God, Satan and Homo Tewler
Chapter 1
“Tewler” To “Sapiens”
THAT completes all that is essential in the life of Edward Albert Tewler, his Deeds and Significant Sayings. But before this specimen1 human being can be put definitively3 into its place, in space, in time, among the stars, and Finis written to this book, a few possibly exasperating4 comments have still to be made on the nature of the universe and the wisdom of the ages. The reader was warned of this in the penultimate paragraph of the Introduction (q.v.).
Certain types of Homo Tewler, functioning under the designations of philosophers, theologians, teachers and the like, are still regarded with an excessive awe5 and far too readily accepted at their own valuation by the great majority of our race. They are like business, firms, competing among themselves for a monopoly, but agreed in selling God, Truth and Righteousness into the Tewler soul precisely6 as the proprietary7 medicine sellers sold their bottlefuls into Mrs Richard Tewler’s body. Not too confidently. Most of them betray a doubt of their own reality by dressing8 up in strange apologetic garments, gowns, hoods9, robes, the oddest tiaras, mitres, petticoats and the like, shaving their heads, growing vast unclean beards, as who should say, “I am peculiar10. I am not a man but a divine medium.”
I ask you; a medium for what?
For philosophy? But can there be more than one single philosophy for sane11 humanity? And can that philosophy be so outside the limits of the human understanding that it is necessary to dress up like a Gold Coast witch-doctor to expound12 that high hokey-pokey? Since poor rambling13 Homo sub-sapiens began to put facts together and ask questions about them, he has been accumulating a vast disorder14 of answers, right, wrong and oblique15. Mostly they are oblique. His so-called “thinkers” were overtaken either by death or a conviction of indisputable Tightness, before they had thought anything out. The history of human thought is essentially16 a history of human error, of a midden that has never been thoroughly17 cleaned. Accumulation is the word for it. Never in all recorded time down to this last syllable18, has that mass been submitted to an honest, sustained, digestive process. Its unassimilated chunks19 become “classics.” The student of philosophy doing “Greats” or whatever pompous20 name is given to this stale resurrection pie, is introduced to a jumble21 of incompatible22 ideas, a mixture of bits from different jig-saw puzzles; incoherence as wisdom. Our story of Edward Albert has shown reason why we still wait for a comprehensive clean-up. The little beast by the million blocks the way. But that clean-up has to come, if the transition to sapiens is ever to be attained23.
And as with philosophy, so with religion. Religion is the binding24 system of ideas and practices which holds a community together. Obviously then, a healthy community can have only one religion, and now that distance has been abolished and mankind has become an interdependent world — wide community, there can be only one religion in the world. There can be no “religious toleration” in a sane world community. Your community needs to be bound by a common understanding, and you cannot allow organisations of priestly kidnappers27 to attack the social solidarity28 because they have a Church to sell.
The religion a world community needs is a very simple one. It cannot hold together without a dogmatic assertion of the supreme29 duty of outspoken30 truth, of the common ownership of the earth and the equal rights of man. So long, as people accept these fundamental dogmas, for dogmas they are, albeit31 vitally necessary dogmas, there is nothing to prevent folks elaborating whatever novel or antiquarian ceremonies or mythologies32 they have a mind for, or discussing in adult freedom any seditious ideas that occur to them. In a reasonably educated world, there would be no justification33 for suppressing the private sessions of the Jewish Khans or a Hell Fire Club or adult baptism, or Hitler’s astrologer or a celebration of the mass or a spiritualistic séance. So long as those who indulged in these oddities did not organise34 a propaganda of them and sell them to impair35 the general mental balance of the human community. But to tamper36 with the trustful minds of the young or the informative37 organisation26 of the world, is quite a different matter.
So we come to the problem of world teaching. This is certainly the most formidable problem ahead of us. For that old slattern, our Mother Nature, who has let one thing lead to another until we are now in a single world community, has neglected to give us any individual or collective drive for an education that will reconcile us to that conscious adaptation our situation demands. She has failed to mitigate38 our obstinate39 indisposition to learn. Homo Tewler may yet perish miserably41 en masse because of his fear of a plunge42 into reality. He holds on to his sinking ship; he looks at the dark waters and runs back to lock himself in his mental cabin with the sedatives43 the clerical salesman has persuaded him to trust. Yet time and again men of exceptional penetration44 have attempted to launch a recognition of universal brotherhood45, of a new generosity46 and a cooperative life upon the world, as the only possible salvation47 for our species. It is not a new realisation. Now, indeed, it is finally urgent, but it has been plainly necessary to men of clear vision for scores of centuries. Nineteen centuries ago, Jesus of Nazareth, last, most indignant and most revolutionary of the Hebrew prophets, beating the money-changers and cursing the barren fig48 tree, was, so far as we can disinter his doctrine49 from subsequent accretions50, preaching the gospel of human solidarity as his “Kingdom of Heaven”, and the socialist51 movement, before Marx undermined it, was an equally disinterested52 drive towards a sane salvation of our Tewler world.
There is-much to be learnt about the psychology53 of the animal we are, from the fate of these two initiatives. They were caught and crippled and destroyed by the sub-conscious malice54 of their first generation of disciples55. Paul took possession of Jesus and smothered56 him in doctrinal Christianity, and in a little while that noble beginning had sunken to the wangling of the “Fathers.” It was not the Galilean who triumphed over the pagan stoicism of Julian. It was Paul who conquered. It was the fundamental Tewlerism of mankind that asserted itself against a precocious58 stirring of Homo sapiens. In the same way Marx imposed an orthodoxy upon the socialist impulse, and infected it with his own conceit59, jealousy60 and arrogance61.
Corruptio optima, pessima. To-day the most evil thing in the whole world is the Roman Catholic Church, whose shameless symbol is Jesus the Son of Man, drooping62, crucified and done for. Wherever the Catholic priest prevails, among the decadent63 pious64 French generals of the surrender, in Croatia, in Japan, in Spain, in that spite-slum, Eire, in Italy, in South America, in Australia, there you find malicious65 mischief66 afoot against the enlightenment of mankind. People have called Catholicism a cancer of the human mind. But it is no such neoplasm; it is congenital; it is the organised front of that base heritage of the Tewlers, from which we are seeking Escape. It had no revelation; to claim a revelation is priestly impudence67; it is the most natural religion possible, mean and muddle68-witted, human to the dregs, pretending to be divine.
The Communist Party is the identical twin of Catholicism. It is its little left brother, psychologically the same. Inevitably69 the two work together for the same general frustration70 of human hope. They gratify the same resentful craving71 of the inferiority complex that we have traced throughout the life of our particular specimen. They arc; the same sort of animal as he. Never shall life be better than my life! they insist.
In view of these two great betrayals, we may reasonably doubt the possibility of a world-wide common education that will raise and keep Homo Tewler above himself. Whatever a few far-seeing people may attempt, it will surely be undermined and defeated by those who will come in and be brought into the great work. “You can’t expect humanity to pull itself up by its own shoe-straps,” tee-hees Mr Chamble Pewter triumphantly72. “Forgive my sense of humour.”
But obstinate rebels exist who will not accept that. They argue, for instance, that already there has been at least one drive in this Tewler world, the onset73 of what it is customary nowadays to call Science with a capital S, which has so far evaded74 priestcraft or any sort of authoritarian75 suffocation76. This Science has revolutionised the material conditions of human life, and it behoves us to examine how it sprang up and what exactly it is. No miracle begot77 it. It had no Founder78. It began in a natural Adlerian revolt against the overbearing religious dogmatisms of the Middle Ages. Against their exasperating self-confidence, the recalcitrants, unable to take it meekly79 any longer, and casting about for some means of self-assertion, discovered to their delight certain incompatibilities between the teaching and facts, and summoned a new arbitrator, experimental verification, to justify80 their revolt. It is absurd to ennoble the driving force of that new movement. We cannot afford to sentimentalise Science; Roger Bacon, so far as our knowledge of him goes, never said, “I love truth,” or “What noble thing can I do for my fellow — men?” or in a state of pious helpfulness, “Let me discover something for the greater glory of God.” He did nothing of the sort; and anyhow the essential thing about him was something quite different; he lost his temper. He endured the philosophical81 assurance about him as long as he could, and then flung himself at a weak point, abusively and violently, and made the most of it. There was really no essential difference between the motives82 of Roger Bacon when he put out his tongue at the medieval Aristotle and young Master Edward Albert Tewler when he put out his tongue at the serene83 self — satisfaction of the lion in the Zoo.
Galileo again, was no visitant from a higher sphere; he was as human as any of us. But the complacent84 finality of the Church about everything in heaven and earth was too much for him. He published his forbidden book to make those who were set in authority 6ver him realise just what damned fools they were. He could not keep quiet. They argued with him, they made him recant and keep a civil tongue in his bead85, but they knew and he knew that they knew. “All the same, it moves,” he jeered86 at their dignified87 efforts to nail the earth down again, the earth that Copernicus and he had dislodged and sent spinning off round the sun for ever.
It is very important for our purpose here to recall this essential resentful Tewlerism of the scientific initiative, because then we can realise that great truths can and do emerge and increase without the agency of great minds, exalted88 discoverers or the like, Through a quite ignoble89 recalcitrance90. It was Tewler insubordinate against Tewler in authority. Scientific progress oozes91 out of the general substance of Tewlerism, and its outstanding personalities92, so liable to deification, are a hindrance93 rather than a help.
But this does not explain why these new expansions of the human outlook were not presently seized upon and exploited and betrayed by some creed-maker like St Paul, followed up by the usually inevitable94 priesthood. For that we must account in some other way. It is not so very difficult to do that. Science began differently. It began less as a public teaching than as a hobby. And it did not invade more than a limited part of the field of modern life and thought, and that was a part of the field remote from the primordial95 scuffle for pride and power. It began completely out of politics, and it raised no objections to current religious and social life. The Royal Society, like the Academia dei Lincei, was a society of gentlemen amateurs who met unobtrusively and exchanged their sceptical observations, their entertaining Centuries of Inventions and so forth96, and published their Philosophical Transactions more or less privately97. In those days they did not use the word “Science.” It was Natural Philosophy and Natural History they talked about.
The Royal Society was a toy for Charles II, and it was only as the nineteenth century unfolded that mankind realised that this pet tiger cub98 was growing into a rather formidable monster. It stuck its claws through the gaiters of Bishop99 Wilberforce with great effect, when he launched a Tewleresque kick at it. It was that memorable100 encounter of “Soapy Sam” and Grandfather Huxley at the British Association meeting which made the “Conflict of Religion and Science” a fighting issue. Then it was that the great vested interest of Anglicanism, which, in spite of the resistances of nonconformity and dissent101, had been selling the Hanoverian Church-and — State system to the variegated102 population of the British Empire very successfully, took alarm, and the competing nostrum103 — sellers of Roman Catholicism and the Bible-reading sects104, made common cause with it. This young tiger was biting mouthfuls out of the Creator! A Creator was an integral asset in their common equipment; they could not have him eroded105 and damaged; they could not do without him.
It is plausible106 to liken Science to a young tiger in this way, but that comparison needs to be qualified107. Science may claw or bite upon occasion, but essentially it is the product of a protean108 anonymous109 power, and if in certain circumstances it took on the appearance of a dangerous assailant, it eluded110 any definitive2 suppression by its extraordinary lack of centralised organisation. It had no head to strike off, no sanctum to burn. There were no consolidated111 funds to be seized. It arose from the world-wide natural recalcitrance of the human mind. It was here. It was there. Like a dawn. And wherever it spread, the critical spirit in man was stimulated112 and encouraged to further insubordination.
So the struggle against Science is not so much an attempt to uproot113 and end something tangible114 and uprootable, as a world-wide disposition40 on the part of the great vested interests that overshadow our lives and sell us God, government and war today, to prevent an undesired and unexpected illumination reaching die general mass of mankind.
In this they have succeeded to a disconcerting extent. You have been told how a sample young Englishman, fifty years after Darwin, could dispose of his relationship to Tarsius and the apes with an oafish115 guffaw116, still believing that he and all things were made, as one might mould clay, by a personal God rather resembling Mr Myame but with a whiter and woollier beard, a little muddled117 in his identity with an extremely mawkish118 Saviour119 who was also his Son, a phosphorescent pigeon intervening. (“Mystery of the Holy Trinity,” comes an echo from Edward Albert. “‘Ands off sacred things! ‘Oly! ‘Oly! ‘Oly! People won’t tol’rate you saying things like that, and if God was anything like what he used to be, you’d be struck dead for it instanter”)
Which belated outbreak of Edward Albert’s is exactly why I write with ruthless precision here. The words I have used describe Christian57 doctrine unconventionally but exactly as it is presented by the Church and Christian art. If my phrases shock the reader, that only shows it is high time.he or she was shocked. The doctrine of the Trinity is, I repeat, atrocious nonsense. Yet all over the English-speaking world, children’s minds are still being paralysed by the injection of this same atrocious nonsense. You can hear the bland120 voices of the parsons in the British Broadcasting Corporation’s Children’s Hour, telling the old Bible stories as truth, telling of real angels and real miracles, of resurrections and marvels121 of the utmost absurdity122, lying deliberately123 to earn their livings.
“You talk like the Village Atheist125,” protests Bishop Tewler, being as upper-class and socially subtle as he knows how. “All that, we understand quite as well as you do, is just a series of time-honoured stories, dear bewtiful old symbols.” The village atheist was often the salt of the village; and I am proud to rank with him. I had rather jest with him at the public house than dine at the Bishop’s Palace and be lubricated. Have the common people been told that these tales are just symbols? And what do they understand them to symbolise?
When we think of readapting mankind to a world of unity25 and cooperation, we have to consider that practically all the educational machinery126 on earth, is still in the hands of God-selling or Marx-selling combines. Everywhere in close cooperation with our nationalist governments, the oil and steel interests, our drug salesmanship and so forth, the hirelings of these huge religious concerns, with more or less [allegiance?] and loyalty127, are selling destruction to mankind.
To those italics I will return after a paragraph or so. Plainly if the mind of the world needs urgently to be reconditioned, this is on the face of it a very dismaying state of affairs. And it is not even a practicable suggestion merely to utter the magic word “Science.” Is it really Science we have in mind when we think of a reorganised and mentally reconditioned world? Or are we taking the advancement128 of Science merely as the sample of the process of sustained free rationalisation, a process capable of a much wider extension to human affairs in general?
Science, as we know it now, gathers prestige as its scope extends, and as the need for experimental teamwork and rapid interchanges increases, it seems to be losing much of its early immunity129 from interference and perversion130. It does not hold power but it creates it now in enormous volume. It has completely revolutionised war, but it has not abolished it. A hundred years ago and scientific research was still mainly a free private activity and science could get along as. that, Now it cannot do so. Now it is open and exposed and continually more vulnerable, and every salesman in the world is trying to attach it and profit by it. But he still finds a difficulty in its essentially protean quality.
The attitude of militant131 Germany to Science is peculiarly interesting. The bulk of the German people has been disciplined to acquiescence132 for centuries. That rebellious133 factor which breaks out in new discoveries and creative inventions has been well nigh drilled out of them. On the other hand, as part of their disposition to subservience134, they have a greater respect for scientific achievement than any other people, with the possible exception of the new Russians. They want to capture it and make it their own. So that they will follow up and do more with suggestions and leading ideas that come to them from abroad than almost any other people The theory of National Socialism, and especially its intense racialism, is pseudo-scientific. Homo Tewler var. Germanicus is far less hostile on principle to knowledge and new ideas than are the pluto-Christian democracies.
The group of adventurers, bored by inferiority, who, with such remarkable135 success, have been selling the world death by unending totalitarian Var, and incidentally having a glorious time, have no use for the religious appeal. They find it a dead appeal. They get better results by producing pseudo-scientific generalisations. Relativity is taboo136 in Germany, possibly because Hess and Hitler, the joint137 authors of Man Kampf, were unfitted to understand it, and so were embittered138 by it, but mainly because its main exponent139 was a Jew, It was, they declared, not “Nordic.” And in the place of it we were presented with genuine “Nordic” physics. In Hess–Hitler-land Nordic archaeology140, Nordic biology and so forth are replacing real archaeology, real biology, etc. In Russia the left priesthood of Communism is attempting a similar strangulation of intellectual life by selling cheap substitutes. Prolet-art, we hear of, and Proletarian chemistry. And a biological worker finds himself driven into exile, to avoid a harsher fate, because “Darwinism” is represented as infringing141 in some way upon that sacred mystery, the dictatorship of the proletariat.
So far from extending itself into the realms of government and general creative direction, Science as such may be already shrinking back into a subservient142 position. The continuance of the present scientific process is by no means secure from without or from within. We have seen it assailed143 and appropriated from without. Within, the specialist, with the mentality144 of a Greek slave, develops an increasing hostility145 to the irritating, autocratic-spirited outsider who exasperates146 him by the broader sweep of his views. He will extinguish him if he can. He will block his interrogative intervention147 in research organisation. He will take refuge under the wing of authority. The doors of the Royal Society in the days when it was dominated by free-thinking, free-speaking gentlemen have stood open to disturbing ideas, but with the increase in specialisation, there is an increasing disposition for the new sort of scientific worker to appropriate and canalise for hit own satisfaction the prestige accumulated by the old.
Plainly Science as we know it and so far as it is represented by societies, endowments, chairs, honours, titles, museum collections and the like, can be subjugated148 and replaced by a parody149 of itself, and it holds out little promise in itself of fresh and vigorous initiatives in the present human riddle150. But the question takes on an entirely151 different complexion152 if it is realised that, as I have already been hinting, what we call Science, with its bundle of “ologies”, is merely the first harvest of a much wider system of mental motivations which still remains153 protean, elusive154, in the face of systematic155 opposition156, and capable now of rapid destructive processes among our staggering and obsolescent157 institutions, destruction that will in itself lay bare the broader realities upon which alone world reconstruction158 can be based. Or to put it in other phrases, there is reason to hope that that same proteus of insubordination which liberated159 Science, may give us — not a further extension of Science and fresh “ologies”, but something greater, a kindred thing, para-science, the next stage of human liberation, world understanding and world revolution, the dawn of sapiens.
This new thrust of the rebellious proteus may be expected to seek and find its own implements160 and methods in the replacement161 of the world muddle of Homo Tewler by the awakening163 will of sapiens. One thing towards which it is moving even now is the renascence of law upon a world scale. Like medical practice, the legal organisation has been corrupted164 by the protective professionalism of the old order of things, yet law, even bad, old-fashioned law, rigidly165 enforced, is an instrument for liberty. The man under law is a man protected from arbitrary violence; he knows clearly beforehand what he may do and what he may not do, and the advance of freedom wherever it has existed in the world has gone on concurrently166 with the declaration and maintenance of rights. Even our Edward Albert and his Evangeline struggled to express something they called their “rights” of the case, and it is a hopeful augury167 of revolution that there should be even now a formulated168 Declaration of Rights approved of by a growing number of intelligent and resentful people, and resisted, actively169 or passively, by every existing government on earth. For governing gangs and classes everywhere know what that Declaration means for them. It offers a fundamental law for a touted170 and reciviiised world, into which their pomps and pretensions171 will be dissolved, and as the old order of things becomes more and more plainly an intolerable confusion of enslavement and frustration, it will be the sole means of uniting and implementing172 a thousand storms of resentment173. What possible rival can it have? Fraudulent imitations and falsifications may help the diffusion174 of its suggestions rather than Binder175 its establishment. Given only a few desperate men, sick with disgust at the tediums and pretences176 of the Tewler life, and bored to fury by the vistas177 of aimless, incessant178 and finally suicidal bloodshed ahead of them, in which they personally can expect no gratification, and there is no reason now why they by the measure of any previous human experience should not put a new face upon reality very rapidly indeed. They need not be idealists nor devotees nor anything of that sort. If they belong to the school of Mr F.‘s aunt in David Copperfield it is enough. “I hate a fool,” said the old lady.
The collaboration179 of these exasperated180 men will find infinitely181 more powerful means of ousting182 old ideas by new ones than any previous revolutionaries. The Acts of the Apostles were vocal183, pedestrian and storm-tossed, and Christianity seeped184 and changed about the Roman world through a long and confusing adolescence185 and was one thing here and another there; it took centuries to penetrate186 the countryside (pagani) or reach the frontiers; even the Marxist propaganda was an affair of books, periodicals, smuggled187 leaflets, slogans, small lecturing nuclei188; but modern mechanism189 now, as it has developed in the last third of a century, gives all that is needed for a simultaneous diffusion of the same essential ideas and the immediate190 correction of differences, from end to end of the earth. Even an opposition suggestion spreads at lightning speed, as the German propaganda shows, and quite a small number of men in earnest and in unison191 could wrench192 the whole world into acquiescence with a unifying193 fundamental law.
And when we think of reconditioning the mind of mankind, we need not be dismayed by a vision of ill-lit stuffy194 classrooms and millions of half-trained teachers struggling with blackboard and tattered195 text-book to “teach” scores of millions of children. In a world of plenty all that will be different, and modern apparatus196 — radio, screen, gramophone and the like — affords the possibility of an enormous economy of teaching ability. One skilful197 teacher or demonstrator can teach from pole to pole, just as Toscanini can conduct Brahms for all the world to hear, and at the same time go on record for our children’s children. All this “canned teaching” will provoke Mr Chamble Pewter’s rich sense of humour. I doubt if that will deter198 those angry rebels who have got their hands upon the levers, and are determined199 to let the children see and hear and know and hope. Not in any mood of love or that sort of thing, but because they hate the pomp and glories of incapable200 authority.
And hard upon the revolt in teaching and the sweeping201 — away of the irritating private localised and nationalised controls of universal interests, may come the establishment of a great framework of ordered and recorded knowledge throughout the world. At present such encyclopaedias202 as our world possesses are in the hands of unscrupulous salesmen, they are a century and a half antiquated203 and blinkered in outlook, but the facilities afforded by microphotography, modern methods of multiplication204, modern methods of documentation, open up the clear possibility of putting all the knowledge in the world, brought right up to date, within easy reach of every man everywhere on earth, within a couple of days. That is no fantastic dream; it is a plain and calculable enterprise now to throw that net of living consciousness over all our planet. (Here in the most untimely fashion Edward Albert Tewler intervenes with raucous205 screams of “Bawls206! I tell you. Bawls.”) Once the new plant has struck root it will be very difficult to be#t it down again. It will give far more satisfaction to the elementary needs of Homo Tewler than the old stuff, which was not only inadequate207 and frustrating208 but humiliating. It will be like horse-radish, which grows again from any torn shred209 wherever it has once been grown.
It may be that we want a new word for a system of knowledge-distribution that alms only to inform and put everything that is known within the reach of every individual man, Mr H.D. Jennings White would sweep away the word “education” altogether, as a tainted210 word, and have us talk of Eutrophy, good nourishment211 of body and mind, and then let free men decide. A Eutrophic world from which priest and pedagogue212 have been swept as unnecessary evils is quite within the range of human possibility.
Moreover, when we canvass213 the possibilities of a break towards the light and “sapiens”, there is another important factor in the process of mental liberation that must be brought into our accounting214, and that is revolt from within. These Tewler priesthoods, the more they dominate, the more they must awaken162 the spirit of insubordination in those whose role is mainly acquiescence.
The Catholic priesthood has never sat lightly and easily upon the lives of common men, and wherever the level of education has risen to a general elementary literacy, there has been revolt. Catholicism has produced the bloodiest215 revolts in history. Wherever the Catholic Church has been in complete control of education, the final outcome has been a revolution at once bloodthirsty and blasphemous216. The lands have risen in a state of infuriated ingratitude217 to hunt priests and desecrate218 and burn churches. Mrs Nesta Webster ascribes this to the direct activity of Satan, and possibly she is right. Perhaps he does not exert himself so much in Protestant and Pagan countries because they can be considered damned already. But this reaction has been so invariable in the past, it has occurred in so many countries, that it seems for instance a fairly safe bet that in quite a short time the faithful in Ireland, bored to death by a too intimate control of their minds, their morals and their economic life, may be shooting their priests exactly as they used to shoot their landlords, and through practically the same wholesome219 exasperation220 of their inferiority complex.
But it seems probable that this lack of submissiveness is not peculiar to the flock. The shepherds also must feel the stirring of Satan in their souls. Much of this is hidden from the enquiring221 outsider. What his fellow-cardinals think of the encyclicals of the current Pope, for instance, is wrapped in the darkness of their discretion222, but up and down the body of the Church there is and always has been a certain restiveness223, and in this time of universal mental stress there is likely to be more. The chief critical attacks that have strained and broken the solidarity of the Great Imposition in the past have come from Churchmen.
Even in the days before Constantine the Great, when a definite Credo became a plain necessity to substantiate224 the bargain between Church and State, Christian controversy225 was chiefly internecine226. There was no definite arraignment227 of the new teaching from any of the philosophical teachers of the schools of Alexandria or the University of Athens, in spite of the provocative228 snarls229 of such Christians230 as Tertullian. They did not think that there was anything in Christianity worthy231 of argument. Down the ages the typical source of trouble has been the undistinguished man within the Church reading the Scriptures232 and irritated by the assumptions and interferences of his superiors. He made trouble because he wanted to make trouble. And today now more than ever a collapse233 behind this formidable facade234 of Catholicism is possible. The Church may feel a chill of doubt about the future and take to professing235 liberal and democratic ideals, and that may liberate124 a number of smouldering recalcitrants grimly determined to make their ecclesiastical superiors mean what they say.
Another thing that may weaken this still arrogant236 opposition to any release of sapiens may be a great social and monetary237 storm that will Wash away its financial foundations. Priests out of work can forget their sacred calling and authority with remarkable rapidity. They are, as a class, soft-handed and sedentary, and it is possible that many of the younger ones may be interested and reconditioned for educational work. Throughout the social fabric238 the work of the essential revolution is not a simple implacable conflict but rather a miscellaneous release and reorientation.
We are dealing239 here with a number of factors whose force and relative importance are practically incalculable. From them there may or may not emerge a federated world, a common fundamental law, an economically unified240 planet, an organised and properly implemented241 world education. But until Homo Tewler has got thus far in the balance and control of his incoherent resistances and egotisms, it is preposterous242, it is ridiculous, to call him Homo sapiens. That is simply flattering a disagreeable and suicidally backward animal to its own extermination243.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
specimen
|
|
| n.样本，标本 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
definitive
|
|
| adj.确切的，权威性的；最后的，决定性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
definitively
|
|
| adv.决定性地，最后地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
exasperating
|
|
| adj. 激怒的 动词exasperate的现在分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
awe
|
|
| n.敬畏，惊惧；vt.使敬畏，使惊惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
proprietary
|
|
| n.所有权，所有的；独占的；业主 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
dressing
|
|
| n.(食物)调料；包扎伤口的用品，敷料 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
hoods
|
|
| n.兜帽( hood的名词复数 )；头巾；（汽车、童车等的）折合式车篷；汽车发动机罩v.兜帽( hood的第三人称单数 )；头巾；（汽车、童车等的）折合式车篷；汽车发动机罩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
sane
|
|
| adj.心智健全的，神志清醒的，明智的，稳健的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
expound
|
|
| v.详述；解释；阐述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
rambling
|
|
| adj.[建]凌乱的，杂乱的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
disorder
|
|
| n.紊乱，混乱；骚动，骚乱；疾病，失调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
oblique
|
|
| adj.斜的，倾斜的，无诚意的，不坦率的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
syllable
|
|
| n.音节；vt.分音节 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
chunks
|
|
| 厚厚的一块( chunk的名词复数 )； （某物）相当大的数量或部分 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
pompous
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的；夸大的；豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
jumble
|
|
| vt.使混乱，混杂；n.混乱；杂乱的一堆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
incompatible
|
|
| adj.不相容的，不协调的，不相配的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
binding
|
|
| 有约束力的，有效的，应遵守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
kidnappers
|
|
| n.拐子，绑匪( kidnapper的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
solidarity
|
|
| n.团结；休戚相关 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
outspoken
|
|
| adj.直言无讳的，坦率的，坦白无隐的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
albeit
|
|
| conj.即使；纵使；虽然 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
mythologies
|
|
| 神话学( mythology的名词复数 )； 神话（总称）； 虚构的事实； 错误的观点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
justification
|
|
| n.正当的理由；辩解的理由 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
organise
|
|
| vt.组织，安排，筹办 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
impair
|
|
| v.损害，损伤；削弱，减少 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
tamper
|
|
| v.干预，玩弄，贿赂，窜改，削弱，损害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
informative
|
|
| adj.提供资料的，增进知识的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
mitigate
|
|
| vt.（使）减轻，（使）缓和 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
disposition
|
|
| n.性情，性格；意向，倾向；排列，部署 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
miserably
|
|
| adv.痛苦地；悲惨地；糟糕地；极度地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
plunge
|
|
| v.跳入，(使)投入，(使)陷入；猛冲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
sedatives
|
|
| n.镇静药，镇静剂( sedative的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
penetration
|
|
| n.穿透，穿人，渗透 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
generosity
|
|
| n.大度，慷慨，慷慨的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
salvation
|
|
| n.（尤指基督）救世，超度，拯救，解困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
fig
|
|
| n.无花果(树) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
accretions
|
|
| n.堆积( accretion的名词复数 )；连生；添加生长；吸积 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
socialist
|
|
| n.社会主义者；adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
disinterested
|
|
| adj.不关心的，不感兴趣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
psychology
|
|
| n.心理，心理学，心理状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
malice
|
|
| n.恶意，怨恨，蓄意；[律]预谋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
disciples
|
|
| n.信徒( disciple的名词复数 )；门徒；耶稣的信徒；（尤指）耶稣十二门徒之一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
smothered
|
|
| （使）窒息， （使）透不过气( smother的过去式和过去分词 )； 覆盖； 忍住； 抑制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
precocious
|
|
| adj.早熟的；较早显出的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
conceit
|
|
| n.自负，自高自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
jealousy
|
|
| n.妒忌，嫉妒，猜忌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
arrogance
|
|
| n.傲慢，自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
drooping
|
|
| adj. 下垂的，无力的 动词droop的现在分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
decadent
|
|
| adj.颓废的，衰落的，堕落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
pious
|
|
| adj.虔诚的；道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
malicious
|
|
| adj.有恶意的，心怀恶意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
mischief
|
|
| n.损害，伤害，危害；恶作剧，捣蛋，胡闹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
impudence
|
|
| n.厚颜无耻；冒失；无礼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
muddle
|
|
| n.困惑，混浊状态；vt.使混乱，使糊涂，使惊呆；vi.胡乱应付，混乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
frustration
|
|
| n.挫折，失败，失效，落空 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
craving
|
|
| n.渴望,热望 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
triumphantly
|
|
| ad.得意洋洋地；得胜地；成功地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
onset
|
|
| n.进攻，袭击，开始，突然开始 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
evaded
|
|
| 逃避( evade的过去式和过去分词 )； 避开； 回避； 想不出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
authoritarian
|
|
| n./adj.专制(的)，专制主义者，独裁主义者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
suffocation
|
|
| n.窒息 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
begot
|
|
| v.为…之生父( beget的过去式 )；产生，引起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
Founder
|
|
| n.创始者，缔造者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
meekly
|
|
| adv.温顺地，逆来顺受地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
serene
|
|
| adj. 安详的，宁静的，平静的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
complacent
|
|
| adj.自满的；自鸣得意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
bead
|
|
| n.念珠；(pl.)珠子项链；水珠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
jeered
|
|
| v.嘲笑( jeer的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
dignified
|
|
| a.可敬的，高贵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
exalted
|
|
| adj.(地位等)高的，崇高的；尊贵的，高尚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
ignoble
|
|
| adj.不光彩的，卑鄙的；可耻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
recalcitrance
|
|
| n.固执，顽抗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
oozes
|
|
| v.（浓液等）慢慢地冒出，渗出( ooze的第三人称单数 )；使（液体）缓缓流出；（浓液）渗出，慢慢流出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
personalities
|
|
| n. 诽谤，（对某人容貌、性格等所进行的）人身攻击； 人身攻击；人格, 个性, 名人( personality的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
hindrance
|
|
| n.妨碍，障碍 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
primordial
|
|
| adj.原始的；最初的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
privately
|
|
| adv.以私人的身份，悄悄地，私下地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
cub
|
|
| n.幼兽，年轻无经验的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
bishop
|
|
| n.主教，（国际象棋）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
memorable
|
|
| adj.值得回忆的，难忘的，特别的，显著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
dissent
|
|
| n./v.不同意，持异议 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
variegated
|
|
| adj.斑驳的，杂色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
nostrum
|
|
| n.秘方；妙策 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
sects
|
|
| n.宗派，教派( sect的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
eroded
|
|
| adj. 被侵蚀的，有蚀痕的 动词erode的过去式和过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
plausible
|
|
| adj.似真实的，似乎有理的，似乎可信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
qualified
|
|
| adj.合格的，有资格的，胜任的，有限制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
protean
|
|
| adj.反复无常的；变化自如的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
anonymous
|
|
| adj.无名的；匿名的；无特色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
eluded
|
|
| v.（尤指机敏地）避开( elude的过去式和过去分词 )；逃避；躲避；使达不到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
consolidated
|
|
| a.联合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
stimulated
|
|
| a.刺激的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
uproot
|
|
| v.连根拔起，拔除；根除，灭绝；赶出家园，被迫移开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
tangible
|
|
| adj.有形的，可触摸的，确凿的，实际的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
oafish
|
|
| adj.呆子的，白痴的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
guffaw
|
|
| n.哄笑；突然的大笑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
muddled
|
|
| adj.混乱的；糊涂的；头脑昏昏然的v.弄乱，弄糟( muddle的过去式)；使糊涂；对付，混日子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
mawkish
|
|
| adj.多愁善感的的；无味的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
saviour
|
|
| n.拯救者，救星 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
bland
|
|
| adj.淡而无味的，温和的，无刺激性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
marvels
|
|
| n.奇迹( marvel的名词复数 )；令人惊奇的事物（或事例）；不平凡的成果；成就v.惊奇，对…感到惊奇( marvel的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
absurdity
|
|
| n.荒谬，愚蠢；谬论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
liberate
|
|
| v.解放，使获得自由，释出，放出；vt.解放，使获自由 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
atheist
|
|
| n.无神论者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
loyalty
|
|
| n.忠诚，忠心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
advancement
|
|
| n.前进，促进，提升 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
immunity
|
|
| n.优惠；免除；豁免，豁免权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
perversion
|
|
| n.曲解；堕落；反常 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
militant
|
|
| adj.激进的，好斗的；n.激进分子，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
acquiescence
|
|
| n.默许；顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
rebellious
|
|
| adj.造反的，反抗的，难控制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
subservience
|
|
| n.有利，有益；从属（地位），附属性；屈从，恭顺；媚态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
taboo
|
|
| n.禁忌，禁止接近，禁止使用；adj.禁忌的；v.禁忌，禁制，禁止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
joint
|
|
| adj.联合的，共同的；n.关节，接合处；v.连接，贴合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
embittered
|
|
| v.使怨恨，激怒( embitter的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
exponent
|
|
| n.倡导者，拥护者；代表人物；指数，幂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
archaeology
|
|
| n.考古学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
infringing
|
|
| v.违反（规章等）( infringe的现在分词 )；侵犯（某人的权利）；侵害（某人的自由、权益等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
subservient
|
|
| adj.卑屈的，阿谀的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
assailed
|
|
| v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 )；困扰；质问；毅然应对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
mentality
|
|
| n.心理，思想，脑力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
hostility
|
|
| n.敌对，敌意；抵制［pl.］交战，战争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
exasperates
|
|
| n.激怒，触怒( exasperate的名词复数 )v.激怒，触怒( exasperate的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
intervention
|
|
| n.介入，干涉，干预 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
subjugated
|
|
| v.征服，降伏( subjugate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
parody
|
|
| n.打油诗文，诙谐的改编诗文，拙劣的模仿；v.拙劣模仿，作模仿诗文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
riddle
|
|
| n.谜，谜语，粗筛；vt.解谜，给…出谜，筛，检查，鉴定，非难，充满于；vi.出谜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
complexion
|
|
| n.肤色；情况，局面；气质，性格 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
elusive
|
|
| adj.难以表达(捉摸)的；令人困惑的；逃避的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
systematic
|
|
| adj.有系统的，有计划的，有方法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
obsolescent
|
|
| adj.过时的，难管束的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
reconstruction
|
|
| n.重建，再现，复原 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
liberated
|
|
| a.无拘束的，放纵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
implements
|
|
| n.工具( implement的名词复数 )；家具；手段；[法律]履行（契约等）v.实现( implement的第三人称单数 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
replacement
|
|
| n.取代，替换，交换；替代品，代用品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
awaken
|
|
| vi.醒，觉醒；vt.唤醒，使觉醒，唤起，激起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
awakening
|
|
| n.觉醒，醒悟 adj.觉醒中的；唤醒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
corrupted
|
|
| （使）败坏( corrupt的过去式和过去分词 )； （使）腐化； 引起（计算机文件等的）错误； 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
rigidly
|
|
| adv.刻板地，僵化地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
concurrently
|
|
| adv.同时地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
augury
|
|
| n.预言，征兆，占卦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
formulated
|
|
| v.构想出( formulate的过去式和过去分词 )；规划；确切地阐述；用公式表示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
actively
|
|
| adv.积极地，勤奋地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
touted
|
|
| v.兜售( tout的过去式和过去分词 )；招揽；侦查；探听赛马情报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
pretensions
|
|
| 自称( pretension的名词复数 )； 自命不凡； 要求； 权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
implementing
|
|
| v.实现( implement的现在分词 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
resentment
|
|
| n.怨愤，忿恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
diffusion
|
|
| n.流布；普及；散漫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
binder
|
|
| n.包扎物，包扎工具；[法]临时契约；粘合剂；装订工 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
pretences
|
|
| n.假装( pretence的名词复数 )；作假；自命；自称 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
vistas
|
|
| 长条形景色( vista的名词复数 )； 回顾； 展望； （未来可能发生的）一系列情景 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
incessant
|
|
| adj.不停的，连续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
collaboration
|
|
| n.合作，协作；勾结 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
exasperated
|
|
| adj.恼怒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
infinitely
|
|
| adv.无限地，无穷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
ousting
|
|
| 驱逐( oust的现在分词 )； 革职； 罢黜； 剥夺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
vocal
|
|
| adj.直言不讳的；嗓音的；n.[pl.]声乐节目 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
seeped
|
|
| v.（液体）渗( seep的过去式和过去分词 )；渗透；渗出；漏出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
adolescence
|
|
| n.青春期，青少年 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
penetrate
|
|
| v.透(渗)入；刺入，刺穿；洞察，了解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
smuggled
|
|
| 水货 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
188
nuclei
|
|
| n.核 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
189
mechanism
|
|
| n.机械装置；机构，结构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
190
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
191
unison
|
|
| n.步调一致，行动一致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
192
wrench
|
|
| v.猛拧；挣脱；使扭伤；n.扳手；痛苦，难受 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
193
unifying
|
|
| 使联合( unify的现在分词 )； 使相同； 使一致； 统一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
194
stuffy
|
|
| adj.不透气的，闷热的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
195
tattered
|
|
| adj.破旧的，衣衫破的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
196
apparatus
|
|
| n.装置，器械；器具，设备 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
197
skilful
|
|
| (=skillful)adj.灵巧的，熟练的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
198
deter
|
|
| vt.阻止，使不敢，吓住 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
199
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
200
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
201
sweeping
|
|
| adj.范围广大的，一扫无遗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
202
encyclopaedias
|
|
| n.百科全书，大全( encyclopaedia的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
203
antiquated
|
|
| adj.陈旧的，过时的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
204
multiplication
|
|
| n.增加，增多，倍增；增殖，繁殖；乘法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
205
raucous
|
|
| adj.(声音)沙哑的，粗糙的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
206
bawls
|
|
| v.大叫，大喊( bawl的第三人称单数 )；放声大哭；大声叫出；叫卖（货物） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
207
inadequate
|
|
| adj.(for,to)不充足的，不适当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
208
frustrating
|
|
| adj.产生挫折的，使人沮丧的，令人泄气的v.使不成功( frustrate的现在分词 )；挫败；使受挫折；令人沮丧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
209
shred
|
|
| v.撕成碎片，变成碎片；n.碎布条，细片，些少 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
210
tainted
|
|
| adj.腐坏的；污染的；沾污的；感染的v.使变质( taint的过去式和过去分词 )；使污染；败坏；被污染，腐坏，败坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
211
nourishment
|
|
| n.食物，营养品；营养情况 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
212
pedagogue
|
|
| n.教师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
213
canvass
|
|
| v.招徕顾客，兜售；游说；详细检查，讨论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
214
accounting
|
|
| n.会计，会计学，借贷对照表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
215
bloodiest
|
|
| adj.血污的( bloody的最高级 )；流血的；屠杀的；残忍的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
216
blasphemous
|
|
| adj.亵渎神明的，不敬神的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
217
ingratitude
|
|
| n.忘恩负义 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
218
desecrate
|
|
| v.供俗用，亵渎，污辱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
219
wholesome
|
|
| adj.适合；卫生的；有益健康的；显示身心健康的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
220
exasperation
|
|
| n.愤慨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
221
enquiring
|
|
| a.爱打听的，显得好奇的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
222
discretion
|
|
| n.谨慎；随意处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
223
restiveness
|
|
| n.倔强，难以驾御 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
224
substantiate
|
|
| v.证实；证明...有根据 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
225
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
226
internecine
|
|
| adj.两败俱伤的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
227
arraignment
|
|
| n.提问，传讯，责难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
228
provocative
|
|
| adj.挑衅的，煽动的，刺激的，挑逗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
229
snarls
|
|
| n.（动物的）龇牙低吼( snarl的名词复数 )；愤怒叫嚷（声）；咆哮（声）；疼痛叫声v.（指狗）吠，嗥叫， （人）咆哮( snarl的第三人称单数 )；咆哮着说，厉声地说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
230
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
231
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
232
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
233
collapse
|
|
| vi.累倒；昏倒；倒塌；塌陷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
234
facade
|
|
| n.(建筑物的)正面，临街正面；外表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
235
professing
|
|
| 声称( profess的现在分词 )； 宣称； 公开表明； 信奉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
236
arrogant
|
|
| adj.傲慢的，自大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
237
monetary
|
|
| adj.货币的，钱的；通货的；金融的；财政的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
238
fabric
|
|
| n.织物，织品，布；构造，结构，组织 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
239
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
240
unified
|
|
| (unify 的过去式和过去分词)； 统一的； 统一标准的； 一元化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
241
implemented
|
|
| v.实现( implement的过去式和过去分词 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
242
preposterous
|
|
| adj.荒谬的，可笑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
243
extermination
|
|
| n.消灭，根绝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |