orthodoxy-第36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！





side　of　humanity　and　liberty　and　love。　　Love　desires　personality；



therefore　love　desires　division。　　It　is　the　instinct　of　Christianity



to　be　glad　that　God　has　broken　the　universe　into　little　pieces；



because　they　are　living　pieces。　　It　is　her　instinct　to　say　〃little



children　love　one　another〃　rather　than　to　tell　one　large　person



to　love　himself。　　This　is　the　intellectual　abyss　between　Buddhism



and　Christianity；　that　for　the　Buddhist　or　Theosophist　personality



is　the　fall　of　man；　for　the　Christian　it　is　the　purpose　of　God；



the　whole　point　of　his　cosmic　idea。　　The　world…soul　of　the　Theosophists



asks　man　to　love　it　only　in　order　that　man　may　throw　himself　into　it。　



But　the　divine　centre　of　Christianity　actually　threw　man　out　of　it



in　order　that　he　might　love　it。　　The　oriental　deity　is　like　a　giant



who　should　have　lost　his　leg　or　hand　and　be　always　seeking　to　find　it；



but　the　Christian　power　is　like　some　giant　who　in　a　strange



generosity　should　cut　off　his　right　hand；　so　that　it　might　of　its



own　accord　shake　hands　with　him。　　We　come　back　to　the　same　tireless



note　touching　the　nature　of　Christianity；　all　modern　philosophies



are　chains　which　connect　and　fetter；　Christianity　is　a　sword　which



separates　and　sets　free。　　No　other　philosophy　makes　God　actually



rejoice　in　the　separation　of　the　universe　into　living　souls。　



But　according　to　orthodox　Christianity　this　separation　between　God



and　man　is　sacred；　because　this　is　eternal。　　That　a　man　may　love　God



it　is　necessary　that　there　should　be　not　only　a　God　to　be　loved；



but　a　man　to　love　him。　　All　those　vague　theosophical　minds　for　whom



the　universe　is　an　immense　melting…pot　are　exactly　the　minds　which



shrink　instinctively　from　that　earthquake　saying　of　our　Gospels；



which　declare　that　the　Son　of　God　came　not　with　peace　but　with　a



sundering　sword。　　The　saying　rings　entirely　true　even　considered



as　what　it　obviously　is；　the　statement　that　any　man　who　preaches　real



love　is　bound　to　beget　hate。　　It　is　as　true　of　democratic　fraternity



as　a　divine　love；　sham　love　ends　in　compromise　and　common　philosophy；



but　real　love　has　always　ended　in　bloodshed。　　Yet　there　is　another



and　yet　more　awful　truth　behind　the　obvious　meaning　of　this　utterance



of　our　Lord。　　According　to　Himself　the　Son　was　a　sword　separating



brother　and　brother　that　they　should　for　an　aeon　hate　each　other。　



But　the　Father　also　was　a　sword；　which　in　the　black　beginning



separated　brother　and　brother；　so　that　they　should　love　each　other



at　last。







　　　　　This　is　the　meaning　of　that　almost　insane　happiness　in　the



eyes　of　the　mediaeval　saint　in　the　picture。　　This　is　the　meaning



of　the　sealed　eyes　of　the　superb　Buddhist　image。　　The　Christian



saint　is　happy　because　he　has　verily　been　cut　off　from　the　world；



he　is　separate　from　things　and　is　staring　at　them　in　astonishment。　



But　why　should　the　Buddhist　saint　be　astonished　at　things？



since　there　is　really　only　one　thing；　and　that　being　impersonal　can



hardly　be　astonished　at　itself。　　There　have　been　many　pantheist　poems



suggesting　wonder；　but　no　really　successful　ones。　　The　pantheist



cannot　wonder；　for　he　cannot　praise　God　or　praise　anything　as　really



distinct　from　himself。　　Our　immediate　business　here；　however；　is　with



the　effect　of　this　Christian　admiration　（which　strikes　outwards；



towards　a　deity　distinct　from　the　worshipper）　upon　the　general



need　for　ethical　activity　and　social　reform。　　And　surely　its



effect　is　sufficiently　obvious。　　There　is　no　real　possibility



of　getting　out　of　pantheism；　any　special　impulse　to　moral　action。　



For　pantheism　implies　in　its　nature　that　one　thing　is　as　good



as　another；　whereas　action　implies　in　its　nature　that　one　thing



is　greatly　preferable　to　another。　　Swinburne　in　the　high　summer



of　his　scepticism　tried　in　vain　to　wrestle　with　this　difficulty。　



In　〃Songs　before　Sunrise；〃　written　under　the　inspiration　of　Garibaldi



and　the　revolt　of　Italy　he　proclaimed　the　newer　religion　and　the



purer　God　which　should　wither　up　all　the　priests　of　the　world：







〃What　doest　thou　now　　　　　　Looking　Godward　to　cry　　　　　　I　am　I；



thou　art　thou；　　　　　　I　am　low；　thou　art　high；　　　　　　I　am　thou　that　thou



seekest　to　find　him；　find　thou　but　thyself；　thou　art　I。〃







　　　　　Of　which　the　immediate　and　evident　deduction　is　that　tyrants



are　as　much　the　sons　of　God　as　Garibaldis；　and　that　King　Bomba



of　Naples　having；　with　the　utmost　success；　〃found　himself〃



is　identical　with　the　ultimate　good　in　all　things。　　The　truth　is



that　the　western　energy　that　dethrones　tyrants　has　been　directly



due　to　the　western　theology　that　says　〃I　am　I；　thou　art　thou。〃　



The　same　spiritual　separation　which　looked　up　and　saw　a　good　king　in



the　universe　looked　up　and　saw　a　bad　king　in　Naples。　　The　worshippers



of　Bomba's　god　dethroned　Bomba。　　The　worshippers　of　Swinburne's　god



have　covered　Asia　for　centuries　and　have　never　dethroned　a　tyrant。　



The　Indian　saint　may　reasonably　shut　his　eyes　because　he　is



looking　at　that　which　is　I　and　Thou　and　We　and　They　and　It。　



It　is　a　rational　occupation：　　but　it　is　not　true　in　theory　and　not



true　in　fact　that　it　helps　the　Indian　to　keep　an　eye　on　Lord　Curzon。　



That　external　vigilance　which　has　always　been　the　mark　of　Christianity



（the　command　that　we　should　WATCH　and　pray）　has　expressed　itself



both　in　typical　western　orthodoxy　and　in　typical　western　politics：　



but　both　depend　on　the　idea　of　a　divinity　transcendent；　different



from　ourselves；　a　deity　that　disappears。　　Certainly　the　most　sagacious



creeds　may　suggest　that　we　should　pursue　God　into　deeper　and　deeper



rings　of　the　labyrinth　of　our　own　ego。　　But　only　we　of　Christendom



have　said　that　we　should　hunt　God　like　an　eagle　upon　the　mountains：　



and　we　have　killed　all　monsters　in　the　chase。







　　　　　Here　again；　therefore；　we　find　that　in　so　far　as　we　value



democracy　and　the　self…renewing　energies　of　the　west；　we　are　much



more　likely　to　find　them　in　the　old　theology　than　the　new。　



If　we　want　reform；　we　must　adhere　to　orthodoxy：　　especially　in　this



matter　（so　much　disputed　in　the　counsels　of　Mr。　R。J。Campbell）；



the　matter　of　insisting　on　the　immanent　or　the　transcendent　deity。　



By　insisting　specially　on　the　immanence　of　God　we　get　introspection；



self…isolation；　quietism；　social　indifferenceTibet。　　By　insisting



specially　on　the　transcendence　of　God　we　get　wonder；　curiosity；



moral　and　political　adventure；　righteous　indignationChristendom。　



Insisting　that　God　is　inside　man；　man　is　always　inside　himself。　



By　insisting　that　God　transcends　man；　man　has　transcended　himself。







　　　　　If　we　take　any　other　doctrine　that　has　been　called　old…fashioned



we　shall　find　the　case　the　same。　　It　is　the　same；　for　instance；



in　the　deep　matter　of　the　Trinity。　　Unitarians　（a　sect　never　to　be



mentioned　without　a　special　respect　for　their　distinguished　intellectual



dignity　and　high　intellectual　honour）　are　often　reformers　by　the



accident　that　throws　so　many　small　sects　into　such　an　attitude。　



But　there　is　nothing　in　the　least　liberal　or　akin　to　reform　in



the　substitution　of　pure　monotheism　for　the　Trinity。　　The　complex



God　of　the　Athanasian　Creed　may　be　an　enigma　for　the　intellect；



but　He　is　far　less　likely　to　gather　the　mystery　and　cruelty



of　a　Sultan　than　the　lonely　god　of　Omar　or　Mahomet。　　The　god



who　is　a　mere　awful　unity　is　not　only　a　king　but　an　Eastern　king。　



The　HEART　of　humanity；　especially　of　European　humanity；　is　certainly



much　more　satisfied　by　the　strange　hints　and　symbols　that　gather



round　the　Trinitarian　idea；　the　image　of　a　council　at　which　mercy



pleads　as　well　as　justice；　the　conception　of　a　sort　of　liberty



and　variety　existing　even　in　the　inmost　chamber　of　the　world。　



For　Western　religion　has　always　felt　keenly　the　idea　〃it　is　not



well　for　man　to　be　alone。〃　　The　social　instinct　asserted　itself



everywhere　as　when　the　Eastern　idea　of　hermits　was　practically　expelled



by　the　Western　idea　of　monks。　　So　even　asceticism　became　brotherly；



and　the　Trappists　were　sociable　even　when　they　were　silent。　



If　this　love　of　a　living　complexity　be　our　test；　it　is　certainly



healthier　to　have　the　Trinitarian　religion　than　the　Unitarian。　



For　to　us　Trinitarians　（if　I　may　say　it　with　reverence）to　us　God



Himself　is　a　society。　　It　is　indeed　a　fathomless　mystery　of　theology；



and　even　if　I　were　theologian　enough　to　deal　with　it　directly；　it　would



not　be　relevant　to　do　so　here。　　Suffice　it　to　say　here　that　this　triple



enigma　is　as　comforting　as　wine　and　open　as　an　English　fireside；



tha