THE RENASCENCE OF HERESIES.
IT is not in human nature to remain long contented with a social or political creed or policy, and sit in virtuous acquiescence without thought of questioning. Not in Western nature, at least, though in the East, where things are measured not by years but by generations, there is some chance of such a Nirvana. A doctrine, let us say, is established after a hard struggle. For a little it commands the enthusiastic devotion of its followers; there is no thought of criticism because the living realities of the struggle which gave it birth are still fresh in men's memories. But a new generation arises which has forgotten the struggle, or remembers it only among other vague historical origins. The doctrine seems a dull thing, a fit object for ambitions youth to have a fling at. So it becomes the fashion to speak disrespectfully of the Equator, or sneer at the North Pole, among persons who have a reputation to make. Then one fine day a real iconoclast arises who declares that the doctrine is not only antiquated and futile, but positively wicked ; and he summons his friends, and they do their best to have the thing de- stroyed root and branch. But all the noise has wakened a few older memories in people's minds. They remember to have heard from their fathers how the doctrine came Ito be; and the natural conservatism of mankind disinclines them to get rid of anything without a careful study of the why and the wherefore. And so the whole fight is fought over again, and the doctrine, if it is really valuable, emerges in better repute than ever, and its critics are cast out of the synagogue. Such is the old story of the genesis of heresies. Mankind must every little while go through the ceremony of stoning the prophets, and when they have almost made an end of them, taking them back to their arms, and paying more heed to their prophecies than before. Our Sinaitic dogmas must have their letters recut every now and then ; otherwise they will get so encrusted with moss that they will become more like old boulders than tablets of the law, and youth will have no respect for them. A little doubt is a wholesome thing if it drives us to rethink the reasons of our faith ; and if it abolishes the faith alto- gether, why then it is a most wholesome, though undoubtedly painful, thing to get rid of a faith which is so very unsub- stantial.
It is worth while looking at the mental process involved in the revival of old heresies. Some creeds must at any given time occupy a place in the foreground of men's minds, but a large number must remain in the background. The latter have lost their immediate application, no issue has to be faced which involves them, so they remain pious opinions, defended, if attacked, by the ingrained conservatism of man. They are held half-heartedly, and attacked rather with sarcasm than frank opposition. But sooner or later comes youth looking for something to tilt against, and descries these venerable dogmas. To many men doubt is per se an intellectual duty, and to question something which all admit is the sign of a superior mind. So in place of a vague and careless general acceptance, an atmosphere of distrust is created. People talk darkly of the follies of their grandfathers, and by contrast bask in a consciousness of superior acumen. It
becomes highly unfashionable to suggest that the old doctrine may be right, and the superficial observer would assume that it had gone for ever. And then comes some event which involves the question, the old struggle is resumed, and the result is that the heresy is vanquished and orthodoxy
established, till another cycle of doubt sets in. This is not the process which is the basis of all human progress, by which one doctrine serves its day and then gives place to another, which contains and amplifies whatever of value belonged to its predecessor. Still less is it the case where some pretentious bogey has imposed on mankind for long, till' a little simple scepticism overthrows it. We are dealing with the case where the dogma is right and valuable, the criticism wrong and worthless; but it will be found that the
atmosphere of scepticism is as pervasive in one case as in the others.
History is full of examples of abortive sceptical move- ments. There is an essay by Nassau Senior in the
Edinburgh Review so far back as 1844 in which he analyst.* very clearly the nature of such revolts. He is writing of the first recoil after the inauguration of Free-trade, but his analysis is as true of other crusades. The passage deserves quotation :—
" In the Moral Sciences the ground seems never to be inCot- testably won ; and this is peculiarly the case with respect to the sciences which are subsidiary to the arts of administration and legislation The policy founded upon the refuted error is relaxed, and the evils which it inflicted, so far as they are capable of remedy, are removed or mitigated. After a time new theoriste arise, who are seduced or impelled by some moral or intellectual defect or error to reassert the exploded doctrine. They have become entangled by some logical fallacy, or deceived by some inaccurate or incomplete assumption - of facts, or think that they see the means of acquiring reputation, or of promoting their interests, or of gratifying their political or private resentments, by attacking the altered policy. All popular errors are plausible ; indeed, if they were not so, they would not be popular. The plausibility, to which the revived doctrine owed its original currency, makes it acceptable to those to whom the subject is new; and even among those to whom it is familiar, probably ninety-nine out of every hundred are accustomed to take their opinions on such matters on trust.
They hear with surprise that what they supposed to be settled is questioned, and often avoid the trouble of enquiring, by en- deavouring to believe that the truth is not to be ascertained.
And thus the cause has again to be pleaded before judges, some of whom are prejudiced, and others will not readily attend to reasoning founded on premises which they think nnsusceptible of proof."
Every little while some gentleman makes a brief reputation by reviving the doctrine of the divine right of Kings, or the Baconian authorship of Shakespeare, or some other prehistoric heresy; and the case for orthodoxy has to be reargued. The root of the revival is commonly paradox. To say that Plato was an impostor, or that Nero and Tiberius were statesmen of the first order, is to make certain of a kind of hearing. The ordinary man is pulled up short and compelled to consider what is his real opinion on the matter. Considerable temporary reputations have been built up on a denial of the worth of Shakespeare, or an assertion of the transcendent merits of some obscure poetaster. But paradox apart, there are a good many heresies mooted for more serious reasons, vanity, irritation, or mere confusion of mind. It is impossible to set up any image on a pillar without exciting in a part of mankind an insane desire to knock it down.
On the whole, perhaps, it does less harm than good. If a few waverers are led astray by a fashionable fallacy, ortho- doxy is as well rid of them. No principle of value will remain long overthrown by such an assault. And there is one result which is wholly beneficial. A heretical propaganda compels men to find reasons for the faith which is in them, to rethink the grounds of their belief. Dogmas which have long lain in the lumber-rooms of their mind are pulled into the clear light of day, and the whole system of a man's know- ledge is put in order. Heresies are, indeed, the scavengers of thought, clearing away only what is of little importance, and leaving the world a little cleaner for their unwelcome presence.
Previous page
