orthodoxy-第30章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！





of　his　scepticism　tried　in　vain　to　wrestle　with　this　difficulty。　



In　〃Songs　before　Sunrise；〃　written　under　the　inspiration　of　Garibaldi



and　the　revolt　of　Italy　he　proclaimed　the　newer　religion　and　the



purer　God　which　should　wither　up　all　the　priests　of　the　world：







〃What　doest　thou　now　　　　　　Looking　Godward　to　cry　　　　　　I　am　I；



thou　art　thou；　　　　　　I　am　low；　thou　art　high；　　　　　　I　am　thou　that　thou



seekest　to　find　him；　find　thou　but　thyself；　thou　art　I。〃







　　　　　Of　which　the　immediate　and　evident　deduction　is　that　tyrants



are　as　much　the　sons　of　God　as　Garibaldis；　and　that　King　Bomba



of　Naples　having；　with　the　utmost　success；　〃found　himself〃



is　identical　with　the　ultimate　good　in　all　things。　　The　truth　is



that　the　western　energy　that　dethrones　tyrants　has　been　directly



due　to　the　western　theology　that　says　〃I　am　I；　thou　art　thou。〃　



The　same　spiritual　separation　which　looked　up　and　saw　a　good　king　in



the　universe　looked　up　and　saw　a　bad　king　in　Naples。　　The　worshippers



of　Bomba's　god　dethroned　Bomba。　　The　worshippers　of　Swinburne's　god



have　covered　Asia　for　centuries　and　have　never　dethroned　a　tyrant。　



The　Indian　saint　may　reasonably　shut　his　eyes　because　he　is



looking　at　that　which　is　I　and　Thou　and　We　and　They　and　It。　



It　is　a　rational　occupation：　　but　it　is　not　true　in　theory　and　not



true　in　fact　that　it　helps　the　Indian　to　keep　an　eye　on　Lord　Curzon。　



That　external　vigilance　which　has　always　been　the　mark　of　Christianity



（the　command　that　we　should　WATCH　and　pray）　has　expressed　itself



both　in　typical　western　orthodoxy　and　in　typical　western　politics：　



but　both　depend　on　the　idea　of　a　divinity　transcendent；　different



from　ourselves；　a　deity　that　disappears。　　Certainly　the　most　sagacious



creeds　may　suggest　that　we　should　pursue　God　into　deeper　and　deeper



rings　of　the　labyrinth　of　our　own　ego。　　But　only　we　of　Christendom



have　said　that　we　should　hunt　God　like　an　eagle　upon　the　mountains：　



and　we　have　killed　all　monsters　in　the　chase。







　　　　　Here　again；　therefore；　we　find　that　in　so　far　as　we　value



democracy　and　the　self…renewing　energies　of　the　west；　we　are　much



more　likely　to　find　them　in　the　old　theology　than　the　new。　



If　we　want　reform；　we　must　adhere　to　orthodoxy：　　especially　in　this



matter　（so　much　disputed　in　the　counsels　of　Mr。　R。J。Campbell）；



the　matter　of　insisting　on　the　immanent　or　the　transcendent　deity。　



By　insisting　specially　on　the　immanence　of　God　we　get　introspection；



self…isolation；　quietism；　social　indifferenceTibet。　　By　insisting



specially　on　the　transcendence　of　God　we　get　wonder；　curiosity；



moral　and　political　adventure；　righteous　indignationChristendom。　



Insisting　that　God　is　inside　man；　man　is　always　inside　himself。　



By　insisting　that　God　transcends　man；　man　has　transcended　himself。







　　　　　If　we　take　any　other　doctrine　that　has　been　called　old…fashioned



we　shall　find　the　case　the　same。　　It　is　the　same；　for　instance；



in　the　deep　matter　of　the　Trinity。　　Unitarians　（a　sect　never　to　be



mentioned　without　a　special　respect　for　their　distinguished　intellectual



dignity　and　high　intellectual　honour）　are　often　reformers　by　the



accident　that　throws　so　many　small　sects　into　such　an　attitude。　



But　there　is　nothing　in　the　least　liberal　or　akin　to　reform　in



the　substitution　of　pure　monotheism　for　the　Trinity。　　The　complex



God　of　the　Athanasian　Creed　may　be　an　enigma　for　the　intellect；



but　He　is　far　less　likely　to　gather　the　mystery　and　cruelty



of　a　Sultan　than　the　lonely　god　of　Omar　or　Mahomet。　　The　god



who　is　a　mere　awful　unity　is　not　only　a　king　but　an　Eastern　king。　



The　HEART　of　humanity；　especially　of　European　humanity；　is　certainly



much　more　satisfied　by　the　strange　hints　and　symbols　that　gather



round　the　Trinitarian　idea；　the　image　of　a　council　at　which　mercy



pleads　as　well　as　justice；　the　conception　of　a　sort　of　liberty



and　variety　existing　even　in　the　inmost　chamber　of　the　world。　



For　Western　religion　has　always　felt　keenly　the　idea　〃it　is　not



well　for　man　to　be　alone。〃　　The　social　instinct　asserted　itself



everywhere　as　when　the　Eastern　idea　of　hermits　was　practically　expelled



by　the　Western　idea　of　monks。　　So　even　asceticism　became　brotherly；



and　the　Trappists　were　sociable　even　when　they　were　silent。　



If　this　love　of　a　living　complexity　be　our　test；　it　is　certainly



healthier　to　have　the　Trinitarian　religion　than　the　Unitarian。　



For　to　us　Trinitarians　（if　I　may　say　it　with　reverence）to　us　God



Himself　is　a　society。　　It　is　indeed　a　fathomless　mystery　of　theology；



and　even　if　I　were　theologian　enough　to　deal　with　it　directly；　it　would



not　be　relevant　to　do　so　here。　　Suffice　it　to　say　here　that　this　triple



enigma　is　as　comforting　as　wine　and　open　as　an　English　fireside；



that　this　thing　that　bewilders　the　intellect　utterly　quiets　the　heart：　



but　out　of　the　desert；　from　the　dry　places　and　the　dreadful　suns；



come　the　cruel　children　of　the　lonely　God；　the　real　Unitarians　who



with　scimitar　in　hand　have　laid　waste　the　world。　　For　it　is　not　well



for　God　to　be　alone。







　　　　　Again；　the　same　is　true　of　that　difficult　matter　of　the　danger



of　the　soul；　which　has　unsettled　so　many　just　minds。　　To　hope



for　all　souls　is　imperative；　and　it　is　quite　tenable　that　their



salvation　is　inevitable。　　It　is　tenable；　but　it　is　not　specially



favourable　to　activity　or　progress。　　Our　fighting　and　creative　society



ought　rather　to　insist　on　the　danger　of　everybody；　on　the　fact



that　every　man　is　hanging　by　a　thread　or　clinging　to　a　precipice。　



To　say　that　all　will　be　well　anyhow　is　a　comprehensible　remark：　



but　it　cannot　be　called　the　blast　of　a　trumpet。　　Europe　ought　rather



to　emphasize　possible　perdition；　and　Europe　always　has　emphasized　it。　



Here　its　highest　religion　is　at　one　with　all　its　cheapest　romances。　



To　the　Buddhist　or　the　eastern　fatalist　existence　is　a　science



or　a　plan；　which　must　end　up　in　a　certain　way。　　But　to　a　Christian



existence　is　a　STORY；　which　may　end　up　in　any　way。　　In　a　thrilling



novel　（that　purely　Christian　product）　the　hero　is　not　eaten



by　cannibals；　but　it　is　essential　to　the　existence　of　the　thrill



that　he　MIGHT　be　eaten　by　cannibals。　　The　hero　must　（so　to　speak）



be　an　eatable　hero。　　So　Christian　morals　have　always　said　to　the　man；



not　that　he　would　lose　his　soul；　but　that　he　must　take　care　that　he



didn't。　In　Christian　morals；　in　short；　it　is　wicked　to　call　a　man



〃damned〃：　but　it　is　strictly　religious　and　philosophic　to　call



him　damnable。







　　　　　All　Christianity　concentrates　on　the　man　at　the　cross…roads。



The　vast　and　shallow　philosophies；　the　huge　syntheses　of　humbug；



all　talk　about　ages　and　evolution　and　ultimate　developments。　



The　true　philosophy　is　concerned　with　the　instant。　　Will　a　man



take　this　road　or　that？that　is　the　only　thing　to　think　about；



if　you　enjoy　thinking。　　The　aeons　are　easy　enough　to　think　about；



any　one　can　think　about　them。　　The　instant　is　really　awful：　



and　it　is　because　our　religion　has　intensely　felt　the　instant；



that　it　has　in　literature　dealt　much　with　battle　and　in　theology



dealt　much　with　hell。　　It　is　full　of　DANGER；　like　a　boy's　book：　



it　is　at　an　immortal　crisis。　　There　is　a　great　deal　of　real　similarity



between　popular　fiction　and　the　religion　of　the　western　people。　



If　you　say　that　popular　fiction　is　vulgar　and　tawdry；　you　only　say



what　the　dreary　and　well…informed　say　also　about　the　images　in　the



Catholic　churches。　　Life　（according　to　the　faith）　is　very　like　a



serial　story　in　a　magazine：　　life　ends　with　the　promise　（or　menace）



〃to　be　continued　in　our　next。〃　　Also；　with　a　noble　vulgarity；



life　imitates　the　serial　and　leaves　off　at　the　exciting　moment。　



For　death　is　distinctly　an　exciting　moment。







　　　　　But　the　point　is　that　a　story　is　exciting　because　it　has　in　it



so　strong　an　element　of　will；　of　what　theology　calls　free…will。



You　cannot　finish　a　sum　how　you　like。　　But　you　can　finish　a　story



how　you　like。　　When　somebody　discovered　the　Differential　Calculus



there　was　only　one　Differential　Calculus　he　could　discover。　



But　when　Shakespeare　killed　Romeo　he　might　have　married　him　to



Juliet's　old　nurse　if　he　had　felt　inclined。　　And　Christendom　has



excelled　in　the　narrative　romance　exactly　because　it　has　insisted



on　the　theological　free…will。　It　is　a　large　matter　and　too　much



to　one　side　of　the　road　to　be　discussed　adequately　here；　but　this



is　the　real　objection　to　that　torrent　of　modern　talk　about　treating



crime　as　disease；　about　making　a　prison　merely　a　hygienic　environment



like　a　hospital；　of　healing　sin　by　slow　scientific　methods。　



The　fallacy　of　the　whole　thing　is　that　evil　is　a　matter　of　active



choice　whereas　disease　is　not。　　If　you　say　that　you　are　going　to　cure



a　profligate　as　you　cure　an　asthmatic；　my　cheap　and　obvious　answer　is；



〃Produce　the　people　who　want　to　be　asthmatics　as　many　people　want



to　be　profligates。〃　　A　man　may　lie　still　and　be　cured　of　a　malady。　



But　he　must　not　lie　still　if　he　wants　to　be　cured　of　a　sin；



on　the　contrary；　he　must　get　up　and　jump　about　violently。　



The　whole　point　indeed　is　perfectly　expressed　in　the　very　word



which　we　use　for　a　man　in　hospital；　〃patient〃　is　in　the　passive　mood；



〃sinner〃　is　in　the　active。　　If　a　man　is　to　be　saved　from　influenza；



he　may　be　a　patient。　　But　if　he　is　to　be　saved　from　forging；



he　must　be　not　a　patient　but　an　IMPATIENT。　　He　must　be　personally



impatient　with　forgery。　　All　moral　reform　must　start　in　the　active



not　the　passive　will。







　　　　　Here　again　we　reach　the　same　substantial　conclusion。　　In　so　far



as　we　desire　the　definite　reconstructions　and　the　dangerous　revolutions



which　have　distinguished　European　civilization；　we　shall　not　discourage



the　thought　of　possible　ruin；　we　shall　rather　encourage　it。　



If　we　want；　like　the　Eastern　saints；　merely　to　contemplate　how　right



things　are；　of　course　we　shall　only　say　that　they　must　go　right。　



But　if　we　particularly　want　to　MAKE　them　go　right；　we　must　insist



that　they　may　go　wrong。







　　　　　Lastly；　this　truth　is　yet　again　true　in　the　case　of　the　common



modern　attempts　to　diminish　or　to　explain　away　the　divinity　of　Christ。　



The　thing　may　be　true　or　not；　that　I　shall　deal　with　before　I　end。　



But　if　the　divinity　is　true　it　is　certainly　terribly　revolutionary。　



That　a　good　man　may　have　his　back　to　the　wall　is　no　more　than　we



knew　already；　but　that　God　could　have　his　back　to　the