Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

CHAPTER I

RELIGION AS AN OBJECT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL STUDY

The closing years of the nineteenth century and the opening years of the twentieth mark the beginning of a definite determination to use the resources of scientific psychology in the investigation of religion. The roots of modern science reach far into the past, of course; yet a distinctly new departure was made when systematic, empirical methods were employed in order to analyze religious conversion and thus place it within the general perspective of the natural sciences. Associated with the interest in conversion there quickly arose inquiry into the wider problem of mysticism. Coincidently with such

The earliest articles bearing on this topic are as follows: G. Stanley Hall, "The Moral and Religious Training of Children and Adolescents," Pedagogical Seminary, I (1891), 196 ff.; A. H. Daniels, "The New Life," American Journal of Psychology, VI (1893), 61 ff.; J. H. Leuba, "A Study in the Psychology of Religious Phenomena," ibid., VII (1896), 309 ff.; W. H. Burnham, "The Study of Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, I (1891), 2 ff; E. G. Lancaster, "Psychology and Pedagogy of Adolescence," Pedagogical Seminary, V (1895), 1ff; E. D. Starbuck, "A Study of Conversion," American Journal of Psychology, VIII (1897), 268 ff.; "Some Aspects of Religious Growth," ibid., IX (1898), 70 ff. These articles were succeeded by the following volumes devoted largely or wholly to conversion and kindred phenomena: E. D. Starbuck, The Psychology of Religion (London, 1899); G. A. Coe, The Spiritual Life (New York, 1900); W. James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (London, 1902).

2 Typical of this interest are: J. H. Leuba, "Tendances fondamentales des mystiques chrétiens," Revue philosophique, LIV (1902), 1-36 and 441-87; "On the Psychology of a Group of Christian Mystics," Mind, XIV (1905), 15-27; M. Delacroix, Etudes d'histoire et de psychologie du mysticisme (Paris, 1908). James's Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) and J. B. Pratt's Psychology of Religious Belief (New York, 1907) are to a considerable degree arguments for the truth of mysticism.

studies of individual life came investigations of the earliest forms of religion.' Investigation of origins both included and stimulated attempts at a critical determination of the nature of religion and its relation to human evolution. Finally, the systematization of results in general surveys of the whole field has begun.3 The whole constitutes a fresh chapter that belongs on the one hand to psychology and on the other to the science of religion.

Attempts to psychologize this or that phase of religion are not new, of course. What is new is the use of critical, empirical methods, and the specific results of applying them. One could write a long history of what may be called, in no opprobrious sense, the quasi-psychology of religion, that is, attempts to conceive religion, or parts of it, in terms of mental structure or of mental process, but without a method sufficiently critical to correct erroneous statements of fact or of law. Inner religion, when it becomes reflective, commonly attempts to psychologize. Thus the New Testament writers, Paul in particular, have views concerning the structure of the mind (soul, spirit, the flesh, etc.) and the inner working

I

For example: Irving King, The Development of Religion (New York, 1910); E. Durkheim, Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse (Paris, 1912); W. Wundt, Elemente der Völker psychologie (Leipzig, 1913).

G. M. Stratton, Psychology of the Religious Life (London, 1911); J. H. Leuba, A Psychological Study of Religion (New York, 1912).

3 E. S. Ames, Psychology of Religious Experience (Boston, 1910). J. B. Pratt, in his article "The Psychology of Religion," Harvard Theological Review, I (1908), 435-54, gives an outline of the movement up to the date of his writing.

[ocr errors]

of spiritual influences, divine and demonic! Tertullian (ca. 155-222) defends Christianity against its detractors by declaring that "The soul is naturally Christian," and that the persecutors themselves bear unintentional witness to the things that they would stamp out.3 He goes so far in his treatise on the soul as to attempt a psychology of the Christian soul. Augustine, Pascal, and unnumbered others found God, as they thought, by studying the soul of man.

To dissect out the quasi-psychological elements in theology would require a survey of very nearly the whole history of Christian doctrine. The natural man, creationism and traducianism, dichotomy and trichotomy, inspiration, regeneration, free will, the person of Christ-these are some of the angles from which theologians have made the mind of man, as they have believed, an object of study. Schleiermacher (1768– 1834), with his insistence that religion is neither belief nor action, but feeling, gave a psychologic direction to all progressive theology. We must look for the essence of religion, he argues, in the interior of the soul itself. "Otherwise," he says, "ye will understand nothing of religion, and it will happen to you as to one who, bringing his tinder too late, hunts for the fire which the flint has drawn from the steel, and finds only a cold and meaningless particle of base metal, with which he cannot

1 See M. S. Fletcher, The Psychology of the New Testament (New York: Hodder & Stoughton Co.). The title of this work seems hardly fortunate. In these days the term psychology should connote scientific method, which, of course, the New Testament writers lacked.

1 Apology xvii.

3 Testimony of the Soul vi.

studies of individual life came investigations of the earliest forms of religion. Investigation of origins both included and stimulated attempts at a critical determination of the nature of religion and its relation to human evolution. Finally, the systematization of results in general surveys of the whole field has begun.3 The whole constitutes a fresh chapter that belongs on the one hand to psychology and on the other to the science of religion.

Attempts to psychologize this or that phase of religion are not new, of course. What is new is the use of critical, empirical methods, and the specific results of applying them. One could write a long history of what may be called, in no opprobrious sense, the quasi-psychology of religion, that is, attempts to conceive religion, or parts of it, in terms of mental structure or of mental process, but without a method sufficiently critical to correct erroneous statements of fact or of law. Inner religion, when it becomes reflective, commonly attempts to psychologize. Thus the New Testament writers, Paul in particular, have views concerning the structure of the mind (soul, spirit, the flesh, etc.) and the inner working

For example: Irving King, The Development of Religion (New York, 1910); E. Durkheim, Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse (Paris, 1912); W. Wundt, Elemente der Völkerpsychologie (Leipzig, 1913).

G. M. Stratton, Psychology of the Religious Life (London, 1911); J. H. Leuba, A Psychological Study of Religion (New York, 1912).

3 E. S. Ames, Psychology of Religious Experience (Boston, 1910). J. B. Pratt, in his article “The Psychology of Religion,” Harvard Theological Review, I (1908), 435-54, gives an outline of the movement up to the date of his writing.

[ocr errors]

of spiritual influences, divine and demonic! Tertullian (ca. 155-222) defends Christianity against its detractors by declaring that "The soul is naturally Christian,' , and that the persecutors themselves bear unintentional witness to the things that they would stamp out.3 He goes so far in his treatise on the soul as to attempt a psychology of the Christian soul. Augustine, Pascal, and unnumbered others found God, as they thought, by studying the soul of man.

To dissect out the quasi-psychological elements in theology would require a survey of very nearly the whole history of Christian doctrine. The natural man, creationism and traducianism, dichotomy and trichotomy, inspiration, regeneration, free will, the person of Christ-these are some of the angles from which theologians have made the mind of man, as they have believed, an object of study. Schleiermacher (1768– 1834), with his insistence that religion is neither belief nor action, but feeling, gave a psychologic direction to all progressive theology. We must look for the essence of religion, he argues, in the interior of the soul itself. "Otherwise," he says, "ye will understand nothing of religion, and it will happen to you as to one who, bringing his tinder too late, hunts for the fire which the flint has drawn from the steel, and finds only a cold and meaningless particle of base metal, with which he cannot

1 See M. S. Fletcher, The Psychology of the New Testament (New York: Hodder & Stoughton Co.). The title of this work seems hardly fortunate. In these days the term psychology should connote scientific method, which, of course, the New Testament writers

lacked.

'Apology xvii.

3 Testimony of the Soul vi.

« AnkstesnisTęsti »