Apologetics; Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith), 1874-1936; Christianity -- Essence, genius, nature
Now, it is the peculiar honour of Europe since it has been Christian
that while it has had aristocracy it has always at the back of its heart
treated aristocracy as a weakness--generally as a weakness that must be
allowed for. If any one wishes to appreciate this point, let him go
outside Christianity into some other philosophical atmosphere. Let him,
for instance, compare the classes of Europe with the castes of India.
There aristocracy is far more awful, because it is far more
intellectual. It is seriously felt that the scale of classes is a scale
of spiritual values; that the baker is better than the butcher in an
invisible and sacred sense. But no Christianity, not even the most
ignorant or perverse, ever suggested that a baronet was better than a
butcher in that sacred sense. No Christianity, however ignorant or
extravagant, ever suggested that a duke would not be damned. In pagan
society there may have been (I do not know) some such serious division
between the free man and the slave. But in Christian society we have
always thought the gentleman a sort of joke, though I admit that in some
great crusades and councils he earned the right to be called a practical
joke. But we in Europe never really and at the root of our souls took
aristocracy seriously. It is only an occasional non-European alien (such
as Dr. Oscar Levy, the only intelligent Nietzscheite) who can even
manage for a moment to take aristocracy seriously. It may be a mere
patriotic bias, though I do not think so, but it seems to me that the
English aristocracy is not only the type, but is the crown and flower of
all actual aristocracies; it has all the oligarchical virtues as well as
all the defects. It is casual, it is kind, it is courageous in obvious
matters; but it has one great merit that overlaps even these. The great
and very obvious merit of the English aristocracy is that nobody could
possibly take it seriously.
In short, I had spelled out slowly, as usual, the need for an equal law
in Utopia; and, as usual, I found that Christianity had been there
before me. The whole history of my Utopia has the same amusing sadness.
I was always rushing out of my architectural study with plans for a new
turret only to find it sitting up there in the sunlight, shining, and a
thousand years old. For me, in the ancient and partly in the modern
sense, God answered the prayer, "Prevent us, O Lord, in all our doings."
Without vanity, I really think there was a moment when I could have
invented the marriage vow (as an institution) out of my own head; but I
discovered, with a sigh, that it had been invented already. But, since
it would be too long a business to show how, fact by fact and inch by
inch, my own conception of Utopia was only answered in the New
Jerusalem, I will take this one case of the matter of marriage as
indicating the converging drift, I may say the converging crash of all
the rest.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account