The Canonization of Incompetence

The supreme crime of the church to-day is that everywhere and in

all its operations and influences it is on the side of sloth of

mind; that it banishes brains, it sanctifies stupidity, it

canonizes incompetence. Consider the power of the Church of

England and its favorite daughter here in America; consider their

prestige with the press and in politics, their hold upon

literature and the arts, their control of education and the minds

of children, of charity and the lives of the poor: consider all

this, and then say what it means to society that such a power

must be, in every new issue that arises, on the side of reaction

and falsehood. "So it was in the beginning, is now, and ever

shall be," runs the church's formula; and this per se and a

priori, of necessity and in the nature of the case.

Turn over the pages of history and read the damning record of the

church's opposition to every advance in every field of science,

even the most remote from theological concern. Here is the

Reverend Edward Massey, preaching in 1772 on "The Dangerous and

Sinful Practice of Inoculation"; declaring that Job's distemper

was probably confluent small-pox; that he had been inoculated

doubtless by the devil; that diseases are sent by Providence for

the punishment of sin; and that the proposed attempt to prevent

them is "a diabolical operation". Here are the Scotch clergy of

the middle of the nineteenth century denouncing the use of

chloroform in obstetrics, because it is seeking "to avoid one

part of the primeval curse on woman". Here is Bishop Wilberforce

of Oxford anathematizing Darwin: "The principle of natural

selection is absolutely incompatible with the word of God"; it

"contradicts the revealed relation of creation to its creator";

it "is inconsistent with the fulness of His glory"; it is "a

dishonoring view of nature". And the Bishop settled the matter by

asking Huxley whether he was descended from an ape through his

grandmother or grandfather.

Think what it means, friends of progress, that these

ecclesiastical figures should be set up for the reverence of the

populace, and that every time mankind is to make an advance in

power over Nature, the pioneers of thought have to come with

crow-bars and derricks and heave these figures out of the way!

And you think that conditions are changed to-day? But consider

syphilis and gonorrhea, about which we know so much, and can do

almost nothing; consider birth-control, which we are sent to jail

for so much as mentioning! Consider the divorce reforms for which

the world is crying--and for which it must wait, because of St.

Paul! Realize that up to date it has proven impossible to

persuade the English Church to permit a man to marry his deceased

wife's sister! That when the war broke upon England the whole

nation was occupied with a squabble over the disestablishment of

the church of Wales! Only since 1888 has it been legally possible

for an unbeliever to hold a seat in Parliament; while up to the

present day men are tried for blasphemy and convicted under the

decisions of Lord Hale, to the effect that "it is a crime either

to deny the truth of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian

religion or to hold them up to contempt or ridicule." Said Mr.

justice Horridge, at the West Riding Assizes, 1911: "A man is not

free in any public place to use common ridicule on subjects which

are sacred."

The purpose, as outlined by the public prosecutor in London, is

"to preserve the standard of outward decency." And you will find

that the one essential to prosecution is always that the victim

shall be obscure and helpless; never by any chance is he a duke

in a drawing-room. I will record an utterance of one of the

obscure victims of the British "standard of outward decency", a

teacher of mathematics named Holyoake, who presumed to discuss in

a public hall the starvation of the working classes of the

country. A preacher objected that he had discussed "our duty to

our neighbor" and neglected "our duty to God"; whereupon the

lecturer replied: "Our national Church and general religious

institutions cost us, upon accredited computation, about twenty

million pounds annually. Worship being thus expensive, I appeal

to your heads and your pockets whether we are not too poor to

have a God. While our distress lasts, I think it would be wise to

put deity upon half pay." And for that utterance the unfortunate

teacher of mathematics served six months in the common Gaol at

Gloucester!

While men were being tried for publishing the "Free-thinker", the

Premier of England was William Ewart Gladstone. And if you wish

to know what an established church can do by way of setting up

dullness in high places, get a volume of this "Grand Old Man's"

writings on theological and religious questions. Read his

"Juventus Mundi", in the course of which he establishes, a mystic

connection between the trident of Neptune and the Christian

Trinity! Read his efforts to prove that the writer of Genesis was

an inspired geologist! This writer of Genesis points out in

Nature "a grand, fourfold division, set forth in an orderly

succession of times: First, the water population; secondly, the

air population; thirdly, the land population of animals;

fourthly, the land population consummated in man." And it seems

that this division and sequence "is understood to have been so

affirmed in our time by natural science that it may be taken as a

demonstrated conclusion and established fact." Hence we must

conclude of the writer of Genesis that "his knowledge was

divine"! Consider that this was actually published in one of the

leading British monthlies, and that it was necessary for

Professor Huxley to answer it, pointing out that so far is it

from being true that "a fourfold division and orderly sequence"

of water, air and land animals "has been affirmed in our time by

natural science", that on the contrary, the assertion is

"directly contradictory to facts known to everyone who is

acquainted with the elements of natural science". The

distribution of fossils proves that land animals originated

before sea-animals, and there has been such a mixing of land, sea

and air animals as utterly to destroy the reputation of both

Genesis and Gladstone as possessing a divine knowledge of

Geology.

The Profits of Religion: An Essay in Economic Interpretation · 第 28 / 117 题