1

5

glance at the curious notion that there is something impure and sinful in marriage, as in sexual relations generally. The missionary Jellinghaus found this idea prevalent among the Munda Kols in Chota Nagpore. Once when he asked them, 'May a dog sin?" the answer was, "If the dog did not sin how could he breed?" In Efate, of the New Hebrides, according to Mr. Macdonald, sexual intercourse is regarded as something unclean; 2 and the Tahitians believed that, if a man refrained from all connection with women some months before death, he passed immediately into his eternal mansion without any purification. It is perhaps for a similar reason that the Shawanese have a great respect for certain persons who observe celibacy, and that, among the Californian Karok, a man who touches a woman within three days before going out hunting is believed to miss the quarry. Among several peoples, as the Brazilian aborigines," the Papuans of New Guinea, certain tribes in Australia, the Khyoungtha of the Chittagong Hills, and the Khevsurs of the Caucasus,10 continence is required from newly married people for some time after marriage. The same is the case with several peoples of Aryan origin; and Dr. v. Schroeder even believes that this custom can be traced back to the primitive times of the Indo-European race. In ancient Mexico, the Mazatek bridegroom kept apart from the bride during the first fifteen days of his wedded life, both spending the time in fasting and penance. 12 In Greenland, according to Egede, if married couples had children before a year was past, or if they had large families, they were blamed, and compared to dogs.13 In Fiji, husbands and wives do not usually spend the night together,

1 Jellinghaus, in 'Zeitschr. f. Ethnol.,' vol. iii. p. 367.

2 Macdonald, 'Oceania,' p. 181.

4 Ashe, loc. cit. p. 250.

6 v. Martius, loc. cit. vol. i. p. 113.

3 Cook, loc. cit. vol. ii. p. 164.

5 Powers, loc. cit. p. 31.

7 Guillemard, 'The Cruise of the Marchesa,' p. 389.

'Zeitschr. f. vgl. Rechtswiss,' vol. vii. p. 372.

8 Dawson, loc. cit. p. 32. Curr, loc. cit. vol. ii. p. 245. Lewin, loc. cit. p. 130.

10 Kohler, in 'Zeitschr. f. vgl. Reichtswiss,' vol. v. p. 343.

11

Kohler, in

V. Schroeder, 'Die Hochzeitsgebräuche der Esten, pp. 192-194.

12 Bancroft, loc. cit. vol. ii. p. 261.

13 Egede, loc. cit. p. 143, note.

except as it were by stealth; it is quite contrary to Fijian ideas of delicacy that they should sleep under the same roof. Thus a man spends the day with this family, but absents himself on the approach of night.1 Speaking of certain American Indians, Lafitau remarks, "Ils n'osent aller dans les cabanes particulières où habitent leurs épouses, que durant l'obscurité de la nuit ; . . . ce seroit une action extraordinaire de s'y présenter de jour." 2 Moreover, in spite of the great licentiousness of many savage races, a veil of modesty, however transparent, is generally drawn over the relations of the sexes.3

The same notion of impurity doubtless explains the fact that certain persons devoted to religion have to live a single life. In the Marquesas Islands, no one could become a priest without having lived chastely for several years previously. In Patagonia, according to Falkner, the male wizards were not allowed to marry," and the same prohibition applied to the priests of the Mosquito Indians and the ancient Mexicans. In Peru, there were virgins dedicated to the Sun, who lived in seclusion to the end of their lives; and besides the virgins who professed perpetual virginity in the monasteries, there were other women, of the blood royal, who led the same life in their own houses, having taken a vow of chastity. "These women," says Garcilasso de la Vega, "were held in great veneration for their chastity and purity, and, as a mark of worship and respect, they were called 'Occlo,' which was a name held sacred in their idolatry." In Mexico, also, certain religious women were bound to chastity, although their profession was but for one year. Speaking of these nuns, the pious Father Acosta remarks, "The devil hath desired to be

1 Seemann, Mission to Viti,' p. 191. 2 Lafitau, loc. cit. vol. i. p. 576. 3 Cf. Carver, loc. cit. p. 241 (Naudowessies); Lumholtz, loc. cit. p. 345 (natives of Queensland); Kotzebue, loc. cit. vol. iii. p. 172 (people of Radack); Schellong, in 'Zeitschr. f. Ethnol., vol. xxi. p. 18 (Papuans of Finschhafen); Riedel, loc. cit. p. 96 (Alfura of Ceram); Man, in 'Jour. Anthr. Inst., vol. xii. p. 94 (Andamanese).

4 Waitz-Gerland, loc. cit. vol. vi. p. 387.

5 Falkner, loc. cit. p. 117.

6 Bancroft loc. cit. vol. i. p. 734. Waitz, vol. iv. p. 152. 7 Garcilasso de la Vega, loc. cit. vol. i. pp. 291–299, 305.

served by them that observe Virginitie, not that chastitie is pleasing unto him, for he is an uncleane spirite, but for the desire he hath to take from the great God, as much as in him lieth, this glory to be served with cleanness and integrity." 1 Justinus tells us of Persian Sun priestesses, who, like the Roman vestals and certain Greek priestesses, were obliged to refrain from intercourse with men ;2 and according to Pomponius Mela, the nine priestesses of the oracle of a Gallic deity. in Sena were devoted to perpetual virginity.3

The Buddhistic doctrine teaches that lust and ignorance are the two great causes of the misery of life, and that we should therefore suppress lust and remove ignorance. We read in the 'Dhammika-Sutta' that "a wise man should avoid married life as if it were a burning pit of live coals." Sensuality is altogether incompatible with wisdom and holiness. According to the legend, Buddha's mother, who was the best and purest of the daughters of men, had no other sons, and her conception was due to supernatural causes. And one of the fundamental duties of monastic life, by an infringement of which the guilty person brings about his inevitable expulsion from Buddha's Order, is, that "an ordained monk may not have sexual intercourse, not even with an animal. The monk who has sexual intercourse is no longer a monk." 6 Mr. Wilson, indeed, states that, in Tibet, some sects of the Lamas are allowed to marry; but those who do not are considered more holy. And in every sect the nuns must take a vow of absolute continence. Again, the Chinese laws enjoin celibacy upon all priests, Buddhist or Taouist. 8

In India, where, according to Sir Monier Williams, married life has been more universally honoured than in any other country of the world, celibacy has, nevertheless, in instances

1 Acosta, loc. cit. vol. ii. pp. 333, et seq.

·

2 Das Ausland,' 1875, p. 307.

3 Pomponius Mela, loc. cit. book iii. ch. 6.

4 Monier Williams, 'Buddhism,' pp. 88, 99.

5 Rhys Davids, 'Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion,' p. 148. 6 Oldenberg, Buddha,' pp. 350, et seq.

7 Wilson, loc. cit. p. 213.

8 Medhurst, in 'Trans. Roy. As. Soc. China Branch,' vol. iv. p. 18.

of extraordinary sanctity, always commanded respect.1 "Those of their Sannyâsis," says Dubois, "who are known to lead their lives in perfect celibacy, receive, on that account, marks of distinguished honour and respect." But the single state, which is allowed to those who devote themselves to a life of contemplation, is not tolerated in any class of women.2

Among a small class of Hebrews, too, the idea that marriage is impure gradually took root. The Essenes, says Josephus, "reject pleasures as an evil, but esteem continence and the conquest over our passions to be virtue. They neglect wedlock." 3 This doctrine exercised no influence upon Judaism, but probably much upon Christianity. St. Paul held celibacy to be preferable to marriage:-"He that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well," he says; "but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better."4 Yet, as for most men continence is not possible, marriage is for them not only a right but a duty. "It is good for a man not to touch a woman; nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. . . . If they (the unmarried and widows) cannot contain, let them marry for it is better to marry than to burn."5 A much stronger opinion as to the superiority of celibacy is expressed by most of the Fathers of the Church. Origen thought marriage profane and impure. Tertullian says that celibacy must be chosen, even if mankind should perish. According to St. Augustine, the unmarried children will shine in heaven as beaming stars, whilst their parents will look like the dim ones. Indeed, as Mr. Lecky observes, the cardinal virtue of the religious type became the absolute suppression of the whole sensual side of our nature, and theology made the indulgence of one passion almost the sole unchristian sin. It was a favourite opinion among the Fathers that, if Adam had preserved his obedience 1 Monier Williams, 'Buddhism,' p. 88.

2 Dubois, loc. cit. pp. 99, et seq.

3

Josephus, "Iovdaïký ädwσis,' book ii. ch. 8, § 2. Solinus, loc. cit. ch. xxxv. §§ 9, et seq. 4 St. Paul, 1 Corinthians,' ch. vii. v. 38.

5 Ibid., ch. vii. vv. 1, 2, 9. • Mayer, loc. cit. vol. ii. pp. 289, et seq. 7 Lecky, 'History of European Morals,' vol. ii. p. 122. Milman, History of Latin Christianity,' vol. i. p. 152

to the Creator, he would have lived for ever in a state of virgin purity, and that some harmless mode of vegetation might have peopled paradise with a race of innocent and immortal beings. The use of marriage was in fact permitted to his fallen posterity only as a necessary expedient for the continuance of the human species, and as a restraint, however imperfect, on the natural licentiousness of desire.1 But, though it may be marriage that fills the earth, says St. Jerome, it is virginity that replenishes heaven.2

These opinions led by degrees to the obligatory celibacy of the secular and regular clergy. The New Testament gives us no intimation that, during the lifetime of the apostles, monastic vows were taken by men of any age, or by unmarried women, and hardly any of the apostles themselves were celibates. But gradually, as continence came to be regarded as a cardinal virtue, and celibacy as the nearest approach to the Divine perfection, a notion that the married state is not consistent with the functions of the clergy became general. As early as the end of the fourth century, the continence of the higher grades of ecclesiastics was insisted on by a Roman synod, but no definite punishment was ordered for its violation. Gregory VII.-who "looked with abhorrence on the contamination of the holy sacerdotal character, even in its lowest degree, by any sexual connection"-was the first who prescribed with sufficient force the celibacy of the clergy. Yet, in many countries, it was so strenuously resisted, that it could not be carried through till late in the thirteenth century.5

As for the origin of this notion of sexual uncleanness, it may perhaps be connected with the instinctive feeling, to be dealt with later on, against intercourse between members of the same family or household. Experience, I think, tends to prove that there exists a close association between these two feelings, which shows itself in many ways. Sexual love is

1 Gibbon, loc. cit. vol. i. pp. 318, et seq.

2 Draper,' History of the Intellectual Development of Europe,' vol. i. p. 415. 3 Fulton, loc. cit. pp. 140, 142. Lea, 'Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church,' p. 66.

5 Gieseler, 'Text-Book of Ecclesiastical History,' vol. ii. p. 275.