on liberty-第16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！




reconciling　and　combining　of　opposites；　that　very　few　have　minds



sufficiently　capacious　and　impartial　to　make　the　adjustment　with　an



approach　to　correctness；　and　it　has　to　be　made　by　the　rough　process　of



a　struggle　between　combatants　fighting　under　hostile　banners。　On　any



of　the　great　open　questions　just　enumerated；　if　either　of　the　two



opinions　has　a　better　claim　than　the　other；　not　merely　to　be



tolerated；　but　to　be　encouraged　and　countenanced；　it　is　the　one



which　happens　at　the　particular　time　and　place　to　be　in　a　minority。



That　is　the　opinion　which；　for　the　time　being；　represents　the



neglected　interests；　the　side　of　human　well…being　which　is　in　danger



of　obtaining　less　than　its　share。　I　am　aware　that　there　is　not；　in



this　country；　any　intolerance　of　differences　of　opinion　on　most　of



these　topics。　They　are　adduced　to　show；　by　admitted　and　multiplied



examples；　the　universality　of　the　fact；　that　only　through　diversity　of



opinion　is　there；　in　the　existing　state　of　human　intellect；　a　chance



of　fair　play　to　all　sides　of　the　truth。　When　there　are　persons　to　be



found　who　form　an　exception　to　the　apparent　unanimity　of　the　world



on　any　subject；　even　if　the　world　is　in　the　right；　it　is　always



probable　that　dissentients　have　something　worth　hearing　to　say　for



themselves；　and　that　truth　would　lose　something　by　their　silence。



　　It　may　be　objected；　〃But　some　received　principles；　especially　on　the



highest　and　most　vital　subjects；　are　more　than　half…truths。　The



Christian　morality；　for　instance；　is　the　whole　truth　on　that



subject；　and　if　any　one　teaches　a　morality　which　varies　from　it；　he　is



wholly　in　error。〃　As　this　is　of　all　cases　the　most　important　in



practice；　none　can　be　fitter　to　test　the　general　maxim。　But　before



pronouncing　what　Christian　morality　is　or　is　not；　it　would　be



desirable　to　decide　what　is　meant　by　Christian　morality。　If　it　means



the　morality　of　the　New　Testament；　I　wonder　that　any　one　who　derives



his　knowledge　of　this　from　the　book　itself；　can　suppose　that　it　was



announced；　or　intended；　as　a　complete　doctrine　of　morals。　The　Gospel



always　refers　to　a　pre…existing　morality；　and　confines　its　precepts　to



the　particulars　in　which　that　morality　was　to　be　corrected；　or



superseded　by　a　wider　and　higher；　expressing　itself；　moreover；　in



terms　most　general；　often　impossible　to　be　interpreted　literally；



and　possessing　rather　the　impressiveness　of　poetry　or　eloquence　than



the　precision　of　legislation。　To　extract　from　it　a　body　of　ethical



doctrine；　has　never　been　possible　without　eking　it　out　from　the　Old



Testament；　that　is；　from　a　system　elaborate　indeed；　but　in　many



respects　barbarous；　and　intended　only　for　a　barbarous　people。　St。



Paul；　a　declared　enemy　to　this　Judaical　mode　of　interpreting　the



doctrine　and　filling　up　the　scheme　of　his　Master；　equally　assumes　a



preexisting　morality；　namely　that　of　the　Greeks　and　Romans；　and　his



advice　to　Christians　is　in　a　great　measure　a　system　of　accommodation



to　that；　even　to　the　extent　of　giving　an　apparent　sanction　to　slavery。



What　is　called　Christian；　but　should　rather　be　termed　theological；



morality；　was　not　the　work　of　Christ　or　the　Apostles；　but　is　of　much



later　origin；　having　been　gradually　built　up　by　the　Catholic　church　of



the　first　five　centuries；　and　though　not　implicitly　adopted　by　moderns



and　Protestants；　has　been　much　less　modified　by　them　than　might　have



been　expected。　For　the　most　part；　indeed；　they　have　contented



themselves　with　cutting　off　the　additions　which　had　been　made　to　it　in



the　Middle　Ages；　each　sect　supplying　the　place　by　fresh　additions；



adapted　to　its　own　character　and　tendencies。



　　That　mankind　owe　a　great　debt　to　this　morality；　and　to　its　early



teachers；　I　should　be　the　last　person　to　deny；　but　I　do　not　scruple　to



say　of　it　that　it　is；　in　many　important　points；　incomplete　and



one…sided；　and　that　unless　ideas　and　feelings；　not　sanctioned　by　it；



had　contributed　to　the　formation　of　European　life　and　character；　human



affairs　would　have　been　in　a　worse　condition　than　they　now　are。



Christian　morality　（so　called）　has　all　the　characters　of　a　reaction；



it　is；　in　great　part；　a　protest　against　Paganism。　Its　ideal　is



negative　rather　than　positive；　passive　rather　than　active；　Innocence



rather　than　Nobleness；　Abstinence　from　Evil；　rather　than　energetic



Pursuit　of　Good；　in　its　precepts　（as　has　been　well　said）　〃thou　shalt



not〃　predominates　unduly　over　〃thou　shalt。〃　In　its　horror　of



sensuality；　it　made　an　idol　of　asceticism；　which　has　been　gradually



compromised　away　into　one　of　legality。　It　holds　out　the　hope　of　heaven



and　the　threat　of　hell；　as　the　appointed　and　appropriate　motives　to



a　virtuous　life：　in　this　falling　far　below　the　best　of　the　ancients；



and　doing　what　lies　in　it　to　give　to　human　morality　an　essentially



selfish　character；　by　disconnecting　each　man's　feelings　of　duty　from



the　interests　of　his　fellow　creatures；　except　so　far　as　a



self…interested　inducement　is　offered　to　him　for　consulting　them。　It



is　essentially　a　doctrine　of　passive　obedience；　it　inculcates



submission　to　all　authorities　found　established；　who　indeed　are　not　to



be　actively　obeyed　when　they　command　what　religion　forbids；　but　who



are　not　to　be　resisted；　far　less　rebelled　against；　for　any　amount　of



wrong　to　ourselves。　And　while；　in　the　morality　of　the　best　Pagan



nations；　duty　to　the　State　holds　even　a　disproportionate　place；



infringing　on　the　just　liberty　of　the　individual；　in　purely



Christian　ethics；　that　grand　department　of　duty　is　scarcely　noticed　or



acknowledged。　It　is　in　the　Koran；　not　the　New　Testament；　that　we



read　the　maxim…　〃A　ruler　who　appoints　any　man　to　an　office；　when



there　is　in　his　dominions　another　man　better　qualified　for　it；　sins



against　God　and　against　the　State。〃　What　little　recognition　the　idea



of　obligation　to　the　public　obtains　in　modern　morality　is　derived　from



Greek　and　Roman　sources；　not　from　Christian；　as；　even　in　the



morality　of　private　life；　whatever　exists　of　magnanimity；



highmindedness；　personal　dignity；　even　the　sense　of　honour；　is　derived



from　the　purely　human；　not　the　religious　part　of　our　education；　and



never　could　have　grown　out　of　a　standard　of　ethics　in　which　the　only



worth；　professedly　recognised；　is　that　of　obedience。



　　I　am　as　far　as　any　one　from　pretending　that　these　defects　are



necessarily　inherent　in　the　Christian　ethics　in　every　manner　in



which　it　can　be　conceived；　or　that　the　many　requisites　of　a　complete



moral　doctrine　which　it　does　not　contain　do　not　admit　of　being



reconciled　with　it。　Far　less　would　I　insinuate　this　of　the　doctrines



and　precepts　of　Christ　himself。　I　believe　that　the　sayings　of　Christ



are　all　that　I　can　see　any　evidence　of　their　having　been　intended　to



be；　that　they　are　irreconcilable　with　nothing　which　a　comprehensive



morality　requires；　that　everything　which　is　excellent　in　ethics　may　be



brought　within　them；　with　no　greater　violence　to　their　language　than



has　been　done　to　it　by　all　who　have　attempted　to　deduce　from　them



any　practical　system　of　conduct　whatever。　But　it　is　quite　consistent



with　this　to　believe　that　they　contain；　and　were　meant　to　contain；



only　a　part　of　the　truth；　that　many　essential　elements　of　the



highest　morality　are　among　the　things　which　are　not　provided　for；



nor　intended　to　be　provided　for；　in　the　recorded　deliverances　of　the



Founder　of　Christianity；　and　which　have　been　entirely　thrown　aside



in　the　system　of　ethics　erected　on　the　basis　of　those　deliverances



by　the　Christian　Church。　And　this　being　so；　I　think　it　a　great　error



to　persist　in　attempting　to　find　in　the　Christian　doctrine　that



complete　rule　for　our　guidance　which　its　author　intended　it　to



sanction　and　enforce；　but　only　partially　to　provide。　I　believe；　too；



that　this　narrow　theory　is　becoming　a　grave　pr