By Mark Owen - © 2010
Chapter 15 - The sexual underground of religion
All religion in its beginning is a mere misinterpretation of sex-ecstasy, and the religion of today is, only the, essentially unchanged, evolutionary product, of psychological perversion . . . Thus literally may we say 'God is love' - sex-love, sometimes in disguise and indistinctly recognized as such, by the lover whose lovesick longings even now create a god to take the place of the undiscovered and much-craved human lover. - Theodore Schroeder
Novalis (Friedrich von Hardenberg, 1772-1801) made the perceptive comment: 'It is rather astonishing that the association of lust, religion and cruelty during all these years has not caused mankind to pay greater attention to the intimate character of their relationship and to their common aims.'
There is no doubt that there are often strange links manifested between human sexuality and religion. The Austrian sexologist Dr Wilhelm Stekel, who wrote extensively in the first half of the 20th century, certainly believed strongly in such links and, indeed, discovered in a large proportion of his patients a personal history that indicated a close connection between religion and sex.
It is interesting to note, as Mr Schroeder has pointed out, that the language of faith is often akin to the language of love, nowhere more so than in the relationship between the professed Catholic nun and the Christ-god. But not only female disciples! Take these revealing words of devotion from St John of the Cross (in The Dark Night of the Soul):
On his flowery bosom, Kept whole for Him alone, There He reposed and slept; and I cherished Him, and the waving of the cedars fanned Him. As His hair floated in the breeze, That from the turret blew, He struck me on the neck, With His gentle hand, And all sensation left me. I continued in oblivion lost, My head was resting on my love; Lost to all things and myself, And, amid the lilies forgotten, Threw all my cares away.
It is also noteworthy that religious awareness seems to reach some sort of peak that coincides with the sexual development of the individual. I have already drawn attention to the fact that far more persons are converted in the teen years than in any comparable age group. Adolescence is the period of the individual's life that evangelists love! Interestingly many young people with awakening and insistent but suppressed sexual demands find in religion at this time a means of sublimation of those urges. This is clearly evident in the life stories of some of the famous mystics, including Blaise Pascal, Mme Guyon and St Catherine of Genoa. In the case of the latter two saints, both were very unhappy in their married lives when they experienced their mystical encounter with the other world. However it is also possible, as Stekel has shown, that a dangerous mix of religion and sexuality may lead to future trouble in the individual's life.
Through the manifold seemingly asexual activities of Christians one can detect the hidden undercurrents of sexuality, suppressed, repressed, but never ever rooted out altogether, forever lurking beneath the respectable surface of religious faith and practice, ready to break forth in disastrous ways. Surely the very institution of the castrati is a clear manifestation of this fact? And within such an atmosphere of aberrant sexuality it is no wonder the antihuman notion of clerical celibacy arose. Not without a struggle, though, a struggle against the normal healthy carnal instincts of priests and nuns. It was to be many centuries before celibacy was fully adopted in the Western Church, while the Orthodox sensibly allowed its priests to marry, as did the Protestant churches.
But even when celibacy became the official rule bishops and priests lived openly and sometimes secretly with wives and concubines, yes, even in our own time, as we have seen in the case of philandering bishops and priests. (In 2009 it was alleged that at least 500 women in Ireland were currently conducting clandestine affairs with Catholic priests - according to support groups for those in 'forbidden relationships'. Bishop Pat Buckley stated that a conservative estimate was that one in 10 priests enjoyed regular sex with women and some even referred to their clerical collar as the 'bird catcher'. Studies showed that 80 percent of clergy had broken their vows of celibacy. Including practising homosexuals, Bishop Buckley said that up to 40 percent of the Catholic clergy of Ireland were sexually active.)
The suppression of the natural sexual instinct almost always results in aberrations of one kind or another appearing in the individual. And through long centuries an explosive situation obtained, with thousands of young children and adolescents, of both sexes, being shut up under the complete control of celibates. Although there were undoubtedly pockets of genuine care and concern, the treatment meted out to helpless children, entirely in the power of their kindly God-fearing keepers, both male and female, was often appalling.
It is only in our own time that the widespread sexual and physical abuse of children by the clergy has come to light. We have but occasional hints of past misdemeanours, but they must surely have occurred; logic at least would tell us this. In an era when the Church and its clergy were regarded with godlike awe little of the truth came under public notice and abused children were rarely in a position to complain or report what had happened to them. Doubtless few would believe them anyway. We even have cases recorded where children were punished severely for daring to suggest they might have been abused. The Church and its clergy could do no wrong. But it is hard to escape the conclusion, extrapolating from our own time, that many children fell prey to sexual predators and sadists.
And some cases did come under public scrutiny, one, for example, in 1861. It surely represents but the tip of an iceberg, the roots of which stretch back into antiquity. In France in that year, out of a population of some 300 boys in a Catholic school, an estimated 100 or more of them had been sexually abused by the brothers who taught them! The school was operated by a powerful religious order and many parents of victims, although aware of what was going on, were afraid to say anything. Not so an old soldier, now working as a gendarme. When he discovered that a child within his own family had been despoiled he raised a complaint. The local board of supervision, afraid of 'compromising the interests of religion' (doesn't that sound terribly familiar?), tried to hush up the affair. The board was overruled. Eventually the evildoers were allowed to quietly slip away from the area, their Superior claiming to know nothing of what had been happening (and isn't that familiar too?). For his trouble, the old soldier was dismissed from his post!
An interesting statistical survey was conducted in France around this same period. A total of 100,000 lay schools were compared with a similar number of church-operated establishments. It was found that in the lay centres an average 5.44 'moral crimes' and 22.29 'offences' had been committed, whereas in the Church schools the figures were 65.1 'moral crimes' and 90.5 'offences'. I cannot resist making a personal observation here. Many years ago I earnt my living from running market stalls. The worst experience I ever had of continual theft from my stall occurred at a notable Catholic boys' college. The appalling behaviour of those little thieves far outdid anything I had experienced at public schools or elsewhere.
But back to history. In 1873 another scandal erupted, in the great Barnabite (Catholic) college at Monza, in Lombardy. Many of the 300 students there were found to have been sexually abused by tutors. The authorities acted with greater despatch than their French counterparts. They promptly closed down the institution. The chief criminals, including the Principal, Father Stanislas Cereza, conveniently disappeared. Yet again in France, scandal erupted in 1902 when the press was filled with the stories coming out of a girls' school run by the nuns of Notre Dame de Charite at Tours. This time it was not sexual abuse but sadism that shocked the nation. Punishments were many and showed a considerable degree of inventiveness. One of the worst was to confine a girl in a damp cellar, but this was no ordinary cellar, it was one used to house the dead bodies of nuns, left there to lie in state after their demise. The girls were specially terrified of this particular punishment.
There were, however, many physical cruelties. A girl might be made to prostrate herself before a sister and draw crosses on the ground with her tongue. If this punishment took place in the refectory or kitchen it was most unpleasant but if, as it sometimes happened, it was done in the lavatory, a girl might well vomit. No matter, a duster would be stuffed into her mouth as punishment for being sick. The girls were on other occasion forced to kiss the feet of fellow-pupils. One sister, the delightfully named, Marie Sainte-Rose du Coeur de Jesus, enjoyed smearing the faces of her charges with mud and was known to have stuffed the victims' own excreta into their mouths. But perhaps the most notable innovation was the use of the straitjacket. Girls were often strapped into one for days on end. Naturally, without the use of their hands, they had difficulty in eating and so had to manage as best they could, heads forced into earthenware pots. A further refinement of cruelty was to take a girl in a straitjacket and hold her head down in a basin of water 'until her throat rattled'. Recent revelations involving physical and sexual abuse by members of several orders of brothers and sisters should thus come as no surprise to any of us.
That carnal thoughts were not banished by the Christian way is also seen in a curious practice known as agapetism, first noted in the Christian context around the middle of the 3rd century. Young virgin women, even nuns, would sleep, usually entirely nude (for that has been more often than not the mode adopted for sleeping by humans through the centuries, as it is even today in many societies) with a male while the couple claimed not to have had sexual congress. Whether or not the ladies retained their virginity, the practice stirred up the ire of Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, who decreed that if a young woman announced that she had successfully passed through such a test of chastity, she must submit to a midwife for examination! Cyprian once questioned a nun as to her claim of remaining virginal after spending a night thus bedded down. The prelate told the poor women that even if she passed the normal test of virginity (through examination of the generative organ) she was still guilty of sin if 'parts of her body', i.e. the mouth, had been employed in lovemaking.
There was also the phenomenon of phantom females! One of the great Fathers of the Church, St Jerome, recorded his experience of ghostly bed-companions, come to tempt his flesh. According to the holy man troops of attractive naked females danced about him at night as he attempted to sleep, while trying to keep his thoughts pure. And all without the help of pornography! In a later era, another saint, Aldhelm of Malmesbury, had his resolution tested in a very dangerous manner. He went to bed between two real girls ('unam ab uno latere, alterem ab altero'). Which goes to show there is nothing new under the sun.
Virginity was as much a preoccupation of the Christian doctors as it was (and still is!) of others inside and outside the Church. The lascivious activities in the 3rd century were not the first such occurrences. As early as around 100 CE an account was written anonymously (but believed by some to have been penned by Hermas, brother of a Christian bishop), a fantasy-story of this bygone era. The storyteller is introduced by a shepherd to a company of twelve females. Night approaches and the narrator asks the girls where he is to sleep. 'You will sleep with us' they reply, 'but as a brother not as other men, for you are indeed our brother and in future we shall serve you, for we love you.' There follows a scene where one of the maidens kisses the man, followed by each of the others. More titillation follows. The virgin ladies remove their clothing, even undergarments, placing them on the floor to form a sort of bed, telling the man to lie upon this. 'Next they prayed, and I prayed with them,' the narrator continues, 'and I remained with them, praying, until two o'clock in the morning.' (Does something sound familiar here - from our own time?) At length the shepherd returns and questions the ladies, asking: 'I hope that you did not abuse him.' (A touch of male chauvinism here!) The ladies reply, 'Ask him.' The final word of this curious tale is somewhat enigmatic, for the narrator simply states: 'Lord, it gave me pleasure to spend the night with the women.'
Through the centuries there was another odd development, seen in many eras and places. Groups of zealous Christians, e.g. the Adamites, already mentioned, set out to preach and practise a pure form of religion in which sex played no part, yet in time degenerated into quite the opposite. Sexuality manifests itself in many ways, especially when it has been repressed in the individual. It is noteworthy that in recent times there have been numerous scandals involving 'illicit' sexual activities, both in America and here in Australia, where the transgressor was a prominent Pentecostalist or member of some other Evangelical church. Now this is not to say other Christians do not transgress their own codes, nor to paint all fundamentalists with the same brush. However, I believe that underneath the veneer of righteousness there is repressed sexuality crying to get out. Those of us who have no such beliefs are happily able to find many legitimate outlets for our sexual instincts. Not so the Bible-believing Christian.
And distortions of the sex instinct are also noted in the religious context. There was an era in England when many a small private school seemed to be plagued with a cane-wielding clergyman (usually Anglican) as the headmaster. Some of these men were undoubted sadists and the strong link between sadism and sex is well known. What a wonderful situation in which to exercise their cruelties - with almost complete control over their young charges, who were usually cut off in one way or another from families and friends.
In former times in Catholic schools, too, many nuns and brothers were undoubted sadists. The awe with which Catholics tended to treat their religious mentors ensured that the cruel activities of many of these pedagogues went unchallenged and generations of young children grew up in fear of the rod and strap. It is only now, when the hold of Catholicism upon enlightened people has weakened, that there has been revealed the widespread abuses that occurred, both physical and sexual, and the misery through which many children lived. Recent official reports into the activities of Catholic priests and nuns in Ireland revealed some quite appalling instances of cruelty suffered by children along with sexual abuse.
Returning to our account of Christian history, readers will recall that in the earliest period we met with the strange practice known as agapetism. In the late 18th and early 19th centuries this activity, now called bundling, was resurrected. First in vogue in Europe it was transported across the waters to the USA, where it found fertile soil in which to establish itself. Bundling involved the sharing of a common bed by two young people, male and female, the couple not engaging in sexual activity. Well, that was the theory. Why there was a renewed and quite vigorous outbreak of this neo-sexual practice in the New World has never been fully explained. We may observe, though, that conditions favoured the growth of many strange doctrines and practices. In fact, it would probably be true to say that in no period of history and in no other area did there arise such a concentrated cacophony of conflicting religious views as in 19th century America. In this context religion and sex became inextricably mixed, resulting in some very odd activities and beliefs indeed. A visitor in 1788, Abbé Robin, highlighted this fact. 'The Americans in these parts are very hospitable,' he remarked. 'They have commonly but one bed in the house, and the chaste spouse, although she were alone, would divide it with her guest, without hesitation or fear.'
If boy and girl were approaching marriage to one another, which was often the case, little harm would result. But the preachers of the day frowned on the practice and there is little doubt that something more than innocent pleasure often resulted from the cosy arrangement. Some concerned parents erected low vertical boards in the centre of the beds, sufficient hindrance to prevent coupling but not so as to stop innocent hand-holding and small talk. Others ensured that their daughters wore tight-fitting garments, especially over the lower parts of the body, or even tied the girl's ankles together to prevent union! But there is no doubt that even under the harsh religious rule of the Puritans many babies were born out of wedlock, but bundling was not the only reason!
Alarmed religious leaders eventually began to preach in earnest against the practice. Near Boston, one preacher, Haven by name, towards the end of the 18th century preached what was described as 'a long and memorable discourse' denouncing bundling. 'Growing sin,' i.e., intercourse and pregnancy, et al, could be attributed, he claimed, to the 'frequent recurrence of the fault to the custom then prevalent of females admitting young men to their beds who sought their company with intentions of marriage.' The cat was now out of the bag! Meanwhile humorists and ballad-writers cheerily mocked the practice and poked fun at bundlers, after which the decline really set in and little by little bundling was abandoned.
Among these same people there arose the popular revivalist or camp meetings. Some observers believe such meetings gave ordinary, otherwise restrained, individuals an outlet for their repressed sexuality. As bundling fell into decline, the camp meeting, later known as the revival, became the popular vehicle for Christian enthusiasms. Begun in the USA and eventually spreading to Britain, the camp meeting was a way of drawing together isolated people to hear Gospel messages, but such meetings on occasions developed into veritable orgies of sexual congress.
In the USA the ground was well prepared around the mid-1800s. The isolated settlements and farmhouses offered fertile soil in which to plant the seed of religious enthusiasm. Men would, through isolation, be rendered morose and despotic and women might even be driven to insanity. Insanity was not an uncommon occurrence among the pioneers in the scattered lands of the West.
The flourishing camp-meetings drew large numbers of women. It was noticed by observers that women isolated for long stretches of time would naturally be drawn to occasions where they might mix with other women. They were susceptible, too, to the excitement generated in the meeting. But there was a sexual element underlying the spiritual exercises. Of course, this was never the intention of the well-meaning organisers and in general among the settlers, moral standards were high. However, students of the subject have noted a specific link between religious excitement and sexual morality. James D. Davis, a pioneer lawyer in Memphis, wrote about the camp meetings held in the sparsely-populated areas between Raleigh and Memphis prior to 1830:
There may be some who think that a camp-meeting is no place for lovemaking; if so they are very much mistaken. When the mind becomes bewildered and confused, the moral restraints give way, and the passions are quickened and less controllable. For a mile or so around a camp-meeting the woods seem alive with people; every tree or bush has its group or couple while hundreds of others in pairs are seen prowling around in search of some cosy spot. (Quoted by Will and Merritt Hale in History of Tennessee and Tennesseeans, Chicago 1913)
A clergyman, the Rev. John Brook, wrote (quoted in the same book):
All denominations of Christians except the Cumberland Presbyterian, opposed them [the camp-meetings] with all their power . . . There was a great many who thought it would have disgraced their wife or daughter forever if they stayed on the camp ground at night. Sometimes their wives and daughters would be so convicted that they would go up to be prayed for - they would come into the altar in great haste to get them out. Those who were praying for them would reason with them and entreat them to let them get religion, but to no purpose; out they would have them, right or wrong.
Then in great rage, cursing the straw pen, as they called the altar; and off home they would take them . . . If the children of other denominations would get religion among us, they would rather that they would be anywhere else than in the Methodist church. They would do all in their power to keep them out, and, if they had joined, to get them out again . . .
It was dangerous for a Methodist preacher to walk out of the encampment unless he had a respectable company with him, for there were some, it would seem, always watching for some opportunity to tell a slanderous tale among them; and as there were more or less women of ill fame lurking about, they only wanted suitable circumstances to give colouring to their hellish designs.
All manner of odd activities occurred under the heady influence of spiritual fervour. For example, on one occasion some otherwise chaste and devout young ladies streaked - ran naked - through the countryside during a revival. The incredible occurrences recorded of some revival meetings clearly prove the link between sexuality and spirituality. Twisting bodies, convulsive movements, shrieks and gesticulations; indeed, the physical writhings of the worshippers so often approximated the movements of the person experiencing sexual orgasm as to make the connection an obvious one. In his aptly-titled book Primitive Traits in Religious Revivals: A Study in Mental and Social Evolution (New York, 1906) Frederick Davenport reproduced an account of an 1801 Kentucky revival meeting involving some 20,000 people which went on for several days:
The whole body of persons who actually fell helpless to the earth during the progress of the meeting was computed . . . to be about three thousand persons, about one in every six . . . At no time was the floor less than half covered. Some lay quiet, unable to move or speak. Some talked, but could not move. Some beat the floor with their heels. Some, shrieking in agony, bounded about like a live fish out of water. Many lay down and rolled over and over for hours at a time. Others rushed wildly over the benches, and then plunged, shouting, 'Lost! Lost!' into the forest.
Next to the 'falling' exercise the most notable and characteristic Kentucky phenomenon was 'the jerks'. The unhappy victim shook in every joint. Sometimes the head was thrown from side to side with great rapidity. Again the feet were affected and the subject would hop like a frog. Often the body would be thrown violently to the ground, where it would continue to bound from one place to another. Peter Cartwright declares that he has seen more than 500 jerking at once in the congregation . . .
Another phenomenon not so common was the 'barking' exercise. The votaries of this dignified rite gathered in groups on all fours, like dogs, growling and snapping their teeth at the foot of a tree as the minister preached, a practice which they designated as 'treeing the Devil'! . . . Many of these camp-meeting folk lay insensible, sometimes for hours, but when they recovered from the swoon it was to relate, in what were called 'strains of heaven', experiences of interviews with departed friends and visions of glory.
It is not surprising that accusations of sexual impropriety were levelled at people attending the Kentucky meetings and these charges did not come from hostile laymen but from clergymen. At least we can be thankful that evangelistic meetings in our own time appear to be at least a little more restrained!
