orthodoxy-第44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!
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