|
The extraordinary facts discussed in the preceding chapter,
particularly stigmatization, levitation, and so on, which
occasionally accompany ecstasy are so well proved that positivists
cannot deny their existence. They try, however, to liken them to
certain morbid phenomena proceeding from psychoneuroses, especially
hysteria. The saints are, as a matter of fact, subject, like other
men, to illness; but we are concerned with discovering whether, in
spite of their maladies, they are mentally sane and well
balanced.(1) We shall point out here, as many psychologists and
theologians have already done, the differences: (I) on the part of
the subject; (2) on the part of the phenomena; (3) on the part of
the effects. After these general remarks, we shall indicate by some
examples how to proceed to the examination of certain particular
facts. DIFFERENCES ON THE PART OF THE SUBJECT Patients afflicted with psychoneuroses are unbalanced from a mental
point of view, whereas true mystics and ecstatics manifest perfect
moral equilibrium. Dr. E. Regis thus characterizes the mentality of hysterical
subjects:
Many hysterical subjects have a distinctive mental state, easily
recognizable. From early youth, future hysterical subjects - for we
are speaking here especially of hysterical members of the feminine
sex - stand out by reason of particular characteristics. In the
majority of cases, they are girls of intellectual brilliancy,
precocious in the extreme, impressionable, coquettes, seeking to
draw attention to themselves, clever in feigning and lying, subject,
moreover, to nocturnal terrors, dreams, and nightmares. Hysteria
once established, the mental and moral state of its tributaries is
characterized principally, where the intellect is concerned, by an
excessive mobility, which makes the patients incapable of
perseverance and of any stable idea; . . . they are absolutely
incapable of succeeding in any serious endeavor. In addition, they
have a very manifest tendency to contradiction, controversy,
paradoxical ideas. . . likewise to imitation, suggestion, and
autosuggestion. Morally the state is the same: a bizarre,
capricious, fantastic, immoderately mobile character; . . .
duplicity, untruthfulness, cleverness in simulating, deceiving,
inventing; brusque and untimely propensity to the most perverse
acts, as well as to most meritorious actions of bravery and display;
continual need to make a spectacle of themselves, and so on.(2) Then
come subconscious fixed ideas, hallucinations even outside of any
delirium properly so called, attacks with delirium, finally mental
deterioration and madness.
It is evident that mental disturbance is increasingly accentuated,
the intellect directs the patient's conduct less and less, the
memory splits, sometimes to the extent that the patient believes
that he has two personalities; soon there is nothing left in the
mind except a small number of fixed ideas; whence arises a certain
mono-ideism bordering on madness. With the diminution of the
intellect, goes the weakening of the will; the emotions get the
upper hand, gradually the personality disappears, and caprice dominates.(3) In true mystics and ecstatics, on the contrary, it has been established that their intellect grows through their knowledge of God,
the divine perfections, the dogmas of faith, and also through their
profound knowledge of themselves. They declare that in a few
moments of contemplation they learn more than by reading all books
on the interior life. In these moments they receive a higher light
which makes them glimpse, as it were, a superior synthesis of all
they already knew, a living, luminous synthesis which, arousing the
impulse of the will, makes them undertake and carry out great
things with admirable, persevering courage in spite of almost
unbelievable difficulties. The lives of St. Catherine of Siena and
of St. Teresa illustrate this fact. In addition, true mystics are humble, charitable, submissive to the
divine will amid even the greatest trials. In them is patent the
connection and the harmony of the most dissimilar virtues, and,
dominating all, a love of God and of neighbor and a wisdom that give
them peace and wonderful serenity. Properly speaking, they represent
the inverse of the passionate agitation and inconstancy of
hysterical subjects. This fact is evident in their labors for the
successful prosecution of a difficult undertaking; likewise their
perseverance in good, their constant love of the truth, united to
reserve and humility, give proof of it. DIFFERENCES ON THE PART OF THE PHENOMENA No less difference exists. between true ecstasy and what has been
called hysterical ecstasy. It suffices to have assisted once or
twice at this latter manifestation in hospitals to see that there is no
resemblance whatever between the two. In attacks of hysteria, as Dr. E. Regis says,(4) there is a delirium
of illusion, clearly hallucinatory in character or marked by
memories or lengthy monologues. Fundamentally it is one and the same
delirium, but corresponding to different degrees of depth of the
illusion. The first phase of the crisis resembles a light attack of
epilepsy, but is distinguished from it by the sensation of a ball
that rises in the throat; the person experiences a feeling of
suffocation, which comes from the swelling of the throat. The second
phase consists in inordinate gestures, contortions of the whole
body, especially in
arched circles. The third is that of passional attitudes of fright,
jealousy, lubricity in relation to the obsessing image. The crisis
ends by attacks of tears or of laughter, which relax the patient. On
coming out of these crises, the subjects are exhausted. In short,
there are different phases, epileptoid, clownish, plastic, and
passional (called hysterical ecstasy), the crisis terminating in
exhaustion of the body, dulling of the mind, collapse of the whole
being. In true ecstasy, on the contrary, there are no convulsions, violent
agitation, passional attitudes of fright, jealousy, and so on; there
is calm, the rapture of a soul profoundly united to God by one of
those passive recollections which God alone can give and which
considerably surpass the recollection that proceeds from our
personal effort of concentration. There is absolutely no relation
between so-called hysterical ecstasy and the ecstasy, for example,
of Bernadette during the apparitions of Lourdes. In a real ecstasy
there is no morbid excitation, no strange agitation, no entirely
physical delectation, followed by depression. Ecstasy is the
movement of the whole being, both body and soul, toward the divine
object present in the imagination or intellect. Ecstasy ends in the
calm return to the natural state, with simple regret over the
disappearance of the celestial vision and the wholly spiritual joy
that it gave. St. Teresa even points out in her Life (5) that this
state, which should weaken the body, on the contrary, gives it new
strength. DIFFERENCES IN THE EFFECTS These differences are more and more marked. In hysterical subjects
when the crises increase, the unbalanced mental condition grows and
with it dissimulation, lying, brutalization, lascivity, and finally
capricious sensuality completely dominates the intellect and will.
If mono-ideism is present, it springs from the disorganization and
disintegration of the personality, and from mental confusion which
leads to madness. In true mystics and ecstatics, on the other hand, there is a
growing development of the understanding of divine things, of those
of the interior life, of the life of the Church, of all that touches
on the salvation or the loss of souls. There is likewise a steady
increase in the love of God and in devotion to their neighbor, as
shown by the
works they undertake and often bring to success, to such a degree
that their foundations last for centuries. St. Francis of Assisi, the stigmatic of Alvernia, founded in the
thirteenth century a religious order that is still one of the most
numerous in the Church. St. Thomas Aquinas, during his ecstasies,
dictated whole chapters on the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and
saw from a superior point of view the entire synthesis of
theological science. St. Catherine of Siena, who died at the age of thirty-two and who
for a long time could neither read nor write, played a role of
primary importance in the affairs of her day, particularly in the
return of the popes to Rome. In spite of opposition on the part of many, St. Teresa founded
before her death sixteen convents for women and fourteen for men. If in hysterical subjects there is mono-ideism (for lack of other
ideas), for example, the fixed idea of suicide, in true mystics
there is one great idea which subordinates all others to itself in
perfect harmony; in other words, the thought of God, of His immense
goodness toward us and the profound and radiating conviction that we
must correspond to His love. It is not the disintegration of the
elements of a man's personality; rather it is their perfect
subordination according to the very order of charity: God loved
above all else, then souls to be saved. This is why, even from the
human point of view, as a number of unbelieving psychologists have
recognized, the saints are great organizers. Although an unbeliever,
De Montmorand writes on this subject: "True mystics are people of
experience and action, not of reasoning and theory. They have the
sense of organization, the gift of commanding, and reveal
themselves well endowed for business. The works that they found are
capable of surviving and enduring; in the conception and direction
of their enterprises, they give proof of prudence, of daring, and of
that just appreciation of possibilities which characterizes good
sense. And, as a matter of fact, good sense seems to be their
fundamental quality; good sense untroubled by an unhealthy
exaltation and a disordered imagination, and coupled with the most
unusual power of penetration." (6) This we see exemplified in St.
Paul, St. Augustine,
St. Bernard, St. Dominic, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Thomas Aquinas,
St. Bonaventure, St. Teresa, and so many others.(7) AN EXAMINATION OF SOME PARTICULAR FACTS Occasionally in the lives of mystics and ecstatics we find evidence
of a given fact that might suggest the hypothesis of hysteria. We
shall give an example of blindness which we have studied
particularly. It is known that functional blindness and even
temporary paralysis are occasionally found in hysteria and may last
even beyond the crisis and for a long time. In Father Estrate's life of the Arabian Carmelite, Sister Mary of
Jesus Crucified,(8) we read that in her youth in the Orient the
servant of God was stricken with blindness which lasted forty days,
that she recovered her sight instantaneously after a prayer to the
Blessed Virgin, and that at the moment of her cure she felt
something fall from her eyes. In another life of the same
Carmelite,(9) the fact is reported in an identical manner. Is this
blindness for forty days a sign of hysteria in this Carmelite who
had frequent ecstasies accompanied by levitation? To answer this question and every other one of the same kind, the
moral and physical qualities of the subject should first be
examined. In the case under discussion, the constitution of the
servant of God was healthy and even strong; her corpulence and the
incessant work she performed do not permit us to classify her among
neuropaths or among psychopaths. No functional malady was observed
in her. Moreover, she never had the signs of typical hysteria, or
the precursory symptoms, or the crises with epileptoid, clownish,
plastic, passional phases, or delirium followed by physical
exhaustion. Instead of discovering inconstancy or untruthfulness in
her, one sees perseverance in good, love of the truth, purity,
reserve, and humility. Should the fact of this forty-day blindness,
nevertheless, be attributed to hysteria? Is it a symptom of this
malady? On this subject we shall make a few observations which are applicable to several similar facts: I. The nature of hysteria is not yet well known; some see a neurosis
in it, others a psychosis, others the two at once, to such a degree
that Professor Lassegue, of the Paris Academy of Medicine, said, as
reported in L'Ami du clerge: "The definition of hysteria has never
been given, and it is possible that it never will be. . . . It is a
basket into which people throw the papers that they do not know how
to classify." (10) Since this malady has not yet been sufficiently
defined, it has not as yet, properly speaking, differential
symptoms, such, for example, as Koch's bacillus for tuberculosis.
What seems to be fixed is the form of the hysterical crisis, with
its precursory symptoms and the different phases of the crisis.
Blindness is occasionally, but not always, found in it; therefore,
among the signs of this malady that are customarily cited, it is not
a cardinal symptom. 2. Moreover, blindness occurred only once in the life of the servant
of God of whom we are speaking. 3. She has not one of the peculiar symptoms of hysteria, not any of
the precursory symptoms, not any of the phases of the crisis. In the
syndrome of these symptoms, blindness would have contributed to
proving something; without them, it proves nothing. 4. On the other hand, the particular cadre of Sister Mary of Jesus
Crucified harmonizes sufficiently with that of mystical ecstasy
described by St. Teresa. 5. Persons least favorably inclined to the servant of God never said
that she was hysterical. A doctor at Pau who had suspected this malady and sought to make sure of it, one day witnessed her
extraordinary state and admitted that it was ecstasy. All these observations show that the temporary blindness of which we
are speaking did not originate in hysteria. 6. There is a confirmation of our opinion in the reasons which lead
to the conclusion that it was an organic malady. It occurred, in
fact, in the Orient where blind persons are notably more numerous
than elsewhere because of the brilliant glare of the sun, the
whiteness of the earth, the calcareous dust carried by the wind, the
coolness of the nights and the fact that people sleep on the flat roofs, and finally because of the lack of hygiene, because of flies
and other insects.(11) 7. There is a final reason, and one not to be disregarded, related
by the two above-mentioned biographers of the servant of God,
namely, that at the moment when her blindness was cured "she felt
that something fell from her eyes." This same remark is made by
those who are cured of organic blindness caused by leucoma (albugo),
well known in pathology, that is, the yellowish spot which forms
between the layers of the cornea in several inflammations of the
eyeball or of one of its parts. These different reasons lead us to think that blindness in this case
is organic and not functional, and consequently not hysterical.
Particular facts, more or less similar to this case, may be examined
in the same way by considering, first of all, the qualities of the
subject and the particular details of the fact itself, to see
whether or not it is related to one or another symptom of hysteria
or of some other psychoneurosis.(12) The director will be able and sometimes will be obliged to consult
a competent physician. An attentive examination, well conducted
from both the medical and the spiritual point of view, will often
give moral certitude, especially if it is accompanied by prayer,
great disinterestedness, and perfect purity of intention in the
search for truth. NOTE In the "Congress on Religious Psychology" of Avon-Fontainebleau
(September 21-22, 1938), the reports of which are assembled in the
Etudes carmelitaines (October, 1938), the following question was
raised: "In what measure are sanctity and lofty mystical life
compatible with pathological disturbances?" Father Bruno, who
organized the Congress, believed that the entire result could be summed up in the following proposition: "Theologians and doctors who
were consulted believe possible the concomitance of normal mystical
life and of certain psychopathological states not to be identified
with insanity. However, it appears that definitive and incrustating
anomalies are not compatible with regular mystical elevation." In
accord with Father de Guibert and Father de Tonquedec, we admit
this proposition with some reservations. During the same Congress,
Doctor A. Delmas, who also admits the possibility of a lofty
interior life in lucid moments for a cyclothymic like Father Surin,
declared that nevertheless true hysteria does not seem to him
compatible with an eminent moral life; such a state would constitute
a veritable enigma. (13) The articles of Dr. Biot on these questions may be read with profit.
(14)
|
|
1. On this subject, see the studies of Dr. Pierre Janet, L'Automatisme
psychologique (10th ed., 1930), Part II, chaps. 3 f.; De l'angoisse
a l'extase, 1926; La Medecine psychologique, 1928. Cf. also Dr. E.
Regis, Precis de psychiatrie, (6th ed., 1926), in particular on
hysteria, pp. 954-66. Robert de Sinety, S.J., Psychopathologie et
direction, 1934. A. Poulain, S.J., Des Graces d'oraison (10th ed.,
1922), Part III, chap. 18; Part IV, chap. 21. Msgr. A. Saudreau,
L'Etat mystique, sa nature et ses phases (2nd ed., 192 I), chap. 17.
G. Rabeau, "Theologie mystique et psychiatrie," La Vie spirituelle
(suppl.), June 1935; and in the same issue an article by Dr. H. Ey,
"La notion de psychopathologie
dans ses rapports avec les problemes mystiques." J. de Tonquedec,
S.J.,
"Anormaux" (sanctification des), Dict. de spiritualite, I, col.
678-89. Dr. Biot, "Les maladies nerveuses et mentales," Ami du
clerge (1939), no. I, pp. 17-27. 2. Op. cit., p. 955.
3. Cf. P. Janet, L'Automatisme psychologique, Part II, chaps. 3 f.
4. Op. cit., p. 960.
5. Chaps. 18, 20. 6. Psycbologie des mystiques (1910), pp.
20f. 7. Cf. H. Bergson, Les Deux sources de la morale et de la religion
(1932), pp. 228, 235, 256. 8. Estrate, Vie de Soeur Marie de ]esus-Crucifie, carmelite arabe
(2nd ed., 1816), p. 18. 9. Buzy, Vie de Soeur Marie de ]esus-Crucifie, carmelite arabe
(1927, pp. 29 ff. 10. L'Ami du clerge (1914), p. 82. 11. Cf. "Aveugles,"
Dict. de la Bible, col. 1289. 12. It should also be pointed out, as Dr. Regis observes (op. cit.,
pp. 697-99: "Psychopathic states resulting from hyperfunction of the thyroid"),
that diseases like Basedow's have symptoms which recall those of
hysteria; but "when psychic disturbances arise through crises
corresponding to Basedowian pressures, the diagnosis cannot be
doubtful" (ibid.). In the same work (pp. 700 ff.) cf. the article on endocrinian
autointoxications. 13. Cf. Etudes carmelitaines (October, 1938), pp. 188 if., 235-39. 14. "Quelques notions elementaires sur les maladies nerveuses et
mentales," L'Ami du clerge (1939), pp. 17-27. After having distinguished the
organic maladies of the nervous system from nervous diseases, he
divides the latter into neuroses, psychoneuroses, and psychoses.
Neuroses which attack the nervous system from the functional point
of view are epilepsy, Basedow's disease, and the diseases of the
endocrine glands, neurasthenia, one of the symptoms of which is
asthenia, a notable loss of strength. Psychoneuroses include hyperemotivity, with its manifestations:
anxiety; psychasthenia, which is manifested by obsession, scruples;
the mythomania of false ecstatics, false visionaries, false
stigmatics. Psychoses, which peculiarly affect mental activity, have diverse
forms: melancholia, mania, cyclothymia (manias or melancholy
returning in cycles), hallucinations, delirium, which show the
disintegration of the personality, whereas unity through the
subordination and coordination of ideas, feelings, and voluntary
acts, is the sign of mental health. |