Sir,—A friend has favored me with a copy of your last issue, containing a long report of the Rev1. W. E. Blomfield's sermon at Turret2 Green Chapel3, apparently4 in reply to my lecture on "Secularism5 superior to Christianity." Mr. Blomfield declines to meet me in set debate, on the ground that I am not "a reverent9 Freethinker," which is indeed true; but I observe that he does not really mind arguing with me, only he prefers to do it where I cannot answer him.
Mr. Blomfield finds the pulpit a safe place for what can hardly be called the courtesies of discussion. He refers to certain remarks of mine (I presume) as "petty jokes and witticisms10 fit only for the tap-room of a fourth-rate tavern11." I will not dispute the description. I defer12 to Mr. Blomfield's superior knowledge of taverns13 and tap-rooms.
I notice Mr. Blomfield's great parade of "reverence14." I notice also that he speaks of Freethought arguments or objections as "short-sighted folly15" and "sheer nonsense." I judge, therefore, that "reverence" is not intended by Mr. Blomfield to be reciprocal. He claims a monopoly of it for his own opinions.
If he would only take the trouble to think about the matter, it might occur to him that "reverence" is not, properly speaking, a preliminary but a result. Let us have inquiry16 and discussion first and "reverence" afterwards. If I find anything to revere8 I shall not need Mr. Blomfield's admonitions. I revere truth, goodness, and heroism17, though I cannot revere what I regard as false or absurd. "Reverence" is often the demand that imposture18 makes on honesty and superstition19 on intelligence. Long faces are highly valued by the professors of mystery.
Mr. Blomfield did not hear my lecture. Had he done so he would have found an answer to many of his questions. It is all very well to bid the Ipswich people to "Beware of false prophets," but it is better to hear before condemning20.
How much attention, Mr. Blomfield asks, am I to give to this world and how much to another? Just as much as they deserve. We know a great deal about this world, and may learn more. There are plenty of guesses about another world, but no knowledge. It is easy to ask "Is there a future life?" but we must die to find out. Meanwhile this life confronts us, with its hard duties and legitimate21 pleasures. It is our wisdom to make the best of it, on the rational belief that, if there should be a future life—which no one is in a position to affirm or deny—this must be the best preparation for it, whether our future be decided22 by evolution or divine justice.
Mr. Blomfield's arguments against Utility as the test of conduct were answered in my lecture. He says the principle is of difficult application. So are all principles in intricate cases; why else have Christian7 divines written so many tons of casuistry? In any case the Utilitarian23 principle is the only one which is honored in practice. Other principles do very well on Sunday, but they are cast aside on Monday. The only question asked by statesmen, county councillors, School Board members, or other public representatives, is "Will the proposal tend to benefit the people?" This can be debated and settled. "Is it according to the will of God?" is a question to set people by the ears and raise an endless quarrel.
Mr. Blomfield says the fear of God saved poor Joseph, yet I dare say Potiphar's wife was a religious woman. The will of God sanctions many crimes. It tells the Thug to kill travellers; it told the Inquisition to torture and burn heretics; it told the Catholics and Protestants to rack and slaughter24 witches; it told Christians25 and Mohammedans to fight each other on hundreds of bloody26 battle-fields; it tells Christians now to keep up laws against liberty of thought. There never was a time when these things would not have been denounced by Secularism as crimes against humanity.
Motives27 to morality do not come from religion. They come from our social sympathies. Preach to a tiger and he will eat you. Differ from a Torquemada and he will burn you. When one man wants another to help him, he does not judge by the name of his sect28, but by the glance of his eye and the lines of his mouth. Some men are born philanthropists, others are born criminals; between these are multitudes in whom good and bad tendencies are variously mixed, and who may be made better or worse by education and environment. The late Professor Clifford was an Atheist29, and one of the gentlest, kindest, and tenderest men that ever lived. Jay Gould was a member of a Christian church and sometimes went round with the plate. He left twenty millions of money, and not a penny to any charity or good cause. Lick, the Freethinker, built and endowed the great observatory30 which is one of the glories of America.
I do not propose to follow Mr. Blomfield in his excursion into ancient history. I will only remark that if he thinks there was any lack of "religion" in the worst days of the Pagan world he is very much mistaken. Coming to more modern times, I decline to accept his present of priests and popes who were "atheistic31." Whatever they were is a domestic question for the Christian Church. Nor need I discuss Luther's "fresh vision of God." He was a great man, but a savage32 controversialist, who called his opponents asses33, swine, foxes, geese, and fools; which, I suppose, is worthy34 of the tap-room of a first-rate tavern. As to the "awful collapse35" of "unbelieving France" I do not know when it occurred. It was certainly not France that collapsed36 in the Revolution. The monarchy37, the aristocracy, and the Church collapsed; but France inaugurated a new epoch38 of modern history.
With respect to prayer, on which Mr. Blomfield is very hazy39, I would like to discriminate40 between its "objective value" and its "subjective41 benefits." Prayer as a means of inducing patience when you do not get what you ask for, is outside my province. I leave it to the clergy42. Prayer as a means of obtaining what you require is my concern, and I defy Mr. Blomfield to prove a single case. Yet if prayer is not answered objectively, the Secular6 principle holds the field that science is man's only providence43. I am aware that Christians employ doctors, insure their houses, and put lightning-conductors over their church steeples. They leave as little to God as possible. Mr. Blomfield says this is quite right, and I agree with him; but I will give him, if he cannot find them, twenty texts in support of the honest old doctrine44 of prayer from the New Testament45.
Mr. Blomfield tells me I do not understand the Bible. Well, as I am not exactly a fool, the fault may be in the book. Why was it not made plainer? Why did God write it so that thousands of gentlemen get a fine living by explaining it—in all sorts of different ways? I am reminded that the Bible is not a handbook of physical science. But did the Church think so when it imprisoned46 Galileo and made him swear that the earth did not go round the sun? Mr. Blomfield says that "Genesis gives an account of the origin of matter, and of life, and, finally, of man, which science has not disproved, on the admission of her most eminent47 sons." The Bible is a handbook of science after all then! But what has science to do with the origin of matter? The origin of life is still an open question. The origin of man is not an open question. Genesis gives us a piece of mythology48; Darwin gave us the truth. Among the eminent sons of science who is greater than he? Yet he has utterly49 exploded the Adam and Eve story. Darwin has left it on record that he rejected all revelation, and that for nearly forty years of his life he was a disbeliever in Christianity. He did subscribe50 to a Missionary51 Society that was attempting to reform South American savages52, but he never subscribed53 a penny for the propagation of Christianity in England. I myself might think Christianity good for savages.
If I understand Mr. Blomfield rightly, God was unable to teach the Jews any faster than he did, although he is both omnipotent54 and omniscient55. Were I to imitate Mr. Blomfield I should call this "sheer nonsense."
In my lecture I stated that the Old Testament sanctioned slavery, and that there was not a word against it in the New Testament. Mr. Blomfield replies that "the principles of the New Testament sapped the foundations of that system." But let us deal with one question at a time. Let the reverend gentleman indicate the text which I say does not exist. As for the "generous spirit" of the Old Testament laws about slavery, am I to find it in the texts allowing the Jews to buy and sell the heathen, to enslave their own countrymen, to appropriate their children born in slavery, and to beat them to death providing they did not expire within forty-eight hours?
My point is not that the Jews held slaves. That was common in ancient times. I merely take objection to the doctrine that God laid down the slavery laws of the Old Testament.
With regard to Jesus Christ, I am not aware that I have spoken of him as a "trickster." Kenan, however, whom Mr. Blomfield appears to admire, suggests that the raising of Lazarus was a performance arranged between him and Jesus. This is a line of criticism I have never attempted. I do not regard the New Testament miracles as actual occurrences, but as the products of Christian imagination.
Mr. Blomfield is angry with me for saying that the books of the Bible are mostly anonymous56, yet he declares that "their anonymity57 is little against them." I leave Mr. Blomfield to settle the point of fact with Christian writers like Canon Driver and Professor Bruce. With respect to the New Testament, I am told that my statement is "palpably incorrect." But what are the facts? With the exception of four of Paul's epistles, and perhaps the first of Peter, the whole of the New Testament books are anonymous, in the sense that they were not written—as we have them—by the men whose names they bear, and that no one knows who did write them. This is practically admitted by Christian scholars, and I am ready to maintain it in discussion with Mr. Blomfield.
Mr. Blomfield talks very freely, in conclusion, about the "fruits" of Christianity and Secularism. He even condescends58 to personal comparisons, which I warn him are dangerous. He compares Spurgeon with Bradlaugh. Well, the one swam with the stream, and the other against it; the one lived in the world's smile, the other in the world's frown; the one enjoyed every comfort and many luxuries, the other was poor, worried, and harassed59 into his grave. Spurgeon was no doubt a good man, but Bradlaugh was the more heroic figure.
Jesus Christ said some good things. Among them was the injunction not to let one hand know the other's charity. Mr. Blomfield disregards this. He challenges Secularists to a comparison. He asks where are our Secularist60 hospitals. We do not believe in such things. Sectarianism in charity is a Christian vice61. On the other hand, our party is comparatively small and poor, and Christian laws prevent our holding any trusts for Secularism. Still, we do attend to our own poor as well as we can. Our Benevolent62 Fund is sufficient for the relief of those who apply in distress63. We cannot build "almshouses," but "Atheist widows" are not neglected. On the whole, however, we are not so loud as the Christians in praise of "charity," Much of it is very degrading. If we had justice in society there would be less for "charity" to do.
It is obvious that Mr. Blomfield picks his fruits of Christianity with great discrimination. Is it logical to select all you admire in Christian countries and attribute it to Christianity? The same process would prove the excellence64 of Buddhism65, Brahminism, and Mohammedanism. There are almshouses and hospitals in Chrisendom, but there are also workhouses, gin-palaces, brothels, and prisons. Drunkenness, prostitution, and gambling66, are the special vices67 of Christian nations. It is Christian countries that build ironclads and make cannon68, gatling guns, deadly rifles, and terrible explosives. It is Christians who do most of the fighting on this planet.
Mr. Blomfield may or may not consider these things. I scarcely expect him to reply. He prefers the "humble69, obedient heart" to the "curious intellect." At any rate he preaches the preference to the young men of Ipswich. For my part, I hope they will reject the counsel. I trust they will read, inquire, and think for themselves. Their "intellect" should have enough "curiosity" to be satisfied as to the truth of what they are asked to believe.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
rev
|
|
| v.发动机旋转，加快速度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
turret
|
|
| n.塔楼，角塔 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
chapel
|
|
| n.小教堂，殡仪馆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
secularism
|
|
| n.现世主义；世俗主义；宗教与教育分离论；政教分离论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
secular
|
|
| n.牧师，凡人；adj.世俗的，现世的，不朽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
revere
|
|
| vt.尊崇，崇敬，敬畏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
reverent
|
|
| adj.恭敬的，虔诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
witticisms
|
|
| n.妙语，俏皮话( witticism的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
tavern
|
|
| n.小旅馆，客栈；小酒店 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
defer
|
|
| vt.推迟，拖延；vi.(to)遵从，听从，服从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
taverns
|
|
| n.小旅馆，客栈，酒馆( tavern的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
reverence
|
|
| n.敬畏，尊敬，尊严；Reverence:对某些基督教神职人员的尊称；v.尊敬，敬畏，崇敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
inquiry
|
|
| n.打听，询问，调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
heroism
|
|
| n.大无畏精神，英勇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
imposture
|
|
| n.冒名顶替，欺骗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
superstition
|
|
| n.迷信，迷信行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
condemning
|
|
| v.（通常因道义上的原因而）谴责( condemn的现在分词 )；宣判；宣布…不能使用；迫使…陷于不幸的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
utilitarian
|
|
| adj.实用的，功利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
slaughter
|
|
| n.屠杀，屠宰；vt.屠杀，宰杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
bloody
|
|
| adj.非常的的；流血的；残忍的；adv.很；vt.血染 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
sect
|
|
| n.派别，宗教，学派，派系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
atheist
|
|
| n.无神论者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
observatory
|
|
| n.天文台，气象台，瞭望台，观测台 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
atheistic
|
|
| adj.无神论者的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
asses
|
|
| n. 驴，愚蠢的人，臀部 adv. (常用作后置)用于贬损或骂人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
collapse
|
|
| vi.累倒；昏倒；倒塌；塌陷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
collapsed
|
|
| adj.倒塌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
monarchy
|
|
| n.君主，最高统治者；君主政体，君主国 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
hazy
|
|
| adj.有薄雾的，朦胧的；不肯定的，模糊的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
discriminate
|
|
| v.区别，辨别，区分；有区别地对待 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
subjective
|
|
| a.主观(上)的，个人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
clergy
|
|
| n.[总称]牧师，神职人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
imprisoned
|
|
| 下狱，监禁( imprison的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
mythology
|
|
| n.神话，神话学，神话集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
subscribe
|
|
| vi.(to)订阅，订购；同意；vt.捐助，赞助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
missionary
|
|
| adj.教会的，传教(士)的；n.传教士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
savages
|
|
| 未开化的人，野蛮人( savage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
subscribed
|
|
| v.捐助( subscribe的过去式和过去分词 )；签署，题词；订阅；同意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
omnipotent
|
|
| adj.全能的，万能的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
omniscient
|
|
| adj.无所不知的；博识的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
anonymous
|
|
| adj.无名的；匿名的；无特色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
anonymity
|
|
| n.the condition of being anonymous | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
condescends
|
|
| 屈尊，俯就( condescend的第三人称单数 )； 故意表示和蔼可亲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
harassed
|
|
| adj. 疲倦的，厌烦的 动词harass的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
secularist
|
|
| n.现世主义者，世俗主义者；宗教与教育分离论者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
61
vice
|
|
| n.坏事；恶习；[pl.]台钳，老虎钳；adj.副的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
benevolent
|
|
| adj.仁慈的，乐善好施的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
distress
|
|
| n.苦恼，痛苦，不舒适；不幸；vt.使悲痛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
excellence
|
|
| n.优秀，杰出，(pl.)优点，美德 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
Buddhism
|
|
| n.佛教（教义） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
gambling
|
|
| n.赌博；投机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
cannon
|
|
| n.大炮，火炮；飞机上的机关炮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
humble
|
|
| adj.谦卑的，恭顺的；地位低下的；v.降低，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |