The Non-religion of the Future: A Sociological StudyGuyau, Jean-Marie
Religion
The Non-religion of the Future: A Sociological Study
Guyau, Jean-Marie
Irreligion and sociology; Religion; Social sciences
[43] It has been remarked that peoples who for centuries
have renounced anthropophagy have long persisted in human
sacrifices: that thousands of women in certain sanctuaries
have offered the painful sacrifices of their chastity to gods
of a furious sensuality. The gods of paganism are dissolute,
arbitrary, vindictive, pitiless, and still their adorers
rise little by little to a conception of moral purity, of
clemency, and of justice. Javeh is vindictive and ferocious,
and yet it is in the midst of his people that the religion
_par excellence_ of benignity and forgiveness took its rise.
Also the real morality of men was never proportionate to the
frequently fanatic intensity of their religious sentiments. See
M. Réville (_Prolégomènes_, p. 281).
[Sidenote: Religion much less moral than society.]
If one stops to recollect that moral laws are in a great measure
the expression of the very necessities of human life, and that the
generality of certain rules is due to the uniformity of the conditions
of life on the surface of the globe, one will understand why it was
that one’s relations to the gods, that is to say to creatures of
the imagination, were not dominated so directly as one’s relations
to one’s fellow-men by the exigencies of practical life, but were
regulated by much more variable and fantastic laws containing often
a visible germ of immorality. The divine society was an imaginary
extension of human society, not an imaginative perfection of it. It was
physical fear, _timor_, and not moral reverence, which gave being to
the first gods. The human imagination, labouring thus under the empire
of fear, naturally gave birth to a prodigy more often than to an ideal.
For the primitive conscience, as for primitive art, the distinction
between the great and the monstrous was by no means sufficiently
marked. The germ of immorality, therefore, not less than of morality
lies at the root of every religion. Once more, it would be an error to
believe that religions are immoral in that they are anthropomorphic, or
sociomorphic; rather the contrary is true, they are not moral except
in so far as they are sociomorphic. Mutilation, for example, cruelty,
obscenity are foreign to the conceptions which dominate human conduct.
One may verify in every religion what is observed in Christianity,
that the truly moral God is precisely the man-God, Jesus, whereas God
the Father, who pitilessly sacrifices his own son, is anti-human and
immoral, precisely in that he is superhuman.
[Sidenote: Summary.]
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