orthodoxy-第32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！





saw　of　the　merely　abstract　arguments　against　the　Christian　cosmology



the　less　I　thought　of　them。　　I　mean　that　having　found　the　moral



atmosphere　of　the　Incarnation　to　be　common　sense；　I　then　looked



at　the　established　intellectual　arguments　against　the　Incarnation



and　found　them　to　be　common　nonsense。　　In　case　the　argument　should



be　thought　to　suffer　from　the　absence　of　the　ordinary　apologetic　I



will　here　very　briefly　summarise　my　own　arguments　and　conclusions



on　the　purely　objective　or　scientific　truth　of　the　matter。







　　　　　If　I　am　asked；　as　a　purely　intellectual　question；　why　I　believe



in　Christianity；　I　can　only　answer；　〃For　the　same　reason　that　an



intelligent　agnostic　disbelieves　in　Christianity。〃　　I　believe　in　it



quite　rationally　upon　the　evidence。　　But　the　evidence　in　my　case；



as　in　that　of　the　intelligent　agnostic；　is　not　really　in　this　or　that



alleged　demonstration；　it　is　in　an　enormous　accumulation　of　small



but　unanimous　facts。　　The　secularist　is　not　to　be　blamed　because



his　objections　to　Christianity　are　miscellaneous　and　even　scrappy；



it　is　precisely　such　scrappy　evidence　that　does　convince　the　mind。　



I　mean　that　a　man　may　well　be　less　convinced　of　a　philosophy



from　four　books；　than　from　one　book；　one　battle；　one　landscape；



and　one　old　friend。　　The　very　fact　that　the　things　are　of　different



kinds　increases　the　importance　of　the　fact　that　they　all　point



to　one　conclusion。　　Now；　the　non…Christianity　of　the　average



educated　man　to…day　is　almost　always；　to　do　him　justice；　made　up



of　these　loose　but　living　experiences。　　I　can　only　say　that　my



evidences　for　Christianity　are　of　the　same　vivid　but　varied　kind



as　his　evidences　against　it。　　For　when　I　look　at　these　various



anti…Christian　truths；　I　simply　discover　that　none　of　them　are　true。　



I　discover　that　the　true　tide　and　force　of　all　the　facts　flows



the　other　way。　　Let　us　take　cases。　　Many　a　sensible　modern　man



must　have　abandoned　Christianity　under　the　pressure　of　three　such



converging　convictions　as　these：　　first；　that　men；　with　their　shape；



structure；　and　sexuality；　are；　after　all；　very　much　like　beasts；



a　mere　variety　of　the　animal　kingdom；　second；　that　primeval　religion



arose　in　ignorance　and　fear；　third；　that　priests　have　blighted　societies



with　bitterness　and　gloom。　　Those　three　anti…Christian　arguments



are　very　different；　but　they　are　all　quite　logical　and　legitimate；



and　they　all　converge。　　The　only　objection　to　them　（I　discover）



is　that　they　are　all　untrue。　　If　you　leave　off　looking　at　books



about　beasts　and　men；　if　you　begin　to　look　at　beasts　and　men　then



（if　you　have　any　humour　or　imagination；　any　sense　of　the　frantic



or　the　farcical）　you　will　observe　that　the　startling　thing　is　not



how　like　man　is　to　the　brutes；　but　how　unlike　he　is。　　It　is　the



monstrous　scale　of　his　divergence　that　requires　an　explanation。　



That　man　and　brute　are　like　is；　in　a　sense；　a　truism；　but　that　being



so　like　they　should　then　be　so　insanely　unlike；　that　is　the　shock



and　the　enigma。　　That　an　ape　has　hands　is　far　less　interesting　to　the



philosopher　than　the　fact　that　having　hands　he　does　next　to　nothing



with　them；　does　not　play　knuckle…bones　or　the　violin；　does　not　carve



marble　or　carve　mutton。　　People　talk　of　barbaric　architecture　and



debased　art。　　But　elephants　do　not　build　colossal　temples　of　ivory



even　in　a　roccoco　style；　camels　do　not　paint　even　bad　pictures；



though　equipped　with　the　material　of　many　camel's…hair　brushes。　



Certain　modern　dreamers　say　that　ants　and　bees　have　a　society　superior



to　ours。　　They　have；　indeed；　a　civilization；　but　that　very　truth



only　reminds　us　that　it　is　an　inferior　civilization。　　Who　ever



found　an　ant…hill　decorated　with　the　statues　of　celebrated　ants？　



Who　has　seen　a　bee…hive　carved　with　the　images　of　gorgeous　queens



of　old？　　No；　the　chasm　between　man　and　other　creatures　may　have



a　natural　explanation；　but　it　is　a　chasm。　　We　talk　of　wild　animals；



but　man　is　the　only　wild　animal。　　It　is　man　that　has　broken　out。　



All　other　animals　are　tame　animals；　following　the　rugged　respectability



of　the　tribe　or　type。　　All　other　animals　are　domestic　animals；



man　alone　is　ever　undomestic；　either　as　a　profligate　or　a　monk。　



So　that　this　first　superficial　reason　for　materialism　is；　if　anything；



a　reason　for　its　opposite；　it　is　exactly　where　biology　leaves　off　that



all　religion　begins。







　　　　　It　would　be　the　same　if　I　examined　the　second　of　the　three　chance



rationalist　arguments；　the　argument　that　all　that　we　call　divine



began　in　some　darkness　and　terror。　　When　I　did　attempt　to　examine



the　foundations　of　this　modern　idea　I　simply　found　that　there



were　none。　　Science　knows　nothing　whatever　about　pre…historic　man；



for　the　excellent　reason　that　he　is　pre…historic。　A　few　professors



choose　to　conjecture　that　such　things　as　human　sacrifice　were　once



innocent　and　general　and　that　they　gradually　dwindled；　but　there　is



no　direct　evidence　of　it；　and　the　small　amount　of　indirect　evidence



is　very　much　the　other　way。　　In　the　earliest　legends　we　have；



such　as　the　tales　of　Isaac　and　of　Iphigenia；　human　sacrifice



is　not　introduced　as　something　old；　but　rather　as　something　new；



as　a　strange　and　frightful　exception　darkly　demanded　by　the　gods。　



History　says　nothing；　and　legends　all　say　that　the　earth　was　kinder



in　its　earliest　time。　　There　is　no　tradition　of　progress；　but　the　whole



human　race　has　a　tradition　of　the　Fall。　　Amusingly　enough；　indeed；



the　very　dissemination　of　this　idea　is　used　against　its　authenticity。　



Learned　men　literally　say　that　this　pre…historic　calamity　cannot



be　true　because　every　race　of　mankind　remembers　it。　　I　cannot　keep



pace　with　these　paradoxes。







　　　　　And　if　we　took　the　third　chance　instance；　it　would　be　the　same；



the　view　that　priests　darken　and　embitter　the　world。　　I　look　at　the



world　and　simply　discover　that　they　don't。　Those　countries　in　Europe



which　are　still　influenced　by　priests；　are　exactly　the　countries



where　there　is　still　singing　and　dancing　and　coloured　dresses　and　art



in　the　open…air。　Catholic　doctrine　and　discipline　may　be　walls；



but　they　are　the　walls　of　a　playground。　　Christianity　is　the　only



frame　which　has　preserved　the　pleasure　of　Paganism。　　We　might　fancy



some　children　playing　on　the　flat　grassy　top　of　some　tall　island



in　the　sea。　　So　long　as　there　was　a　wall　round　the　cliff's　edge



they　could　fling　themselves　into　every　frantic　game　and　make　the



place　the　noisiest　of　nurseries。　　But　the　walls　were　knocked　down；



leaving　the　naked　peril　of　the　precipice。　　They　did　not　fall　over；



but　when　their　friends　returned　to　them　they　were　all　huddled　in



terror　in　the　centre　of　the　island；　and　their　song　had　ceased。







　　　　　Thus　these　three　facts　of　experience；　such　facts　as　go　to　make



an　agnostic；　are；　in　this　view；　turned　totally　round。　　I　am　left　saying；



〃Give　me　an　explanation；　first；　of　the　towering　eccentricity　of　man



among　the　brutes；　second；　of　the　vast　human　tradition　of　some



ancient　happiness；　third；　of　the　partial　perpetuation　of　such　pagan



joy　in　the　countries　of　the　Catholic　Church。〃　　One　explanation；



at　any　rate；　covers　all　three：　　the　theory　that　twice　was　the　natural



order　interrupted　by　some　explosion　or　revelation　such　as　people



now　call　〃psychic。〃　　Once　Heaven　came　upon　the　earth　with　a　power



or　seal　called　the　image　of　God；　whereby　man　took　command　of　Nature；



and　once　again　（when　in　empire　after　empire　men　had　been　found　wanting）



Heaven　came　to　save　mankind　in　the　awful　shape　of　a　man。　



This　would　explain　why　the　mass　of　men　always　look　backwards；



and　why　the　only　corner　where　they　in　any　sense　look　forwards　is



the　little　continent　where　Christ　has　His　Church。　　I　know　it　will



be　said　that　Japan　has　become　progressive。　　But　how　can　this　be　an



answer　when　even　in　saying　〃Japan　has　become　progressive；〃　we　really



only　mean；　〃Japan　has　become　European〃？　But　I　wish　here　not　so　much



to　insist　on　my　own　explanation　as　to　insist　on　my　original　remark。　



I　agree　with　the　ordinary　unbelieving　man　in　the　street　in　being



guided　by　three　or　four　odd　facts　all　pointing　to　something；



only　when　I　came　to　look　at　the　facts　I　always　found　they　pointed



to　something　else。







　　　　　I　have　given　an　imaginary　triad　of　such　ordinary　anti…Christian



arguments；　if　that　be　too　narrow　a　basis　I　will　give　on　the　spur



of　the　moment　another。　　These　are　the　kind　of　thoughts　which　in



combination　create　the　impression　that　Christianity　is　something　weak



and　diseased。　　First；　for　instance；　that　Jesus　was　a　gentle　creature；



sheepish　and　unworldly；　a　mere　ineffectual　appeal　to　the　world；　second；



that　Christianity　arose　and　flourished　in　the　dark　ages　of　ignorance；



and　that　to　these　the　Church　would　drag　us　back；　third；　that　the　people



still　strongly　religious　or　（if　you　will）　superstitioussuch　people



as　the　Irishare　weak；　unpractical；　and　behind　the　times。　



I　only　mention　these　ideas　to　affirm　the　same　thing：　　that　when　I



looked　into　them　independently　I　found；　not　that　the　conclusions



were　unphilosophical；　but　simply　that　the　facts　were　not　facts。　



Instead　of　looking　at　books　and　pictures　about　the　New　Testament　I



looked　at　the　New　Testament。　　There　I　found　an　account；　not　in　the



least　of　a　person　with　his　hair　parted　in　the　middle　or　his　hands



clasped　in　appeal；　but　of　an　extraordinary　being　with　lips　of　thunder



and　acts　of　lurid　decision；　flinging　down　tables；　casting　out　devils；



passing　with　the　wild　secrecy　of　the　wind　from　mountain　isolation　to　a



sort　of　dreadful　demagogy；　a　being　who　often　acted　like　an　angry　god



and　always　like　a　god。　　Christ　had　even　a　literary　style　of　his　own；



not　to　be　found；　I　think；　elsewhere；　it　consists　of　an　almost　furious



use　of　the　A　FORTIORI。　　His　〃how　much　more〃　is　piled　one　upon



another　like　castle　upon　castle　in　the　clouds。　　The　diction　used



ABOUT　Christ　has　been；　and　perhaps　wisely；　sweet　and　submissive。　



But　the　diction　used　by　Christ　is　quite　curiously　gigantesque；



it　is　full　of　camels　leaping　through　needles　and　mountains　hurled



into　the　sea。　　Morally　it　is　equally　terrific；　he　called　himself



a　sword　of　slaughter；　and　told　men　to　buy　swords　if　they　sold　their



coats　for　them。　　That　he　used　other　even　wilder　words　on　the　side



of　non…resistance　greatly　increases　the　mystery；　but　it　also；



if　anything；　rather　increases　the　violence。　　We　cannot　even　explain