heretics-第22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！
to believe that Elizabeth Barrett eloped with Robert Browning；
and will prove their point up to the hilt by the； unquestionable fact
that the whole fiction of the period was full of such elopements
from end to end。
Possibly the most pathetic of all the delusions of the modern
students of primitive belief is the notion they have about the thing
they call anthropomorphism。 They believe that primitive men
attributed phenomena to a god in human form in order to explain them；
because his mind in its sullen limitation could not reach any
further than his own clownish existence。 The thunder was called
the voice of a man； the lightning the eyes of a man； because by this
explanation they were made more reasonable and comfortable。
The final cure for all this kind of philosophy is to walk down
a lane at night。 Any one who does so will discover very quickly
that men pictured something semi…human at the back of all things；
not because such a thought was natural； but because it was supernatural；
not because it made things more comprehensible； but because it
made them a hundred times more incomprehensible and mysterious。
For a man walking down a lane at night can see the conspicuous fact
that as long as nature keeps to her own course； she has no power
with us at all。 As long as a tree is a tree； it is a top…heavy
monster with a hundred arms； a thousand tongues； and only one leg。
But so long as a tree is a tree； it does not frighten us at all。
It begins to be something alien； to be something strange； only when it
looks like ourselves。 When a tree really looks like a man our knees
knock under us。 And when the whole universe looks like a man we
fall on our faces。
XII Paganism and Mr。 Lowes Dickinson
Of the New Paganism （or neo…Paganism）； as it was preached
flamboyantly by Mr。 Swinburne or delicately by Walter Pater；
there is no necessity to take any very grave account；
except as a thing which left behind it incomparable exercises
in the English language。 The New Paganism is no longer new；
and it never at any time bore the smallest resemblance to Paganism。
The ideas about the ancient civilization which it has left
loose in the public mind are certainly extraordinary enough。
The term 〃pagan〃 is continually used in fiction and light literature
as meaning a man without any religion； whereas a pagan was generally
a man with about half a dozen。 The pagans； according to this notion；
were continually crowning themselves with flowers and dancing
about in an irresponsible state； whereas； if there were two things
that the best pagan civilization did honestly believe in； they were
a rather too rigid dignity and a much too rigid responsibility。
Pagans are depicted as above all things inebriate and lawless；
whereas they were above all things reasonable and respectable。
They are praised as disobedient when they had only one great virtue
civic obedience。 They are envied and admired as shamelessly happy
when they had only one great sindespair。
Mr。 Lowes Dickinson； the most pregnant and provocative of recent
writers on this and similar subjects； is far too solid a man to
have fallen into this old error of the mere anarchy of Paganism。
In order to make hay of that Hellenic enthusiasm which has
as its ideal mere appetite and egotism； it is not necessary
to know much philosophy； but merely to know a little Greek。
Mr。 Lowes Dickinson knows a great deal of philosophy；
and also a great deal of Greek； and his error； if error he has；
is not that of the crude hedonist。 But the contrast which he offers
between Christianity and Paganism in the matter of moral ideals
a contrast which he states very ably in a paper called 〃How long
halt ye？〃 which appeared in the Independent Reviewdoes； I think；
contain an error of a deeper kind。 According to him； the ideal
of Paganism was not； indeed； a mere frenzy of lust and liberty
and caprice； but was an ideal of full and satisfied humanity。
According to him； the ideal of Christianity was the ideal of asceticism。
When I say that I think this idea wholly wrong as a matter of
philosophy and history； I am not talking for the moment about any
ideal Christianity of my own； or even of any primitive Christianity
undefiled by after events。 I am not； like so many modern Christian
idealists； basing my case upon certain things which Christ said。
Neither am I； like so many other Christian idealists；
basing my case upon certain things that Christ forgot to say。
I take historic Christianity with all its sins upon its head；
I take it； as I would take Jacobinism； or Mormonism； or any other
mixed or unpleasing human product； and I say that the meaning of its
action was not to be found in asceticism。 I say that its point
of departure from Paganism was not asceticism。 I say that its
point of difference with the modern world was not asceticism。
I say that St。 Simeon Stylites had not his main inspiration in asceticism。
I say that the main Christian impulse cannot be described as asceticism；
even in the ascetics。
Let me set about making the matter clear。 There is one broad fact
about the relations of Christianity and Paganism which is so simple
that many will smile at it； but which is so important that all
moderns forget it。 The primary fact about Christianity and Paganism
is that one came after the other。 Mr。 Lowes Dickinson speaks
of them as if they were parallel idealseven speaks as if Paganism
were the newer of the two； and the more fitted for a new age。
He suggests that the Pagan ideal will be the ultimate good of man；
but if that is so； we must at least ask with more curiosity
than he allows for； why it was that man actually found his
ultimate good on earth under the stars； and threw it away again。
It is this extraordinary enigma to which I propose to attempt an answer。
There is only one thing in the modern world that has been face
to face with Paganism； there is only one thing in the modern
world which in that sense knows anything about Paganism：
and that is Christianity。 That fact is really the weak point in
the whole of that hedonistic neo…Paganism of which I have spoken。
All that genuinely remains of the ancient hymns or the ancient dances
of Europe； all that has honestly come to us from the festivals of Phoebus
or Pan； is to be found in the festivals of the Christian Church。
If any one wants to hold the end of a chain which really goes back
to the heathen mysteries； he had better take hold of a festoon
of flowers at Easter or a string of sausages at Christmas。
Everything else in the modern world is of Christian origin；
even everything that seems most anti…Christian。 The French Revolution
is of Christian origin。 The newspaper is of Christian origin。
The anarchists are of Christian origin。 Physical science is of
Christian origin。 The attack on Christianity is of Christian origin。
There is one thing； and one thing only； in existence at the present
day which can in any sense accurately be said to be of pagan origin；
and that is Christianity。
The real difference between Paganism and Christianity is perfectly
summed up in the difference between the pagan； or natural； virtues；
and those three virtues of Christianity which the Church of Rome
calls virtues of grace。 The pagan； or rational； virtues are such
things as justice and temperance； and Christianity has adopted them。
The three mystical virtues which Christianity has not adopted；
but invented； are faith； hope； and charity。 Now much easy
and foolish Christian rhetoric could easily be poured out upon
those three words； but I desire to confine myself to the two
facts which are evident about them。 The first evident fact
（in marked contrast to the delusion of the dancing pagan）the first
evident fact； I say； is that the pagan virtues； such as justice
and temperance； are the sad virtues； and that the mystical virtues
of faith； hope； and charity are the gay and exuberant virtues。
And the second evident fact； which is even more evident；
is the fact that the pagan virtues are the reasonable virtues；
and that the Christian virtues of faith； hope； and charity are
in their essence as unreasonable as they can be。
As the word 〃unreasonable〃 is open to misunderstanding； the matter
may be more accurately put by saying that each one of these Christian
or mystical virtues involves a paradox in its own nature； and th
