THE PNEUMA, OR SPIRITUAL ATTRIBUTE OF
THE IDIOT.
Ὁ δε νους εοικεν εγγινεθαι ουσια τις ουσα, και ου φθειρεσθαι.
Aristot. De Anima, I. 4.
Inasmuch as the instrument by which the manifestation of mind is alone possible is undoubtedly damaged in idiots, they were formerly supposed not to belong to the human family, and their place in the order of creation was disputed. All admitted that they had the σωμα, or material part of our nature; they also conceded to them the ψυχη, or principle of animal life, but they considered that the πνευμα, or spirit of immortal life—that which essentially differentiates man from the brute—was absent in the idiot. This idea seemed to have been entertained by a great theologian of the 16th century, who, on being asked by a father what he was to do with his idiot boy, replied that the child might be drowned as he possessed no soul! Times are happily changed. We don't admit the lawfulness of drowning idiots in these days, but we teach them to swim against the adverse currents to which they are exposed; we buoy them up on the tempestuous waves of life; we pilot them through the rocks and shoals of their ill-starred career till their chequered race is run, and they are safely landed in the haven of everlasting rest.
Not only in the 16th century, but certain philosophers of a later date have questioned the idiot's place in creation, and have disputed his right to be classed among the human family; and some scientists—believers in the so-called doctrine of Evolution, as applied to the Descent of Man—have gone so far as to pretend that the brain of the microcephalic idiot is so far removed from the human type, as to constitute him a connecting link between man and the anthropoid apes! Now, the interesting results of our training institutions, showing the capacity for progressive improvement which exists in the idiot, gives the lie to this absurd and purely sensational hypothesis.
Here let me add that I strongly deprecate introducing the odium theologicum into the discussion of this subject, being fully conscious of the futility of attempting to check an unwelcome or distasteful theory by means of ecclesiastical censures; and I further admit that in anything like a scientific demonstration of truth, an appeal to the affections would be absurdly out of place.[36] Moreover, I should not reject the Darwinian theory from any sensational notion that its adoption was derogatory to Man's dignity, and I fully echo the sentiment of the naturalist who said that he would prefer being descended from a good honest monkey, than to be obliged to avow himself the offspring of certain fanatical enemies of scientific knowledge and progress; but I do complain of the tendency of the present day to accept new ideas without knowing or caring how to sift them. Everything is hypothetical, and allowed to enter the mind through the ivory gate of fancy; and on purely hypothetical premises, an attempt is made to found conclusive arguments. Strip the assertions of all their vagueness and superficial varnish, and reduce them to a skeleton of logical statement, and we shall see how much is assumed and how little is proved; and we shall find that we are asked to accept a chain of hypotheses, as if it were an induction founded on ascertained and indisputable facts. In thus expressing myself, I wish to add that the ultimate goal of the scientist is the establishment of truth, and I should as soon attempt to stop the progress of the avalanche that has become dislodged from the mountain top, as to try to bar the path of scientific progress, or to extinguish the torch of discovery. The tide of scientific truth will continue to flow on in spite of the modern Canutes, who may utter from time to time their imperial commands to stay its course. Magna est veritas et prevalebit.
The supporters of evolution base their arguments upon the remarkable resemblance between the brain of man and that of certain other animals. Now, I admit this striking analogy; I admit that every chief fissure and fold in the brain of man has its counterpart in that of the gorilla and the ourang-outang; and I am not prepared to deny the statement, that as far as the organ of intelligence is concerned, there is no very striking physical difference between him who weighs the stars and makes the light tell its secrets as to the constitution of distant worlds, and the howling senseless brute, who lives merely to satisfy his animal appetites. All animals of the vertebrate type are constructed on a plan which is essentially similar, not only as regards their skeleton, but as regards their brain. I don't deny that man is an animal, and that he has the essential properties of a highly organised one; but what I do maintain is, that the brain, after all, is merely an instrument by which the high psychological attributes peculiar to man become externally manifested.[37] Thought is not phosphorus, as some would have us believe; the human mind is not the result of a mere molecular arrangement of cerebral matter. There is something over and above all this, and the very resemblance of man's physical nature to that of some members of the brute creation, proves beyond all doubt that his superiority to them is hyperphysical, and I fully endorse Mr. Froude's philosophical remarks, when he says, "It is nothing to me how the Maker of me has been pleased to construct the organised substance which I call my body. It is mine, but it is not I. The νους, the intellectual spirit, being an ουσια—an essence—I believe to be an imperishable something which has been engendered in me from another source." The unhappy idiot, that stricken member of our race, possesses the tripartite nature of man—for he has not only the σωμα or material part, and the ψυχη or principle of animal life, but he also undoubtedly possesses the πνευμα or principle of immortal life.
The above statement could be amply borne out by a reference to cases which have been observed in idiot asylums. I will, however, mention but three:—An idiot boy has been known to retire alone, when there was a thunderstorm, to ask God to take care of his father, who was a sailor. A former superintendent of our Asylum, the late Mr. Millard, noticed one of the inmates praying in private, and on saying to the boy, "God hears prayer," he quietly observed, "Yes, and answers it, too." A little boy in the Massachussetts Asylum for Idiots was in declining health, and became, during his dying illness, an object of great interest to the matron and attendants. Unbidden, he said his prayers frequently, and putting up his little hand, he muttered, "Me want to go up! me want to go up!" Surely he was thinking of some sort of hereafter, because he added distinctly, "They'll say, here comes one of the boys from the Boston School for Idiots." The approach of death seemed to awaken his spiritual life; out of the decaying body appeared to rise the growing soul, for, after repeating the verse of a hymn, the spirit of this simple child became liberated from its earthly tenement—its material habitat—the connection between matter and mind was severed, and, to use the touching language of his biographer, "this poor little idiot boy bade a long adieu to his sorrowing friends, and doubtless there was then joy in heaven, as the recording angel wrote in the Book of Life the name of George Tobey."[38]
In an interesting essay published many years ago, entitled, "A Morning at Essex Hall, Colchester," its author, the Rev. Edwin Sidney, in describing his visit to the Asylum, remarked that, "The conduct of those who go to Church on Sunday is very decorous. One of the most cheering things in connection with these objects of benevolent solicitude, is the capability some of them manifest in receiving and being comforted by religion. There are amongst them instances of high conscientiousness and piety, which might be examples to such as are gifted with unimpaired faculties."