THE CHRISTIAN EPIC
[Sidenote: The essence of the good not adventitious but expressive.]
Revolutions are ambiguous things. Their success is generally
proportionate to their power of adaptation and to the reabsorption
within them of what they rebelled against. A thousand reforms have left
the world as corrupt as ever, for each successful reform has founded a
new institution, and this institution has bred its new and congenial
abuses. What is capable of truly purifying the world is not the mere
agitation of its elements, but their organisation into a natural body
that shall exude what redounds and absorb or generate what is lacking to
the perfect expression of its soul.
Whence fetch this seminal force and creative ideal? It must evidently
lie already in the matter it is to organise; otherwise it would have no
affinity to that matter, no power over it, and no ideality or value in
respect to the existences whose standard and goal it was to be. There
can be no goods antecedent to the natures they benefit, no ideals prior
to the wills they define. A revolution must find its strength and
legitimacy not in the reformer’s conscience and dream but in the temper
of that society which he would transform; for no transformation is
either permanent or desirable which does not forward the spontaneous
life of the world, advancing those issues toward which it is already
inwardly directed. How should a gospel bring glad tidings, save by
announcing what was from the beginning native to the heart?
[Sidenote: A universal religion must interpret the whole world.]
No judgment could well be shallower, therefore, than that which condemns
a great religion for not being faithful to that local and partial
impulse which may first have launched it into the world. A great
religion has something better to consider: the conscience and
imagination of those it ministers to. The prophet who announced it first
was a prophet only because he had a keener sense and clearer premonition
than other men of their common necessities; and he loses his function
and is a prophet no longer when the public need begins to outrun his
intuitions. Could Hebraism spread over the Roman Empire and take the
name of Christianity without adding anything to its native inspiration?
Is it to be lamented that we are not all Jews? Yet what makes the
difference is not the teaching of Jesus—which is pure Hebraism reduced
to its spiritual essence—but the worship of Christ—something perfectly
Greek. Christianity would have remained a Jewish sect had it not been
made at once speculative, universal, and ideal by the infusion of Greek
thought, and at the same time plastic and devotional by the adoption of
pagan habits. The incarnation of God in man, and the divinisation of man
in God are pagan conceptions, expressions of pagan religious sentiment
and philosophy. Yet what would Christianity be without them? It would
have lost not only its theology, which might be spared, but its
spiritual aspiration, its artistic affinities, and the secret of its
metaphysical charity and joy. It would have remained unconscious, as the
Gospel is, that the hand or the mind of man can ever construct anything.
Among the Jews there were no liberal interests for the ideal to express.
They had only elementary human experience—the perpetual Oriental round
of piety and servitude in the bosom of a scorched, exhausted country. A
disillusioned eye, surveying such a world, could find nothing there to
detain it; religion, when wholly spiritual, could do nothing but succour
the afflicted, understand and forgive the sinful, and pass through the
sad pageant of life unspotted and resigned. Its pity for human ills
would go hand in hand with a mystic plebeian insensibility to natural
excellence. It would breathe what Tacitus, thinking of the liberal life,
could call _odium generis humani_; it would be inimical to human genius.
[Sidenote: Double appeal of Christianity.]
There were, we may say, two things in Apostolic teaching which rendered
it capable of converting the world. One was the later Jewish morality
and mysticism, beautifully expressed in Christ’s parables and maxims,
and illustrated by his miracles, those cures and absolutions which he
was ready to dispense, whatever their sins, to such as called upon his
name. This democratic and untrammelled charity could powerfully appeal
to an age disenchanted with the world, and especially to those lower
classes which pagan polity had covered with scorn and condemned to
hopeless misery. The other point of contact which early Christianity had
with the public need was the theme it offered to contemplation, the
philosophy of history which it introduced into the western world, and
the delicious unfathomable mysteries into which it launched the fancy.
Here, too, the figure of Christ was the centre for all eyes. Its
lowliness, its simplicity, its humanity were indeed, for a while,
obstacles to its acceptance; they did not really lend themselves to the
metaphysical interpretation which was required. Yet even Greek fable was
not without its Apollo tending flocks and its Demeter mourning for her
lost child and serving in meek disguise the child of another. Feeling
was ripe for a mythology loaded with pathos. The humble life, the
homilies, the sufferings of Jesus could be felt in all their
incomparable beauty all the more when the tenderness and tragedy of
them, otherwise too poignant, were relieved by the story of his
miraculous birth, his glorious resurrection, and his restored divinity.
[Sidenote: Hebrew metaphors become Greek myths.]
The gospel, thus grown acceptable to the pagan mind, was, however, but a
grain of mustard-seed destined to branch and flower in its new soil in
a miraculous manner. Not only was the Greek and Roman to refresh himself
under its shade, but birds of other climates were to build their nests,
at least for a season, in its branches. Hebraism, when thus expanded and
paganised, showed many new characteristics native to the minds which had
now adopted and transformed it. The Jews, for instance, like other
Orientals, had a figurative way of speaking and thinking; their poetry
and religion were full of the most violent metaphors. Now to the classic
mind violent and improper metaphors were abhorrent. Uniting, as it did,
clear reason with lively fancy, it could not conceive one thing to _be_
another, nor relish the figure of speech that so described it, hoping by
that unthinkable phrase to suggest its affinities. But the classic mind
could well conceive transformation, of which indeed nature is full; and
in Greek fables anything might change its form, become something else,
and display its plasticity, not by imperfectly being many things at
once, but by being the perfection of many things in succession. While
metaphor was thus unintelligible and confusing to the Greek,
metamorphosis was perfectly familiar to him. Wherever Hebrew tradition,
accordingly, used violent metaphors, puzzling to the Greek Christian, he
rationalised them by imagining a metamorphosis instead; thus, for
instance, the metaphors of the Last Supper, so harmless and vaguely
satisfying to an Oriental audience, became the doctrine of
transubstantiation—a doctrine where images are indeed lacking to
illustrate the concepts, but where the concepts themselves are not
confused. For that bread should _become_ flesh and wine blood is not
impossible, seeing that the change occurs daily in digestion; what the
assertion in this case contradicts is merely the evidence of sense.
Thus at many a turn in Christian tradition a metaphysical mystery takes
the place of a poetic figure; the former now expressing by a little
miraculous drama the emotion which the latter expressed by a tentative
phrase. And the emotion is thereby immensely clarified and strengthened;
it is, in fact, for the first time really expressed. For the idea that
Christ stands upon the altar and mingles still with our human flesh is
an explicit assertion that his influence and love are perpetual; whereas
the original parable revealed at most the wish and aspiration, contrary
to fact, that they might have been so. By substituting embodiment for
allegory, the Greek mind thus achieved something very congenial to its
habits: it imagined the full and adequate expression, not in words but
in existences, of the emotion to be conveyed. The Eucharist is to the
Last Supper what a centaur is to a horseman or a tragedy to a song.
Similarly a Dantesque conception of hell and paradise embodies in living
detail the innocent apologue in the gospel about a separation of the
sheep from the goats. The result is a chimerical metaphysics,
containing much which, in reference to existing facts, is absurd; but
that metaphysics, when taken for what it truly is, a new mythology,
utters the subtler secrets of the new religion not less ingeniously and
poetically than pagan mythology reflected the daily shifts in nature and
in human life.
[Sidenote: Hebrew philosophy of history identified with Platonic
cosmology.]
Metaphysics became not only a substitute for allegory but at the same
time a background for history. Neo-Platonism had enlarged, in a way
suited to the speculative demands of the time, the cosmos conceived by
Greek science. In an intelligible region, unknown to cosmography and
peopled at first by the Platonic ideas and afterward by Aristotle’s
solitary God, there was now the Absolute One, too exalted for any
predicates, but manifesting its essence in the first place in a supreme
Intelligence, the second hypostasis of a Trinity; and in the second
place in the Soul of the World, the third hypostasis, already relative
to natural existence. Now the Platonists conceived these entities to be
permanent and immutable; the physical world itself had a meaning and an
expressive value, like a statue, but no significant history. When the
Jewish notion of creation and divine government of the world presented
itself to the Greeks, they hastened to assimilate it to their familiar
notions of imitation, expression, finality, and significance. And when
the Christians spoke of Christ as the Son of God, who now sat at his
right hand in the heavens, their Platonic disciples immediately thought
of the Nous or Logos, the divine Intelligence, incarnate as they had
always believed in the whole world, and yet truly the substance and
essence of divinity. To say that this incarnation had taken place
pre-eminently, or even exclusively, in Christ was not an impossible
concession to make to pious enthusiasm, at least if the philosophy
involved in the old conception could be retained and embodied in the new
orthodoxy. Sacred history could thus be interpreted as a temporal
execution of eternal decrees, and the plan of salvation as an ideal
necessity. Cosmic scope and metaphysical meaning were given to Hebrew
tenets, so unspeculative in their original intention, and it became
possible even for a Platonic philosopher to declare himself a Christian.
[Sidenote: The resulting orthodox system.]
The eclectic Christian philosophy thus engendered constitutes one of the
most complete, elaborate, and impressive products of the human mind. The
ruins of more than one civilisation and of more than one philosophy were
ransacked to furnish materials for this heavenly Byzantium. It was a
myth circumstantial and sober enough in tone to pass for an account of
facts, and yet loaded with enough miracle, poetry, and submerged wisdom
to take the place of a moral philosophy and present what seemed at the
time an adequate ideal to the heart. Many a mortal, in all subsequent
ages, perplexed and abandoned in this ungovernable world, has set sail
resolutely for that enchanted island and found there a semblance of
happiness, its narrow limits give so much room for the soul and its
penitential soil breeds so many consolations. True, the brief time and
narrow argument into which Christian imagination squeezes the world must
seem to a speculative pantheist childish and poor, involving, as it
does, a fatuous perversion of nature and history and a ridiculous
emphasis laid on local events and partial interests. Yet just this
violent reduction of things to a human stature, this half-innocent,
half-arrogant assumption that what is important for a man must control
the whole universe, is what made Christian philosophy originally
appealing and what still arouses, in certain quarters, enthusiastic
belief in its beneficence and finality.
Nor should we wonder at this enduring illusion. Man is still in his
childhood; for he cannot respect an ideal which is not imposed on him
against his will, nor can he find satisfaction in a good created by his
own action. He is afraid of a universe that leaves him alone. Freedom
appals him; he can apprehend in it nothing but tedium and desolation, so
immature is he and so barren does he think himself to be. He has to
imagine what the angels would say, so that his own good impulses (which
create those angels) may gain in authority, and none of the dangers that
surround his poor life make the least impression upon him until he
hears that there are hobgoblins hiding in the wood. His moral life, to
take shape at all, must appear to him in fantastic symbols. The history
of these symbols is therefore the history of his soul.
[Sidenote: The brief drama of things.]
There was in the beginning, so runs the Christian story, a great
celestial King, wise and good, surrounded by a court of winged musicians
and messengers. He had existed from all eternity, but had always
intended, when the right moment should come, to create temporal beings,
imperfect copies of himself in various degrees. These, of which man was
the chief, began their career in the year 4004 B.C., and they would live
on an indefinite time, possibly, that chronological symmetry might not
be violated, until A.D. 4004. The opening and close of this drama were
marked by two magnificent tableaux. In the first, in obedience to the
word of God, sun, moon, and stars, and earth with all her plants and
animals, assumed their appropriate places, and nature sprang into being
with all her laws. The first man was made out of clay, by a special act
of God, and the first woman was fashioned from one of his ribs,
extracted while he lay in a deep sleep. They were placed in an orchard
where they often could see God, its owner, walking in the cool of the
evening. He suffered them to range at will and eat of all the fruits he
had planted save that of one tree only. But they, incited by a devil,
transgressed this single prohibition, and were banished from that
paradise with a curse upon their head, the man to live by the sweat of
his brow and the woman to bear children in labour. These children
possessed from the moment of conception the inordinate natures which
their parents had acquired. They were born to sin and to find disorder
and death everywhere within and without them.
At the same time God, lest the work of his hands should wholly perish,
promised to redeem in his good season some of Adam’s children and
restore them to a natural life. This redemption was to come ultimately
through a descendant of Eve, whose foot should bruise the head of the
serpent. But it was to be prefigured by many partial and special
redemptions. Thus, Noah was to be saved from the deluge, Lot from Sodom,
Isaac from the sacrifice, Moses from Egypt, the captive Jews from
Babylon, and all faithful souls from heathen forgetfulness and idolatry.
For a certain tribe had been set apart from the beginning to keep alive
the memory of God’s judgments and promises, while the rest of mankind,
abandoned to its natural depravity, sank deeper and deeper into crimes
and vanities. The deluge that came to punish these evils did not avail
to cure them. “The world was renewed[A] and the earth rose again above
the bosom of the waters, but in this renovation there remained eternally
some trace of divine vengeance. Until the deluge all nature had been
exceedingly hardy and vigorous, but by that vast flood of water which
God had spread out over the earth, and by its long abiding there, all
saps were diluted; the air, charged with too dense and heavy a moisture,
bred ranker principles of corruption. The early constitution of the
universe was weakened, and human life, from stretching as it had
formerly done to near a thousand years, grew gradually briefer. Herbs
and roots lost their primitive potency and stronger food had to be
furnished to man by the flesh of other animals.... Death gained upon
life and men felt themselves overtaken by a speedier chastisement. As
day by day they sank deeper in their wickedness, it was but right they
should daily, as it were, stick faster in their woe. The very change in
nourishment made manifest their decline and degradation, since as they
became feebler they became also more voracious and blood-thirsty.”
Henceforth there were two spirits, two parties, or, as Saint Augustine
called them, two cities in the world. The City of Satan, whatever its
artifices in art, war, or philosophy, was essentially corrupt and
impious. Its joy was but a comic mask and its beauty the whitening of a
sepulchre. It stood condemned before God and before man’s better
conscience by its vanity, cruelty, and secret misery, by its ignorance
of all that it truly behoved a man to know who was destined to
immortality. Lost, as it seemed, within this Babylon, or visible only
in its obscure and forgotten purlieus, lived on at the same time the
City of God, the society of all the souls God predestined to salvation;
a city which, however humble and inconspicuous it might seem on earth,
counted its myriad transfigured citizens in heaven, and had its
destinies, like its foundations, in eternity. To this City of God
belonged, in the first place, the patriarchs and the prophets who,
throughout their plaintive and ardent lives, were faithful to what
echoes still remained of a primeval revelation, and waited patiently for
the greater revelation to come. To the same city belonged the magi who
followed a star till it halted over the stable in Bethlehem; Simeon, who
divined the present salvation of Israel; John the Baptist, who bore
witness to the same and made straight its path; and Peter, to whom not
flesh and blood, but the spirit of the Father in heaven, revealed the
Lord’s divinity. For salvation had indeed come with the fulness of time,
not, as the carnal Jews had imagined it, in the form of an earthly
restoration, but through the incarnation of the Son of God in the Virgin
Mary, his death upon a cross, his descent into hell, and his
resurrection at the third day according to the Scriptures. To the same
city belonged finally all those who, believing in the reality and
efficacy of Christ’s mission, relied on his merits and followed his
commandment of unearthly love.
All history was henceforth essentially nothing but the conflict between
these two cities; two moralities, one natural, the other supernatural;
two philosophies, one rational, the other revealed; two beauties, one
corporeal, the other spiritual; two glories, one temporal, the other
eternal; two institutions, one the world, the other the Church. These,
whatever their momentary alliances or compromises, were radically
opposed and fundamentally alien to one another. Their conflict was to
fill the ages until, when wheat and tares had long flourished together
and exhausted between them the earth for whose substance they struggled,
the harvest should come; the terrible day of reckoning when those who
had believed the things of religion to be imaginary would behold with
dismay the Lord visibly coming down through the clouds of heaven, the
angels blowing their alarming trumpets, all generations of the dead
rising from their graves, and judgment without appeal passed on every
man, to the edification of the universal company and his own unspeakable
joy or confusion. Whereupon the blessed would enter eternal bliss with
God their master and the wicked everlasting torments with the devil whom
they served.
The drama of history was thus to close upon a second tableau: long-robed
and beatified cohorts passing above, amid various psalmodies, into an
infinite luminous space, while below the damned, howling, writhing, and
half transformed into loathsome beasts, should be engulfed in a fiery
furnace. The two cities, always opposite in essence, should thus be
finally divided in existence, each bearing its natural fruits and
manifesting its true nature.
Let the reader fill out this outline for himself with its thousand
details; let him remember the endless mysteries, arguments, martyrdoms,
consecrations that carried out the sense and made vital the beauty of
the whole. Let him pause before the phenomenon; he can ill afford, if he
wishes to understand history or the human mind, to let the apparition
float by unchallenged without delivering up its secret. What shall we
say of this Christian dream?
[Sidenote: Mythology is a language and must be understood to convey
something by symbols.]
Those who are still troubled by the fact that this dream is by many
taken for a reality, and who are consequently obliged to defend
themselves against it, as against some dangerous error in science or in
philosophy, may be allowed to marshal arguments in its disproof. Such,
however, is not my intention. Do we marshal arguments against the
miraculous birth of Buddha, or the story of Cronos devouring his
children? We seek rather to honour the piety and to understand the
poetry embodied in those fables. If it be said that those fables are
believed by no one, I reply that those fables are or have been believed
just as unhesitatingly as the Christian theology, and by men no less
reasonable or learned than the unhappy apologists of our own ancestral
creeds. Matters of religion should never be matters of controversy. We
neither argue with a lover about his taste, nor condemn him, if we are
just, for knowing so human a passion. That he harbours it is no
indication of a want of sanity on his part in other matters. But while
we acquiesce in his experience, and are glad he has it, we need no
arguments to dissuade us from sharing it. Each man may have his own
loves, but the object in each case is different. And so it is, or should
be, in religion. Before the rise of those strange and fraudulent Hebraic
pretensions there was no question among men about the national,
personal, and poetic character of religious allegiance. It could never
have been a duty to adopt a religion not one’s own any more than a
language, a coinage, or a costume not current in one’s own country. The
idea that religion contains a literal, not a symbolic, representation of
truth and life is simply an impossible idea. Whoever entertains it has
not come within the region of profitable philosophising on that subject.
His science is not wide enough to cover all existence. He has not
discovered that there can be no moral allegiance except to the ideal.
His certitude and his arguments are no more pertinent to the religious
question than would be the insults, blows, and murders to which, if he
could, he would appeal in the next instance. Philosophy may describe
unreason, as it may describe force; it cannot hope to refute them.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote A: Bossuet: Discours sur l’histoire universelle, Part II,
Chap. I.]