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！
the world。 〃You will have real obligations； and therefore real
adventures when you get to my Utopia。 But the hardest obligation
and the steepest adventure is to get there。〃
VIII THE ROMANCE OF ORTHODOXY
It is customary to complain of the bustle and strenuousness
of our epoch。 But in truth the chief mark of our epoch is
a profound laziness and fatigue； and the fact is that the real
laziness is the cause of the apparent bustle。 Take one quite
external case； the streets are noisy with taxicabs and motorcars；
but this is not due to human activity but to human repose。
There would be less bustle if there were more activity； if people
were simply walking about。 Our world would be more silent if it
were more strenuous。 And this which is true of the apparent physical
bustle is true also of the apparent bustle of the intellect。
Most of the machinery of modern language is labour…saving machinery；
and it saves mental labour very much more than it ought。
Scientific phrases are used like scientific wheels and piston…rods
to make swifter and smoother yet the path of the comfortable。
Long words go rattling by us like long railway trains。 We know they
are carrying thousands who are too tired or too indolent to walk
and think for themselves。 It is a good exercise to try for once
in a way to express any opinion one holds in words of one syllable。
If you say 〃The social utility of the indeterminate sentence is
recognized by all criminologists as a part of our sociological
evolution towards a more humane and scientific view of punishment；〃
you can go on talking like that for hours with hardly a movement
of the gray matter inside your skull。 But if you begin 〃I wish
Jones to go to gaol and Brown to say when Jones shall come out；〃
you will discover； with a thrill of horror； that you are obliged
to think。 The long words are not the hard words； it is the short
words that are hard。 There is much more metaphysical subtlety in the
word 〃damn〃 than in the word 〃degeneration。〃
But these long comfortable words that save modern people the toil
of reasoning have one particular aspect in which they are especially
ruinous and confusing。 This difficulty occurs when the same long word
is used in different connections to mean quite different things。
Thus； to take a well…known instance； the word 〃idealist〃 has
one meaning as a piece of philosophy and quite another as a piece
of moral rhetoric。 In the same way the scientific materialists
have had just reason to complain of people mixing up 〃materialist〃
as a term of cosmology with 〃materialist〃 as a moral taunt。
So； to take a cheaper instance； the man who hates 〃progressives〃
in London always calls himself a 〃progressive〃 in South Africa。
A confusion quite as unmeaning as this has arisen in connection
with the word 〃liberal〃 as applied to religion and as applied
to politics and society。 It is often suggested that all Liberals
ought to be freethinkers； because they ought to love everything that
is free。 You might just as well say that all idealists ought to be
High Churchmen； because they ought to love everything that is high。
You might as well say that Low Churchmen ought to like Low Mass；
or that Broad Churchmen ought to like broad jokes。 The thing is
a mere accident of words。 In actual modern Europe a freethinker
does not mean a man who thinks for himself。 It means a man who；
having thought for himself； has come to one particular class
of conclusions； the material origin of phenomena； the impossibility
of miracles； the improbability of personal immortality and so on。
And none of these ideas are particularly liberal。 Nay； indeed almost
all these ideas are definitely illiberal； as it is the purpose
of this chapter to show。
In the few following pages I propose to point out as rapidly
as possible that on every single one of the matters most strongly
insisted on by liberalisers of theology their effect upon social
practice would be definitely illiberal。 Almost every contemporary
proposal to bring freedom into the church is simply a proposal
to bring tyranny into the world。 For freeing the church now
does not even mean freeing it in all directions。 It means
freeing that peculiar set of dogmas loosely called scientific；
dogmas of monism； of pantheism； or of Arianism； or of necessity。
And every one of these （and we will take them one by one）
can be shown to be the natural ally of oppression。 In fact； it is
a remarkable circumstance （indeed not so very remarkable when one
comes to think of it） that most things are the allies of oppression。
There is only one thing that can never go past a certain point
in its alliance with oppressionand that is orthodoxy。 I may；
it is true； twist orthodoxy so as partly to justify a tyrant。
But I can easily make up a German philosophy to justify him entirely。
Now let us take in order the innovations that are the notes
of the new theology or the modernist church。 We concluded the last
chapter with the discovery of one of them。 The very doctrine which
is called the most old…fashioned was found to be the only safeguard
of the new democracies of the earth。 The doctrine seemingly
most unpopular was found to be the only strength of the people。
In short； we found that the only logical negation of oligarchy
was in the affirmation of original sin。 So it is； I maintain；
in all the other cases。
I take the most obvious instance first； the case of miracles。
For some extraordinary reason； there is a fixed notion that it
is more liberal to disbelieve in miracles than to believe
in them。 Why； I cannot imagine； nor can anybody tell me。
For some inconceivable cause a 〃broad〃 or 〃liberal〃 clergyman always
means a man who wishes at least to diminish the number of miracles；
it never means a man who wishes to increase that number。 It always
means a man who is free to disbelieve that Christ came out of His grave；
it never means a man who is free to believe that his own aunt came
out of her grave。 It is common to find trouble in a parish because
the parish priest cannot admit that St。 Peter walked on water；
yet how rarely do we find trouble in a parish because the clergyman
says that his father walked on the Serpentine？ And this is not
because （as the swift secularist debater would immediately retort）
miracles cannot be believed in our experience。 It is not because
〃miracles do not happen；〃 as in the dogma which Matthew Arnold recited
with simple faith。 More super