I. It is the Pagan who charges her with excessive Holiness.

"You Catholics," he tells us, "are far too hard on sin and not nearly

indulgent enough towards poor human nature. Let me take as an instance

the sins of the flesh. Now here is a set of desires implanted by God or

Nature (as you choose to name the Power behind life) for wise and

indeed essential purposes. These desires are probably the very fiercest

known to man and certainly the most alluring; and human nature is, as we

know, an extraordinarily inconsistent and vacillating thing. Now I am

aware that the abuse of these passions leads to disaster and that Nature

has her inexorable laws and penalties; but you Catholics add a new

horror to life by an absurd and irrational insistence on the offence

that this abuse causes before God. For not only do you fiercely denounce

the "acts of sin," as you name them, but you presume to go deeper still

to the very desire itself, as it would seem. You are unpractical and

cruel enough to say that the very thought of sin deliberately

entertained can cut off the soul that indulges in it from the favour of

God.

"Or, to go further, consider the impossible ideals which you hold up

with regard to matrimony. These ideals have a certain beauty of their

own to persons who can embrace them; they may perhaps be, to use a

Catholic phrase, Counsels of Perfection; but it is merely ludicrous to

insist upon them as rules of conduct for all mankind. Human Nature is

human nature. You cannot bind the many by the dreams of the few.

"Or, to take a wider view altogether, consider the general standards you

hold up to us in the lives of your saints. These saints appear to the

ordinary common-place man as simply not admirable at all. It does not

seem to us admirable that St. Aloysius should scarcely lift his eyes

from the ground, or that St. Teresa should shut herself up in a cell, or

that St. Francis should scourge himself with briers for fear of

committing sin. That kind of attitude is too fantastically fastidious

altogether. You Catholics seem to aim at a standard that is simply not

desirable; both your ends and your methods are equally inhuman and

equally unsuitable for the world we have to live in. True religion is

surely something far more sensible than this; true religion should not

strain and strive after the impossible, should not seek to improve human

nature by a process of mutilation. You have excellent aims in some

respects and excellent methods in others, but in supreme demands you go

beyond the mark altogether. We Pagans neither agree with your morality

nor admire those whom you claim as your successes. If you were less holy

and more natural, less idealistic and more practical, you would be of a

greater service to the world which you desire to help. Religion should

be a sturdy, virile growth; not the delicate hot-house blossom which you

make it."

The second charge comes from the Puritan. "Catholicism is not holy

enough to be the Church of Jesus Christ; for see how terribly easy she

is to those who outrage and _crucify Him afresh!_ Perhaps it may not be

true after all, as we used to think, that the Catholic priest actually

gives leave to his penitents to commit sin; but the extraordinary ease

with which absolution is given comes very nearly to the same thing. So

far from this Church having elevated the human race, she has actually

lowered its standards by her attitude towards those of her children who

disobey God's Laws.

"And consider what some of these children of hers have been! Are there

any criminals in history so monumental as Catholic criminals? Have any

men ever fallen so low as, let us say, the Borgia family of the Middle

Ages, as Gilles de Rais and a score of others, as men and women who were

perhaps in their faith 'good Catholics' enough, yet in their lives a

mere disgrace to humanity? Look at the Latin countries with their

passionate records of crime, at the sexual immorality of France or

Spain; the turbulence and thriftlessness of Ireland, the ignorant

brutality of Catholic England. Are there any other denominations of

Christendom that exhibit such deplorable specimens as the runaway nuns,

the apostate priests, the vicious Popes of Catholicism? How is it that

tales are told of the iniquities of Catholicism such as are told of no

other of the sects of Christendom? Allow for all the exaggeration you

like, all the prejudice of historians, all the spitefulness of enemies,

yet there surely remains sufficient Catholic criminality to show that at

the best the Church is no better than any other religious body, and at

the worst, infinitely worse. The Catholic Church, then, is not holy

enough to be the Church of Jesus Christ."

II. When we turn to the Gospels we find that these two charges are, as a

matter of fact, precisely among those which were brought against our

Divine Lord.

First, undoubtedly, He was hated for His Holiness. Who can doubt that

the terrific standard of morality which He preached--the Catholic

preaching of which also is one of the charges of the Pagan--was a

principal cause of His rejection. For it was He, after all, who first

proclaimed that the laws of God bind not only action but thought; it was

He who first pronounced that man to be a murderer and an adulterer who

in his heart willed these sins; it was He who summed up the standard of

Christianity as a standard of perfection, _Be you perfect, as your

Father in Heaven is perfect;_ who bade men aspire to be as good as God!

It was His Holiness, then, that first drew on Him the hostility of the

world--that radiant white-hot sanctity in which His Sacred Humanity went

clothed. _Which of you convinceth me of sin?... Let him that is without

sin amongst you cast the first stone at her!_ These were words that

pierced the smooth formalism of the Scribe and the Pharisee and awoke an

undying hatred. It was this, surely, that led up irresistibly to the

final rejection of Him at the bar of Pilate and the choice of Barabbas

in His place. "_Not this man!_ not this piece of stainless Perfection!

Not this Sanctity that reveals all hearts, _but Barabbas_, that

comfortable sinner so like ourselves! This robber in whose company we

feel at ease! This murderer whose life, at any rate, is in no

reproachful contrast to our own!" Jesus Christ was found too holy for

the world.

But He was found, too, not holy enough. And it is this explicit charge

that is brought against Him again and again. It was dreadful to those

keepers of the Law that this Preacher of Righteousness should sit with

publicans and sinners; that this Prophet should allow such a woman as

Magdalen to touch Him. If this man were indeed a Prophet, He could not

bear the contact of sinners; if He were indeed zealous for God's

Kingdom, He could not suffer the presence of so many who were its

enemies. Yet He sits there at Zacchaeus' table, silent and smiling,

instead of crying on the roof to fall in; He calls Matthew from the

tax-office instead of blasting him and it together; He handles the leper

whom God's own Law pronounces unclean.

III. These, then, are the charges brought against the disciples of

Christ, as against the Master, and it is undeniable that there is truth

in them both.

It is true that the Catholic Church preaches a morality that is utterly

beyond the reach of human nature left to itself; that her standards are

standards of perfection, and that she prefers even the lowest rung of

the supernatural ladder to the highest rung of the natural.

And it is also true, without doubt, that the fallen or the unfaithful

Catholic is an infinitely more degraded member of humanity than the

fallen Pagan or Protestant; that the monumental criminals of history are

Catholic criminals, and that the monsters of the world--Henry VIII for

example, sacrilegious, murderer, and adulterer; Martin Luther, whose

printed table-talk is unfit for any respectable house; Queen Elizabeth,

perjurer, tyrant, and unchaste--were persons who had had all that the

Catholic Church could give them: the standards of her teaching, the

guidance of her discipline, and the grace of her sacraments. What, then,

is the reconciliation of this Paradox?

(1) First the Catholic Church is Divine. She dwells, that is to say, in

heavenly places; she looks always upon the Face of God; she holds

enshrined in her heart the Sacred Humanity of Jesus Christ and the

stainless perfection of that Immaculate Mother from whom that Humanity

was drawn. How is it conceivable, then, that she should be content with

any standard short of perfection? If she were a Society evolved from

below--a merely human Society that is to say--she could never advance

beyond those standards to which in the past her noblest children have

climbed. But since there dwells in her the Supernatural--since Mary was

endowed from on high with a gift to which no human being could ascend,

since the Sun of Justice Himself came down from the heavens to lead a

human life under human terms--how can she ever again be content with

anything short of that height from which these came?

(2) But she is also human, dwelling herself in the midst of humanity,

placed here in the world for the express object of gathering into

herself and of sanctifying by her graces that very world which has

fallen from God. These outcasts and these sinners are the very material

on which she has to work; these waste products of human life, these

marred types and specimens of humanity have no hope at all except in

her.

For, first, she desires if she can--and she has often been

able--actually to raise these, first to sanctity and then to her own

altars; it is for her and her only to _raise the poor from the dunghill

and to set them with the princes_. She sets before the Magdalen and the

thief, then, nothing less but her own standard of perfection.

Yet though in one sense she is satisfied with nothing lower than this,

in another sense she is satisfied with almost infinitely nothing. If she

can but bring the sinner within the very edge of grace; if she can but

draw from the dying murderer one cry of contrition; if she can but turn

his eyes with one look of love to the crucifix, her labours are a

thousand times repaid; for, if she has not brought him to the head of

sanctity, she has at least brought him to its foot and set him there

beneath that ladder of the supernatural which reaches from hell to

heaven.

For she alone has this power. She alone is so utterly confident in the

presence of the sinner because she alone has the secret of his cure.

There in her confessional is the Blood of Christ that can make his soul

clean again, and in her Tabernacle the Body of Christ that will be his

food of eternal life. She alone dares be his friend because she alone

can be his Saviour. If, then, her saints are one sign of her identity,

no less are her sinners another.

For not only is she the Majesty of God dwelling on earth, she is also

His Love; and therefore its limitations, and they only, are hers. That

Sun of mercy that shines and that Rain of charity that streams, _on just

and unjust alike_, are the very Sun and Rain that give her life. If I

_go up to Heaven she is there_, enthroned in Christ, on the Right Hand

of God;_ if I go down to Hell she is there also_, drawing back souls

from the brink from which she alone can rescue them. For she is that

very ladder which Jacob saw so long ago, that staircase planted here in

the blood and the slime of earth, rising there into the stainless Light

of the Lamb. Holiness and unholiness are both alike hers and she is

ashamed of neither--the holiness of her own Divinity which is Christ's

and the unholiness of those outcast members of her Humanity to whom she

ministers.

By her power, then, which again is Christ's, the Magdalen becomes the

Penitent; the thief the first of the redeemed; and Peter, the yielding

sand of humanity, the _Rock on which Herself is built_.

Paradoxes of Catholicism · 第 22 / 50 题