“WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE HOMOEOPATHIC MOVEMENT-PROFESSIONALLY “


“WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE HOMOEOPATHIC MOVEMENT-PROFESSIONALLY “.

   AN ANSWER TO OPEN FORUM QUERY.

WILLIAM H. SCHWARTZ, M. D.

 

P…


Perhaps the answer to the question What Is Wrong with the Homoeopathic Movement–Professionally? is found through a discussion of the issues involved in the authors query, “Is it not because we are not in the least unanimous about the limitations of our particular method?”.

There is nothing the matter with homoeopathy. The attitude of mind of many–that homoeopathy has limitations–is largely what is the matter with the profession. The field of homoeopathy is too large for mortal conception. Homoeopathy is unique. It is a science that even the most fastidious cannot embrace in its entirely in a lifetime. Therefore there is bound to be a variance of opinions, due to the limit placed on each individual by each individuals experience. Each individuals vision or horizon is limited to the height of his mental attainment, so there is bound to be a variance of honest opinionS, due to the limit placed on each individual by each individuals experience. Each individuals vision or horizon is limited to the height of his mental attainment, so there is bound to be a variance of honest opinion.

Ignorance then, is the greatest handicap of our profession. That accounts for their limitations as teachers. If the students have not been properly taught, how can you expect them to follow doctrines that have not been taught?.

So our colleges are largely to be blamed. I can but touch that phase. However it is a fact that when dear old Hahnemann College of Philadelphia was dominated by those powerful intellects, like Hering and Farrington, their enthusiasm and ability just radiated homoeopathy to the students, and although, like all other medical colleges of the time, the students were graduated in two years, I would, today, rather have one of those old time prescribers doctor me than the present pseudo- scientists, whose knowledge is largely a record of vacillating theories apeing allopathy.

There are many reasons for this state of affairs. I think a mistake was made when Hahnemann College first undertook to give a degree in both medicine and homoeopathic medicine. The outcome of this was that since those first days of the masters of homoeopathy, the strong teachers have been the teachers of allopathy, whose teachings and prescriptions gradually usurped the homoeopathic teaching.

This is reflected in the November 1930, issue of the Hahnemannian Monthly where Doctor Margaret Hassler, in her presidential address before the members of the Homoeopathic Medical Society of Pennsylvania, states:.

Briefly, the result of this survey shows most clearly:.

First– A. lamentable indifference to the establishment of new societies, county or district, or to any effort to revive former societies. The indifference was explained by the frank statement of so many of our members that through their affiliation with its hospitals,they no longer saw the need for homoeopathic societies, nor any necessity for them as individuals to assert their homoeopathic affiliation.

Second–In the existing societies there was little or no evidence of a keen professional interest in homoeopathic matters per se, but a notable lack of interest in promoting an increased membership. Again, in some of these societies otherwise very active as high as one-third of the total membership were not members of the State Society.

But perhaps the founders of Old Hahnemann College were right in their concept, for complete knowledge of medicine is a three- fold development of physical, mental and spiritual therapy. One should first be grounded in the physical aspect of the trinity. Then a study of the action of remedies on the nerve plane, and last the esoteric teaching of the spiritual plane which dominates the mental and physical. I might dwell on the lack of coordination; lack of creating a homoeopathic consciousness (which field allopathy has monopolized), and the delay of our organization to that end. But all nature is an intelligent force gradually bringing that about herself. Many wonderful discoveries of research laboratories.

in physics are rediscovering or demonstrating homoeopathic principles; they pick up our spoor quiet often. No longer are infinitesimals “the fiction product of diseased mind.”.

If we had the space we could, with profit to all, discuss the various problems to reach Utopia, so I must confine my remarks largely to correct a number of rash statements, where the author of the caption question has confused the ignorance of the doctor mass with the scientific highly trained “honest-to- goodness” “dyed-in-the-wool” homoeopaths. There is a distinction to be made as wide as the poles. We shall attempt to prove that not only are many doctors incompetent to carry out strictly homoeopathic prescriptions, but they are that way because they have not been properly taught basic guiding principles.

The teachers themselves having no conception of what it is all about! Most present day college curriculums are largely a haphazard, chaotic confusing course of study, with but a feeble laboratory attempt to demonstrate their teachings, and a woeful lack of instruction in esoteric and exoteric principles. This applies to nearly all colleges. I shall attempt to prove that “we should have none such” mincemeat, as “the widely accepted standard tests of the regular school,” but instead, that we have officially accepted (but little taught) texts composed of fixed guiding principles; and that we have already two foundations at work (American Foundation for Homoeopathy , and Mid-West Homoeopathic Institute) which are going to teach their principles and keep homoeopathy on the map, and establish a national, if not international, homoeopathic consciousness.

The various planes of therapeutics consciousness. The various planes of therapeutics, physical, mental, and spiritual, will be covered, with particular attention to the plane on which the homoeopathic remedies work. It will also point out that the failure of so-called homoeopaths in homoeopathic practice is because they have been trying to practise homoeopathy on an allopathic basis, without rule or reason or fixed principles to guide them, not that our texts are not filled with scientific doctrine, but that the doctrines have not been taught-excepting to those fortunate enough to have had a master teacher.

If you will all take a course at the Post-Graduate College of the American Foundation for Homoeopathy at Boston next summer, you will be given the surprise of your life, and I will promise that you will be not only satisfied, but thrilled, and better skilled, after taking that course. If not I will give you a check for the full amount of your tuition, one hundred and fifty dollars.

Yes, I agree with you, “all we want to know is the truth,” that is those of us who are not too prejudiced for such an attitude closes and locks up the mind and understanding. But the truth is a relative term. What may seem the truth to one person, is a fallacy to one who knows. Those who are seeking the truth will have the doors of Heaven opened unto them and a Divine influx of knowledge and understanding will flow into them. “Seek and ye shall find.” Knock and the doors of Heaven shall be opened unto you of knowledge and understanding will flow into them. “Seek and ye shall find.” Knock and the doors of Heaven shall be opened unto you.

All fine teaching, but already many of you who are reading this will at once close your mind to such wisdom as I have just said, but if you will put your mind in a state of humility and open it by the key “Oh, Lord, what is it that ye will have me to do?” and pray in spirit, every day, “give me this day my daily bread, the manna of Heaven will fall like the dew for you to gather and feast upon, and it will nourish your mind and soul.

I suppose such teaching gives most of you “a pain in the neck”. While they are the teachings of the inner mysteries, they may give you mental indigestion if you have no appetite for them. It is the esoteric doctrine of homoeopathy, and you are not even ready for the exoteric doctrine of Hahnemanns teachings. Such are the self-centered and enlightened(?) pseudo-scientific physical minded group of men who deny the vital doctrine of matter, mind, and spirit. They deny God. They believe that a cell is the cause of itself, without prior spiritual existence or influx.

“THE REGULAR SCHOOL HAS MANY STANDARD TEXTS WHICH ARE WIDELY ACCEPTED”.

Yes, the regular school has many standard texts, the second hand book stores and waste paper mills are paying one quarter cent per pound for them, as so much waste paper, to “make new and better ones”. Their riotic haste to abandon their kaleidoscopic

theories cant even keep them up to date, so to their annual editions, they issue a monthly loose-leaf suffix. God forbid that we ever get in that fix. Homoeopathy has only fixed principles to guide us. We progress by accretion without death or decay. I value my masters work cheaply at 5.00 per pound. It is possible that there is a single homoeopath who is not aware that we have many standard texts, aside from the Organon, all filled with guiding principles as the foundation stones of homoeopathy, and that by repeated borings, we have found still greater strata of solid rock to carry any weight of intellect that may bear upon it?

Of course the old-timers will refer me to the Organon. But, though there is no more ardent worshipper at the shrine of the father of our school than myself, it seems to me an utterly unanswerable fact that we are just as narrow, just as one-sided, and squint-eyed, as many other single-track schools before the public today.

I agree that that is a failing of most doctors, but why blame the “dyed-in-the-wool” Hahnemannians or even poor Samuel? He has already been denied thrice by his own disciples.

The doctor who holds that the high potency is all- sufficient simply shows his utter lack of perspective. No sane physician would for a moment contend that the potency will do away with the necessity for eating; it is an accepted conclusion that one cannot make bricks without clay-yet there are lots of physicians who vainly treat patients suffering from some deficiency without in any way trying to supply that deficiency. In other words, they utterly neglect the chemical side of life. That is illogical to say the least.

How can anyone make such outrageous charges against the “dyed-in-the-wool” Hahnemannians? You must remember that homoeopathy is comparatively a new science, and it is amazing that with so little material at hand Hahnemann did “make bricks without straw” even as did the Israelites. It is ever the source of wonder to me that one man alone could both proclaim and advance a science so far as Hahnemann did homoeopathy- a feat equalled in science only by Swedenborg, whose writings are a reservoir overflowing with homoeopathic doctrine; a source of esoteric homoeopathic principles that will satisfy the most fastidious pseudo-homoeopath, homoeopathician, spiritualist, or divine healer, who is honestly seeking for TRUTH.

But getting back to food. Yes, “There are many who neglect the food factor.” This also applies to those who fail to feed their brain at the least prepared by Hahnemann, Hering, Kent, and a host of other immortals of homoeopathy.

Protein, carbohydrates, and fats, as well as minerals foods, are just as essential to the body on the physical plane, as mental food is for the brain and the spiritual food of the Bible for those who can digest it.

The ignorance of many is profound. It is not a rare vice. It is very common. As common as laziness. I know many fairly skilled and honest homoeopaths who know that lime and all the salts of Schussler, and “fifty-seven” more varieties of elements may be lacking in a patient. So they proceed to supply (at least theoretically) the deficient element, by feeding it to him by the quart or pound, not being familiar with the principle or fact that the suffering patient lacks lime (or any other element or group of elements) because he suffers from lime inanition or lack of power to digest and assimilate lime, or the other elements. A “dyed-in-the-wool” Hahnemannian who knows his love, will feed that patient the lime or lacking element in potency on the plane where it is assimilable by contact to any mucous membrane, and even skin, if dampened.

The vital force circulates through the nervous system which is the circulatory system of vital government, just as the blood vessels convey digested food in the form of blood. Then that patient will be able to digest and assimilate all the lime or other element, or elements, from the ordinary articles of diet, without the dangers of over-feeding involved in forced feeding of elements glandular products, or physiological drugs. You will not even have to supply the vitamins a, b, c, x, y,z, nor will you have to hunt for those not yet discovered. A Divine Providence provided an influx of all His inner mysteries of chemistry and physics long before the chemist and physicist knew about them. a Divine Providence provided for all those emanations from the sun; and perhaps there are some additional ones from the moon and stars and sun of heaven, for all I know.

Hahnemann taught us a lot about foods-more than most doctors can assimilate until their digestion gets better. No wonder doctors are incompetent. Hahnemanns essay on coffee, among his lesser writings was written before his discovery of the law of homoeopathy, and is worth anyones time to read-and digest. But what does the average doctor know about idiosyncrasies of foods, their compatible relationships, or their incompatibility? What does he know of the physiological action of the various articles of food? Inanitions? What does he know about the effect of unnatural foods for adults such as eggs or milk? Or the viciousness of a man or beast fed raw meat, for example? Or food poisoning from such foods as rice, oysters, pork, fats, etc.? What is behind the idiosyncrasy–what is the law behind it? What does he know about the Doctrine of Forms? Of Series and Degrees? Why, many of these such heralded pseudo-scientific biologists dont even know there are such things, much less the laws behind them.

“We neglect the chemical side of life?”.

Why, these “dyed-in-the-wool” Hahnemannians have got so far away from that kindergarten “stuff” of present day research laboratories that they have been riding astride the cosmic ray for years, exploring the celestial regions. Your pseudo- scientists cannot even today follow them with their marvelous telescopes. To teach them esoteric homoeopathy would be like trying to teach a first grade school child calculus. If you dont believe me just take a course at the Post-Graduate School of the American Foundation for Homoeopathy at Boston next July and August, where you will be shown.

Make your reservations early–money back if not satisfied. I believe that there are quite a number of doctors who do not even know we have such an institution functioning. But even they barely touch the subject of esoteric homoeopathic principle,s for that is three planes above those mongers of the laboratories still selling fish, frogs, and liver, and imposing on faithful dogs.

In 1901, Doctor Kent offered to teach esoteric homoeopathic principles free of charge to any student or physician in Chicago, forming a class at his home. The third night but one student was in attendance. They were not yet prepared to digest the lectures. I would give a thousand dollars today to get such a course.

It is such things as these which serve to discredit our school, and bring us into disrepute–the failure to perceive the commonest limitations of our method which should be abundantly clear.

I protest against the use of the word “limitations” as applied to homoeopathy. It certainly does not fit our groups of scientifically trained Hahnemannians. Homoeopathy has no limitations in curable cases. Homoeopathy prevents those catastrophies long before so-called modern medicine recognizes the disease. “Curable” is, however, a relative term. Much of what is curable to a Hahnemannian is incurable to an allopath. Again one master homoeopath may fail when another less learned homoeopath may cure. All our masters have failed in what they afterwards concluded were curable cases.

But that is a limitation of fallible man and not the law. Without going into an essay on the subject, let is suffice to say that a Hahnemannian considers a case curable when the patient is not so depleted in vitality that the vital force can restore health under the stimulus of the similimum, after first removing all obstacles (if that is possible) to recovery.

No homoeopath would ever dream of trying to deliver a woman in childbirth by means of the remedy alone; it is self evident that here is a mechanical condition (says you) requiring mechanical treatment.

No homoeopath would expect his remedy alone to deliver the woman-he would expect the woman and nature to help a little. But “believe it or not” the obstetrician of Dunham College in 1901, at a clinic, witnessed by a group of students, changed a breech presentation to a normal delivery in less than a minute by one dose of Pulsatilla CM. (Finke). Doctor Kent reported a similar result. In fact, there are several cases on record. When you have a case of prolonged labor with no progress, in a woman inclined to be fat, with a mild tearful disposition, who pleads with you to open the window, as she is smothering, and you think it is a case for forceps delivery, just hunt for the forceps in your car, while your nurse gives the patient a dose of Pulsatilla, anywhere from the 30th to the CM.

You will lay your forceps aside unless there is a malformation. Or if it is a primipara, say about 35 years of age, who is ordering everybody around, and who snaps an order for you to do something, not in an appealing tone of voice, but a mean Chamomilla explosion, just ask your homoeopathically trained nurse whether she has any Chamomilla in her case, if you dont have it, and give the patient one dose on the tongue. You will learn something of the miracles of homoeopathy in short order. And why shouldnt the remedy act in such expressions of sickness, where the normally constructed organs fail to function of themselves? Do the beasts of the field and forest require the attendance of an obstetrician? Perhaps.

Of course, it is supposed that the properly trained homoeopath knows the hindrances to recovery, and such a trained homoeopath is a more skilled obstetrician than one without those instruments of precision-the homoeopathic medicines. Dont get the idea that the allopath and quasi-homoeopath have a corner on mechanical technique.

We could extend the proof by many pages filled with homoeopathic therapeutics in this trial hour of motherhood, but let it suffice to say that the retained Hahnemannian has fewer cases with complications, and fewer maimed babies than these know it-all specialists who meddle with nature. The Hahnemannian works with nature and not contrary to rigid muscle and ligaments; he does not use brute force of interference under the cloak of scientific procedure, but gives the homoeopathic remedy, Puls., Cimic., Bell., Cham., Kali carb., Ipecac, Arsenicum, etc., with miraculous results. Are you mentally equipped to make a rifle shot, bulls eye selection of each particular remedy in emergency practice?.

I know that many of the old time homoeopaths have made grave blunders. Who has not? But I would rather blunder with my diagnosis, than blunder with my prescription, and these old timers could prescribe all around our modern smart. Alecs with all their instruments of torture.

What availeth it a man if, even though he be the most expert diagnostician in the world, if he loses his own child for lack of the more important thing-the homoeopathic remedy. Diagnosis is, to say the most, but a feeble aid to the proper prescription. If I have a patient within three hours of death with a history of tremendous restlessness, rapid prostration, burning pains, and a weakness out of all proportions to the time he has been sick, with likely a burning thirst for water to wet his parched tongue and throat, and a consciousness and fear of death, I need not know that he was spider bit, or that he had typhoid fever. I need not know what his disease is, for I know Arsenicum will cure him- positively!.

Recently I saved a womans life and her childs. She was in convulsions for 38 hours and an allopath had failed. I gave her Arsenicum 10M and she did not have a single convulsion after the remedy was administered.

Of course, I do not mean to suggest that a doctor should not know all about disease, just as Hahnemann charged us to do, but I want to impress the truth that materia medica and homoeopathic philosophy are of much more importance than the allied branch of medicine. Yet our college curricula provide less than one per cent of their time to what is ninety per cent of the doctor profession.

The American Institute of Homoeopathy has allowed the American Medical Association to outline our course of study and requirement to pass state board examinations. How absurd and ridiculous. Yet the homoeopaths made no organized protest. Perhaps that is “what is the matter with the homoeopath, professionally”.

That is what Hahnemann College is up against, for which shortcoming she is wrongly blamed. As a matter of fact, her graduates have made the highest score in Pennsylvania state board examinations, and her graduates are successful physicians, with honors second to no other college. But more time is needed for teaching the esoteric principles of homoeopathy in the threefold essential curriculum of physical, mental, and spiritual therapy. I cannot help repeating this vital truth. Too much time is de voted to the allied branches.

William H. Schwartz