heretics-第2节
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！
When the old Liberals removed the gags from all the heresies； their idea
was that religious and philosophical discoveries might thus be made。
Their view was that cosmic truth was so important that every one
ought to bear independent testimony。 The modern idea is that cosmic
truth is so unimportant that it cannot matter what any one says。
The former freed inquiry as men loose a noble hound； the latter frees
inquiry as men fling back into the sea a fish unfit for eating。
Never has there been so little discussion about the nature of men
as now； when； for the first time； any one can discuss it。 The old
restriction meant that only the orthodox were allowed to discuss religion。
Modern liberty means that nobody is allowed to discuss it。
Good taste； the last and vilest of human superstitions；
has succeeded in silencing us where all the rest have failed。
Sixty years ago it was bad taste to be an avowed atheist。
Then came the Bradlaughites； the last religious men； the last men
who cared about God； but they could not alter it。 It is still bad
taste to be an avowed atheist。 But their agony has achieved just this
that now it is equally bad taste to be an avowed Christian。
Emancipation has only locked the saint in the same tower of silence
as the heresiarch。 Then we talk about Lord Anglesey and the weather；
and call it the complete liberty of all the creeds。
But there are some people； neverthelessand I am one of them
who think that the most practical and important thing about a man
is still his view of the universe。 We think that for a landlady
considering a lodger； it is important to know his income； but still
more important to know his philosophy。 We think that for a general
about to fight an enemy； it is important to know the enemy's numbers；
but still more important to know the enemy's philosophy。
We think the question is not whether the theory of the cosmos
affects matters； but whether in the long run； anything else affects them。
In the fifteenth century men cross…examined and tormented a man
because he preached some immoral attitude； in the nineteenth century we
feted and flattered Oscar Wilde because he preached such an attitude；
and then broke his heart in penal servitude because he carried it out。
It may be a question which of the two methods was the more cruel；
there can be no kind of question which was the more ludicrous。
The age of the Inquisition has not at least the disgrace of having
produced a society which made an idol of the very same man for preaching
the very same things which it made him a convict for practising。
Now； in our time； philosophy or religion； our theory； that is；
about ultimate things； has been driven out； more or less simultaneously；
from two fields which it used to occupy。 General ideals used
to dominate literature。 They have been driven out by the cry
of 〃art for art's sake。〃 General ideals used to dominate politics。
They have been driven out by the cry of 〃efficiency；〃 which
may roughly be translated as 〃politics for politics' sake。〃
Persistently for the last twenty years the ideals of order or liberty
have dwindled in our books； the ambitions of wit and eloquence
have dwindled in our parliaments。 Literature has purposely become
less political； politics have purposely become less literary。
General theories of the relation of things have thus been extruded
from both； and we are in a position to ask； 〃What have we gained
or lost by this extrusion？ Is literature better； is politics better；
for having discarded the moralist and the philosopher？〃
When everything about a people is for the time growing weak
and ineffective； it begins to talk about efficiency。 So it is that when a
man's body is a wreck he begins； for the first time； to talk about health。
Vigorous organisms talk not about their processes； but about their aims。
There cannot be any better proof of the physical efficiency of a man
than that he talks cheerfully of a journey to the end of the world。
And there cannot be any better proof of the practical efficiency
of a nation than that it talks constantly of a journey to the end
of the world； a journey to the Judgment Day and the New Jerusalem。
There can be no stronger sign of a coarse material health
than the tendency to run after high and wild ideals； it is
in the first exuberance of infancy that we cry for the moon。
None of the strong men in the strong ages would have understood
what you meant by working for efficiency。 Hildebrand would have said
that he was working not for efficiency； but for the Catholic Church。
Danton would have said that he was working not for efficiency；
but for liberty； equality； and fraternity。 Even if the ideal
of such men were simply the ideal of kicking a man downstairs；
they thought of the end like men； not of the process like paralytics。
They did not say； 〃Efficiently elevating my right leg； using；
you will notice； the muscles of the thigh and calf； which are
in excellent order； I〃 Their feeling was quite different。
They were so filled with the beautiful vision of the man lying
flat at the foot of the staircase that in that ecstasy the rest
followed in a flash。 In practice； the habit of generalizing
and idealizing did not by any means mean worldly weakness。
The time of big theories was the time of big results。 In the era of
sentiment and fine words； at the end of the eighteenth century； men were
really robust and effective。 The sentimentalists conquered Napoleon。
The cynics could not catch De Wet。 A hundred years ago our affairs
for good or evil were wielded triumphantly by rhetoricians。
Now our affairs are hopelessly muddled by strong； silent men。
And just as this repudiation of big words and big visions has
brought forth a race of small men in politics； so it has brought
forth a race of small men in the arts。 Our modern politicians claim
the colossal license of Caesar and the Superman； claim that they are
too practical to be pure and too patriotic to be moral； but the upshot
of it all is that a mediocrity is Chancellor of the Exchequer。
Our new artistic philosophers call for the same moral license；
for a freedom to wreck heaven and earth with their energy；
but the upshot of it all is that a mediocrity is Poet Laureate。
I do not say that there are no stronger men than these； but will
any one say that there are any men stronger than those men of old
who were dominated by their philosophy and steeped in their religion？
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 t
