History of Circumcision from the Earliest Times to the Present | Page 9

very imperfectly explains
why this rite was either neglected or abolished. Frequent reference is
made to what Saint Paul said and did, but, as Saint Paul was not one of
the Disciples, it is inexplicable wherefrom he received his authority in
this matter, seeing that the Disciples themselves had no new views on
the subject. To the student who prefers to study his subject from all its
aspects, the question naturally arises, "Where, when, and why came the
authority that abolished this rite?" There is one probable explanation,
this being that Paul, who was the real promulgator of Gentile
Christianity, had to establish his creed among an uncircumcised race;
although, as we shall see, devotees have not scrupled to sacrifice their
virility in the hope of being more acceptable to God and to be better
able to observe His commandments, and others, in their blind bigotry,
have not objected to sitting naked on sand-hills, with a six-inch iron
ring passed through the prepuce, it is very evident that the Apostle
Paul's good sense showed him the uselessness of attempting to found
the new creed, and at the same time hold on to the truly distinctive
marking of Judaism among Gentiles, the Hebrew race being those
among whom he found the least converts, as even the Disciples and
Apostles in Palestine disagreed with him. In the words of Dr. I. M.
Wise, it was impossible for the Palestine Apostles, or their flock, either
to acknowledge Paul as one of their own set or submit to his teaching;
for they obeyed the Law and he abolished it; they were sent to the
house of Israel only, and Paul sought the Gentiles with the message that
the Covenant and the Law were at an end; they had one gospel story
and he another; they prophesied the speedy return of the Master and a
restoration of the throne of David in the kingdom of heaven, and he
prophesied the end of the world and the last day of judgment to be at
hand; they forbade their converts to eat of unclean food, and especially
of the sacrificial meats of the Pagans, and he made light of both, as well
as of the Sabbath and circumcision. In the attempted reconciliation that

subsequently took place in Jerusalem at the house of James, the Jacob
of Kaphersamia of the Talmud, Paul was charged by the synod of
Jewish Christians "with disregarding the Law, forsaking the teachings
of Moses, and attempting to abolish circumcision." He was bid to
recant and undergo humiliation with four other Nazarenes, that it might
be known that he walked orderly and observed the Law; Paul submitted
to all that was demanded.
This, in short, with the exception of the sayings of Paul on the subject,
which are all secondary considerations, is really all that there is relating
to the abolishment of circumcision by the Christians. The real Disciples
and Apostles believed in Jesus with as much fervor as Paul, but it is
singular that they who were with the Master should always have
insisted on the observance of the Law, while Paul as energetically
insisted on its abolishment.
From these premises, I have seen fit to inquire into the relative merits
of the three religions practiced by what we call the civilized nations, as
they affect man morally, physically, and mentally. I have given the
facts, my impressions, and reasons for being so impressed; from these,
the reader can easily see that religion has more to do with man's
temporal existence than is generally believed; its discussion is not,
therefore, out of place in this book.
Repetitions in the course of the work have been unavoidable. This is
not a novel nor a work of fiction, and wherever the want of repetition
would have been an injury, either to the proper representation of a fact
or a principle, the repetition has not been avoided. In describing the
operations, I had desired to avoid any too numerous descriptions, as
that is confusing, but have thought it best to give a number, as the
reader will thereby obtain the views of the different operators, the mode
of the operation often being an index to the view of the operator in
regard to the needs or utility of a prepuce. In the general plan of the
work, I have adopted the idea and the historical relation carried out by
Bergmann, of Strasburg, who included all the mutilations practiced on
the genitals while discussing the subject of circumcision, they being, in
the originality of performance, somewhat intimately connected; this

also tends to make the subject more interesting as a contribution to the
natural history of man,--something in which all intelligent persons are
more or less interested.
P. C. REMONDINO, M.D. SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA.
[Illustration: EGYPTIAN CIRCUMCISION.
(From Chabas and