The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1905-12-03
LITERARY NOTES,

The Bath. the Church. and Morals
Though many chapters II the fourth
volume DUST published1 Of HaFeiock
EIiis-s Psychology arr somewhat 100
intimate for discussion II other lI-sA1i
uedico-Iego journals, some parts o. INC
book. such a. that which deals "1~"
the history Of the bath and with per-
fumes in their general relations. are d.
once extremely interesting ana e----IT -
discassabIe.
Regarding the bath, Mr. El-ls points
nut that In Roman days the BATH was
often associated with moral license
The man or woman who took several
baths, hot and cold. each day, ana VINO
was. rnassaged. perfur1e5. and, perhaps
snointed with aromatic cincments, vas
very liable TO be licentous and pleas
71re-loving. The universally OF 0alAs
and bathing is shown by the eXcaFa-
lions If P3mpeii Three public baths
three private ones, and dozen houses
containing complete baths nave b0vA
excavated. Even in a little farm
house at Boscereale (two miles ouu OF
Ponpeii) there was an elaborate series
Of baths II may be added that POM
yeii was well supplied with water Al
me houses but the poorest had noW1hs
iers. and some houses had as many dS |
ten lets. The cult of care of the BODY |
with it's accompanying license was
therefore widespread.
When the Christian church took ITS !
rise. il was natural and perfectly iog1-
cal that il should put its ban upon the
bath. II considered, and justly that
| luxurious bathing was concoInltahe
| of moral iaxity. and it took the IN
|
bath. To such an extent did the pen
duIl1r1 swing under the stress Of the
church that from a personal c4ean1-
Iness .exceIling that Of any modern ma
ton. unless il be the japanese, the no
mans and their immediate successors
became disagreeably unclean- Ihus
&. Jerome tells US with approval that
..zvren the holy Paula noted that any
NJ her nuns were too careful IN TINS
matter she would gravely reproFe
them. saving that the purity Of the
BODY and its garments means the M
purity Of the soul " And the monk OF
!; Mt. Athos still declares that a man
: should live in dirt. as in coat OF man,
so that his soul may so1ourn more
, securely within
J Indeed. under the influence OF Papdi
power the habit of personal uncleanh-
able to-day In the Middle Ages, When
the extreme excuses of the early as
cetics had died out, and monastlclsrn
became regulated, monks generally
took two baths a year when IN health.
The rules of CIuny only allowed three
towels TO the community; one for the
novices, one for the professed, ana one
for the lay brothers. At the end or
the seventeenth century, Nine &c
Mazarin. having retired 70 con-
went Of Tisitandines, one day DE-
sired 70 wash her feet, but me
whole esta bIishnent was set IN an
uproar at such an idea, and she receiV-
Cd q direct refusal In 1850, the Do
rninfcan Richard wrote that in itself
the bath is permissible, but II must
he taken solely for necessity, not for
pleasure The church taught, and this
lesson IS stiIl inculcated in convent
schools that it is wrong to expose the
hodv even 70 ones own gaze, and It e
Inor surprising that many holy persons
boasted that they had never ever
washed their hands.
So far Mr.. Ellis A remarkable IN
stance Of medieval uncleanliness thai
ha does not cite is that related o
Michael Angelo by his biographer
Ascanio Condivi: When he was mor'
Iroby1st he often slept in his clothes anf
with his boots on: and ne has some
times been so long without taking then
r4 that when ne did SO the skin cam
~ off with them like the slough OF
snake And many viii recall the re
y n2arkable evidence of personal nice
] fness" that Chaucer gives Of the Prior
esse:
~HEr over Iippe wiped she SO clen'
That IN hir cope was no ferthin
sene
| Of grace. when she dronken hadd
II mir draughte.
Il Full seemely after hir nete sh
Ii raughte.
II a considerable amount Of oppr'
II briurn. continues Mr. Ellis, has bee
II cast upon the Roman church for il
II tdirect and indirect influence in promo
II ing bodily uncleanliness. However
i he says. I'll IS necessary 10 point OF
that the writer's who have commits
themselves to such utterances Ia
ri shown a lack Of historical insigh
i Christianity was essentially and ful
II IdamentalIy a rebellion against Il
Il classic world. against its vices al
II tneir concoraitant virtues. From 4
II church's point Of view. sexuality "
II tine very stronghold of the class
II world. There could be no compromis
III land the condemnation Of sexuality !
/ IvoIved the condemnation Of the bat
/ The moral was evident; better let {
I temporary garment Of your flesh
| soaked with dirt than risk staining t
radiant purity Of your immortal sou
y | with the decline of the power of t
church in the eighteenth and mir