Is belief in spiritualism ever evidence of insanity per se? / by Matthew D. Field.

  • Field, Matthew D.
Date:
1888
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Is belief in spiritualism ever evidence of insanity per se? / by Matthew D. Field. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    4/10 (page 2)
    ignore all other evidences of insanity except those of his conversing with the spirits, and, of course, held that belief in spiritualism was no proof of insanity. Examinations of medical literature show very little that has a direct bearing upon this question. In this case I held that it was necessary to divide the question, or, rather, to classify the believers in spiritual- ism. Those who have an abstract belief in the communion of spirits I did not consider at all; for no abstract belief is evidence of insanity per se, no matter how absurd it may be. And again, as most religions treat of a future life, and of the participation of the soul or of the spirit in the enjoyments or miseries of the hereafter, and that spirits have communion one with another, it is but a step to believe that spirits may return to this earth. As is related in the Bible, Elias and Moses appeared unto Christ when he was accompanied by Peter and James and John. It is only when the individual himself participates that insanity may be suspected. In insanity the ego is always involved. People may believe that God can talk to us ; this may be, to some, the most reasonable belief, or, to others, the most absurd. The be- lief that He can, or cannot, speak to us here assembled has naught to do with insanity ; but, if an individual states to you, in sober earnest, that he hears God speaking to him, and his actions show beyond peradventure that he does be- lieve this, then we question his sanity. For, even though we believe God may talk to us, and that He did talk to Moses and many others in the Bible times, yet this intro- duction of the ego convinces us of mental alienation. We may believe that the ass spoke to Balaam, and assume that it is so simple because the Bible says so, and accept the Bible as sufficient authority for our belief, and we may be- lieve that God can make any beast speak ; but, at the pres- ent time, if a person says, and evidently believes, that a beast was talking to him, we think he is insane, and we think this because the ego participates. Therefore, leaving the belief in spiritualism in the abstract out of the question, we come to the consideration of the so-called spiritualist, and of these I make three classes :