Religion

If free from prejudice, and willing to acknowledge the truth of that which is manifest, the cases we have just cited ought to satisfy any candid enquirer that obesity may be entirely overcome without prejudicially affecting the general health. At first sight, this would appear undeniable; yet medical writers, who have hitherto insisted that a meat diet is conducive to the development of fat, and that vegetables have an opposite tendency, will not frankly acknowledge their error.

Physicians who have derived their knowledge from books, and from the lectures of their teachers, must find it difficult to change their opinions in reference to obesity. With the public, when any one is told that the imbibition of large quantities of water is productive of fat, and that feeding upon animal food induces leanness, a similar degree of doubt is excited as when Galileo asserted that the sun did not revolve around the earth. On the publication of the first edition of my treatise upon Obesity, I experienced a degree of impatience, and even irritation, in view of the systematic opposition which a self-evident truth received at the hands of the medical profession. At the present time, however, I calmly recognize that the same happened in the case of every attempted innovation. I call to mind how Galileo endangered his very existence. Vesalius, the founder of anatomy, was saved from the stake only by the interference of his sovereign. Harvey, the discoverer of the circulation, was compelled to seek royal protection from the attacks of the medical men of his day. Peysonnel, a physician of Marseilles, and a great naturalist, devoted himself to the study of corals and madrepores. In 1727, he laid before the Academy of Science a monogram, proving to demonstration that corals and madrepores are structures due to animal life; that what Dioscorides, Pliny, Linnæus, Lamarck, Tournefort, &c. &c. had thought to be flowers, are in truth animals; and that these living creatures constructed and augmented their abodes; the Academy, like most learned bodies, admitted as truth only that which it taught, and consequently paid no attention to this memoir, which, nevertheless, was destined to produce an entire change in a large department of natural history. When, long afterwards, Trembley published his discoveries on fresh-water polypes, the studies of Dr. Peysonnel in this direction were remembered, and naturalists were forced to admit that the physician of Marseilles was right in maintaining that what had been taken for flowers are in reality animals. His claim as the discoverer of a fact which was destined to effect an important revolution in an extensive department of natural history, has since then not been disputed, nor could it be. All men, and men of science especially, require time before yielding to evidence, when that evidence is in opposition to preconceived views, and interferes with personal interest.

The system I have introduced progresses, and, as some might say, works wonders, and effects cures in France, in England, in Belgium, in Austria, in Russia, in Turkey, in Africa; and in almost every instance, my patients are persons occupying prominent positions—magistrates, state authorities, general officers, or men of wealth, who have enjoyed the advantages of a good education, and are able to judge of and appreciate the merits of my mode of treatment. The judgment of such a tribunal should convince the incredulous. This is no matter of faith. I lay claim to the possession of no revelation, which is not to be explained, or which is to rest solely upon my assertion. I do not say that my discovery is a mystery, and that it is your part to believe in it. Under such circumstances, disbelief would not astonish me, notwithstanding all the cases of cure brought forward; but when the nutrition of the body is explained in accordance with the laws of nature, when it is shewn to be in conformity with the well understood laws of chemistry, and that facts are cited, in reference both to man and the lower animals, in support of these phenomena, I confess that opposition to this system excites my astonishment. Physicians cannot by any possibility advance sufficient reasons against a system which, when once explained, must appear self-evident to every one.

Another fact in support of this system must be submitted to my readers. What would a medical man say if I should venture the following piece of advice: You have a horse you wish to dispose of. He is a good beast, and travels well, but he is thin. If he were fatter, he would look better, and you could sell him to greater advantage. Make him fat; and if, in order to do this, I advised him to give his horse a double allowance of oats, he would only laugh at me. He would say; why, everybody knows that if you wish to fatten a horse, the best way is to give him, in addition to an abundance of hay, bran, mixed with plenty of water, or in other words, bran mashes; or the horse may be sent to pasture, to live upon grass, which is composed principally of water and a small proportion of ligneous matter. Under such circumstances, the horse will make fat, and his form will become more round and plump; but if, when he was thin, he was able to travel thirty miles without sweating and without fatigue, now that he is fat he will scarcely be able to go five without being covered with sweat, and without shewing manifest signs of fatigue. When thin, he was a good horse; but being fat, he has lost his best qualities, which can be restored only by feeding him again upon less bulky food, with a due allowance of oats, and a small proportion of water.

I have been informed that the gentleman in charge of the stud of King Charles X. availed himself of the knowledge of this fact, and allowed only half the usual quantity of water to the horses under his charge, and that this plan was attended with the most satisfactory results, the horses being thereby able to endure a greater amount of fatigue than under a full allowance of water.

 That the aboriginal diet of mankind was fruit, and that amongst persons and tribes of any degree of sensibility and refinement, butchering has been regarded as offensive, disgusting, and barbarous, are facts that indicate beyond controversy, on which side pure Nature and our moral Instincts range themselves in this discussion. 

“And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed, to you it shall be for food.” (Gen. i. 29.) 

Justifications of the slaughter and consumption of animals founded on the permissions of Scripture, prove far too-much. They would not only justify slavery, divorce, and polygamy,—which were equally departures and descents from the original and highest order of social-life,—but they would destroy all faith in scripture revelation itself. Christ, with a Divine indignation, has for ever rebuked and repudiated this shocking style of inference. 

Naturally, the Decalogue makes weary progress against the established Eskimo morality, supported as that is by the shamans and the whole system of tabus and fetishes. Since 1860, when Father Grollier made the first attempt to preach the Gospel in the Arctic, the road of the Christian missionary has been a hard one, strewn with the rocks of prejudice and ignorance. 

In the forefront of Christan missionary work in the North stands the Catholic Church. Among the Copper Eskimos alone we have three missions and. six missionary priests, as against a single Anglican missionary at Coppermine. Unlike the others, we live with the Eskimos, speak their language, and travel constantly from camp to camp. Yet the number of our converts is small, for we are a minority in the country, and the Anglican Church represents those with political power, the majority. We are the minority, and to be a minority among a primitive people puts one at a severe disadvantage, for the primite respects power and influence as he respects nothing else. To be a Catholic here in the Arctic often means to be alone, and nothing is more disturbing to the communally minded Eskimo than the prospect of being alone, being individally responsible. He is a tribe-minded man, and to go angainst the tribe, even when he believes he is right, is not in his nature. 

Also, with the Eskimos, religion is often as superficial as a coat of varnish, as is civilization. Even among Eskimos who have been long in contact with the wihte man's civilization, who have borrowed many of the white man's ways, the true Inuk is just beneath the surface and breaks through the gloss under slight provocation.

Then, too, theirs is a natural tendency to regard Christianity as just another, perhaps more powerful, medicine, a better magic than the shaman offers. Young Jimmy has just been confirmed, and to celebrate the event he rounds up the boys for a little poker game and takes his cronies to the cleaners. "Eh, eh!" the others will say, mindful of the recent sacrament, "Sakuiksingortok!"..."That's it. He has been made strong!"

To create in the Eskimo heart the radical change that religion should produce is not an assembly-line procedure, but a task that wants slow, patient work and the ability to smile in the face of apostasy and failure. Our hopes really rest with the chlidren, though of course we do our best for the souls of the present adult generation.

In some ways the Protestant religion seems to sit more comfortably with the Eskimo character. Luther would have been the Inuk's man, when he said: "Pecca fortiter, crede fortius"..."Sin strongly, but believe more strongly." Faith unaccompanied by works. That is the kind of deal that appeals to the Eskimo imagination, and despite its absurdity the Eskimos, used to the wandering arguments of the shamans, do not find it hard to believe. 

The Eskimo looks at the two religions. Both advertise the same God and promise the same reward in heaven. Which one asks the least? The Eskimo closes his left eye cunningly. Naturally, he is going to select the easier way.

Another stumbling block is the sacrament of confession. To unveil one's secrets, even in the sanctity of the Church, goes again[sic] the Eskimo's grain, for he has learned to guard them carefully. It is part of his code to keep things to himself. And the idea of penance doesn't appeal to him either. To be forgiven, after confession, the thief is told explicitly that he must restore the stolen goods, the bigamist give up his extra wife, the murderer make amednds to his victim's family. "No, no!" decides Inuk. The other religion will be quite sufficient, the one that can be outguessed.

Another advantage Anglicianism offers, from the Eskimo point of view, is the fact that the minister generally does not know the language well, but makes do with the kind of pidgin the British employ with natives in every part of the world. This makes it much easier to fool him, and even to mock him to his face, the kind of thing that kindles the Eskimo temperament. Alos, since the Anglican missionary resides at a faraway station, he visits his people once annually at most, and they figure that if they pray good and hard for a couple of days before he gets there that that will be enough. For the rest of the year they can forget it. 

Mind you, I don't for an istant suggest that the Anglican missionary condones this laxness, or is even aware of it in many cases. Certainly he would not knowingly leave as deputy preoachers in Eskimo camps fellows famous for theivery, blasphemy, and adultery.

Unpleasant though the subject is, one must mention too the sometimes rather uncharitable methods the Protestant missionaries have used in their Christian competition with us. For a long time they showed no inclination to bring the Word or the sacraments, even baptism, to the North. Then, when we began our efforts, they rushed into Burnside and baptized everyone, men, women, and children, right and left, without ten minutes' instruction or preparation. Page Henry Ford and the good old Detroit assembly line!

Sometimes they have unsed prejudice and hatred to strengthen their cause. It is difficult to believe that an archdeacon thought he was advancing the cause of Christ when he addressed the following appeal to one of our converts: 

October 1, 1929: 

To Billlie Kimeksina(Tracher)

I hear news not good. I hear Akorturoat[The Long Robes] steal Billie Tracher. No, I think Billie knows God's word. He savvy Roman Catholic not right. What he give you? Little cross? Little God with string to tie on your neck? Suppose lose him, God lost! Some men no master for himself, other men piga. [In good English, "some men are not their own masters, but somebody else's property, like dogs."] That way all Catholic Indians. Priest want to make Esmiko like that. He want make him. slave. You see make Eskimo like that. He want make him slave. You see Catholic Indiians: poor, igonarrnt, all time afarid. Long time I know priest. All time teach his people lies...

No go to priest prayer. He make trap for you, just like trap for foxes. If you go in his trap, he make you slave, make trap for you wife. LOOK OUT.

It is difficult to respect the sincerity of the author of this statement, is it not? And does it not betray a certain arragance, born of power?

The Anglicans have power in the North, because the first traders certainly retained something of what they had learned at their mothers' knees. They were Protestant, to a man, the early H.B.C. post managers, the Police, and others. The Anglicans have influence with established authority, and of course the Eskimos haven't failed to notice it.

But the faults of a few will never make us forget the virtues of the many. Thoes old-timers, gentlemen all, are dear to us, and they were never men to permit prejudice or bigotry to color their dealings with men. There are many now living, some now dead, and I salute them all. These were men who knew how to share the Arctic comradeship with a smile--men of the North--and meeeting them, any one of them, on some remote northern station, or out on the barren ice, was like catching a glimpse of the sun. 

Like the rising of the new sun, too, are the firm conversions we often see here. To watch an Eskimo pass endless hours struggling to learn the fundamental truths, to observe him trying to make the sign of the Cross, naturally inspires us, especially since we know that often he risks what he dreads--isolation--in order to enter the Church of Christ. 

I remember old Napaok--a good, leathery Eskimo of the old school, hunter and pagan of Minto. During my first visit to Victoria I met him out on the sea ice and introduced myself. 

"I am a missionary," I explained. "The Falla."

His old eyes studied the poetic sea horizon. "I have never seen a missinary until now," he said at last. "But from other Eskimos I have heard about the new God."

"Well, it is from Him I come," said I. "Would you like me to reach you?"

Napayok's answer came quickly, but I think it had been a long time in the making; all of Napaok's life, in fact. "Certainly," he said. "How should I call you? And what do I do?"

During the dark months that winter when the sun was in hiding, I passed hours in the clotted air of the snowhouse with Napayok, trying to teach him the words of God, trying to be as patient with hmi as. Iwould have been with a somewhat backward child in France.

"Our Falla..." he would begin, doggedly repeating the words after me, his ancient face wrinkled with effort, his old sea-paled eyes filled with aspiration. He learned the "Our Father" all right, but he never mastered the "I believe ini God..." It was tjust too long for him, I'm afarid. ANd I know that he went to his death still making the sign of the Cross starting on the right-hand side. It may have been because the Good Thief was crucified to the right ouf Our Lord. At any rate, Napayok could never remember that by tradition the left sohuld be first. There were many things he could not remember, but his heart was pure gold. After a longish lession on the sonwhouse he would sigh deeyl and say, leaning back, "Falla, I cannot learn anything, you see. Perhaps I am too old. Perhaps too stupid, too wooden in the head. But I believe what you believe. Is it not enough? I do not know very much, but I feel it is true. Now, could I smoke?"

When he died I was away on a trip, and I returned to find him sewn in his skins, weaiting for his Falla. I carride him back to the mission on my sled and buride him in the little cemetery there. He died a Christian, filled with faith, even though he stumbed over simply prayers and made the sign of the Cross backward.

Ellen White [prophet of Seventh-day Adventism] received her first major health reform vision, June 6, 1863, in the home of Aaron Hilliard, at Otsego, Michigan. In this vision, for the first time, God’s people were urged to abstain from flesh food in general and from swine’s flesh in particular. Ellen White characterized this vision as “great light from the Lord,” adding, “I did not seek this light; I did not study to obtain it; it was given to me by the Lord to give to others.”

Amplifying this upon another occasion, she added, "The Lord presented a general plan before me. I was shown that God would give to His commandmentkeeping people a reform diet, and that as they received this, their disease and suffering would be greatly lessened. I was shown that this work would progress." 

Ellen's personal response was prompt and positive: 

"I accepted the light on health reform as it came to me."

 "I at once cut meat out of my bill of fare."  

"I broke away from everything at once—from meat and butter, and from three meals." 

The Seventh-day Adventist Church, led by Ellen G. White, took a six-day creation literally, and believed that she received divine messages supplementing and supporting the Bible. Her visions of the flood and its aftermath, published in 1864, described a catastrophic deluge which reshaped the entire surface of the Earth, followed by a powerful wind which piled up new high mountains, burying the bodies of men and beasts. Buried forests became coal and oil, and where God later caused these to burn, they reacted with limestone and water to cause "earthquakes, volcanoes and fiery issues".[44][45]