Page 168

Page 168

Superstition THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG igg

Slight advance is made toward a comprehension of the subject by a study of the etymology and equivalents of the word, though a development in meaning is traceable. The Latin superstitio (super and stare, " to stand still over or by a thing "; *cf.

the Gk. deisidaimonia, " fear of the s. Etymol- gods, religious feeling "; Germ. Aber ogy; Biblicalglaube, for Oberglaube, " belief to ex-

and Other cess," Dutch, Biglove) expressed " ex- Usages. cessive fear of the gods, unreasonable religious belief," and was opposed to religio, " a proper, reasonable awe of the gods " (Cicero, De natures deorum, i. 42, 117, ii. 28, 72). It developed so as to mean a (religious) performance over and above what custom and the nature of the case required, or one which was not recognized by proper authority. In the authorized version of the New Testament the word and its de rivative " superstitious " both occur. In Acts xvii. 22, in the celebrated address of Paul on Mar's Hill at Athens, " superstitious " translates wrongly the Greek deisidaimonesterous (R. V., margin, " relig ous "). It is to be noted that an unfavorable mean ing is not to be accepted here, since it is not likely that Paul would have prejudiced his case by charg ing his hearers, whom he wished to conciliate, with " superstition." In Acts xxv. 19, " superstition " translates the Greek original deisidaimonia, though exactly what term Festus employed (as he prob ably spoke Latin) is of course not known. But, as in the former case, Festus would hardly have gra tuitously offered offense to Agrippa and the Jews by calling the religion of the latter " superstition," the word employed must have had a good sense (cf. R. V., text, " religion "). Outside these passages, the word does not occur in the English Bible. The meaning the word has taken in modern times fol lows a different construction of its etymological ele ments, and embodies the idea of " something sur viving " or " something left over (from an earlier and less advanced stage of culture)." This mean ing is in itself an explanation of many of the con crete facts of superstition-they are survivals from earlier usage or belief which persist against the pro nouncements of an enlightened reason. At the same time it is not precluded either in fact or the ory that new " superstitions " arise from time to time.

In close connection with the usage just noted is that according to which the word is employed by adherents of one faith to characterize the religious beliefs and practises of adherents of another faith,

particularly those of a dead religion. 3. Historical Tacitus (" Annals," xv. 44) speaks of

Usage in the religion which had sprung from Religion. " Christus, who had been put to death

by . . . Pontius Pilate " as exitiabilis superstitio, " pernicious superstition." On the other hand the compliment was returned when, under Christian influence a couple of centuries later, pagan rites and worship were so denominated. Thus Constantine in a law of 31.9, speaking of the pagan religion of Rome, says: " They who are desirous of being slaves to their superstition, have liberty for the public exercise of their worship " (Codex Theodosianus, IX., xvi. 1-2), only a little afterward

practically defining superstition as praterita usurpatio, " antiquated usage." Even within the bounds of the same religion great, indeed, irreconcilable, difference exists as to what constitutes superstition. Thus to Protestants very many Roman Catholic beliefs and observances are nothing less than superstition. Among these may be named the veneration of the Host, the adoration of images, the entire cult centering about the Virgin Mary and the saints, particularly the belief in arch phenomena as many alleged to have taken place at Lourdes and Loreto (qq.v.), together with the strongly entrenched regard for relics, such as the Holy Coat (q.v,). Yet to the devout Roman Catholic some of these things belong to the very arcana of the religion, and doubt of them seems little if at all short of blasphemy. Another illustration which comes from the same region is the Roman Catholic belief concerning the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius (q.v.), regarded by those of that faith as a recurrent miracle, while scientists scoff at the explanation of the alleged miracle, and point to the fact that analysis of the contents of the vial is refused. Of course the guardians dec4ne to allow decisive tests on the ground of the sanctity of the relic. Agreement upon what constitutes a superstition in- many cases of this sort is unattainable. The difficulty is not relieved if one considers that Roman Catholic authorities would almost certainly denounce as superstition the belief that incubation as practised in the cult of Aaklepios (cf. Mary Hamilton, Incubation, or the Cure of Diseases in, Pagan Temples and Christian Churches, London, 1906) resulted in cures, though it is claimed that cures result from the practise as maintained in connection with certain saints in Roman Catholic churches in and near Naples, at Amalfi, and elsewhere, as well as under the Greek Church (cf. Mary Hamilton, ut sup., pp. 109 sqq.). And the case is still more complicated by the fact that psychologists maintain the entire probability of many cases of cures under both pagan and Christian auspices, and offer what they deem scientific explanation of the alleged cures.

On its subjective side or as a mental attitude superstition seems to spring from four roots: (1) Ignorance, combined with the exceedingly prevalent and characteristically primitive fallacy of post hoc propter hoc, is a fundamental cause.' Man has, so far as indications show, always sought

¢. Bases: for the reasons of events, but in his

Ignorance; lack of knowledge of real causes has Credulity. often linked things causally which are not so connected. Thus, to give an example of savage logic, the breaking of the fluke of an anchor cast ashore from a wreck on the western coast of Africa having been followed by the death of the man who committed the act, his associates regarded the anchor as a divinity which had been offended by the mutilation and had punished the evil-doer, and they thereafter did reverence to the anchor as to a god (cf. E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. 143 aqq., London, 1877). Similarly, bathing in a pool being followed by a scrofulous affection, the natives of the region regarded the pool as the haunt of a deity which was offended by the invasion and looked upon the disease as the