A
CRITICAL SUMMARY OF KENTIAN HOMEOPATHY
by Peter Morrell
Clouds – Peter Morrell
* he regarded the beauty or ugliness of a face to show the beauty or
ugliness of its soul (for which there is LITTLE evidence)
* He was a brilliant teacher of materia medica;
* he gives clear succinct images of remedies based upon a wealth of
experience with cases;
* he treated thousands of patients;
* he wrote in colourful and very quotable prose;
* he wrote in a punchy aphoristic style;
* he taught many people homeopathy;
* he made some astute observations about remedies;
* he used the high potencies and elevated their use, along with others,
into a high art;
* he had a very clear grasp of the Organon;
* he understood and practised homeopathy very well;
* he was a tireless campaigner on behalf of homeopathy generally and of
pure homeopathy in particular.
* he was the main proponent of the single remedy (similimum) approach
* he was the main proponent of ‘one-shot high-potency similimum and wait’
* he had a very clear grasp of the miasm theory and its links to materia
medica
* he had a very clear grasp of the ‘classical’ one-remedy case-taking
method
* he proposed the idea of a scale or ‘octave’ of centesimal potencies from
30 to MM
* he believed high potency approaches the spirit, while low potency
approaches matter (and so revered the high potencies) even though Hahnemann rejected this
idea
* he proposed that going higher (in potency) meant going deeper (into
causes)
* like Plato, he believed that there are two worlds – one spiritual and
one material
* he believed the outer, visible, material world to be largely a world of
results
* he believed the inner, hidden, spiritual world to be a world of causes
* he believed that physical symptoms are the results of disease, not
disease itself
* he believed the causes of disease to be immaterial causes embedded in an
immaterial realm
* he viewed bacteria as just organisms and scavengers, not the cause of
any disease
* he viewed true causes as like energy, electricity, light, magnetism and
gravity
* he believed the vital force to be the vice-regent of the soul
* he believed the corpse is still because the soul has departed
* he believed the miasms were fundamentally moral in origin, ie. stemming
from doing and thinking wrong, sin and wickedness
* he believed Psora to be the Fall of Adam and the work of Lucifer
* he believed Psora to be the foundation of all illness
* he believed that without Psora all sickness would be impossible
* he believed that Man in his origin was pure and in perfect health
* he asserted that the miasmic remedies had a special elevated place in
homeopathy and were solely capable of curing all chronic disease and of restoring a person
into a state of perfect health and blessedness
* he believed the high potencies as being solely capable of reaching into
the higher world and thus solely capable of destroying the true causes of disease
* he believed that the profoundest diseases (eg cancer, TB, mental
illness?) stem from the profoundest causes and are thus curable solely by the highest
potencies (for which there is at best conflicting evidence) – something even Vithoulkas
repeats (a staunch Kentian)
* he regarded the low potencies as superficial, trifling, ‘effeminate’ and
thus worthless
* he regarded the low potencies as insufficiently ‘radiant’ and thus
incapable of reaching the realm of cause (except for acutes)
* he regarded low potencies as too close to matter and not close enough to
the nature of the vital force to be of much use
* he regarded the use of higher potencies, sac lac and patience as the
good solid measure of a masculine and courageous homeopath
* he believed the organism and thus materia medica and thus potency to
follow a pyramid or hierachy, with mentals, highest potencies and miasmics at the apex;
skin, lowest potencies and acutes at the bottom
* he probably did not know about Cooper’s and Burnett’s work with low
potencies and cancer, but would not have believed it anyway, because it conflicts with his
precious theories
* he died before Bach’s work with Flower remedies and mental illness, but
would not have believed that either
* he was rather sceptical about nosodes and thought they were abused
* he adopted a very blinkered approach, absorbed in his spiritual visions
of Swedenborgian homeopathy and like any bad scientist was content to ignore the evidence of
what others were doing
* he disparaged Dr Richard Hughes for being a materialist low potency
traitor of homeopathy (‘that skunk I shall fight to the end of my days!’)
* he regarded the beauty or ugliness of a face to show the beauty or
ugliness of its soul (for which there is no evidence)
* being miserable and unfulfilled in his personal life (due to his
origins? and his 3 marriages?) made him strive to get to the fundamentals about homeopathic
metaphysics and life’s mysteries
* he wrote a book of ‘Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy’ which allegedly
tackles these big ideas
* it is an amalgam of Hahnemann’s Organon (some) and Swedenborg (a lot)
* it is also a very confusing book, whose influence has been well out of
proportion to its actual merits
* he was unable to explain why Nux vom and Rhus tox do such abundant good
work (even though they are not miasmic remedies) or why so many aluminium salts, silicates
and many other ‘psorics’ are rarely used – ie. they disproved his miasmic theories about
materia medica