SOME REMARKS ON THE "ENTELECHEIA"

OF RELIGIOUS PHENOMENA 1)

lt can be said without exaggeration that the student of the history of religions can theoretically survey a period of at least five thousand years, if prehistory is left aside. The oldest civilizations, tho se of Egypt and Mesopotarnia, appeared into the bright light of his tory in the fourth millenium before Christ. During these five thousand years much has happened. Religions came into existence, reached their full bloom and suffered decline. Other forms of religion underwent considerable modi­ fications as to their structure. History is an endless process in which religious phenomena are constantly either being created or transformed or broken clown. These considerations raise the question: what is the nature of the religious development that has taken place during these five thousand years of his tory? Can we disco ver any logical idea in it? In my opinion no science is better qualified to tackle this problem than the phenome­ nology of religion, as it possesses at least theoretically the required familiarity with the entire field of religious phenomena, both in their historical and in their geographical dimensions. Generally the task of the phenomenology of religion is taken as a static one. It is certainly true that the significance of religious pheno­ mena can be clarified to a great extent if they ar exarnined, so to say, not as a moving pictures but as arrested pictures. In previous studies 2) I myself have mainly engaged in this latter kind of research, by stating a double objective for the phenomenology of religion, viz. the in­ quiries into the theo ria and into the logos of the phenomena. The first objective, the theôria, leads to an understanding of the religious im­ plications of various aspects of religion which occur all over the world, such as the idea of God, sacrifice and magic art. The second objective,

1) This article gives in abbreviated form part of a book written by the au thor in Dutch, entitled De structuur van de godsdienst, 1956. It has been published in Scritti in onore di Guiseppe Furlani, 1957, Part II. 2) C. J. Bleeker: Op zoek naar het geheim van de godsdienst, 1952; The Relation of the History of Religions to kindred Sciences, particularly Theology, Sociology of Religion, Psychology of Religion and Phenomenology of Religion (Numen, Vol. I, Fasc. 2, May 1954). THE "ENTELECHEIA" OF RELIGIOUS PHENOMENA 17

i.e. the study of the logos of the phenomena, uncovers the hidden structure of the different religions by showing that they are built up according to strict inner laws. This short indication must suffice within the scope of this article 1). We have to focus our attention here on the main question which we have raised and which arises quite naturally when the religious phenomena are examined in their historical develop­ ment. Scientifically formulated the question reads: does religious de­ velopment during the five thousand years of his tory yield any proof of the existence of an entelecheia of the religious phenomena? It should be added that entelecheia is taken here in the sense which Aristoteles assigned to this word, viz. the course of events in which the essence is realised by its manifestations. By formulating the problem in this way, three theories are eliminated by implication, viz. the theories 1) of a primordial monotheism, 2) of a graduai historical evolution, and 3) of a catastrophic end ofhistory. A few explanatory words on each of these theories. Recent studies have elucidated that the so called High Gods have played a greater part in the oldest stage of religion than a previous generation of scho­ lars was ready to accept. However it would be erroneous to derive from this fact a theory of primordial monotheism, brought about by a primeval revelation of God. For several reasons. Firstly the belief in a High God is nowhere in primitive religion predominant to such an extent that it totally rules out polytheism. Secondly genuine mono­ theism cao not be found at the beginning of the history of humanity because it is the outcome of a prophet's preaching, as R. Pettazzoni has made clear by wellknown studies. Thirdly it is evident that the history of religions by its very principles is unable to decide whether or not certain historical facts, in this case the belief in a High God, are the result of a revelation of God. Moreover this theory generally leads to an evaluation of the history of religions which followed, seen as a decline from original pure religious conceptions. This view of history, though it may have religious value, cannat be used for scientific pur­ poses, as it is built on presuppositions which pure historical research cao neither prove nor reject. An analogous observation cao secondly be made on evolutionism. Influenced by Darwin's idea on the origin of species scholars have tried to trace a similar evolution in the history of religions, showing how religion evolved from a simple initial stage into the highest forms known to humanity. They even thought that

1) See next chapter. NUMEN, Suppl. VIl 2