首页 >出版文学> The Varieties of Religious Experience>第62章
  Butinallthesemattersofsentimentonemusthave“beenthere“
  one’sselfinordertounderstandthem。NoAmericancaneverattaintounderstandingtheloyaltyofaBritontowardshisking,ofaGermantowardshisemperor;norcanaBritonorGermaneverunderstandthepeaceofheartofanAmericaninhavingnoking,noKaiser,nospuriousnonsense,betweenhimandthecommonGodofall。Ifsentimentsassimpleasthesearemysterieswhichonemustreceiveasgiftsofbirth,howmuchmoreisthisthecasewiththosesubtlerreligioussentimentswhichwehavebeenconsidering!Onecanneverfathomanemotionordivineitsdictatesbystandingoutsideofit。Intheglowinghourofexcitement,however,allincomprehensibilitiesaresolved,andwhatwassoenigmaticalfromwithoutbecomestransparentlyobvious。Eachemotionobeysalogicofitsown,andmakesdeductionswhichnootherlogiccandraw。Pietyandcharityliveinadifferentuniversefromworldlylustsandfears,andformanothercentreofenergyaltogether。Asinasupremesorrowlesservexationsmaybecomeaconsolation;asasupremelovemayturnminorsacrificesintogain;soasupremetrustmayrendercommonsafeguardsodious,andincertainglowsofgenerousexcitementitmayappearunspeakablymeantoretainone’sholdofpersonalpossessions。Theonlysoundplan,ifweareourselvesoutsidethepaleofsuchemotions,istoobserveaswellasweareablethosewhofeelthem,andtorecordfaithfullywhatweobserve;andthis,Ineedhardlysay,iswhatIhavestriventodointheselasttwodescriptivelectures,whichInowhopewillhavecoveredthegroundsufficientlyforourpresentneeds。
  Wehavenowpassedinreviewthemoreimportantofthephenomenawhichareregardedasfruitsofgenuinereligionandcharacteristicsofmenwhoaredevout。Todaywehavetochangeourattitudefromthatofdescriptiontothatofappreciation;wehavetoaskwhetherthefruitsinquestioncanhelpustojudgetheabsolutevalueofwhatreligionaddstohumanlife。WereI
  toparodyKant,Ishouldsaythata“CritiqueofpureSaintliness“mustbeourtheme。
  If,inturningtothistheme,wecoulddescenduponoursubjectfromabovelikeCatholictheologians,withourfixeddefinitionsofmanandman’sperfectionandourpositivedogmasaboutGod,weshouldhaveaneasytimeofit。Man’sperfectionwouldbethefulfillmentofhisend;andhisendwouldbeunionwithhisMaker。Thatunioncouldbepursuedbyhimalongthreepaths,active,purgative,andcontemplative,respectively;andprogressalongeitherpathwouldbeasimplemattertomeasurebytheapplicationofalimitednumberoftheologicalandmoralconceptionsanddefinitions。Theabsolutesignificanceandvalueofanybitofreligiousexperiencewemighthearofwouldthusbegivenalmostmathematicallyintoourhands。
  Ifconveniencewereeverything,weoughtnowtogrieveatfindingourselvescutofffromsoadmirablyconvenientamethodasthis。
  Butwedidcutourselvesofffromitdeliberatelyinthoseremarkswhichyourememberwemade,inourfirstlecture,abouttheempiricalmethod;anditmustbeconfessedthatafterthatactofrenunciationwecanneverhopeforclean-cutandscholasticresults。WEcannotdividemansharplyintoananimalandarationalpart。WEcannotdistinguishnaturalfromsupernaturaleffects;noramongthelatterknowwhicharefavorsofGod,andwhicharecounterfeitoperationsofthedemon。WE
  havemerelytocollectthingstogetherwithoutanyspecialaprioritheologicalsystem,andoutofanaggregateofpiecemealjudgmentsastothevalueofthisandthatexperience——judgmentsinwhichourgeneralphilosophicprejudices,ourinstincts,andourcommonsenseareouronlyguides——decidethatONTHEWHOLE
  onetypeofreligionisapprovedbyitsfruits,andanothertypecondemned。“Onthewhole“——Ifearweshallneverescapecomplicitywiththatqualification,sodeartoyourpracticalman,sorepugnanttoyoursystematizer!
  IalsofearthatasImakethisfrankconfession,Imayseemtosomeofyoutothrowourcompassoverboard,andtoadoptcapriceasourpilot。Skepticismorwaywardchoice,youmaythink,canbetheonlyresultsofsuchaformlessmethodasIhavetakenup。
  Afewremarksindeprecationofsuchanopinion,andinfartherexplanationoftheempiricistprincipleswhichIprofess,maythereforeappearatthispointtobeinplace。
  Abstractly,itwouldseemillogicaltotrytomeasuretheworthofareligion’sfruitsinmerelyhumantermsofvalue。HowCAN
  youmeasuretheirworthwithoutconsideringwhethertheGodreallyexistswhoissupposedtoinspirethem?Ifhereallyexists,thenalltheconductinstitutedbymentomeethiswantsmustnecessarilybeareasonablefruitofhisreligion——itwouldbeunreasonableonlyincasehedidnotexist。If,forinstance,youweretocondemnareligionofhumanoranimalsacrificesbyvirtueofyoursubjectivesentiments,andifallthewhileadeitywerereallytheredemandingsuchsacrifices,youwouldbemakingatheoreticalmistakebytacitlyassumingthatthedeitymustbenon-existent;youwouldbesettingupatheologyofyourownasmuchasifyouwereascholasticphilosopher。
  Tothisextent,totheextentofdisbelievingperemptorilyincertaintypesofdeity,Ifranklyconfessthatwemustbetheologians。Ifdisbeliefscanbesaidtoconstituteatheology,thentheprejudices,instincts,andcommonsensewhichIchoseasourguidesmaketheologicalpartisansofuswhenevertheymakecertainbeliefsabhorrent。
  Butsuchcommon-senseprejudicesandinstinctsarethemselvesthefruitofanempiricalevolution。Nothingismorestrikingthanthesecularalterationthatgoesoninthemoralandreligioustoneofmen,astheirinsightintonatureandtheirsocialarrangementsprogressivelydevelop。Afteranintervalofafewgenerationsthementalclimateprovesunfavorabletonotionsofthedeitywhichatanearlierdatewereperfectlysatisfactory:
  theoldergodshavefallenbelowthecommonsecularlevel,andcannolongerbebelievedin。Todayadeitywhoshouldrequirebleedingsacrificestoplacatehimwouldbetoosanguinarytobetakenseriously。Evenifpowerfulhistoricalcredentialswereputforwardinhisfavor,wewouldnotlookatthem。Once,onthecontrary,hiscruelappetiteswereofthemselvescredentials。
  Theypositivelyrecommendedhimtomen’simaginationsinageswhensuchcoarsesignsofpowerwererespectedandnootherscouldbeunderstood。Suchdeitiesthenwereworshipedbecausesuchfruitswererelished。
  Doubtlesshistoricaccidentsalwaysplayedsomelaterpart,buttheoriginalfactorinfixingthefigureofthegodsmustalwayshavebeenpsychological。Thedeitytowhomtheprophets,seers,anddevoteeswhofoundedtheparticularcultborewitnesswasworthsomethingtothempersonally。Theycouldusehim。Heguidedtheirimagination,warrantedtheirhopes,andcontrolledtheirwill——orelsetheyrequiredhimasasafeguardagainstthedemonandacurberofotherpeople’scrimes。Inanycase,theychosehimforthevalueofthefruitsheseemedtothemtoyield。
  Sosoonasthefruitsbegantoseemquiteworthless;sosoonastheyconflictedwithindispensablehumanideals,orthwartedtooextensivelyothervalues;sosoonastheyappearedchildish,contemptible,orimmoralwhenreflectedon,thedeitygrewdiscredited,andwaserelongneglectedandforgotten。ItwasinthiswaythattheGreekandRomangodsceasedtobebelievedinbyeducatedpagans;itisthusthatweourselvesjudgeoftheHindu,Buddhist,andMohammedantheologies;ProtestantshavesodealtwiththeCatholicnotionsofdeity,andliberalProtestantswitholderProtestantnotions;itisthusthatChinamenjudgeofus,andthatallofusnowlivingwillbejudgedbyourdescendants。Whenweceasetoadmireorapprovewhatthedefinitionofadeityimplies,weendbydeemingthatdeityincredible。
  Fewhistoricchangesaremorecuriousthanthesemutationsoftheologicalopinion。Themonarchicaltypeofsovereigntywas,forexample,soineradicablyplantedinthemindofourownforefathersthatadoseofcrueltyandarbitrarinessintheirdeityseemspositivelytohavebeenrequiredbytheirimagination。Theycalledthecruelty“retributivejustice。”andaGodwithoutitwouldcertainlyhavestruckthemasnot“sovereign“enough。Buttodayweabhortheverynotionofeternalsufferinginflicted;andthatarbitrarydealing-outofsalvationanddamnationtoselectedindividuals,ofwhichJonathanEdwardscouldpersuadehimselfthathehadnotonlyaconviction,buta“delightfulconviction。”asofadoctrine“exceedingpleasant,bright,andsweet。”appearstous,ifsovereignlyanything,sovereignlyirrationalandmean。Notonlythecruelty,butthepaltrinessofcharacterofthegodsbelievedinbyearliercenturiesalsostrikeslatercenturieswithsurprise。WeshallseeexamplesofitfromtheannalsofCatholicsaintshipwhichmakesusrubourProtestanteyes。
  Ritualworshipingeneralappearstothemoderntranscendentalist,aswellastotheultra-puritanictypeofmind,asifaddressedtoadeityofanalmostabsurdlychildishcharacter,takingdelightintoy-shopfurniture,tapersandtinsel,costumeandmumblingandmummery,andfindinghis“glory“
  incomprehensiblyenhancedthereby:——justasontheotherhandtheformlessspaciousnessofpantheismappearsquiteemptytoritualisticnatures,andthegaunttheismofevangelicalsectsseemsintolerablybaldandchalkyandbleak。
  Luther,saysEmerson,wouldhavecutoffhisrighthandratherthannailhisthesestothedooratWittenberg,ifhehadsupposedthattheyweredestinedtoleadtothepalenegationsofBostonUnitarianism。
  Sofar,then,althoughwearecompelled,whatevermaybeourpretensionstoempiricism,toemploysomesortofastandardoftheologicalprobabilityofourownwheneverweassumetoestimatethefruitsofothermen’sreligion,yetthisverystandardhasbeenbegottenoutofthedriftofcommonlife。Itisthevoiceofhumanexperiencewithinus,judgingandcondemningallgodsthatstandathwartthepathwayalongwhichitfeelsitselftobeadvancing。Experience,ifwetakeitinthelargestsense,isthustheparentofthosedisbeliefswhich,itwascharged,wereinconsistentwiththeexperientialmethod。Theinconsistency,yousee,isimmaterial,andthechargemaybeneglected。
  Ifwepassfromdisbeliefstopositivebeliefs,itseemstomethatthereisnotevenaformalinconsistencytobelaidagainstourmethod。Thegodswestandbyarethegodsweneedandcanuse,thegodswhosedemandsonusarereinforcementsofourdemandsonourselvesandononeanother。WhatIthenproposetodois,brieflystated,totestsaintlinessbycommonsense,tousehumanstandardstohelpusdecidehowfarthereligiouslifecommendsitselfasanidealkindofhumanactivity。Ifitcommendsitself,thenanytheologicalbeliefsthatmayinspireit,insofarforthwillstandaccredited。Ifnot,thentheywillbediscredited,andallwithoutreferencetoanythingbuthumanworkingprinciples。Itisbuttheeliminationofthehumanlyunfit,andthesurvivalofthehumanlyfittest,appliedtoreligiousbeliefs;andifwelookathistorycandidlyandwithoutprejudice,wehavetoadmitthatnoreligionhaseverinthelongrunestablishedorproveditselfinanyotherway。
  ReligionshaveAPPROVEDthemselves;theyhaveministeredtosundryvitalneedswhichtheyfoundreigning。Whentheyviolatedotherneedstoostrongly,orwhenotherfaithscamewhichservedthesameneedsbetter,thefirstreligionsweresupplanted。
  Theneedswerealwaysmany,andthetestswereneversharp。Sothereproachofvaguenessandsubjectivityand“onthewhole“-ness,whichcanwithperfectlegitimacybeaddressedtotheempiricalmethodasweareforcedtouseit,isafterallareproachtowhichtheentirelifeofmanindealingwiththesemattersisobnoxious。Noreligionhaseveryetoweditsprevalenceto“apodicticcertainty。”InalaterlectureIwillaskwhetherobjectivecertaintycaneverbeaddedbytheologicalreasoningtoareligionthatalreadyempiricallyprevails。
  Oneword,also,aboutthereproachthatinfollowingthissortofanempiricalmethodwearehandingourselvesovertosystematicskepticism。
  Sinceitisimpossibletodenysecularalterationsinoursentimentsandneeds,itwouldbeabsurdtoaffirmthatone’sownageoftheworldcanbebeyondcorrectionbythenextage。
  Skepticismcannot,therefore,beruledoutbyanysetofthinkersasapossibilityagainstwhichtheirconclusionsaresecure;andnoempiricistoughttoclaimexemptionfromthisuniversalliability。Buttoadmitone’sliabilitytocorrectionisonething,andtoembarkuponaseaofwantondoubtisanother。Ofwillfullyplayingintothehandsofskepticismwecannotbeaccused。Hewhoacknowledgestheimperfectnessofhisinstrument,andmakesallowanceforitindiscussinghisobservations,isinamuchbetterpositionforgainingtruththanifheclaimedhisinstrumenttobeinfallible。Orisdogmaticorscholastictheologylessdoubtedinpointoffactforclaiming,asitdoes,tobeinpointofrightundoubtable?Andifnot,whatcommandovertruthwouldthiskindoftheologyreallyloseif,insteadofabsolutecertainty,sheonlyclaimedreasonableprobabilityforherconclusions?IfWEclaimonlyreasonableprobability,itwillbeasmuchasmenwholovethetruthcaneveratanygivenmomenthopetohavewithintheirgrasp。Prettysurelyitwillbemorethanwecouldhavehad,ifwewereunconsciousofourliabilitytoerr。
  Nevertheless,dogmatismwilldoubtlesscontinuetocondemnusforthisconfession。Themereoutwardformofinalterablecertaintyissoprecioustosomemindsthattorenounceitexplicitlyisforthemoutofthequestion。Theywillclaimitevenwherethefactsmostpatentlypronounceitsfolly。Butthesafethingissurelytorecognizethatalltheinsightsofcreaturesofadaylikeourselvesmustbeprovisional。Thewisestofcriticsisanalteringbeing,subjecttothebetterinsightofthemorrow,andrightatanymoment,only“uptodate“and“onthewhole。”
  Whenlargerrangesoftruthopen,itissurelybesttobeabletoopenourselvestotheirreception,unfetteredbyourpreviouspretensions。“Heartilyknow,whenhalf-godsgo,thegodsarrive。”
  Thefactofdiversejudgmentsaboutreligiousphenomenaisthereforeentirelyunescapable,whatevermaybeone’sowndesiretoattaintheirreversible。Butapartfromthatfact,amorefundamentalquestionawaitsus,thequestionwhethermen’sopinionsoughttobeexpectedtobeabsolutelyuniforminthisfield。Oughtallmentohavethesamereligion?Oughttheytoapprovethesamefruitsandfollowthesameleadings?Aretheysolikeintheirinnerneedsthat,forhardandsoft,forproudandhumble,forstrenuousandlazy,forhealthy-mindedanddespairing,exactlythesamereligiousincentivesarerequired?