CHAPTER XIV

GOD’S PROPAGANDA

We have before us another literary criticism, clipped from the “Roman

Times Weekly Review of Books” during the year 300, under the Emperor

Diocletian. It is word for word the same as that from the “American

Times” of 1944--the only difference being that one deals with an outlaw

party known as Bolsheviks, while the other deals with an outlaw sect

known as Christians. The Founder of this latter sect is described by the

“Roman Times” as a proletarian criminal, who was crucified for

disturbing the public peace under the Emperor Augustus Cæsar. His

followers have been hiding in catacombs and tombs, carrying on incessant

propaganda in defiance of the Roman law. In place of John Reed, the

“Roman Times” refers to a certain Paul, a renegade Roman gentleman and

former official of the empire. The good old days to which the “Roman

Times” looks back with longing, are the days of Nero, when these

incendiary fanatics were boiled in oil or fed to the lions. Under the

prodding of this most respectable “Times,” the Emperor Diocletian

undertook a new and ferocious persecution of the sect; but twenty-four

years afterwards the successor of Diocletian became converted to

Christianity, and adopted it as the official religion of the state,

entitled to persecute other religions.

The reader who is a Christian will remind me that Jesus was a pacifist,

he was meek and gentle. To this I answer, the early social

revolutionists were likewise Utopians, appealing to love and

brotherhood. At the time the New Testament became fixed in its present

form, the Christians had never held power in any part of the world. When

they took power under the Emperor Constantine, they behaved like every

government in history--that is, they kept their power, using as much

force as necessary for the purpose. If the reader is shocked by the fact

that the Soviet government of Russia fought for two years a defensive

war on twenty-six fronts against its enemies, I invite him to consider

the Christian crusades, two centuries of offensive propaganda warfare.

If he is shocked by stories he has read about the Tcheka and its

torturing of prisoners, I invite him to consult Lea’s “History of the

Spanish Inquisition.” Considering the series of religious wars which

made of Europe a shambles for more than a thousand years, it is safe to

assert that for every human life sacrificed by the Soviet revolution in

Russia, a hundred thousand lives have been taken in the name of the

gentle and lowly Jesus.

But these are questions which will not be settled in a generation, nor

in a century; therefore we pass on, and take up the question of the New

Testament as literature. It has been generally so recognized, and we may

doubt if any writing ever collected in one volume has exercised as great

an influence upon the human race. And let it be noted that this

literature is propaganda, pure and simple; we may defy anyone to find a

single line in the Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles, or the Book of

Revelations which was not produced as conscious and deliberate

propaganda.

A critic highly regarded by the academic authorities when I was a

student in college was George Henry Lewes. I read his “Life of Goethe,”

and made note of his argument on behalf of “realist” as opposed to

“idealist” art. Goethe and Shakespeare are his examples of the former

type; and how obvious is their superiority to those “subjective”

artists, who “seek in realities only visible illustrations of a deeper

existence!” The critic takes as his test the production of “the grandest

generalizations and the most elevated types”; but it was evident to me,

even in my student days, that he reached his conclusion by the simple

device of overlooking the evidence on the other side. I introduce to you

four “idealist” artists who bear the names--perhaps pen-names--of

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Will anyone maintain that the works of

Shakespeare and Goethe contain “grander generalizations” or “more

elevated types” than the Four Gospels? We set Jesus against Shakespeare,

and Buddha against Goethe, and leave it for the common sense of mankind

to decide.

Mammonart: An essay in economic interpretation · 第 14 / 111 章