a treatise on parents and children-第21部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


The　Impossibility　of　Secular　Education



Now　children　must　be　taught　some　sort　of　religion。　　Secular　education

is　an　impossibility。　　Secular　education　comes　to　this：　　that　the　only

reason　for　ceasing　to　do　evil　and　learning　to　do　well　is　that　if　you

do　not　you　will　be　caned。　　This　is　worse　than　being　taught　in　a　church

school　that　if　you　become　a　dissenter　you　will　go　to　hell；　for　hell　is

presented　as　the　instrument　of　something　eternal；　divine；　and

inevitable：　　you　cannot　evade　it　the　moment　the　schoolmaster's　back　is

turned。　　What　confuses　this　issue　and　leads　even　highly　intelligent

religious　persons　to　advocate　secular　education　as　a　means　of　rescuing

children　from　the　strife　of　rival　proselytizers　is　the　failure　to

distinguish　between　the　child's　personal　subjective　need　for　a

religion　and　its　right　to　an　impartially　communicated　historical

objective　knowledge　of　all　the　creeds　and　Churches。　　Just　as　a　child；

no　matter　what　its　race　and　color　may　be；　should　know　that　there　are

black　men　and　brown　men　and　yellow　men；　and；　no　matter　what　its

political　convictions　may　be；　that　there　are　Monarchists　and

Republicans　and　Positivists；　Socialists　and　Unsocialists；　so　it　should

know　that　there　are　Christians　and　Mahometans　and　Buddhists　and

Shintoists　and　so　forth；　and　that　they　are　on　the　average　just　as

honest　and　well…behaved　as　its　own　father。　　For　example；　it　should　not

be　told　that　Allah　is　a　false　god　set　up　by　the　Turks　and　Arabs；　who

will　all　be　damned　for　taking　that　liberty；　but　it　should　be　told　that

many　English　people　think　so；　and　that　many　Turks　and　Arabs　think　the

converse　about　English　people。　　It　should　be　taught　that　Allah　is

simply　the　name　by　which　God　is　known　to　Turks　and　Arabs；　who　are　just

as　eligible　for　salvation　as　any　Christian。　　Further；　that　the

practical　reason　why　a　Turkish　child　should　pray　in　a　mosque　and　an

English　child　in　a　church　is　that　as　worship　is　organized　in　Turkey　in

mosques　in　the　name　of　Mahomet　and　in　England　in　churches　in　the　name

of　Christ；　a　Turkish　child　joining　the　Church　of　England　or　an　English

child　following　Mahomet　will　find　that　it　has　no　place　for　its　worship

and　no　organization　of　its　religion　within　its　reach。　　Any　other

teaching　of　the　history　and　present　facts　of　religion　is　false

teaching；　and　is　politically　extremely　dangerous　in　an　empire　in　which

a　huge　majority　of　the　fellow　subjects　of　the　governing　island　do　not

profess　the　religion　of　that　island。



But　this　objectivity；　though　intellectually　honest；　tells　the　child

only　what　other　people　believe。　　What　it　should　itself　believe　is

quite　another　matter。　　The　sort　of　Rationalism　which　says　to　a　child

〃You　must　suspend　your　judgment　until　you　are　old　enough　to　choose

your　religion〃　is　Rationalism　gone　mad。　　The　child　must　have　a

conscience　and　a　code　of　honor　（which　is　the　essence　of　religion）　even

if　it　be　only　a　provisional　one；　to　be　revised　at　its　confirmation。

For　confirmation　is　meant　to　signalize　a　spiritual　coming　of　age；　and

may　be　a　repudiation。　　Really　active　souls　have　many　confirmations　and

repudiations　as　their　life　deepens　and　their　knowledge　widens。　　But

what　is　to　guide　the　child　before　its　first　confirmation？　　Not　mere

orders；　because　orders　must　have　a　sanction　of　some　sort　or　why　should

the　child　obey　them？　　If；　as　a　Secularist；　you　refuse　to　teach　any

sanction；　you　must　say　〃You　will　be　punished　if　you　disobey。〃　　〃Yes；〃

says　the　child　to　itself；　〃if　I　am　found　out；　but　wait　until　your　back

is　turned　and　I　will　do　as　I　like；　and　lie　about　it。〃　　There　can　be　no

objective　punishment　for　successful　fraud；　and　as　no　espionage　can

cover　the　whole　range　of　a　child's　conduct；　the　upshot　is　that　the

child　becomes　a　liar　and　schemer　with　an　atrophied　conscience。　　And　a

good　many　of　the　orders　given　to　it　are　not　obeyed　after　all。　　Thus

the　Secularist　who　is　not　a　fool　is　forced　to　appeal　to　the　child's

vital　impulse　towards　perfection；　to　the　divine　spark；　and　no

resolution　not　to　call　this　impulse　an　impulse　of　loyalty　to　the

Fellowship　of　the　Holy　Ghost；　or　obedience　to　the　Will　of　God；　or　any

other　standard　theological　term；　can　alter　the　fact　that　the

Secularist　has　stepped　outside　Secularism　and　is　educating　the　child

religiously；　even　if　he　insists　on　repudiating　that　pious　adverb　and

substituting　the　word　metaphysically。







Natural　Selection　as　a　Religion



We　must　make　up　our　minds　to　it　therefore　that　whatever　measures　we

may　be　forced　to　take　to　prevent　the　recruiting　sergeants　of　the

Churches；　free　or　established；　from　obtaining　an　exclusive　right　of

entry　to　schools；　we　shall　not　be　able　to　exclude　religion　from　them。

The　most　horrible　of　all　religions：　　that　which　teaches　us　to　regard

ourselves　as　the　helpless　prey　of　a　series　of　senseless　accidents

called　Natural　Selection；　is　allowed　and　even　welcomed　in　so…called

secular　schools　because　it　is；　in　a　sense；　the　negation　of　all

religion；　but　for　school　purposes　a　religion　is　a　belief　which　affects

conduct；　and　no　belief　affects　conduct　more　radically　and　often　so

disastrously　as　the　belief　that　the　universe　is　a　product　of　Natural

Selection。　　What　is　more；　the　theory　of　Natural　Selection　cannot　be

kept　out　of　schools；　because　many　of　the　natural　facts　that　present

the　most　plausible　appearance　of　design　can　be　accounted　for　by

Natural　Selection；　and　it　would　be　so　absurd　to　keep　a　child　in

delusive　ignorance　of　so　potent　a　factor　in　evolution　as　to　keep　it　in

ignorance　of　radiation　or　capillary　attraction。　　Even　if　you　make　a

religion　of　Natural　Selection；　and　teach　the　child　to　regard　itself　as

the　irresponsible　prey　of　its　circumstances　and　appetites　（or　its

heredity　as　you　will　perhaps　call　them）；　you　will　none　the　less　find

that　its　appetites　are　stimulated　by　your　encouragement　and　daunted　by

your　discouragement；　that　one　of　its　appetites　is　an　appetite　for

perfection；　that　if　you　discourage　this　appetite　and　encourage　the

cruder　acquisitive　appetites　the　child　will　steal　and　lie　and　be　a

nuisance　to　you；　and　that　if　you　encourage　its　appetite　for　perfection

and　teach　it　to　attach　a　peculiar　sacredness　to　it　and　place　it　before

the　other　appetites；　it　will　be　a　much　nicer　child　and　you　will　have　a

much　easier　job；　at　which　point　you　will；　in　spite　of　your

pseudoscientific　jargon；　find　yourself　back　in　the　old…fashioned

religious　teaching　as　deep　as　Dr。　Watts　and　in　fact　fathoms　deeper。







Moral　Instruction　Leagues



And　now　the　voices　of　our　Moral　Instruction　Leagues　will　be　lifted；

asking　whether　there　is　any　reason　why　the　appetite　for　perfection

should　not　be　cultivated　in　rationally　scientific　terms　instead　of

being　associated　with　the　story　of　Jonah　and　the　great　fish　and　the

thousand　other　tales　that　grow　up　round　religions。　　Yes：　　there　are

many　reasons；　and　one　of　them　is　that　children　all　like　the　story　of

Jonah　and　the　whale　（they　insist　on　its　being　a　whale　in　spite　of

demonstrations　by　Bible　smashers　without　any　sense　of　humor　that　Jonah

would　not　have　fitted　into　a　whale's　gulletas　if　the　story　would　be

credible　of　a　whale　with　an　enlarged　throat）　and　that　no　child　on

earth　can　stand　moral　instruction　books　or　catechisms　or　any　other

statement　of　the　case　for　religion　in　abstract　terms。　　The　object　of　a

moral　instruction　book　is　not　to　be　rational；　scientific；　exact；　proof

against　controversy；　nor　even　credible：　　its　object　is　to　make

children　good；　and　if　it　makes　them　sick　instead　its　place　is　the

waste…paper　basket。



Take　for　an　illustration　the　story　of　Elisha　and　the　bears。　　To　the

authors　of　the　moral　instruction　books　it　is　in　the　last　degree

reprehensible。　　It　is　obviously　not　true　as　a　record　of　fact；　and　the

picture　it　gives　us　of　the　temper　of　God　（which　is　what　interests　an

adult　reader）　is　shocking　and　blasphemous。　　But　it　is　a　capital　story

for　a　child。　　It　interests　a　child　because　it　is　about　bears；　and　it

leaves　the　child　with　an　impression　that　children　who　poke　fun　at　old

gentlemen　and　make　rude　remarks　about　bald　heads　are　not　nice

children；　which　is　a　highly　desirable　impression；　and　just　as　much　as

a　child　is　capable　of　receiving　from　the　story。　　When　a　story　is　about

God　and　a　child；　children　take　God　for　granted　and　criticize　the

child。　　Adults　do　the　opposite；　and　are　thereby　led　to　talk　great

nonsense　about　the　bad　effect　of　Bible　stories　on　infants。



But　let　no　one　think　that　a　child　or　anyone　else　can　learn　religion

from　a　teacher　or　a　book　or　by　any　academic　process　whatever。　　It　is

only　by　an　unfettered　access　to　the　whole　body　of　Fine　Art：　　that　is；

to　the　whole　body　of　inspired　revelation；　that　we　can　build　up　that

conception　of　divinity　to　which　all　virtue　is　an　aspiration。　　And　to

hope　to　find　this　body　of　art　purified　from　all　that　is　obsolete　or

dangerous　or　fierce　or　lusty；　or　to　pick　and　choose　what　will　be　good

for　any　particular　child；　much　less　for　all　children；　is　the

shallowest　of　vanities。　　Such　schoolmasterly　selection　is　neither

possible　nor　desirable。　　Ignorance　of　evil　is　not　virtue　but

imbecility：　　admiring　it　is　like　giving　a　prize　for　honesty　to　a　man

who　has　not　stolen　your　watch　because　he　did　not　know　you　had　one。

Virtue　chooses　good　from　evil；　and　without　knowledge　there　can　be　no

choice。　　And　even　this　is　a　dangerous　simplification　of　what　actually

occurs。　　We　are　not　choosing：　　we　are　growing。　　Were　you　to　cut　all　of

what　you　call　the　evil　out　of　a　child；　it　would　drop　dead。　　If　you　try

to　stretch　it　to　full　human　stature　when　it　is　ten　years　old；　you　will

simply　pull　it　into　two　pieces　and　be　hanged。　　And　when　you　try　to　do

this　morally；　which　is　what　parents　and　schoolmasters　are　doing　every

day；　you　ought　to　be　hanged；　and　some　day；　when　we　take　a　sensible

view　of　the　matter；　you　will　be；　and　serve　you　right。　　The　child　does

not　stand　between　a　good　and　a　bad　angel：　　what　it　has　to　deal　with　is

a　middling　ang