Chương Chương 65 · 第65章
. As he lay on his bed day after day slowly recovering he woke up to the
fact which most men arrive at sooner or later, I mean that very few
care two straws about truth, or have any confidence that it is righter
and better to believe what is true than what is untrue, even though
belief in the untruth may seem at first sight most expedient. Yet it is
only these few who can be said to believe anything at all; the rest are
simply unbelievers in disguise. Perhaps, after all, these last are
right. They have numbers and prosperity on their side. They have all
which the rationalist appeals to as his tests of right and wrong.
Right, according to him, is what seems right to the majority of
sensible, well-to-do people; we know of no safer criterion than this,
but what does the decision thus arrived at involve? Simply this, that a
conspiracy of silence about things whose truth would be immediately
apparent to disinterested enquirers is not only tolerable but righteous
on the part of those who profess to be and take money for being _par
excellence_ guardians and teachers of truth.
Ernest saw no logical escape from this conclusion. He saw that belief
on the part of the early Christians in the miraculous nature of
Christ’s Resurrection was explicable, without any supposition of
miracle. The explanation lay under the eyes of anyone who chose to take
a moderate degree of trouble; it had been put before the world again
and again, and there had been no serious attempt to refute it. How was
it that Dean Alford for example who had made the New Testament his
speciality, could not or would not see what was so obvious to Ernest
himself? Could it be for any other reason than that he did not want to
see it, and if so was he not a traitor to the cause of truth? Yes, but
was he not also a respectable and successful man, and were not the vast
majority of respectable and successful men, such for example, as all
the bishops and archbishops, doing exactly as Dean Alford did, and did
not this make their action right, no matter though it had been
cannibalism or infanticide, or even habitual untruthfulness of mind?
Monstrous, odious falsehood! Ernest’s feeble pulse quickened and his
pale face flushed as this hateful view of life presented itself to him
in all its logical consistency. It was not the fact of most men being
liars that shocked him—that was all right enough; but even the
momentary doubt whether the few who were not liars ought not to become
liars too. There was no hope left if this were so; if this were so, let
him die, the sooner the better. “Lord,” he exclaimed inwardly, “I don’t
believe one word of it. Strengthen Thou and confirm my disbelief.” It
seemed to him that he could never henceforth see a bishop going to
consecration without saying to himself: “There, but for the grace of
God, went Ernest Pontifex.” It was no doing of his. He could not boast;
if he had lived in the time of Christ he might himself have been an
early Christian, or even an Apostle for aught he knew. On the whole he
felt that he had much to be thankful for.
The conclusion, then, that it might be better to believe error than
truth should be ordered out of court at once, no matter by how clear a
logic it had been arrived at; but what was the alternative? It was
this, that our criterion of truth—i.e. that truth is what commends
itself to the great majority of sensible and successful people—is not
infallible. The rule is sound, and covers by far the greater number of
cases, but it has its exceptions.
He asked himself, what were they? Ah! that was a difficult matter;
there were so many, and the rules which governed them were sometimes so
subtle, that mistakes always had and always would be made; it was just
this that made it impossible to reduce life to an exact science. There
was a rough and ready rule-of-thumb test of truth, and a number of
rules as regards exceptions which could be mastered without much
trouble, yet there was a residue of cases in which decision was
difficult—so difficult that a man had better follow his instinct than
attempt to decide them by any process of reasoning.
Instinct then is the ultimate court of appeal. And what is instinct? It
is a mode of faith in the evidence of things not actually seen. And so
my hero returned almost to the point from which he had started
originally, namely that the just shall live by faith.
And this is what the just—that is to say reasonable people—do as
regards those daily affairs of life which most concern them. They
settle smaller matters by the exercise of their own deliberation. More
important ones, such as the cure of their own bodies and the bodies of
those whom they love, the investment of their money, the extrication of
their affairs from any serious mess—these things they generally entrust
to others of whose capacity they know little save from general report;
they act therefore on the strength of faith, not of knowledge. So the
English nation entrusts the welfare of its fleet and naval defences to
a First Lord of the Admiralty, who, not being a sailor can know nothing
about these matters except by acts of faith. There can be no doubt
about faith and not reason being the _ultima ratio_.
Even Euclid, who has laid himself as little open to the charge of
credulity as any writer who ever lived, cannot get beyond this. He has
no demonstrable first premise. He requires postulates and axioms which
transcend demonstration, and without which he can do nothing. His
superstructure indeed is demonstration, but his ground is faith. Nor
again can he get further than telling a man he is a fool if he persists
in differing from him. He says “which is absurd,” and declines to
discuss the matter further. Faith and authority, therefore, prove to be
as necessary for him as for anyone else. “By faith in what, then,”
asked Ernest of himself, “shall a just man endeavour to live at this
present time?” He answered to himself, “At any rate not by faith in the
supernatural element of the Christian religion.”
And how should he best persuade his fellow-countrymen to leave off
believing in this supernatural element? Looking at the matter from a
practical point of view he thought the Archbishop of Canterbury
afforded the most promising key to the situation. It lay between him
and the Pope. The Pope was perhaps best in theory, but in practice the
Archbishop of Canterbury would do sufficiently well. If he could only
manage to sprinkle a pinch of salt, as it were, on the Archbishop’s
tail, he might convert the whole Church of England to free thought by a
_coup de main_. There must be an amount of cogency which even an
Archbishop—an Archbishop whose perceptions had never been quickened by
imprisonment for assault—would not be able to withstand. When brought
face to face with the facts, as he, Ernest, could arrange them; his
Grace would have no resource but to admit them; being an honourable man
he would at once resign his Archbishopric, and Christianity would
become extinct in England within a few months’ time. This, at any rate,
was how things ought to be. But all the time Ernest had no confidence
in the Archbishop’s not hopping off just as the pinch was about to fall
on him, and this seemed so unfair that his blood boiled at the thought
of it. If this was to be so, he must try if he could not fix him by the
judicious use of bird-lime or a snare, or throw the salt on his tail
from an ambuscade.
To do him justice it was not himself that he greatly cared about. He
knew he had been humbugged, and he knew also that the greater part of
the ills which had afflicted him were due, indirectly, in chief measure
to the influence of Christian teaching; still, if the mischief had
ended with himself, he should have thought little about it, but there
was his sister, and his brother Joey, and the hundreds and thousands of
young people throughout England whose lives were being blighted through
the lies told them by people whose business it was to know better, but
who scamped their work and shirked difficulties instead of facing them.
It was this which made him think it worth while to be angry, and to
consider whether he could not at least do something towards saving
others from such years of waste and misery as he had had to pass
himself. If there was no truth in the miraculous accounts of Christ’s
Death and Resurrection, the whole of the religion founded upon the
historic truth of those events tumbled to the ground. “My,” he
exclaimed, with all the arrogance of youth, “they put a gipsy or
fortune-teller into prison for getting money out of silly people who
think they have supernatural power; why should they not put a clergyman
in prison for pretending that he can absolve sins, or turn bread and
wine into the flesh and blood of One who died two thousand years ago?
What,” he asked himself, “could be more pure ‘hanky-panky’ than that a
bishop should lay his hands upon a young man and pretend to convey to
him the spiritual power to work this miracle? It was all very well to
talk about toleration; toleration, like everything else, had its
limits; besides, if it was to include the bishop let it include the
fortune-teller too.” He would explain all this to the Archbishop of
Canterbury by and by, but as he could not get hold of him just now, it
occurred to him that he might experimentalise advantageously upon the
viler soul of the prison chaplain. It was only those who took the first
and most obvious step in their power who ever did great things in the
end, so one day, when Mr Hughes—for this was the chaplain’s name—was
talking with him, Ernest introduced the question of Christian
evidences, and tried to raise a discussion upon them. Mr Hughes had
been very kind to him, but he was more than twice my hero’s age, and
had long taken the measure of such objections as Ernest tried to put
before him. I do not suppose he believed in the actual objective truth
of the stories about Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension any more than
Ernest did, but he knew that this was a small matter, and that the real
issue lay much deeper than this.
Mr Hughes was a man who had been in authority for many years, and he
brushed Ernest on one side as if he had been a fly. He did it so well
that my hero never ventured to tackle him again, and confined his
conversation with him for the future to such matters as what he had
better do when he got out of prison; and here Mr Hughes was ever ready
to listen to him with sympathy and kindness.