id="Footnote_198_198"></a><a href="#FNanchor_198_198"><span class="label">[198]</span></a> Charles, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 52, 53; 58; 61; 84; 124, 125; 126-132; 68-77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_199_199" id="Footnote_199_199"></a><a href="#FNanchor_199_199"><span class="label">[199]</span></a> B. Stade, <i>Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments</i>, Vol. I, 1905, -p. 184.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_200_200" id="Footnote_200_200"></a><a href="#FNanchor_200_200"><span class="label">[200]</span></a> <i>L’Automatisme Psychologique</i>, ed. 1903, p. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_201_201" id="Footnote_201_201"></a><a href="#FNanchor_201_201"><span class="label">[201]</span></a> W. James, <i>The Principles of Psychology</i>, 1891, Vol. II, pp. 442-467.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_202_202" id="Footnote_202_202"></a><a href="#FNanchor_202_202"><span class="label">[202]</span></a> See Prof. James Ward’s closely knit proof in his <i>Naturalism and -Agnosticism</i>, 2nd ed., 1905, and his striking address, “Mechanism and -Morals,” <i>Hibbert Journal</i>, October, 1905.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_203_203" id="Footnote_203_203"></a><a href="#FNanchor_203_203"><span class="label">[203]</span></a> “The Desire for Immortality,” in <i>Humanism</i> 1903, pp. 228-249.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_204_204" id="Footnote_204_204"></a><a href="#FNanchor_204_204"><span class="label">[204]</span></a> <i>Op. cit.</i> Lib. XVIII, c. x, ed. 1559, fol. 3413.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_205_205" id="Footnote_205_205"></a><a href="#FNanchor_205_205"><span class="label">[205]</span></a> Neither she nor her friends can have derived these doctrines from -Ficino’s <i>Theologia Platonica</i>, Florence, 1482, since precisely the points -in question are quite curiously absent from, or barely recognizable in, that -book. See its cc. x and xi, Book XVIII, on “the State of the Impure -Soul” and “the State of the Imperfect Soul” respectively: ed. 1559, fol. -340, <i>v. seq.</i> See also foll. 318<i>r</i>, 319<i>v</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_206_206" id="Footnote_206_206"></a><a href="#FNanchor_206_206"><span class="label">[206]</span></a> <i>Phaedo</i>, 81<i>a</i>-82<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_207_207" id="Footnote_207_207"></a><a href="#FNanchor_207_207"><span class="label">[207]</span></a> <i>Laws</i>, X, 904<i>a-e</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_208_208" id="Footnote_208_208"></a><a href="#FNanchor_208_208"><span class="label">[208]</span></a> <i>Timaeus</i>, 41<i>d</i>, <i>e</i>; 42<i>b</i>, <i>d</i>, I have, for clearness’ sake, turned Plato’s -indirect sentences into direct ones; and have taken the <i>Timaeus</i> after -the <i>Laws</i>, although it is chronologically prior to them, because the full -balance of his system, (which requires the originally lofty “place” of -each individual soul),—is, I think, abandoned in the <i>Laws</i>: see 904<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_209_209" id="Footnote_209_209"></a><a href="#FNanchor_209_209"><span class="label">[209]</span></a> These four passages are all within pp. 110<i>b</i>-114<i>d</i> of the <i>Phaedo</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_210_210" id="Footnote_210_210"></a><a href="#FNanchor_210_210"><span class="label">[210]</span></a> <i>Gorgias</i>, pp. 525<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>; 526<i>c</i>, <i>d</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_211_211" id="Footnote_211_211"></a><a href="#FNanchor_211_211"><span class="label">[211]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 523<i>b-e</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_212_212" id="Footnote_212_212"></a><a href="#FNanchor_212_212"><span class="label">[212]</span></a> 2 Cor. v, 2, 3.—<i>Vita</i>, pp. 109<i>b</i>, 66<i>a</i>, 171<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_213_213" id="Footnote_213_213"></a><a href="#FNanchor_213_213"><span class="label">[213]</span></a> <i>Republic</i>, X, pp. 617<i>e</i>, 619<i>e</i>, 920<i>e</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_214_214" id="Footnote_214_214"></a><a href="#FNanchor_214_214"><span class="label">[214]</span></a> <i>Phaedrus</i>, p. 249<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_215_215" id="Footnote_215_215"></a><a href="#FNanchor_215_215"><span class="label">[215]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, III, 4, 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_216_216" id="Footnote_216_216"></a><a href="#FNanchor_216_216"><span class="label">[216]</span></a> Enarr. in Ps. xxxvi, § 1, n. 10, ed. Ben., col. 375<i>b</i>. See also <i>Enchiridion</i>, -CIX, <i>ibid.</i> col. 402<i>d</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_217_217" id="Footnote_217_217"></a><a href="#FNanchor_217_217"><span class="label">[217]</span></a> So in the <i>De Civitate Dei</i>, Lib. XXI, c. xxvi, n. 4, <i>ibid.</i> col. 1037<i>d</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_218_218" id="Footnote_218_218"></a><a href="#FNanchor_218_218"><span class="label">[218]</span></a> <i>Confess.</i>, Lib. I, c. 2, n. 1; X, c. 26; XIII, c. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_219_219" id="Footnote_219_219"></a><a href="#FNanchor_219_219"><span class="label">[219]</span></a> <i>De Genesi ad litt.</i>, Lib. VIII, n. 39, ed. Ben. col. 387<i>b</i>; n. 43, col. -389<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_220_220" id="Footnote_220_220"></a><a href="#FNanchor_220_220"><span class="label">[220]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> Lib. XII, n. 32, col. 507<i>c</i>. He soon after attempts to decide in -favour of “incorporeal places,” as the other-world destination of all -classes of human souls.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_221_221" id="Footnote_221_221"></a><a href="#FNanchor_221_221"><span class="label">[221]</span></a> Esra IV, iv, 35. See also iv, 41; vii, 32, 80, 95, 101. Apocalypse of -Baruch, xxx, 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_222_222" id="Footnote_222_222"></a><a href="#FNanchor_222_222"><span class="label">[222]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i> suppl., qu. 69, art. 1, in corp. et ad 3; art. 6, in corp.; -Appendix de Purgat., art. 2, in corp.; suppl., qu. 69, art 7 concl.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_223_223" id="Footnote_223_223"></a><a href="#FNanchor_223_223"><span class="label">[223]</span></a> <i>De gratia primi hominis</i>, XIV.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_224_224" id="Footnote_224_224"></a><a href="#FNanchor_224_224"><span class="label">[224]</span></a> Clemens, <i>Stromata</i>, VII, 6. Origen, <i>De Princ.</i>, II, 10, 4. St. Greg. -Nyss., <i>Orat.</i>, XL, 36. St. Greg. Nazianz., <i>Poema de Seipso</i>, I, 546. St. -Joann. Damasc., <i>De Fide Orthod.</i>, cap. ult.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_225_225" id="Footnote_225_225"></a><a href="#FNanchor_225_225"><span class="label">[225]</span></a> St. Ambros., <i>In Lucam</i>, VII, 205. St. Hieron., Ep. 124, 7; <i>Apol. -contra Ruf.</i>, II; in Isa. lxv, 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_226_226" id="Footnote_226_226"></a><a href="#FNanchor_226_226"><span class="label">[226]</span></a> <i>Liber de Fide</i> (413 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>), 27, 29; ed. Ben., coll. 313<i>b</i>, 314<i>c</i>. <i>De octo -Dulcit. quaestm</i> (422 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>) 12, 13; <i>ibid.</i> coll. 219<i>d</i>, 220<i>a</i>. Repeated in -<i>Enchiridion</i> (423 <span class="smcapuc">A.D.</span>?), LXIX; <i>ibid.</i> col. 382<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_227_227" id="Footnote_227_227"></a><a href="#FNanchor_227_227"><span class="label">[227]</span></a> <i>De Purgatorio</i>, II, 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_228_228" id="Footnote_228_228"></a><a href="#FNanchor_228_228"><span class="label">[228]</span></a> Denzinger, <i>Enchiridion</i>, ed. 1888, No. LXXIII.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_229_229" id="Footnote_229_229"></a><a href="#FNanchor_229_229"><span class="label">[229]</span></a> <i>Theol. Dogm.</i>, Vol. II, num. 206.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_230_230" id="Footnote_230_230"></a><a href="#FNanchor_230_230"><span class="label">[230]</span></a> <i>Œuvres</i>, ed. Versailles, 1816, Vol. XI, p. 376.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_231_231" id="Footnote_231_231"></a><a href="#FNanchor_231_231"><span class="label">[231]</span></a> <i>Le feu du Purgatoire est-il un feu corporel? op. cit.</i>, 1902, pp. 263-282; -270. I owe most of my references on this point to this paper.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_232_232" id="Footnote_232_232"></a><a href="#FNanchor_232_232"><span class="label">[232]</span></a> <i>Sixteen Revelations of Mother Juliana of Norwich</i>, 1373, ed. 1902, -pp. 73, 74, 78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_233_233" id="Footnote_233_233"></a><a href="#FNanchor_233_233"><span class="label">[233]</span></a> <i>Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life</i>, 1899, pp. 63, 64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_234_234" id="Footnote_234_234"></a><a href="#FNanchor_234_234"><span class="label">[234]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, ch. iv, secs, xxiii, xxiv: Parker, pp. 61-64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_235_235" id="Footnote_235_235"></a><a href="#FNanchor_235_235"><span class="label">[235]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 173<i>b</i>; 33<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_236_236" id="Footnote_236_236"></a><a href="#FNanchor_236_236"><span class="label">[236]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, suppl., qu. 69, art. 7 ad 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_237_237" id="Footnote_237_237"></a><a href="#FNanchor_237_237"><span class="label">[237]</span></a> Dionysius, <i>Divine Names</i>, ch. iv, sec. xxiii: Parker, p. 63. St. -Thomas, <i>Summa Theol.</i>, suppl., qu. 98, art. 1, in corp.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_238_238" id="Footnote_238_238"></a><a href="#FNanchor_238_238"><span class="label">[238]</span></a> <i>Enchiridion</i>, CX, ed. Ben., col. 403<i>c</i>; CXII, col. 404<i>c</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_239_239" id="Footnote_239_239"></a><a href="#FNanchor_239_239"><span class="label">[239]</span></a> The passages here referred to will be found carefully quoted and discussed -in Petavius’s great <i>Dogmata Theologica, De Angelis</i>, III, viii, -16, 17, with Zaccaria’s important note (ed. Fournials, 1866, Vol. IV, -pp. 119-121).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_240_240" id="Footnote_240_240"></a><a href="#FNanchor_240_240"><span class="label">[240]</span></a> <i>Dogmata Theologica</i>, Vol. IV, p. 120<i>b</i>. See also the interesting note -in the Benedictine Edition of <i>St. Augustine</i>, Vol. VI, col. 403.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_241_241" id="Footnote_241_241"></a><a href="#FNanchor_241_241"><span class="label">[241]</span></a> <i>Vie de M. Emery</i>, by M. Gosselin, Paris, 1862, Vol. II, pp. 322-324.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_242_242" id="Footnote_242_242"></a><a href="#FNanchor_242_242"><span class="label">[242]</span></a> <i>Vita</i> (<i>Trattato</i>), p. 173<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_243_243" id="Footnote_243_243"></a><a href="#FNanchor_243_243"><span class="label">[243]</span></a> So Atzberger, in Scheeben’s <i>Dogmatik</i>, Vol. IV (1903), p. 826.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_244_244" id="Footnote_244_244"></a><a href="#FNanchor_244_244"><span class="label">[244]</span></a> <i>Enigmas of Life</i>, ed. 1892, p. 255.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_245_245" id="Footnote_245_245"></a><a href="#FNanchor_245_245"><span class="label">[245]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, ch. iv, secs. 23, 24: Parker, pp, 70, 71.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_246_246" id="Footnote_246_246"></a><a href="#FNanchor_246_246"><span class="label">[246]</span></a> 2 Cor. iv, 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_247_247" id="Footnote_247_247"></a><a href="#FNanchor_247_247"><span class="label">[247]</span></a> See H. J. Holtzmann, Richard Rothe’s <i>Speculatives System</i>, 1899, -pp. 110, 111; 123, 124;—Georg Class, <i>Phänomenologie und Ontologie des -Menschlichen Geistes</i>, 1896, pp. 220, 221;—and that strange mixture of -stimulating thought, deep earnestness, and fantastic prejudice, Edward -White’s <i>Life of Christ</i>, ed. 1876.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_248_248" id="Footnote_248_248"></a><a href="#FNanchor_248_248"><span class="label">[248]</span></a> <i>Grammar of Assent</i>, 1870, p. 417. <i>Hard Sayings</i>, 1898, p. 113.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_249_249" id="Footnote_249_249"></a><a href="#FNanchor_249_249"><span class="label">[249]</span></a> G. E. Lessing, “Leibniz von den Ewigen Strafen,” in Lessing’s -<i>Sämmtliche Werke</i>, ed. Lachmann-Muncker, 1895, Vol. XI, p. 486. D. F. -Strauss, <i>Die christliche Glaubenslehre</i>, 1841, Vol. II, pp. 684, 685. Carl -von Hase, <i>Handbuch der protestantischen Polemik</i>, ed. 1864, p. 422. -G. T. Fechner, <i>Die drei Gründe und Motive des Glaubens</i>, 1863, pp. 146, -147, 177. G. Anrich, “Clemens und Origenes, als Begründer der Lehre -vom Fegfeuer,” in <i>Theologische Abhandlungen für H. J. Holtzmann</i>, -1902, p. 120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_250_250" id="Footnote_250_250"></a><a href="#FNanchor_250_250"><span class="label">[250]</span></a> W. R. Greg, <i>Enigmas of Life</i>, ed. 1892, pp. 256, 257, 259. J. S. -Mill, <i>Three Essays on Religion</i>, ed. 1874, p. 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_251_251" id="Footnote_251_251"></a><a href="#FNanchor_251_251"><span class="label">[251]</span></a> Sess. XXV, Decret. de Purgatorio, med.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_252_252" id="Footnote_252_252"></a><a href="#FNanchor_252_252"><span class="label">[252]</span></a> N. Paulus, <i>Johann Tetzel</i> 1899. Brieger’s review, <i>Theologische -Literatur-Zeitung</i>, 1900, coll. 117, 118.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_253_253" id="Footnote_253_253"></a><a href="#FNanchor_253_253"><span class="label">[253]</span></a> 1 Cor. xv, 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_254_254" id="Footnote_254_254"></a><a href="#FNanchor_254_254"><span class="label">[254]</span></a> <i>De Corona</i>, III, IV. See M. Salomon Reinach’s interesting paper, -“l’Origine des Prières pour les Morts,” in <i>Cultes, Mythes, et Religions</i>, -1905, pp. 316-331.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_255_255" id="Footnote_255_255"></a><a href="#FNanchor_255_255"><span class="label">[255]</span></a> W. Bacher, <i>Die Agada der palästinensischen Amoräer</i>, Vol. I, 1892, -p. 331.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_256_256" id="Footnote_256_256"></a><a href="#FNanchor_256_256"><span class="label">[256]</span></a> <i>Strom.</i>, VII, 26 (Migne, <i>Ser. Graec</i>, Vol. IX, col. 541); I, 26 (<i>ibid.</i> -Vol. VIII, col. 916); VII, 26 (<i>ibid.</i> Vol. IX, col. 540).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_257_257" id="Footnote_257_257"></a><a href="#FNanchor_257_257"><span class="label">[257]</span></a> <i>De Princ.</i>, II, 10, 6. <i>De Orat.</i>, XXIX, p. 263.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_258_258" id="Footnote_258_258"></a><a href="#FNanchor_258_258"><span class="label">[258]</span></a> <i>Paedag.</i>, I, 8, p. 51; and Plato, <i>Gorgias</i>, p. 477<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_259_259" id="Footnote_259_259"></a><a href="#FNanchor_259_259"><span class="label">[259]</span></a> I owe here almost everything to the truly classical account in Rhode’s -<i>Psyche</i>, ed. 1898, Vol. II, pp. 1-136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_260_260" id="Footnote_260_260"></a><a href="#FNanchor_260_260"><span class="label">[260]</span></a> <i>Republic</i> II, p. 364<i>b</i>, <i>c</i>, <i>e</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_261_261" id="Footnote_261_261"></a><a href="#FNanchor_261_261"><span class="label">[261]</span></a> I take these passages from Anrich’s <i>Clemens und Origenes, op. cit.</i> -p. 102, n. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_262_262" id="Footnote_262_262"></a><a href="#FNanchor_262_262"><span class="label">[262]</span></a> Clemens, <i>Strom.</i>, V, 3, p. 236. Origen, <i>Contra Cels.</i>, VII, 13. Clemens, -<i>Strom.</i>, IV, 24. Origen, <i>Contra Cels.</i>, IV, 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_263_263" id="Footnote_263_263"></a><a href="#FNanchor_263_263"><span class="label">[263]</span></a> Dionysius, <i>Divine Names</i>, ch. iv, sec. 24: Parker, p. 64. St. Thomas, -<i>Summa Theol.</i> I, ii, qu. 86, art. 1 ad 3 et concl.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_264_264" id="Footnote_264_264"></a><a href="#FNanchor_264_264"><span class="label">[264]</span></a> <i>Treatise on Purgatory</i>, by St. Catherine of Genoa, ed. 1880, p. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_265_265" id="Footnote_265_265"></a><a href="#FNanchor_265_265"><span class="label">[265]</span></a> Plato, <i>Cratylus</i>, p. 400<i>c</i>. <i>Republic</i>, II, p. 364<i>e</i>. Euripides, <i>Orestes</i> -XXX, <i>seq.</i>, with Schol. Rhode, <i>op. cit.</i> Vol. II, p. 101, n. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_266_266" id="Footnote_266_266"></a><a href="#FNanchor_266_266"><span class="label">[266]</span></a> <i>Natur. quaest.</i> III, 28, 7; 30, 7, 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_267_267" id="Footnote_267_267"></a><a href="#FNanchor_267_267"><span class="label">[267]</span></a> Disp. XI, Sec. iv, art. 2, §§ 13, 10; Disp. XLVII, Sec. i, art 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_268_268" id="Footnote_268_268"></a><a href="#FNanchor_268_268"><span class="label">[268]</span></a> Scheeben’s <i>Dogmatik</i> Vol. IV, 1903, pp. 856 (No. 93), 723.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_269_269" id="Footnote_269_269"></a><a href="#FNanchor_269_269"><span class="label">[269]</span></a> See Abbé Boudhinon’s careful article, “Sur l’Histoire des Indulgences,” -<i>Revue d’Histoire et de Littérature Religieuses</i>, 1898, pp. 435-455, for a -vivid illustration of the necessity of explaining the details of this doctrine -and practice by history of the most patient kind.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_270_270" id="Footnote_270_270"></a><a href="#FNanchor_270_270"><span class="label">[270]</span></a> Denzinger, <i>Enchiridion</i>, ed. 1888, Nos. 387, 588, 859.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_271_271" id="Footnote_271_271"></a><a href="#FNanchor_271_271"><span class="label">[271]</span></a> Denzinger, <i>ibid.</i>, Hurter, <i>op. cit.</i> ed. 1893, Vol. III, p. 591.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_272_272" id="Footnote_272_272"></a><a href="#FNanchor_272_272"><span class="label">[272]</span></a> Denzinger, Nos. 778, 951.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_273_273" id="Footnote_273_273"></a><a href="#FNanchor_273_273"><span class="label">[273]</span></a> Cardinal Manning in <i>Treatise</i>, ed. cit. p. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_274_274" id="Footnote_274_274"></a><a href="#FNanchor_274_274"><span class="label">[274]</span></a> <i>Op. cit.</i> pp. 119, 120: “The Purgatory of the Catholic Church, in -strictness, bears its name without warrant.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_275_275" id="Footnote_275_275"></a><a href="#FNanchor_275_275"><span class="label">[275]</span></a> <i>Cat.</i>, cc. viii, 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_276_276" id="Footnote_276_276"></a><a href="#FNanchor_276_276"><span class="label">[276]</span></a> <i>De octo Dulcitii quaest.</i> 12, 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_277_277" id="Footnote_277_277"></a><a href="#FNanchor_277_277"><span class="label">[277]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, app., qu. 2, art. 4, in corp. et ad 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_278_278" id="Footnote_278_278"></a><a href="#FNanchor_278_278"><span class="label">[278]</span></a> <i>Divina Commedia</i>, Purg. II, 40-42. See Faber, <i>All for Jesus</i>, ed. -1889, p. 361.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_279_279" id="Footnote_279_279"></a><a href="#FNanchor_279_279"><span class="label">[279]</span></a> <i>De Purgatorio</i>, Lib. I, c. iv, 6; c. xiv, 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_280_280" id="Footnote_280_280"></a><a href="#FNanchor_280_280"><span class="label">[280]</span></a> <i>Les Controverses</i>, Pt. III, ch. ii, art. 1 (end); <i>Œuvres</i>, Annecy, 1892 -<i>seq.</i>, Vol. I, p. 365.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_281_281" id="Footnote_281_281"></a><a href="#FNanchor_281_281"><span class="label">[281]</span></a> Faber’s <i>All for Jesus</i>, 1853, ch. ix, sec. 4; Cardinal Manning’s -Appendix (B) to Engl. tr. of St. Catherine’s <i>Treatise on Purgatory</i>, -1858; Cardinal Newman’s <i>Dream of Gerontius</i>, 1865.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_282_282" id="Footnote_282_282"></a><a href="#FNanchor_282_282"><span class="label">[282]</span></a> <i>In Rom.</i>, Tom. II, i, p. 477.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_283_283" id="Footnote_283_283"></a><a href="#FNanchor_283_283"><span class="label">[283]</span></a> <i>Richard Rothe’s Spekulatives System</i>, 1899, pp. 123, 124.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_284_284" id="Footnote_284_284"></a><a href="#FNanchor_284_284"><span class="label">[284]</span></a> <i>Richard Rothe’s Spekulatives System</i>, 1899, pp. 69; 74, 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_285_285" id="Footnote_285_285"></a><a href="#FNanchor_285_285"><span class="label">[285]</span></a> St. Augustine, <i>Confessions</i>, Lib. XI, ch. xxvii, 3; ch. xx; ch. xi. <i>De -Trinit.</i>, Lib. XV, ch. 16, ed. Ben., col. 1492 D.—St. Thomas, <i>Summa -Theol.</i>, I, qu. 12, art. 10, in corp.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_286_286" id="Footnote_286_286"></a><a href="#FNanchor_286_286"><span class="label">[286]</span></a> I am here but giving an abstract of Mr. F. C. S. Schiller’s admirable -essay, “Activity and Substance,” pp. 204-227 of his <i>Humanism</i>, 1903, -where all the Aristotelian passages are carefully quoted and discussed. -He is surely right in translating ἠρεμία by “constancy,” not by “rest.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_287_287" id="Footnote_287_287"></a><a href="#FNanchor_287_287"><span class="label">[287]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 4, art. 1, concl. qu. 25, art. 1 ad 2 et concl.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_288_288" id="Footnote_288_288"></a><a href="#FNanchor_288_288"><span class="label">[288]</span></a> Matt. xxii, 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_289_289" id="Footnote_289_289"></a><a href="#FNanchor_289_289"><span class="label">[289]</span></a> <i>Metaphysic</i>, xii, 1072<i>b</i>, 1074<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_290_290" id="Footnote_290_290"></a><a href="#FNanchor_290_290"><span class="label">[290]</span></a> E. Caird, <i>Evolution of Theology in the Greek Philosophers</i>, 1904 -Vol. II, pp. 12, 16. See here, too, the fine discussion of the other, rightly -immanental as well as transcendental, teaching of Aristotle, pp. 15, 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_291_291" id="Footnote_291_291"></a><a href="#FNanchor_291_291"><span class="label">[291]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, ii, qu. 3, art. 2 ad 4; art. 4, concl.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_292_292" id="Footnote_292_292"></a><a href="#FNanchor_292_292"><span class="label">[292]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> I, qu. 14, art. 4, in corp.; qu. 19, art. I, concl.; qu. 20, art. I, concl.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_293_293" id="Footnote_293_293"></a><a href="#FNanchor_293_293"><span class="label">[293]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 14, art. 11, 3; qu. 14, art. 2, ad 2; I, ii, qu. 3, -art. 2 ad 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_294_294" id="Footnote_294_294"></a><a href="#FNanchor_294_294"><span class="label">[294]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> I, qu. 12, art. 8 ad 4; I, ii, qu. 4, art. 8 ad 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_295_295" id="Footnote_295_295"></a><a href="#FNanchor_295_295"><span class="label">[295]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> I, qu. 14, art. 8, in corp.; art. 11, contra et concl.; art. 8, -concl.; art. 11, concl.—<i>Contra Gent.</i>, Lib. III, c. xxi, in fine.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_296_296" id="Footnote_296_296"></a><a href="#FNanchor_296_296"><span class="label">[296]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, II, ii, qu. 3, art. 4, 4; I, qu. 19, art. 2, in corp.; -qu. 20, art. 1 ad 1; ad 3; art. 2 ad 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_297_297" id="Footnote_297_297"></a><a href="#FNanchor_297_297"><span class="label">[297]</span></a> Mark xii, 28-34 and parallels; Matt, x, 29; Luke xii, 6; Matt, xxv, 10; -Mark xiv, 25 and parallels, and elsewhere; Apoc. vii, 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_298_298" id="Footnote_298_298"></a><a href="#FNanchor_298_298"><span class="label">[298]</span></a> Matt. xviii, 12-14; Luke xv, 1-10; John x, 11-16 (Ezekiel xxxiv, -12-19).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_299_299" id="Footnote_299_299"></a><a href="#FNanchor_299_299"><span class="label">[299]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 47, art. 1, in corp.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_300_300" id="Footnote_300_300"></a><a href="#FNanchor_300_300"><span class="label">[300]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 29, art. 3 ad 4; ad 2; in corp. <i>Contra Gent.</i>, -Lib. II, c. xciv, init.; c. xciii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_301_301" id="Footnote_301_301"></a><a href="#FNanchor_301_301"><span class="label">[301]</span></a> <i>Excitationum</i>, Lib. VIII, 604.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_302_302" id="Footnote_302_302"></a><a href="#FNanchor_302_302"><span class="label">[302]</span></a> <i>The World and the Individual</i>, Vol. II, p. 430.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_303_303" id="Footnote_303_303"></a><a href="#FNanchor_303_303"><span class="label">[303]</span></a> G. E. Lessing: <i>Leibniz von den Ewigen Strafen, Werke</i>, ed. Lachmann-Muncker, -Vol. XI, 1895, p. 482. E. Troeltsch, <i>Theologische -Rundschau</i>, 1893, p. 72.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_304_304" id="Footnote_304_304"></a><a href="#FNanchor_304_304"><span class="label">[304]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 12, art. 1, in corp.; art. 7, in corp.; art. 6 -ad 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_305_305" id="Footnote_305_305"></a><a href="#FNanchor_305_305"><span class="label">[305]</span></a> “A Spiritual Canticle,” stanza vii, 10, in <i>Works</i>, transl. by D. Lewis, -ed. 1891, pp. 206, 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_306_306" id="Footnote_306_306"></a><a href="#FNanchor_306_306"><span class="label">[306]</span></a> <i>Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft</i>, Werke, ed. -Hartenstein, 1868, Vol. VI, pp. 252, 274.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_307_307" id="Footnote_307_307"></a><a href="#FNanchor_307_307"><span class="label">[307]</span></a> <i>Kant</i>, 1904, pp. 129-132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_308_308" id="Footnote_308_308"></a><a href="#FNanchor_308_308"><span class="label">[308]</span></a> <i>Das Historische in Kant’s Religions-philosophie, Kant-Studien</i>, 1904, -pp. 43, 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_309_309" id="Footnote_309_309"></a><a href="#FNanchor_309_309"><span class="label">[309]</span></a> “Das Heilige,” in <i>Präludien</i>, 1903, pp. 356, 357.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_310_310" id="Footnote_310_310"></a><a href="#FNanchor_310_310"><span class="label">[310]</span></a> <i>Elements of the Science of Religion</i>, 1897, Vol. I, pp. 274, 275; Vol. -II, p. 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_311_311" id="Footnote_311_311"></a><a href="#FNanchor_311_311"><span class="label">[311]</span></a> <i>Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott</i>, ed. 1892, p. 281.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_312_312" id="Footnote_312_312"></a><a href="#FNanchor_312_312"><span class="label">[312]</span></a> <i>Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott</i>, ed. 1892, pp. 27, 28; 230, 231; 262; 23.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_313_313" id="Footnote_313_313"></a><a href="#FNanchor_313_313"><span class="label">[313]</span></a> E. Caird, <i>Development of Theology in the Greek Philosophers</i>, Vol. I, -pp, 367, 362. The whole chapter, “Does the Primacy belong to Reason -or to Will?” pp. 350-382, is admirable in its richness and balance.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_314_314" id="Footnote_314_314"></a><a href="#FNanchor_314_314"><span class="label">[314]</span></a> <i>Verkehr des Christen</i>, pp. 15, 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_315_315" id="Footnote_315_315"></a><a href="#FNanchor_315_315"><span class="label">[315]</span></a> I. Kant, “Anthropologie,” in <i>Werke</i>, ed. Berlin Academy, Vol. VII, -1907, pp. 135, 136. G. W. Leibniz, “Nouveaux Essais sur l’Entendement,” -in <i>Die philosophischen Schriften von G. W. L.</i>,” ed. Gerhardt, -Vol. V, 1882, pp. 8, 10; 45, 69, 100, 121, 122.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_316_316" id="Footnote_316_316"></a><a href="#FNanchor_316_316"><span class="label">[316]</span></a> All this first clearly formulated by Leibniz, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 121, 122.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_317_317" id="Footnote_317_317"></a><a href="#FNanchor_317_317"><span class="label">[317]</span></a> See his <i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, pp. 209-211; 242, 243; -and elsewhere.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_318_318" id="Footnote_318_318"></a><a href="#FNanchor_318_318"><span class="label">[318]</span></a> <i>The Prophets of Israel</i>, 1882, pp. 11, 12; 10, 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_319_319" id="Footnote_319_319"></a><a href="#FNanchor_319_319"><span class="label">[319]</span></a> <i>Lex Orandi</i>, 1903, pp. xxix, xxxi.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_320_320" id="Footnote_320_320"></a><a href="#FNanchor_320_320"><span class="label">[320]</span></a> M. Jastrow, <i>The Study of Religion</i>, 1901, pp. 279-286. C. P. Tiele, -<i>Elements of the Science of Religion</i>, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 227-234; L. W. -E. Rauwenhoff, <i>Religions-philosophie</i>, Germ. tr., ed. 1894, pp. 109-124. -R. Eucken, <i>Der Wahrheitsgehalt der Religion</i>, 1901, pp. 59-238; 303-399. -There are important points in pp. 425-438, which I do not accept.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_321_321" id="Footnote_321_321"></a><a href="#FNanchor_321_321"><span class="label">[321]</span></a> <i>Rothe’s Spekulatives System</i>, 1899, pp. 25, 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_322_322" id="Footnote_322_322"></a><a href="#FNanchor_322_322"><span class="label">[322]</span></a> <i>Elements of the Science of Religion</i>, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 61, 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_323_323" id="Footnote_323_323"></a><a href="#FNanchor_323_323"><span class="label">[323]</span></a> <i>Der Kampf um einen geistigen Lebensinhalt</i>, 1896, p. 309.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_324_324" id="Footnote_324_324"></a><a href="#FNanchor_324_324"><span class="label">[324]</span></a> <i>The Evolution of Religion</i>, 1893, Vol. II, p. 313.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_325_325" id="Footnote_325_325"></a><a href="#FNanchor_325_325"><span class="label">[325]</span></a> “Grundprobleme der Ethik,” in <i>Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche</i>, -1902, pp. 164; 166, 167; 172.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_326_326" id="Footnote_326_326"></a><a href="#FNanchor_326_326"><span class="label">[326]</span></a> <i>Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung</i>, I, Anhang, p. 653.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_327_327" id="Footnote_327_327"></a><a href="#FNanchor_327_327"><span class="label">[327]</span></a> A. E. Taylor’s <i>The Problem of Conduct</i>, 1901, contains, pp. 469-487, -a very vigorous and suggestive study of the similarities and differences -between Morality and Religion, marred though it is by paradox and -impatience.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_328_328" id="Footnote_328_328"></a><a href="#FNanchor_328_328"><span class="label">[328]</span></a> J. Volkelt, <i>Immanuel Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie</i>, 1879, pp. 258, 259.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_329_329" id="Footnote_329_329"></a><a href="#FNanchor_329_329"><span class="label">[329]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 206, 208, 209.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_330_330" id="Footnote_330_330"></a><a href="#FNanchor_330_330"><span class="label">[330]</span></a> J. Volkelt, <i>Immanuel Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie</i>, 1879, p. 244.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_331_331" id="Footnote_331_331"></a><a href="#FNanchor_331_331"><span class="label">[331]</span></a> James Ward, “Present Problems of Psychology,” in (American) -<i>Philosophical Review</i>, 1904, p. 607. J. Volkelt, <i>Kant’s Erkenntnisstheorie</i>, -p. 241.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_332_332" id="Footnote_332_332"></a><a href="#FNanchor_332_332"><span class="label">[332]</span></a> In a Letter of 1772, <i>Briefe</i>, ed. Berlin Academy, Vol. I, 1900, -p. 126.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_333_333" id="Footnote_333_333"></a><a href="#FNanchor_333_333"><span class="label">[333]</span></a> H. Jones, <i>A Critical Account of the Philosophy of Lotze</i>, 1895, -pp. 102-104; 106, 107; 108, 111.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_334_334" id="Footnote_334_334"></a><a href="#FNanchor_334_334"><span class="label">[334]</span></a> <i>The Present Problems</i>, pp. 606, 607.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_335_335" id="Footnote_335_335"></a><a href="#FNanchor_335_335"><span class="label">[335]</span></a> J. Volkelt, <i>Erfahrung und Denken</i>, 1886, p. 485.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_336_336" id="Footnote_336_336"></a><a href="#FNanchor_336_336"><span class="label">[336]</span></a> James Ward, “On the Definition of Psychology,” in <i>Journal of -Psychology</i>, Vol. I, 1904, p. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_337_337" id="Footnote_337_337"></a><a href="#FNanchor_337_337"><span class="label">[337]</span></a> There is a good description of this doctrine in H. Höffding’s <i>Sören -Kierkegaard</i>, Stuttgart, 1896, pp. 100-104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_338_338" id="Footnote_338_338"></a><a href="#FNanchor_338_338"><span class="label">[338]</span></a> Höffding’s <i>Kierkegaard</i>, pp. 119, 120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_339_339" id="Footnote_339_339"></a><a href="#FNanchor_339_339"><span class="label">[339]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 123.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_340_340" id="Footnote_340_340"></a><a href="#FNanchor_340_340"><span class="label">[340]</span></a> See <i>Works</i>, ed. London, 1898, Vol. II, pp. 299-306.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_341_341" id="Footnote_341_341"></a><a href="#FNanchor_341_341"><span class="label">[341]</span></a> <i>Quaestio Mystica</i>, at the end of the notes to Chapter V of Dionysius’s -<i>Mystical Theology</i>, ed. Migne, 1889, Vol. I, pp. 1050-1058.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_342_342" id="Footnote_342_342"></a><a href="#FNanchor_342_342"><span class="label">[342]</span></a> <i>In Librum Boetii de Trinitate</i>, in D. Thomae Aquinatis <i>Opera</i>, -ed. altera Veneta, Vol. VIII, 1776, pp. 341<i>b</i>, 342<i>a</i>; 291<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_343_343" id="Footnote_343_343"></a><a href="#FNanchor_343_343"><span class="label">[343]</span></a> <i>Mystical Theology</i>, Dr. Parker, pp. 135, 136. I have somewhat -modified Parker’s rendering.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_344_344" id="Footnote_344_344"></a><a href="#FNanchor_344_344"><span class="label">[344]</span></a> <i>Religions-philosophie</i>, German tr. ed. 1894, p. 116. His scheme finds -three psychological forms and constituents in all religion, Intellectualism, -Mysticism, Moralism, each with its own advantages and dangers.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_345_345" id="Footnote_345_345"></a><a href="#FNanchor_345_345"><span class="label">[345]</span></a> <i>Confessions</i>: “Evil, Negative,” VII, 12, etc. “Evil, Positive,” VI, -15; VIII, 5, 11, etc.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_346_346" id="Footnote_346_346"></a><a href="#FNanchor_346_346"><span class="label">[346]</span></a> <i>Opus Imperfectum</i>, III, 56, ed. Ben., Vol. X, col. 1750<i>b</i>. <i>De -Nuptiis et Concupiscentia</i>, I, 23, <i>ibid.</i> col. 625<i>a</i>.—M. L. Grandgeorge, -in his memoir <i>St. Augustin et le Neo-Platonisme</i>, 1896, gives an interesting -collection of such Negative and Positive declarations, and traces the -former to their precise sources in Plotinus, pp. 126, 127; 130, 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_347_347" id="Footnote_347_347"></a><a href="#FNanchor_347_347"><span class="label">[347]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, ch. iv, sec. xxiv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_348_348" id="Footnote_348_348"></a><a href="#FNanchor_348_348"><span class="label">[348]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, ii, qu. 86, art. 1 ad 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_349_349" id="Footnote_349_349"></a><a href="#FNanchor_349_349"><span class="label">[349]</span></a> <i>Vita</i>, pp. 39<i>b</i>, 116<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_350_350" id="Footnote_350_350"></a><a href="#FNanchor_350_350"><span class="label">[350]</span></a> <i>Sixteen Revelations</i>, ed. 1902, pp. 69, 70.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_351_351" id="Footnote_351_351"></a><a href="#FNanchor_351_351"><span class="label">[351]</span></a> Meister Ekhart’s “Lateinische Schriften,” published by Denifle, -<i>Archiv f. Litteratur u. Kirchengeschichte des M. A.</i>, 1886, p. 662.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_352_352" id="Footnote_352_352"></a><a href="#FNanchor_352_352"><span class="label">[352]</span></a> <i>Ethica</i>, II, def. vi; IV, prop. lxiv et coroll.; ed. Van Vloten et -Land, 1895, Vol. I, pp. 73, 225.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_353_353" id="Footnote_353_353"></a><a href="#FNanchor_353_353"><span class="label">[353]</span></a> <i>Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten</i>, 1785, <i>Werke</i>, ed. Berlin -Academy, Vol. IV, 1903, p. 393. <i>Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der -reinen Vernunft</i>, 1793, <i>Werke</i>, ed. Hartenstein, Vol. VI, 1868, pp. 127, -128.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_354_354" id="Footnote_354_354"></a><a href="#FNanchor_354_354"><span class="label">[354]</span></a> <i>The Origin and Propagation of Sin</i>, 1902, p. 125.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_355_355" id="Footnote_355_355"></a><a href="#FNanchor_355_355"><span class="label">[355]</span></a> <i>Wahrheitsgehalt der Religion</i>, 1901, pp. 271, 272.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_356_356" id="Footnote_356_356"></a><a href="#FNanchor_356_356"><span class="label">[356]</span></a> Prof. Höffding, in his <i>Sören Kierkegaard</i>, pp. 130, 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_357_357" id="Footnote_357_357"></a><a href="#FNanchor_357_357"><span class="label">[357]</span></a> “Le Dogme du Pêché Originel dans S. Augustin,” <i>Revue d’Histoire -et de Littérature Religieuses</i>, 1901, 1902. See too F. R. Tennant, <i>The -Sources of the Doctrine of the Fall and Original Sin</i>, 1903, which, however, -descends only to St. Ambrose inclusively.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_358_358" id="Footnote_358_358"></a><a href="#FNanchor_358_358"><span class="label">[358]</span></a> So F. R. Tennant, <i>The Origin and Propagation of Sin</i>, 1902, -pp. 131, 110.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_359_359" id="Footnote_359_359"></a><a href="#FNanchor_359_359"><span class="label">[359]</span></a> F. R. Tennant, <i>The Origin and Propagation of Sin</i>, 1902, pp. 82, 95; -107, 108; 115.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_360_360" id="Footnote_360_360"></a><a href="#FNanchor_360_360"><span class="label">[360]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_361_361" id="Footnote_361_361"></a><a href="#FNanchor_361_361"><span class="label">[361]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 153.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_362_362" id="Footnote_362_362"></a><a href="#FNanchor_362_362"><span class="label">[362]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, II, ii, qu. 24, art. 7, in corp.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_363_363" id="Footnote_363_363"></a><a href="#FNanchor_363_363"><span class="label">[363]</span></a> <i>Psychology and Life</i>, 1899, pp. 267, 268. <i>Grundzüge der Psychologie</i>, -Vol. I, 1900, pp. 170, 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_364_364" id="Footnote_364_364"></a><a href="#FNanchor_364_364"><span class="label">[364]</span></a> Mr. W. R. Inge, in his useful <i>Christian Mysticism</i>, 1899, has some -sharp expressions of disgust against these long-lived survivals within the -Catholic Church. And though his own tone towards Rome in general -belongs also, surely, to a more or less barbaric past, he has done good -service in drawing forcible attention to the matter.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_365_365" id="Footnote_365_365"></a><a href="#FNanchor_365_365"><span class="label">[365]</span></a> <i>Sixteen Revelations</i>, ed. 1902, pp. 23, 84, 101.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_366_366" id="Footnote_366_366"></a><a href="#FNanchor_366_366"><span class="label">[366]</span></a> <i>Ascent of Mount Carmel</i>, tr. Lewis, 1891, pp. 159; 26, 27; 195, 265.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_367_367" id="Footnote_367_367"></a><a href="#FNanchor_367_367"><span class="label">[367]</span></a> <i>Confessions</i>, Bk. XI, ch. xxiii, 1. Tract in Joann. Ev., VIII, 1; -XXIV, 1: ed. Ben., Vol. III, 2, coll. 1770 <i>b</i>, 1958 <i>d</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_368_368" id="Footnote_368_368"></a><a href="#FNanchor_368_368"><span class="label">[368]</span></a> <i>Sixteen Revelations</i>, ed. cit. p. 210.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_369_369" id="Footnote_369_369"></a><a href="#FNanchor_369_369"><span class="label">[369]</span></a> J. N. Grou, <i>Méditations sur l’Amour de Dieu</i>, Nouvelle ed. Perisse, -pp. 268, 271.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_370_370" id="Footnote_370_370"></a><a href="#FNanchor_370_370"><span class="label">[370]</span></a> L. Laberthonnière, <i>Annales de Philosophie Chrétienne</i>, 1905, 1906. -G. Tyrrell, <i>Hard Sayings</i>, 1898; <i>External Religion</i>, 1902. A. Sandreau, -<i>La Vie d’Union à Dieu</i>, 1900; <i>L’Etat Mystique</i>, 1903.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_371_371" id="Footnote_371_371"></a><a href="#FNanchor_371_371"><span class="label">[371]</span></a> M. D. Petre, <i>The Soul’s Orbit</i>, 1904, p. 113.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_372_372" id="Footnote_372_372"></a><a href="#FNanchor_372_372"><span class="label">[372]</span></a> <i>Göttinger Gelehrte Anzeigen</i>, 1901, p. 757.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_373_373" id="Footnote_373_373"></a><a href="#FNanchor_373_373"><span class="label">[373]</span></a> Zeller, <i>Philosophie der Griechen</i>, II, 2, ed. 1879, pp. 309, 312.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_374_374" id="Footnote_374_374"></a><a href="#FNanchor_374_374"><span class="label">[374]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 348.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_375_375" id="Footnote_375_375"></a><a href="#FNanchor_375_375"><span class="label">[375]</span></a> Republic, VI, 508<i>e</i>; VII, 517<i>b</i>; and Zeller, <i>ibid.</i> II, 1, ed. 1889, -pp. 707-710.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_376_376" id="Footnote_376_376"></a><a href="#FNanchor_376_376"><span class="label">[376]</span></a> <i>Philebus</i>, 22<i>c</i>; <i>Timaeus</i>, 28<i>a</i>, <i>c</i>; 29<i>e</i>, 92<i>c</i> (with the reading ὅδε ὁ κόσμος -… εἰκὼν τοῦ ποιητοῦ).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_377_377" id="Footnote_377_377"></a><a href="#FNanchor_377_377"><span class="label">[377]</span></a> <i>Timaeus</i>, 29<i>e</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_378_378" id="Footnote_378_378"></a><a href="#FNanchor_378_378"><span class="label">[378]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, I, vii, 1, 61<i>d</i>; I, viii, 2, 72<i>e</i>; VI, viii, 16, end. See, for all -this, Zeller, <i>Philosophie der Griechen</i>, III, ii, ed. 1881, pp. 476-480; 483; -510-414.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_379_379" id="Footnote_379_379"></a><a href="#FNanchor_379_379"><span class="label">[379]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, VIII. ix, 350<i>b</i>; VI, 2317, 610<i>d</i>; III, ix, 3, 358<i>a, b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_380_380" id="Footnote_380_380"></a><a href="#FNanchor_380_380"><span class="label">[380]</span></a> Zeller, <i>op. cit.</i> III, ii, pp. 787-789.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_381_381" id="Footnote_381_381"></a><a href="#FNanchor_381_381"><span class="label">[381]</span></a> <i>Divine Names</i>, ch. v, sec. 1: tr. Parker, pp. 73-75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_382_382" id="Footnote_382_382"></a><a href="#FNanchor_382_382"><span class="label">[382]</span></a> <i>Mystical Theology</i>, ch. iii: Parker, pp. 135, 136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_383_383" id="Footnote_383_383"></a><a href="#FNanchor_383_383"><span class="label">[383]</span></a> <i>Mystical Theology</i>, ch. iv, sec. 2: Parker, pp. 136, 137.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_384_384" id="Footnote_384_384"></a><a href="#FNanchor_384_384"><span class="label">[384]</span></a> <i>De Divisione Naturae</i>, III, 17; I, 78. Ueberweg-Heinze, <i>Grundriss -der Geschichte der Philosophie</i>, Vol. II, ed. 1898, p. 159.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_385_385" id="Footnote_385_385"></a><a href="#FNanchor_385_385"><span class="label">[385]</span></a> Secs. 2, 4, ed. Bardenhewer, 1882, pp. 163-166.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_386_386" id="Footnote_386_386"></a><a href="#FNanchor_386_386"><span class="label">[386]</span></a> Commentarius, in <i>Aristotelis Metaphysica</i>, Tract. VIII, cap. 6, quoted -by Denifle, <i>Archiv f. Litteratur-u-Kirchengeschichte</i>, 1886, p. 520.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_387_387" id="Footnote_387_387"></a><a href="#FNanchor_387_387"><span class="label">[387]</span></a> Ibn Gebirol, <i>Fons Vitae</i>, ed. Bäumker, 1895: IV, 6, pp. 225, 224; -V, 22, p. 298; II, 20, pp. 60-61; V, 24, p. 301.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_388_388" id="Footnote_388_388"></a><a href="#FNanchor_388_388"><span class="label">[388]</span></a> <i>De Ente et Essentia</i>, c. vi. <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 3, art. 4 ad 1; -and elsewhere.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_389_389" id="Footnote_389_389"></a><a href="#FNanchor_389_389"><span class="label">[389]</span></a> <i>De Ente et Essentia</i>, c. ii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_390_390" id="Footnote_390_390"></a><a href="#FNanchor_390_390"><span class="label">[390]</span></a> See Ueberweg-Heinze, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 280, 281.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_391_391" id="Footnote_391_391"></a><a href="#FNanchor_391_391"><span class="label">[391]</span></a> <i>De rerum Principio</i>, qu. viii. Ueberweg-Heinze, <i>op. cit.</i> pp. 295, 296.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_392_392" id="Footnote_392_392"></a><a href="#FNanchor_392_392"><span class="label">[392]</span></a> H. S. Denifle, <i>Meister Eckhart’s Lateinische Schriften</i>, <i>loc. cit.</i> -pp. 489, 490; 540, n. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_393_393" id="Footnote_393_393"></a><a href="#FNanchor_393_393"><span class="label">[393]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 519.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_394_394" id="Footnote_394_394"></a><a href="#FNanchor_394_394"><span class="label">[394]</span></a> <i>Meister Eckhart</i>, ed. Pfeiffer, 1857, pp. 158, 1; 99, 8; 180, 15; 532, -30; 320, 27; 288, 26; 207, 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_395_395" id="Footnote_395_395"></a><a href="#FNanchor_395_395"><span class="label">[395]</span></a> Denzinger, <i>Enchiridion Symbolorum</i>, ed. 1888, Nos. 437, 455.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_396_396" id="Footnote_396_396"></a><a href="#FNanchor_396_396"><span class="label">[396]</span></a> <i>Hegelianism and Personality</i>, ed. 1893, pp. 230, 231, and note.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_397_397" id="Footnote_397_397"></a><a href="#FNanchor_397_397"><span class="label">[397]</span></a> <i>Phaedrus</i>, 245 d; Zeller, <i>op. cit.</i> II, 1, ed. 1889, p. 830.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_398_398" id="Footnote_398_398"></a><a href="#FNanchor_398_398"><span class="label">[398]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 843, 844; 849, 850.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_399_399" id="Footnote_399_399"></a><a href="#FNanchor_399_399"><span class="label">[399]</span></a> Pre-existence of the Noûs: <i>Gen. Anim.</i>, II, 3, 736<i>b</i>; <i>de Anima</i>, III, -5, 430<i>a</i>; Zeller, <i>op. cit.</i> II, 2, ed. 1879, pp. 593, 595. The Supreme Noûs, -purely transcendent: <i>Metaph.</i>, XII, 7-10. But see Dr. Edward Caird’s -admirable pp. 1-30, Vol. II, of his <i>Evolution of Theology in the Greek -Philosophers</i>, 1904.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_400_400" id="Footnote_400_400"></a><a href="#FNanchor_400_400"><span class="label">[400]</span></a> Rom. viii, 11. See too Rom. viii, 9, 14; 1 Cor. iii, 16; vi, 11; vii, -40; xii, 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_401_401" id="Footnote_401_401"></a><a href="#FNanchor_401_401"><span class="label">[401]</span></a> H. J. Holtzmann, <i>Lehrbuch der N. T. Theology</i>, 1897, Vol. II, -pp. 9-12; 15-18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_402_402" id="Footnote_402_402"></a><a href="#FNanchor_402_402"><span class="label">[402]</span></a> H. J. Holtzmann, <i>op. cit.</i> Vol. II, pp. 79, 80. Johannes Weiss, <i>Dic -Nachfolge Christi</i>, 1895, p. 95.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_403_403" id="Footnote_403_403"></a><a href="#FNanchor_403_403"><span class="label">[403]</span></a> Col. iii, 4; Phil. i, 21; Gal. ii, 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_404_404" id="Footnote_404_404"></a><a href="#FNanchor_404_404"><span class="label">[404]</span></a> <i>Enneads</i>, V, book 1, cc. 3 and 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_405_405" id="Footnote_405_405"></a><a href="#FNanchor_405_405"><span class="label">[405]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> VI, book 9, 9 and 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_406_406" id="Footnote_406_406"></a><a href="#FNanchor_406_406"><span class="label">[406]</span></a> <i>Eckhart</i>, ed. Pfeiffer, pp. 113, 33; 469, 40, 36.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_407_407" id="Footnote_407_407"></a><a href="#FNanchor_407_407"><span class="label">[407]</span></a> Denzinger, <i>op. cit.</i> No. 454.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_408_408" id="Footnote_408_408"></a><a href="#FNanchor_408_408"><span class="label">[408]</span></a> <i>Vier Schriften von Johannes Ruysbroek</i>, ed. Ullmann, 1848, pp. 106, -107.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_409_409" id="Footnote_409_409"></a><a href="#FNanchor_409_409"><span class="label">[409]</span></a> <i>Life, written by Herself</i>, tr. D. Lewis, ed. 1888, pp. 124, 421, 146.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_410_410" id="Footnote_410_410"></a><a href="#FNanchor_410_410"><span class="label">[410]</span></a> <i>Life, written by Herself</i>, tr. D. Lewis, ed. 1888, pp. 355, 130, 430; 174.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_411_411" id="Footnote_411_411"></a><a href="#FNanchor_411_411"><span class="label">[411]</span></a> J. B. Schwab, <i>Johannes Gerson</i>, 1858, pp. 361, 362.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_412_412" id="Footnote_412_412"></a><a href="#FNanchor_412_412"><span class="label">[412]</span></a> I can find but one, secondary Ecclesiastical Censure of the doctrine -of God’s substantial presence in the soul,—the censure passed by the -Paris Sorbonne on Peter Lombard. The same Sorbonne repeatedly -censured St. Thomas on other points.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_413_413" id="Footnote_413_413"></a><a href="#FNanchor_413_413"><span class="label">[413]</span></a> Vol. II, pp. 210, 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_414_414" id="Footnote_414_414"></a><a href="#FNanchor_414_414"><span class="label">[414]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 230, 231.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_415_415" id="Footnote_415_415"></a><a href="#FNanchor_415_415"><span class="label">[415]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 231.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_416_416" id="Footnote_416_416"></a><a href="#FNanchor_416_416"><span class="label">[416]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 253-257. <i>Enneads</i>, V, book ii, i.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_417_417" id="Footnote_417_417"></a><a href="#FNanchor_417_417"><span class="label">[417]</span></a> Vol. II, pp. 232, 233.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_418_418" id="Footnote_418_418"></a><a href="#FNanchor_418_418"><span class="label">[418]</span></a> “Religions-philosophie,” in <i>Die Philosophie im Beginn des zwanzigsten -Jahrhunderts</i>, 1904, Vol. I, pp. 115, 117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_419_419" id="Footnote_419_419"></a><a href="#FNanchor_419_419"><span class="label">[419]</span></a> <i>Religions-philosophie</i>, Germ. tr., ed. 1894, p. 140.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_420_420" id="Footnote_420_420"></a><a href="#FNanchor_420_420"><span class="label">[420]</span></a> “Martineau’s Philosophy,” <i>Hibbert Journal</i>, Vol. I, 1902, pp. 458, 457.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_421_421" id="Footnote_421_421"></a><a href="#FNanchor_421_421"><span class="label">[421]</span></a> <i>Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott</i>, ed. 1892, pp. 27, 15, 28, 231.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_422_422" id="Footnote_422_422"></a><a href="#FNanchor_422_422"><span class="label">[422]</span></a> <i>Der Verkehr des Christen mit Gott</i>, ed. 1892, pp. 20; 19-25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_423_423" id="Footnote_423_423"></a><a href="#FNanchor_423_423"><span class="label">[423]</span></a> <i>Timaeus</i>, 29<i>e</i>, <i>seq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_424_424" id="Footnote_424_424"></a><a href="#FNanchor_424_424"><span class="label">[424]</span></a> <i>Metaph.</i>, VII, 1072<i>b</i>; IX, 1074<i>b</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_425_425" id="Footnote_425_425"></a><a href="#FNanchor_425_425"><span class="label">[425]</span></a> See Caird, <i>op. cit.</i> II, p. 337.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_426_426" id="Footnote_426_426"></a><a href="#FNanchor_426_426"><span class="label">[426]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 13, art. 5, concl. et in corp. (See the interesting -note, “The Meaning of Analogy,” in Fr. Tyrrell’s <i>Lex Orandi</i>, -1903, pp. 80-83.) <i>In Librum Boetii de Trinitate</i>: D. Thomae Aquinatis -<i>Opera</i>, ed. Veneta Altera, 1776, p. 341<i>b</i>, 342<i>a</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_427_427" id="Footnote_427_427"></a><a href="#FNanchor_427_427"><span class="label">[427]</span></a> <i>Summa Theol.</i>, I, qu. 8, art. 2; qu. 12, art. 1, in corp.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_428_428" id="Footnote_428_428"></a><a href="#FNanchor_428_428"><span class="label">[428]</span></a> For Leibniz, see especially his <i>Nouveaux Essais</i>, written in 1701-1709, -but not published till 1765: <i>Die Philosophischen Schriften van G. W. -Leibniz</i>, ed. Gebhardt, Vol. V, 1882, especially pp. 45; 67; 69; 121, 122. -For the date 1888, see W. James’s <i>Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, -1902, p. 233.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_429_429" id="Footnote_429_429"></a><a href="#FNanchor_429_429"><span class="label">[429]</span></a> <i>Autobiography</i>, ed. 1875, pp. 133, 134.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_430_430" id="Footnote_430_430"></a><a href="#FNanchor_430_430"><span class="label">[430]</span></a> “Die Selbständigkeit der Religion”: <i>Zeitschrift f. Theologie u. -Kirche</i>, 1895, pp. 404, 405.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_431_431" id="Footnote_431_431"></a><a href="#FNanchor_431_431"><span class="label">[431]</span></a> <i>Elements of the Science of Religion</i>, 1897, Vol. II, pp. 227-231.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_432_432" id="Footnote_432_432"></a><a href="#FNanchor_432_432"><span class="label">[432]</span></a> <i>Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung</i>, ed. Griesbach, Vol. II, pp. 725, -734, 736.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_433_433" id="Footnote_433_433"></a><a href="#FNanchor_433_433"><span class="label">[433]</span></a> <i>The Varieties of Religious Experience</i>, 1902, pp. 362, 364.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_434_434" id="Footnote_434_434"></a><a href="#FNanchor_434_434"><span class="label">[434]</span></a> <i>Ascent of Mount Carmel</i>, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1889, pp. 94, 95, 97.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_435_435" id="Footnote_435_435"></a><a href="#FNanchor_435_435"><span class="label">[435]</span></a> <i>Ascent</i>, pp. 94; 350.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_436_436" id="Footnote_436_436"></a><a href="#FNanchor_436_436"><span class="label">[436]</span></a> <i>Ascent</i>, p. 353.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_437_437" id="Footnote_437_437"></a><a href="#FNanchor_437_437"><span class="label">[437]</span></a> <i>Sören Kierkegaard</i>, von Harald Höffding, Germ. tr. 1896, pp. 116, -118, 120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_438_438" id="Footnote_438_438"></a><a href="#FNanchor_438_438"><span class="label">[438]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 122; 130, 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_439_439" id="Footnote_439_439"></a><a href="#FNanchor_439_439"><span class="label">[439]</span></a> <i>Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte</i>, ed. 1888, Vol. II, pp. 413, 414; 417.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_440_440" id="Footnote_440_440"></a><a href="#FNanchor_440_440"><span class="label">[440]</span></a> <i>Das Wesen des Christenthums</i>, ed. 1902, pp. 180, 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_441_441" id="Footnote_441_441"></a><a href="#FNanchor_441_441"><span class="label">[441]</span></a> Höffding’s <i>Kierkegaard</i>, p. 119.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_442_442" id="Footnote_442_442"></a><a href="#FNanchor_442_442"><span class="label">[442]</span></a> <i>The Faith of the Million</i>, 1901, Vol. II, pp. 49, 50; 52, 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_443_443" id="Footnote_443_443"></a><a href="#FNanchor_443_443"><span class="label">[443]</span></a> <i>Works</i>, tr. David Lewis, ed. 1889, 1891, Vol. I, p. 308; Vol. II, -p. 541.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_444_444" id="Footnote_444_444"></a><a href="#FNanchor_444_444"><span class="label">[444]</span></a> <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_445_445" id="Footnote_445_445"></a><a href="#FNanchor_445_445"><span class="label">[445]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 55, 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_446_446" id="Footnote_446_446"></a><a href="#FNanchor_446_446"><span class="label">[446]</span></a> <i>Psyche</i>, ed. 1898, Vol. II, pp. 292, 293.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_447_447" id="Footnote_447_447"></a><a href="#FNanchor_447_447"><span class="label">[447]</span></a> “Grundprobleme der Ethik”: <i>Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche</i>, -1902, pp. 164, 167.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_448_448" id="Footnote_448_448"></a><a href="#FNanchor_448_448"><span class="label">[448]</span></a> “Was heisst Wesen des Christenthums?” <i>Christliche Welt</i>, 1903, I, -coll. 583, 584. The Abbé Loisy has also dwelt, with rare impressiveness, -upon the intensely Other-Worldly character of the first Christian teaching.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_449_449" id="Footnote_449_449"></a><a href="#FNanchor_449_449"><span class="label">[449]</span></a> <i>Deutsche Mystiker des Mittelalters</i>, ed. Pfeiffer, Vol. I, 1845, pp. xli, -xlii. Any Life of St. Jane F. de Chantal. A. Cadrès, <i>Le P. Jean N. -Grou</i>, 1866, pp. 13, 14. St. Teresa’s <i>Life, written by Herself</i>, tr. David -Lewis, ed. 1888, pp. 176, 177; 186. <i>Revelations of Divine Love, showed -to Mother Juliana of Norwich</i>, ed. 1902, p. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_450_450" id="Footnote_450_450"></a><a href="#FNanchor_450_450"><span class="label">[450]</span></a> A. Gardner, “Confession and Direction,” in <i>The Conflict of Duties</i>, -1903, pp. 223-229. P. Gardner, in <i>The Liberal Churchman</i>, 1905, p. 266.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_451_451" id="Footnote_451_451"></a><a href="#FNanchor_451_451"><span class="label">[451]</span></a> <i>Psyche</i>, ed. 1898, Vol. II, p. 289.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_452_452" id="Footnote_452_452"></a><a href="#FNanchor_452_452"><span class="label">[452]</span></a> “Christianity and Physical Science” (1855), in <i>Idea of a University</i>, -ed. 1873, pp. 432, 433. “University Teaching” (1852), <i>ibid.</i> p. 222. See -Mr. R. E. Froude’s interesting paper, “Scientific Speculation and the -Unity of Truth,” <i>Dublin Review</i>, Oct. 1900, pp. 353-368.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_453_453" id="Footnote_453_453"></a><a href="#FNanchor_453_453"><span class="label">[453]</span></a> W. Windelband, <i>Geschichte und Naturwissenschaft</i>, 1894. H. Rickert, -<i>Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft</i>, 1899. And, above all, H. -Rickert, <i>Die Grenzen der Naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung</i>, 1902.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_454_454" id="Footnote_454_454"></a><a href="#FNanchor_454_454"><span class="label">[454]</span></a> <i>Schopenhauer</i>, 1900, pp. 344, 345.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_455_455" id="Footnote_455_455"></a><a href="#FNanchor_455_455"><span class="label">[455]</span></a> <i>Wie ist der Kampf um die Bedeutung … Jesu zu beendigen?</i> 1901, -p. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_456_456" id="Footnote_456_456"></a><a href="#FNanchor_456_456"><span class="label">[456]</span></a> <i>Wie ist der Kampf um die Bedeutung … Jesu zu beendigen?</i> 1901, -p. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_457_457" id="Footnote_457_457"></a><a href="#FNanchor_457_457"><span class="label">[457]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 10, 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_458_458" id="Footnote_458_458"></a><a href="#FNanchor_458_458"><span class="label">[458]</span></a> <i>Ibid.</i> pp. 26, 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_459_459" id="Footnote_459_459"></a><a href="#FNanchor_459_459"><span class="label">[459]</span></a> “Ueber den letzten Unterschied der philosophischen Systeme,” 1847, -in <i>Beiträge zur Philosophie</i>, 1855, Vol. II, p. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_460_460" id="Footnote_460_460"></a><a href="#FNanchor_460_460"><span class="label">[460]</span></a> See the admirably lucid analysis in Prof. Troeltsch’s “Religions-philosophie,” -in <i>Die Philosophie im Beginn des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts</i>, -1904, Vol. I, p. 116, already referred to further back.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_461_461" id="Footnote_461_461"></a><a href="#FNanchor_461_461"><span class="label">[461]</span></a> <i>Richard Rothe’s Spekulatives System</i>, 1899, pp. 205, 206.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<p class="titlepage"><i>Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, London and Bungay.</i></p> - - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Mystical Element of Religion, as -studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa , by Baron Friedrich von Hügel - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MYSTICAL ELEMENT OF RELIGION, VOL 2 *** - -***** This file should be named 50206-h.htm or 50206-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/0/2/0/50206/ - -Produced by Julie Barkley and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - - -</pre> - -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/50206-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/50206-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 0721239..0000000 --- a/old/50206-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/50206-h/images/frontispiece.jpg b/old/50206-h/images/frontispiece.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f6f1847..0000000 --- a/old/50206-h/images/frontispiece.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/50206-h/images/titlepage.jpg b/old/50206-h/images/titlepage.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e27e6ea..0000000 --- a/old/50206-h/images/titlepage.jpg +++ /dev/null |
