Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) (777 page)
Read Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) Online
Authors: George Eliot
BOOK: Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated)
11.37Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
Bui the most formidable difficulty for Olshausen, in his attempted mediation between the Judaical dcmonology of the New Testament and the intelligence of our own day, arises from the influence of the latter on his own mind-an influence which renders him adverse to the idea of personal demons. This theologian, initiated in the philosophy of the present age, endeavours to resolve the host of demons, - T,,..4-nv««v.t nvn. regarded as distinct individuals, 1
i MIRACLES OF JESUS-DEMONIACS.stance, which indjd sends forth from itself separate powers, not, however to subsiW as independent individuals, but to return as accidents into the unity of the substance. This cast of thought we have already observed in the opinions of Olshausen concerning angels, and it appears still more decidedly in his demonology. Personal demons-are too repugnant, and as Olshausen himself expresses it,* the comprehension of two subjects in one individual is too inconceivable, to rind a ready acceptation. Hence it is everywhere with vague generality that a kingdom of evil and darkness is spoken of; and though a personal prince is given to it, its demons are understood to be mere effluxes, and operations, by which the evil principle manifests itself. But the most vulnerable point of Olshausen’s opinion concerning demons is this: it is too much for him to believe that Jesus asked the name of the demon in the Gadarene; since he himself doubts the personality of those emanations of the kingdom of darkness, it cannot, he thinks, have been thus decidedly supposed by Christ ;^hence he understands the question, What is thy name? (Mark v. 9.) to be addressed, not to the demon, but to the man,t plainly in opposition to the whole context, for the answer, Legion, appears to be in no degree the result of a misunderstanding, but the right answer-the one expected by Jesus.
i MIRACLES OF JESUS-DEMONIACS.stance, which indjd sends forth from itself separate powers, not, however to subsiW as independent individuals, but to return as accidents into the unity of the substance. This cast of thought we have already observed in the opinions of Olshausen concerning angels, and it appears still more decidedly in his demonology. Personal demons-are too repugnant, and as Olshausen himself expresses it,* the comprehension of two subjects in one individual is too inconceivable, to rind a ready acceptation. Hence it is everywhere with vague generality that a kingdom of evil and darkness is spoken of; and though a personal prince is given to it, its demons are understood to be mere effluxes, and operations, by which the evil principle manifests itself. But the most vulnerable point of Olshausen’s opinion concerning demons is this: it is too much for him to believe that Jesus asked the name of the demon in the Gadarene; since he himself doubts the personality of those emanations of the kingdom of darkness, it cannot, he thinks, have been thus decidedly supposed by Christ ;^hence he understands the question, What is thy name? (Mark v. 9.) to be addressed, not to the demon, but to the man,t plainly in opposition to the whole context, for the answer, Legion, appears to be in no degree the result of a misunderstanding, but the right answer-the one expected by Jesus.
If, however, the demons are, according to Olshausen’s opinion, impersonal powders, that which guides them and determines their various functions is the, law which governs the kingdom of darkness in relation to the kingdom of light. On this theory, the worse a man is morally, the closer must be the connexion between him and the kingdom of evil, and the closest conceivable connexion-the entrance of the power of darkness into the personality of the man, i. e. possession-must always occur in the most wicked. But historically this is not so: the demoniacs in the gospels appear to be sinners only in the sense that all sick persons need forgiveness of sins; and the greatest sinners (Judas for example) are spared the infliction of possession. The common opinion, with its personal demons, escapes this contradiction. It is true that this opinion also, as we find for instance in the Clementine Homilies, firmly maintains it to be by sin only that man subjects himself to the ingress of the demon ;J but here there is yet scope for the individual will ot the demon, who often, from motives not to be calculated, passes by the worst, and holds in chase the less wicked. § On the contrary, it the demons are considered, as by Olshausen, to be the actions of the power of evil in its relation to the power of goodness; this relation being regulated by laws, every thing arbitrary and accidental is excluded. Hence it evidently costs that theologian some pains to disprove the consequence, that according to his theory the pos* S. 295 f. f S. 302, after (he example of Taulus, exeg. Handbucli, 1. B. S. 474. } Homil. viii. 1’J. | Thus Asmodeus chooses Sara and her husband as olijects of torment and destruction, not because either the former or the latter v.-pn- nnrti..,ii.,.•!.- ™;..i,n,i i...’
462
THE LIFE OP JESUS.
THE LIFE OP JESUS.
sessed must always be the most wicked. Proceeding from the apparent contest of two powers in the demoniacs, he adopts the position that the state of demonical possession does not appear in those who entirely give themselves up to evil, and thus maintain an internal unity of disposition, hut only in those in whom there exists a struggle against sin.* In that case, however, the above state, being reduced to a purely moral phenomenon, must appear far move frequently ; every violent inward struggle must manifest itself under this form, and especially those who ultimately give themselves up ~i ™,,at
“hpfore arriving at this point, pass through a period of ~’- 44,01-nfove adds a physical *
“hpfore arriving at this point, pass through a period of ~’- 44,01-nfove adds a physical *
MIRACLES OF JESUS-DEMONIACS.to evil must, oeiore um,,,.^ ...
conflict, that is of possession. Olshausen therefore f the demoniacal state. But since such disorders of the nervous system may occur without any moral fault, who does not see that the state which it is intended to ascribe to demoniacal power as its proper source, is thus referred chiefly to natural causes, and that therefore the argument defeats its own object ?Hence Olshauscn. quickly turns away from this side of the question, and lingers on the comparison of the <5a£fiow£6/j,evf (demoniac) with the irovTjpbg (icickect); whereas he ought rather to compare the former with the epileptic and insane, for it is only by this means that any light can be thrown on the nature of possession. This shifting of the question from the ground of physiology and psychology to that of morality and religion, renders the discussion concerning the demoniacs, one of the most useless which Olshausen’s work contains.t Let us then relinquish the ungrateful attempt to modernize the New Testament conception of the demoniacs, or to judaize our modern ideas ;-let us rather, in relation to this subject, understand the statements of the New Testament as simply as they are given, without allowing our investigations to be restricted by the ideas therein presented, which belonged to the age and nation of its writers.£
The method adopted for the cure of the demoniacal state was, especially among the Jews, in conformity with what we have ascertained to have been the idea of its nature.The cause of the malady-was not supposed to be, as in natural diseases, an impersonal object or condition, such as an impure fluid, a morbid excitement or debility, but a self-conscious being; hence it was treated, not mechanically or chemically, but logically, i. e. by words. The demon was enjoined to depart; and to give effect to this injunction, it was coupled with the names of beings who were believed to have power over demons. Hence the main instrument against demoniacal pos* « 994. t It fills S. 289-298.
J I have endeavoured to present helps towards 5- ~’ioaMnn in several essays, which are now incorpo-!.,. ^.unnambuUsmus, session was conjuration,* either in the name of God, or of angels, UK of some other potent being, e. g. the Messiah (Acts xix. 18), with certain forms which were said to be derived from Solomon,! In addition to this, certain roots,}: stones, § fumigations and amulets || were used, in obedience to traditions likewise believed to have been handed down from Solomon. Now as the cause of the malady was not seldom really a psychical one, or at least one lying in the nervous system, which may be acted on to an incalculable extent by moral instrumentality, this psychological treatment was not altogether illusory; for by exciting in the patient the belief that the demon by which he was possessed, could not retain his hold before a form of conjuration, it might often effect the removal of the disorder. Jesus himself admits that the Jewish exorcists sometimes succeeded in working such cures (Matt. xii. 27). But we read of Jesus that without conjuration by any other power, and without the appliance of any further means, he expelled the demons by his word. The most remarkable cures of this kind, of which the gospels inform us, we are now about to examine.
J I have endeavoured to present helps towards 5- ~’ioaMnn in several essays, which are now incorpo-!.,. ^.unnambuUsmus, session was conjuration,* either in the name of God, or of angels, UK of some other potent being, e. g. the Messiah (Acts xix. 18), with certain forms which were said to be derived from Solomon,! In addition to this, certain roots,}: stones, § fumigations and amulets || were used, in obedience to traditions likewise believed to have been handed down from Solomon. Now as the cause of the malady was not seldom really a psychical one, or at least one lying in the nervous system, which may be acted on to an incalculable extent by moral instrumentality, this psychological treatment was not altogether illusory; for by exciting in the patient the belief that the demon by which he was possessed, could not retain his hold before a form of conjuration, it might often effect the removal of the disorder. Jesus himself admits that the Jewish exorcists sometimes succeeded in working such cures (Matt. xii. 27). But we read of Jesus that without conjuration by any other power, and without the appliance of any further means, he expelled the demons by his word. The most remarkable cures of this kind, of which the gospels inform us, we are now about to examine.
§ 93.
CASES OF THE EXPULSION OF DEMON’S BY JESUS, CONSIDERED
CASES OF THE EXPULSION OF DEMON’S BY JESUS, CONSIDERED
SINGLY.
AMONG- the circumstantial narratives which are given us in the three first gospels of cures wrought by Jesus on demoniacs, three are especially remarkable : the cure of a demoniac in the synagogue at Capernaum, that of the Gadarcnes possessed by a multitude of demons, and lastly, that of the lunatic whom the disciples were unable to cure.
In John, the conversion of water into wine is the first miracle performed by Jesus after his return from the scene of his baptism into Galilee; but in Mark (i. 23 ff.) and Luke (iv. 33 ft’.) the cure of a demoniac in the synagogue of Capernaum has this position. Jesus had produced a deep impression by his teaching, when suddenly, a demoniac who was present, cried out in the character of the demon that possesed him, that lie would have nothing to do with him, that he knew him to be the Messiah who was come to destroy them-the demons ; whereupon Jesus commanded the demon to hold his peace and come out of the man, which happened amid cries and convulsions on the part of the demoniac, and to the great astonishment of the people at the power thus exhibited by Jesus.
Here we might, with rationalistic commentators, represent the case to ourselves thus: the demoniac, during a lucid interval, entered the synagogue, was impressed by the powerful discourse of Jesus, and overhearing one of the audience speak of him as the Messiah, was seized with the idea, that the unclean spirit by which he was * See the passage quoted from Lucian, page 457, note (ft). f Joseph. Antiq. viii. t Joseph, ut sup. | Gittin, f. Ixvii. 2. || Justin. Mart. dial. c. Tryph. Ixxxv.THE LIFE OF JESUS.
•4D*
possessed, could not maintain itself in the presence of the holy Messiah ; whence he fell into a paroxysm, and expressed his awe of Jesus in the character of the demon. When Jesus perceived this, what was more natural than that he should make use of the man’s persuasion of his power, and command the demon to come out of him, thus laying hold of the maniac by his fixed idea; which, according to the laws of mental hygiene, might very probably have a favourable effect.It is under this view that Paulus regards the occasion as that on which the thought of using his messianic fame as a means of curing such sufferers, first occurred to Jesus.*
But many difficulties oppose themselves to this natural conception of the case.The demoniac is supposed to learn that Jesus was the Messiah from the people in the synagogue. On this point the text is not merely silent, but decidedly contradicts such an opinion. The demon speaking through the man evidently proclaims his knowledge of the Messiahship of Jesus, in the words, old a ae -if d K. r. X., not as information casually imparted by man, but as an intuition of his demoniacal nature. Further, when Jesus cries, Hold thy peace! he refers to what the demon had just uttered concerning his mes-siahship; for it is related of Jesus that he suffered not the demons to speak because they knew him (Mark i. 34; Luke iv. 41), or because they made him knowrii (Mark iii. 12.). If then Jesus believed that by enjoining silence on the demon he could hinder the promulgation of his messiahship, he must have been of opinion, not that the demoniac had heard something of it from the people in the synagogue, but contrariwise that the latter might learn it from the demoniac ; and this accords with the fact, that at the time of the first appearance of Jesus, in which the evangelists place the occurrence, no one had yet thought of him as the Messiah.
If it be asked, how the demoniac could discover that Jesus was the Messiah, apart from any external communication, Olshausen presses into his service the preteruaturaHy heightened activity of the nervous system, which, in demoniacs as in somnambules, sharpens the prescntient power, and produces a kind of clear-sightedness, by means of which such a man might very well discern the importance of Jesus as regarded the whole realm of spirits. The evangelical narrative, it is true, does not ascribe that knowledge to a power of the patient, but of the demon dwelling within him, and this is the only view consistent with the Jewish ideas of that period. The Messiah was to appear, in order to overthrow the demoniacal kingdom (d-oAtaat fyiac, comp. 1 John iii. 8; Luke x. 18 f.)[ and to cast the devil and his angels into the lake of tire (Matt. xxv. 41; llev. xx. 10.) :J it followed of course that the demons would recognize him who was to pass such a sentence on them.§ This, how* Exeg. Handb. i. (i. S. 422 ; L. J. 1, a, S. 128.
+ Bibl. Coimn. i. ‘2U(5. % Comp.
Bevtholdt, Cliristol. Jud. §§ 36-11. \ According - ••- .:at,
iwtlmldt. n, 185.) Satan recognizes in the MIRACLES OP JESUS-DEMONIACS.ever, might be deducted, as an admixture of the opinion of the narrator, without damage to the rest of the narrative; but it must first be granted admissible to ascribe so extensive a prescntient power to demoniacal subjects. Now, as it is in the highest degree improbable that a nervous patient, however intensely excited, should recognize Jesus as the Messiah, at a time when he was not believed to be such by any one else, perhaps not even by himself; and as on the other hand this recognition of the .Messiah bv the demon so entirely agrees with the popularvideas ;-we must conjecture that on this point the evangelical tradition is not in perfect accordance with historical truth, but has been attuned to those ideas.* There was the more inducement to this, the more such a recognition of Jesus on the part oi the demons would redound to his glory. As when adults disowned him, praise was prepared for him out of the mouth of babes (Matt. xxi. 16.)-1-as he was convinced that if men were silent, the very stones would cry out (Luke xix. 40.): so it must appear fitting, that when his people whom he came to save would not acknowledge him, he should have the involuntary homage of demons, whose testimony, since they had only ruin to expect from him, must be.impartial, and from their higher spiritual nature, was to be relied on.
Bevtholdt, Cliristol. Jud. §§ 36-11. \ According - ••- .:at,
iwtlmldt. n, 185.) Satan recognizes in the MIRACLES OP JESUS-DEMONIACS.ever, might be deducted, as an admixture of the opinion of the narrator, without damage to the rest of the narrative; but it must first be granted admissible to ascribe so extensive a prescntient power to demoniacal subjects. Now, as it is in the highest degree improbable that a nervous patient, however intensely excited, should recognize Jesus as the Messiah, at a time when he was not believed to be such by any one else, perhaps not even by himself; and as on the other hand this recognition of the .Messiah bv the demon so entirely agrees with the popularvideas ;-we must conjecture that on this point the evangelical tradition is not in perfect accordance with historical truth, but has been attuned to those ideas.* There was the more inducement to this, the more such a recognition of Jesus on the part oi the demons would redound to his glory. As when adults disowned him, praise was prepared for him out of the mouth of babes (Matt. xxi. 16.)-1-as he was convinced that if men were silent, the very stones would cry out (Luke xix. 40.): so it must appear fitting, that when his people whom he came to save would not acknowledge him, he should have the involuntary homage of demons, whose testimony, since they had only ruin to expect from him, must be.impartial, and from their higher spiritual nature, was to be relied on.
Other books
Warped (Dueling Devils Book 4) by Colt, Shyla
Thieftaker by D. B. Jackson
Forever Summer by Elaine Dyer
The Four Million by O. Henry
A Fall of Princes by Judith Tarr
The Birthgrave by Tanith Lee
Machines of Eden by Shad Callister
Death in the Valley of Shadows by Deryn Lake
Love the One You're With by Lauren Layne
So. Long.: Bad Boy Next Door by Kelley Harvey