The Living Temple (1903)

AUTHOR: Kellogg, John Harvey

KEYWORDS: animals, dress reform, food, physical exercise, women's rights

SUMMARY (Bryn Skibo & Deborah Madsen):

Kellogg explicitly makes the ethical veganism argument based on shared sentience, intelligence, capacity to learn, feel, and mourn, common to all sentient beings. His argument against meat-eating claims, in brief, that

It is useless to present to those who reason in this way the fact that the killing of animals is ethically wrong, since the animal has a right to live, and man has primarily no right to destroy the life which he did not give and cannot restore; that the flesh eater not only invades the rights of animals, but injures himself through the diseases which he contracts; that he shortens his life, impairs his mental and moral faculties, and brings upon himself many unnecessary miseries (191).

in the preface, Kellogg describes the text is a collection of “facts ... in relation to the structure, the functions, and the proper care and training of the body” (3). Though he quotes the Apostle Paul, “‘Your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost’” (qtd., 3), Kellogg explicitly designates the text as secular: “... while many references to Scripture have been made in this work, it has been no part of the author’s purpose to write a theological treatise, but simply to study man from a physiological standpoint; hence, in the use of the word ‘temple,’ as it appears upon the title-page and in numerous places in the work, the physiological, or literal, sense is to be understood. That man, considered as a spiritual temple, can be such in the fullest sense only when he is ruled by a will which is in complete accord with that of his Creator, is self-evident” (4). However, “Departing from the way of life marked out for him by his Creator, man has sought many inventions, the soul- and body-destroying influences of which are clearly evident to the thoughtful observer” (5). Kellogg refutes social Darwinism, and argues explicitly for mankind having descended from other animals. Moreover, mankind is, he argues, “rapidly going down” due to the rapid extinction of whole races of humans as well as the increase of “insanity, epilepsy, and imbecility” which have increased by “three hundred percent in fifty years” due to a “blight of physical, mental, and moral decadence” (4). “This multiplication of disorders and degenerates is the natural result of perverted habits and the cultivation of abnormal appetites” (4-5).

Kellogg recognizes a connection of life within all beings: “This wonderful life is active all about us in an infinite variety of forms; in bird, insect, fish, reptile, and all the million creatures which people the earth and sea, we recognize one common Life; – a kindred force which springs in every limb that leaps and moves, which throbs in every beating heart, thrills through every nerve, and quivers in every brain” (15). “While human knowledge stands mute respective of the origin of life, investigation has gone far enough to show that life is one, – that animal life and vegetable life are not merely kindred lives, but are really one and the same” (15-16).

Kellogg advocates for Intelligent Design (18-19). Animal intelligence: “In obtaining food, in overcoming obstacles, in extricating themselves from emergencies, in escaping pursuers, what human-like intelligence is manifested by all the million tribes of the animal kingdom!” (20). The intelligence of plants: “An unerring Intelligence guides the plant to hold its leaves in such position as to receive, to the fullest extent, the vitalizing light which energizes its cells, and carries forward the marvelous metamorphosis” (22). And the intelligence of the inanimate world: “Even in the inanimate world, the evidence of an intelligent power is ever present before us. ... every object and operation in nature speaks of an active, controlling Intelligence possessed of infinite power and capacity” (23). Kellogg then turns to evidence of divine intelligence within the body: “What is this instinct? To simply say that it is instinct affords no explanation. To ascribe to a blind, unreasoning faculty greater power than intelligence possesses, is absurd. The instinct which leads the pigeon to return directly to its home, enabling it to take the proper direction without the painful process of trying and failing many times before attain success, is an exhibition of the highest intelligence, – an intelligence far beyond that required for ordinary mental processes” (55). A further example is given when a horse and rider are lost in the woods, the rider may trust the horse to find their way home: “Here the intelligent man, the master, humbly bows before the higher intelligence of the horse, and is saved by the divine voice which the horse hears, but to which his own mind is deaf” (55-56). Kellogg argues that “Instinct is simply God speaking to the creature, guiding it in those things which require a greater wisdom than that of either animal or human mind” (56). “An intelligence which can guide a stray pigeon home without the aid of landmarks of any sort, or notes of any kind taken by the way, is so far above anything known of human intellectual feats that we must believe it to be a manifestation of divine care” (56). Kellogg attributes divine love to nonhuman animals as well as “superhuman” intelligence, through “animal instinct,” which is actually God speaking to animals.

Turning to “The Divine Way in Diet,” Kellogg bases his diet on Genesis 1:29: “which presents, as man’s bill of fare, a dietary of fruits, nuts, and seeds. That this was the original and natural diet of man is a demonstrable scientific fact” (102). He quotes I Cor. 10:31: “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God” (102), arguing that eating and drinking should not be pleasurable but a means to care for God’s living temple. (102-103). “Each particular class of animals has its own bill of fare, prepared for it by its Maker. Man, beast, birds, fishes, even the insects, – all the living creatures of the earth, – are guests at God’s table. Each is provided with the food which is adapted to its needs” (105). Since God makes food to keep every animal fit and healthy, it is unreasonable to think that it is necessary for animals to “devour those who, like themselves, have been invited to ‘eat that which is good’” (106). “Neither can food be called convenient which is only obtainable at the expense of such an enormous amount of suffering and such a prodigious sacrifice of life as is involved in the preparation of animals for use as food” (106). Kellogg asks, “is it not the duty of every human being to take care that he shall eat to the glory of God, and not to the pollution and destruction of his temple? The consequence of such eating and drinking we see all about us in the vast army of dyspeptics, rheumatics, consumptives, and wretched subjects of nervousness, nervous exhaustion, paralysis, and even insanity” (110).

Kellogg advises a diet based on whole grains, nuts for fat, fruit (fresh, dried, and canned), legumes and seeds, and vegetables. He claims that cow’s milk is not an essential food. Following a section outlining the bacterial dangers of milk and the difficulty most human adults have digesting it, Kellogg argues that the use of milk, which is now difficult to remove entirely from the diet, is “certainly questionable”(153) and “Of all forms of animal food, fresh eggs are probably open to the least objection” (159). In place of dairy milk he recommends nut milks. Kellogg discourages the use of some oils as being “unwholesome,” but writes that “Cream and milk made from nuts are entirely wholesome, and agree with persons who cannot take cow’s milk and cream without very harmful results on account of inability to digest casein” (199, 200). He also discourages the use of “chemical bread raisers,” vinegars, condiments and spices, cane sugar, and impartially cooked cereals” (199-207), while encouraging the use of zwieback, granola, granose, crystal wheat, protose, malted nuts, toasted wheat flakes and corn flakes (208-209).

“The question is not, he argues, ‘Is it possible to subsist upon the flesh of animals, and life? but, ‘Is it natural, wholesome, and wise so to do?’  In other words, is it in harmony with the divine order of life for man to slay to eat?” (161). Kellogg investigates the teeth of herbivorous and carnivorous animals, concluding that some carnivorous animals still eat nuts, grasses, and fruit and have developed an “unnatural” taste for flesh (e.g. rats) (162). Kellogg kept a wolf as a pet, to which he fed protose (the "meatless meat" developed at Battle Creek) and nuts (162-163). “If, then, an animal in which its natural state subsists largely, if not exclusively, upon a meat diet becomes a more vigorous animal when fed upon a non-flesh diet, are we not led at once to the conclusion that carnivorous animals are such only as the result of an unnatural state of things, which has been brought about by the failure of their natural food supplies?” (164). Extending this point to humans, via the Bible, he writes: “The Bible and the traditions of profane history clearly picture the first representatives of our race as eaters of fruits, grains, and nuts, and also more than suggest that human beings were brought to the use of flesh food only through being deprived of their original and more natural food stuffs by famine” (165). Looking at human teeth, Kellogg links humans to gorillas rather than carnivorous animals like dogs, and argues that even carnivores were likely herbivores at some point. Kellogg argues that the “fleetest” animals are those who subsist entirely on vegetables, and that eating meat makes one slow (169-170). He suggests that flesh eating tends to promote degeneracy”: “From these facts it is apparent that it is impossible for one animal to subsist upon another animal without increasing the amount of waste matters in its own tissues. As these wastes accumulate, the vitality and life of the animal must be smothered, just as the accumulation of ashes and smoke smothers the fire in a stove or a furnace” (171). He then outlines various diseases resulting from the use of flesh foods” (172-184).

Addressing the ethical arguments against the consumption of animal foods, Kellogg emphasizes the sentience of non-human animals: “The basis for the ethical argument against flesh eating is to be found in the fact that lower animals are, in common with man, sentient creatures. We have somehow become accustomed to think of our inferior brethren, the members of the lower orders of the animal kingdom, as things; we treat them as sticks or stones, as trees and other nonsentient things that are not possessed of organs of sense and feeling. We are wrong in this; they are not things, but beings” (184).

An ox, a sheep, can hear, see, feel, smell, taste, and even think, if not as well as man, at least to some degree after the same fashion. The lamb gamboling in the pastures enjoys life much the same as the little child chasing butterflies across the meadow. A horse or cow can learn, remember, love, hate, mourn, rejoice, and suffer, as human beings do. Its sphere of life is certainly not so great as man’s, but life is not the less real and not the less precious to it; and the fact that a quadruped has little is not a good and sufficient reason why the biped, who has much, should deprive his brother of the little that he hath. For the most part it must be said that the lower animals have adhered far more closely to the divine order established for them than has man (184-185).

He claims a universal brotherhood among animals, including humans: “So there is, in a certain sense, not only a universal brotherhood of man, – although few even recognize this fact, – but there is likewise a great brotherhood, which includes not only man, civilized man, savage man, Christian man, heathen man, – all men, – but likewise man’s humble relatives of the animal world, into whose nostrils as well as into man’s God breathed the breath of life” (185-186). He concedes that Christianity’s treatment of animals compares poorly with other religions: “The fact that our so-called Christian nations are behind many heathen nations in the estimation they put upon life as manifested in animals below man in the scale of being, is without doubt one of the greatest obstacles that has stood in the way of the advancement of Christianity in China, Japan, India, Burma, and kindred countries” (186).

In this context, Kellogg describes the scene of “Union Stockyards in Chicago” (187-189). “The man whose soul is not so calloused that he has ceased to think humanely, and has lost sight of the great fatherhood of God, and the great kinship of all living, sentient things, must be stirred to feel that the slaughterhouse, whether it be the wretched shanty just outside the limits of some country village, or the enormous structure filled with ingenious machinery of every description managed by a great packing company, is simply a place where organized killing – premeditated, systematic taking of life – is carried on” (187). “We should doubtless regard these gigantic cruelties as closely akin to murder had we not been long accustomed to look upon animals as mere things, like blocks and stones, rather than creatures in whose veins runs blood like our own, … who exihibit much the same traits as do human beings, – love, hate, envy, courage, timidity, forethought, – which plan and execute, which combine with others against a common foe” (187). Kellogg also recognizes the deleterious effects of constant murder on the slaughterhouse workers (189). “The Bible declares the unity of animal life. ... There is a fraternity more comprehensive and more universal than the ‘brotherhood of man.’ Let us think and speak of the ‘brotherhood of being’. Let us see in the ox a patient, industrious kinsman, worthy of respect” (189). Kellogg states that the Bible does not explicitly ban the eating of meat, and that his intention is not to argue that it does but rather to harmonize the findings of “science and experience” with “Biblical teaching” (191).

Kellogg links dietary reform to dress reform or “The Clothing of the Temple” and argues that the reason why woman is the "weaker vessel" is due to “waist constriction.” He likens waist constriction to Chinese foot binding and skull flattening (3476-3477). “That there has not been a general rebellion against this unnatural and mischief-making mode of dress on the part of intelligent women of this enlightened age, is probably due to the popular but fallacious idea which seems to be so thoroughly fixed in the minds of both men and women, that woman is ‘the weaker vessel,’ and naturally subject to ailments and weaknesses and general physical inefficiency from which men enjoy immunity. Any one who has made himself familiar with the activity of the women of savage nations, or even the women of the peasant classes in civilized countries, must have recognized the fallaciousness of this popular idea” (356-357).

On the relation of diet to mind and character,” Kellogg proposes “As a man eateth, so he thinketh” (423). Kellogg believes that too much meat consumption can cause physical excitement: “If the blood is charged with irritating substances, the organs through which it circulates will be naturally exposed to abnormal irritation, excitation, and disturbance of function. A brain receiving too large a supply of blood must suffer first and most in this regard” (426). Thus, meat-eating is related to intemperance. (427-429) and "degeneracy": “The pages of history are crowded with facts which clearly show that the successive degeneracy of each of the nations which ruled the world, began with luxuriousness in diet” (430). “The race deterioration, so evident at the present time, must be in no small part attributed to the neglect to properly study this question of diet” (431).

“Self-control is the keynote to purity of conduct” (430). Kellogg argues that mankind possesses the “highest degree” of reason in the animal kingdom, but that doesn’t mean mankind is always reasonable, nor that animals do not reason (432). The human mind is different to the mind in lower animals”: “Man is distinguished from the lower members of the animal creation by the possession of the reasoning faculty to a higher degree than any other living creature, and special reasoning powers which creatures below him in the scale of existence do not possess. There are some particulars, however, in which the animals seems to show better sense, if not a superior reasoning faculty, than does man” (434); animals eat that which is good for them, and avoid that which is not.

“Man alone possesses a conscience, he alone has moral faculties and moral responsibilities” (436). Mankind’s obligation to God rests on the following principles: that God created Man in His image, to be a true image of God, mankind must be Godlike, God is ever-present in Man via physical and moral instincts, to which mankind should listen (437), God is always ready to give mankind the wisdom necessary to live well, to be happy, mankind must obey God (438).