heretics-第3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！
Whether bondage be better than freedom may be discussed。
But that their bondage came to more than our freedom it will be
difficult for any one to deny。
The theory of the unmorality of art has established itself firmly
in the strictly artistic classes。 They are free to produce
anything they like。 They are free to write a 〃Paradise Lost〃
in which Satan shall conquer God。 They are free to write a
〃Divine Comedy〃 in which heaven shall be under the floor of hell。
And what have they done？ Have they produced in their universality
anything grander or more beautiful than the things uttered by
the fierce Ghibbeline Catholic； by the rigid Puritan schoolmaster？
We know that they have produced only a few roundels。
Milton does not merely beat them at his piety； he beats them
at their own irreverence。 In all their little books of verse you
will not find a finer defiance of God than Satan's。 Nor will you
find the grandeur of paganism felt as that fiery Christian felt it
who described Faranata lifting his head as in disdain of hell。
And the reason is very obvious。 Blasphemy is an artistic effect；
because blasphemy depends upon a philosophical conviction。
Blasphemy depends upon belief and is fading with it。
If any one doubts this； let him sit down seriously and try to think
blasphemous thoughts about Thor。 I think his family will find him
at the end of the day in a state of some exhaustion。
Neither in the world of politics nor that of literature； then；
has the rejection of general theories proved a success。
It may be that there have been many moonstruck and misleading ideals
that have from time to time perplexed mankind。 But assuredly
there has been no ideal in practice so moonstruck and misleading
as the ideal of practicality。 Nothing has lost so many opportunities
as the opportunism of Lord Rosebery。 He is； indeed； a standing
symbol of this epochthe man who is theoretically a practical man；
and practically more unpractical than any theorist。 Nothing in this
universe is so unwise as that kind of worship of worldly wisdom。
A man who is perpetually thinking of whether this race or that race
is strong； of whether this cause or that cause is promising； is the man
who will never believe in anything long enough to make it succeed。
The opportunist politician is like a man who should abandon billiards
because he was beaten at billiards； and abandon golf because he was
beaten at golf。 There is nothing which is so weak for working
purposes as this enormous importance attached to immediate victory。
There is nothing that fails like success。
And having discovered that opportunism does fail； I have been induced
to look at it more largely； and in consequence to see that it must fail。
I perceive that it is far more practical to begin at the beginning
and discuss theories。 I see that the men who killed each other
about the orthodoxy of the Homoousion were far more sensible
than the people who are quarrelling about the Education Act。
For the Christian dogmatists were trying to establish a reign of holiness；
and trying to get defined； first of all； what was really holy。
But our modern educationists are trying to bring about a religious
liberty without attempting to settle what is religion or what
is liberty。 If the old priests forced a statement on mankind；
at least they previously took some trouble to make it lucid。
It has been left for the modern mobs of Anglicans and Nonconformists
to persecute for a doctrine without even stating it。
For these reasons； and for many more； I for one have come
to believe in going back to fundamentals。 Such is the general
idea of this book。 I wish to deal with my most distinguished
contemporaries； not personally or in a merely literary manner；
but in relation to the real body of doctrine which they teach。
I am not concerned with Mr。 Rudyard Kipling as a vivid artist
or a vigorous personality； I am concerned with him as a Heretic
that is to say； a man whose view of things has the hardihood
to differ from mine。 I am not concerned with Mr。 Bernard Shaw
as one of the most brilliant and one of the most honest men alive；
I am concerned with him as a Hereticthat is to say； a man whose
philosophy is quite solid； quite coherent； and quite wrong。
I revert to the doctrinal methods of the thirteenth century；
inspired by the general hope of getting something done。
Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something；
let us say a lamp…post； which many influential persons desire to
pull down。 A grey…clad monk； who is the spirit of the Middle Ages；
is approached upon the matter； and begins to say； in the arid manner
of the Schoolmen； 〃Let us first of all consider； my brethren；
the value of Light。 If Light be in itself good〃 At this point
he is somewhat excusably knocked down。 All the people make a rush
for the lamp…post； the lamp…post is down in ten minutes； and they go
about congratulating each other on their unmediaeval practicality。
But as things go on they do not work out so easily。 Some people
have pulled the lamp…post down because they wanted the electric light；
some because they wanted old iron； some because they wanted darkness；
because their deeds were evil。 Some thought it not enough of a
lamp…post； some too much； some acted because they wanted to smash
municipal machinery； some because they wanted to smash something。
And there is war in the night； no man knowing whom he strikes。
So； gradually and inevitably； to…day； to…morrow； or the next day；
there comes back the conviction that the monk was right after all；
and that all depends on what is the philosophy of Light。
Only what we might have discussed under the gas…lamp； we now must
discuss in the dark。
II。 On the negative spirit
Much has been said； and said truly； of the monkish morbidity；
of the hysteria which as often gone with the visions of hermits or nuns。
But let us never forget that this visionary religion is； in one sense；
necessarily more wholesome than our modern and reasonable morality。
It is more wholesome for this reason； that it can contemplate the idea
of success or triumph in the hopeless fight towards the ethical ideal；
in what Stevenson called； with his usual startling felicity；
〃the lost fight of virtue。〃 A modern morality； on the other hand；
can only point with absolute conviction to the horrors that follow
breaches of law； its only certainty is a certainty of ill。
It can only point to imperfection。 It has no perfection to point to。
But the monk meditating upon Christ or Buddha has in his mind
an image of perfect health； a thing of clear colours and clean air。
He may contemplate this ideal wholeness and happiness far more than he ought；
he may contemplate it to the neglect of exclusion of essential THINGS
he may contemplate it until he has become a dreamer or a driveller；
but still it is wholeness and happiness that he is contemplating。
He may even go mad； but he is going mad for the love of sanity。
But the modern student of ethics； even if he remains sane； remains sane
from an insane dread of insanity。
The anchorite rolling on the stones in a frenzy of submission
is a healthier person fundamentally than many a sober man
in a silk hat who is walking down Cheapside。 For many
such are good only through a withering knowledge of evil。
I am not at this moment claiming for the devotee anything
more than this primary advantage； that though he may be ma
