II

The most remarkable fact in connection with the religion of the Greeks

is its attitude towards the use of the reason. Of all the religions

known to us this exercised the least restrictive power over the minds

of those who entertained it. Over their conduct in matters of ritual

it did of course exercise power both restrictive and positive, but the

reason it left free. Greek religion is therefore recalcitrant to M.

Reinach's definition of religion in general as "a sum of scruples

which impede the free exercise of our faculties." All that was

obligatory was ritual; there was no confession of faith, the priests

did not form a class with vested interests to maintain. The absence

of dogma from a religion will not recommend it to everybody, but those

who regard that as a fortunate circumstance will grant that the credit

rests not with the religion itself but with the people who hold it.

Just as any state can have as many paupers as it cares to pay for, so

any body of religionists can have as many dogmas as it chooses to

encourage. Greek religion began like any other with its terrors, its

taboos and its magic. If it did not tie up its adherents hand and

foot, as other primitive religions have done, that was due to the

psychological idiosyncracy of the Greeks. When their time of expansion

was over they became the patients and the agents of dogma, but in

connection with a foreign religion. It might have been expected from

the history of native religions in Greece, that the strong influence

of Greek thought on early Christianity would have been anti-dogmatic.

On the contrary, practically the whole dogmatic structure of the

fathers, though Oriental in spirit, is Greek in form. The tradition of

free thought could not stand before St. Paul, and Greek religion,

which for fifteen hundred years had given the world a lesson in the

true function and status of mythology, lent itself in its decay to the

creation of a system which, in the hands of races of very different

temperament, became dogma. But though Greek religion began with magic

and ended with dogma, it very early rendered the one harmless, and

never submitted to the other in connection with a native cult.

For the primitive Greek, as for the primitive Hebrew, the Latin, the

Maori, the Melanesian, the American Indian, the world was full of a

mysterious force, unaccountable, able either to curse or to bless; and

man's very existence depended on his ability to learn the laws of this

power's action, to direct it if possible, and if not, to placate it.

As man proceeds along the well-worn path to animism, the force comes

to be thought of as wielded by will and intelligence like his own. But

he never leaves it behind him. After the gods are born, he worships

them in terms of it. From his earliest ritualistic act, to the

contemporary sacrament of the Christian church, holy water for

instance has been the means of salvation. For unnumbered ages ritual

has remained unchanged, but its psychology has changed. What is

everywhere performed today with hope, originated everywhere in the

dark past with fear.

The Eleusinian mysteries sprang doubtless from as primitive beginnings

as any Greek ritual of which we have knowledge. Nevertheless they are

free from many of the marks of primitive ritual. They show no

cannibalism, probably no totemism, certainly no orgiastic excesses. If

animal sacrifice was practised in the precincts, no blood was spilt in

the hall of the mysteries. Moreover there was originally nothing

either mystic or mysterious about them, in our sense. But a god came

to be associated with them, a newcomer to Greece, who brought mystery

and mysticism in his train, a god whose mission was to emotionalize

religion. Dionysus, of Thracian origin, was, to begin with, a

vegetation-power, the son of the earth-goddess. The vine with its

strange psychic powers became the plant oftenest associated with him,

but the plane and the pine were also his, and if he was

Dionysus-the-Grape at Philippi, he was Dionysus-the-Ivy at Acharnania.

Remnants of strong magic, compelling the earth to fertility, were

present in his rites. Like other vegetation-powers he had a dark side;

he suffered death and resurrection, and was powerful in the world of

the dead. In the history of culture the ritual of Dionysus has a

distinguished place as the putative father of tragedy. In the history

of religion that ritual is chiefly remarkable for having brought into

Greece, together with all the phenomena of auto-suggestion, a

conception that was to have a portentous sequel, the conception of a

sacramental meal consisting of the body and blood of the god himself,

by partaking of which the communicant shared the divine nature. The

whole aim of the Dionysiac method in its native Thrace was hypnosis;

the wild Bacchic dance, the tossing of the head, the frantic clash of

the tambourine, the harrowing cry of wind-instruments, the waving of

torches in the night, the use of stimulants or narcotics, and finally

the rending and devouring of the still quivering flesh of the animal

which incarnated the god, were all means of so altering the psychic

states of the participant that he was no longer conscious of the

operation of his own will, but was filled with the god,--enthusiastic.

The practical aim of the induced ecstasy was doubtless originally the

acquisition of divine power for magical purposes. As the savage eats

his brave enemy to acquire his bravery, so the early agrarian eats the

vegetation-god to acquire his power of making things grow. But in

classical times the phenomena of enthusiasm had taken on a

significance that overshadowed the claims of vegetation-magic. Among a

people temperamentally self-restrained, nothing is more curious than

the psychology of self-abandonment. If we must select one aspect of

the godhead as most expressive of the Greek mind, that aspect will

unquestionably be Apollo, lucid, rational, self-possessed and

civilized. The gulf between the two doctrines, between Apollo's "never

too much" and Dionysus' exhortation to let yourself go, would have

constituted heresy and schism in a dogmatic age.

But the Greek, seeing how true and how indispensable both are, made

shift to bridge the gulf by the set of opinions associated with the

name of Orpheus. The state of our knowledge of the origins of Orphism

may be illustrated by the fact that Maass says Orpheus was a god and

indigenous in Greece, Miss Harrison believes him to have been a man,

probably a native of Crete whence he made his way to Greece by way of

Thrace, while Reinach declares he was a fox-totem of the Bassarids.

Fortunately it does not greatly matter. What is really important, not

only for Hellenism but for Christianity, is the spirit of his

doctrine, of which we can recover, not it is true, anything like

expository teaching, but the traces of the color it laid on almost

every fabric of Greek thought. No image could more justly picture it

than the faded remnants of paint found on the remains of Greek

buildings and sculptures. It is pretty nearly impossible to our

imagination to tolerate the vision of a temple or a statue clad

otherwise than in its original whiteness or in the beautiful tones

bestowed by time and rust. And similarly the forms of Greek spiritual

expression show to the soul's eye as logical, pure and monotone. But

just as surely as the houses of the gods were painted gaudily with red

and blue and green, as surely as their hair was ruddy and their cheeks

glowing, so surely was their worship touched and tinted with the

emotion that transcends and defies reason.

Orphism took up and developed the mystic elements of the Dionysiac

cult, giving them a higher spiritual content and a more restrained

expression. It was a scheme of salvation, based on the hope of life

after death. The central fact of religious experience was communion

with the god; by eating his body and drinking his blood the worshipper

partook of his nature, of which immortality was an attribute. "To

become Bacchus" was the aim of the partaker of the sacrament. But

whereas the old Thracian ritual surrendered the worshipper to the god

by means of drunkenness and frenzy, the new ritual induced ecstasy by

the equally efficacious use of fasting, silence and quiet suggestion.

Orphism though of foreign origin became a genuine Greek religion, and

was the last. It was never adopted by the state, but remained in the

hands of private congregations. Through these it permeated Greece.

Thinkers and poets and the plain people were reached by its different

methods of appeal. If we sum up its most striking characteristics, we

cannot fail to see how strong was its influence on the world-religion

that was to succeed it. Orphism took up the beliefs of paganism, and

adapted them to its own ends. It gave them fresh life through its

doctrine of the immortality of the soul. It taught that the soul after

death rests for a time in a state of probation, and is finally,

according to the works done in the body, either admitted to felicity

or punished by reincarnation. Final felicity was to be obtained by

ceremonial purity of life, reached through the use of sacraments

necessary to salvation, and the chief of these sacraments was the

symbolic and memorial partaking of the body and blood of a god slain

by his enemies. By the proper use of sacraments, the living could

improve the condition of the dead; unscrupulous priests sometimes

traded on the simplicity of ignorant worshippers, and engaged for

money to perform rites that should free the transgressor from the

consequences of his transgression, whether he were alive or dead. The

cult of Orpheus therefore summarizes an enormous range of human

history. From the Mountain Mother of the Cretan seals and her son,

through the patriarchal reign of Zeus, to Mary and the son of Mary, it

follows certain apparently unchanging requirements of the soul.

The ceremony of the Eleusinia was a magnificent pageant, the

culmination of the religious year. It was a strong appeal to eye and

ear, and to the _psychologie de la foule_. It was probably accompanied

neither by dogmatic exhortation nor by any appeal to the intellect.

Aristotle analyzed the method in a sentence: "The initiated do not

learn anything; rather they feel certain emotions, and are put into a

certain frame of mind." This frame of mind was a hopeful one for this

life and the next. On the supernatural side, the mystic felt that he

was sure of the good-will of the great powers of the underworld,

having done them honor, eaten of their food and enrolled himself as

their friend and follower. On the natural side, he had felt the

benefit--on which all ritual is based--of performing, in unison with

others, after preparation both bodily and mental, and with the moving

accompaniments of beautiful and impressive sights and sounds, certain

acts entirely apart from the ordinary routine of life, and venerable

with the usage of the past. But it is to be noted that although the

door was open for communication between religion and morals, the

original conception of purity was formal and ceremonial, a survival of

magic. We may picture Greek morals as standing with one foot on a

religious, the other on a social basis; but if, as in the usual

posture of Greek sculpture, the weight of the body is thrown chiefly

on one foot, that is the social one. When foreign cults began to make

their way into Greece, they generally followed the form of the

mystery. Isis, Serapis and Mithras, oriental in origin but Hellenized

in ritual, were centers for religions of the personal, mystic and

consolatory type. All these oriental cults brought with them a

tendency to take literally what the Greeks had taken loosely, and

Mithraism brought a high development of the tendency to base morality

on the egoistic motive.

Bearing in mind the wide prevalence of these and similar rites on the

shores of the Mediterranean during the first century of our era, we

are in a position to understand a situation which Archdeacon Cheetham

and Dr. Hatch discussed fifteen years ago. In apostolic times the

Christian sacraments were of the most informal character possible. A

man could be baptized at any time in any place by anyone. "Lo, here is

water; what hindereth me to be baptized?" For the years immediately

succeeding the apostolic, we have no evidence, and by the time

evidence begins again, a great change is visible. Baptism no longer

follows at once on conversion, but is preceded by a probationary term,

as was initiation. It can no longer be performed anywhere at any time,

but only in the great churches and at one of the great festivals,

generally Easter-even or Pentecost. Similarly, once in the year, on

the 16th of Boedromion, the candidates for initiation used to go down

to the sea in a body to be purified by immersion. And baptism is no

longer a simple thing done in the sight of all men but a mystery--so

Justin Martyr calls it--and the officiant is a "mystagogos." The

baptized are now called "initiate," the unbaptized "uninitiate."

Before the Lord's supper, the priest now asks, as the mystagogos used

to ask, "Is there anyone who has a quarrel with any?" And until infant

baptism removed the distinction, the "uninitiate" were directed to

withdraw before the consummation of the mystery, as for unnumbered

ages they had been bidden to withdraw from the crowning rites of the

Eleusinia. It is clear that the founders of Christian mysticism,

Clement for instance and Dionysius the Areopagite, did consciously all

in their power to emphasize the resemblances between the new and the

old. Gregory of Nyssa calls baptism "the mystic bath," Athanasius

calls unction "the mystic oil," Gregory of Nazianzen calls the

elements "mystic food." Secret formulas, the idea of which comes from

the mysteries, are called by the old name, "what must not be spoken."

Clement speaks the technical language of the mysteries. "O truly

sacred mysteries! O stainless light! My way is lighted with torches,

and I survey the heavens and God! I am become holy while I am being

initiated! The Lord is my hierophant!"

During the last ten years the researches of Reitzensteim and Cumont

have corrected the first impression that the influence of mystic cult

and language was late and self-conscious. The very origin of the

Christian sacraments, the very theology of Saint Paul, are now

believed by many scholars to reflect the Hermitic and Gnostic versions

of the mysteries.