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
Faith in testimony and authority leads to faith in sacred texts and in
the very letter of these texts. This is what one means by _literal_
faith. It exists still in our day, among many civilized people. It
constitutes the basis of the Catholicism of the masses. “In order
to silence restless spirits,” said the council of Trent, “it is
decreed that no one may, in the interpretation of the Scriptures, ...
deviate from the construction sanctioned by the Church, to seek for a
supposedly more exact rendering.” Faith lies thus in a renunciation
of thought, an abdication of liberty; imposes upon itself a rule not
of logic but of morals, and subjects itself to dogmas as to immutable
principles. It restricts intelligence beforehand to precise limits,
and imposes a general direction on it, with instructions not to swerve
from it. It is at this point that faith comes really to be opposed
to scientific belief for which in the beginning it was a substitute.
According to the council of the Vatican, those who have faith do not
believe “because of the intrinsic truth of the things revealed,” but
“because of the divine _authority_ that revealed them.” If you reason
with a person of that stamp, he will listen, understand, and follow
you—but only to a certain point; there he stops, and nothing in the
world can make him go beyond. Or rather from that point he will declare
himself inexpugnable, and will assure you that you have absolutely
no hold on him; and in effect, no scientific or philosophical reason
could turn him from his belief, since he places the object of his
faith in a sphere superior to reason, and makes his faith an affair of
“conscience.” Nothing can force a man to think rightly when he does not
propose rectitude of thought to himself as a supreme aim, and nothing
can oblige him to follow the dictates of reason to the bitter end,
if he believes that the instant he calls certain dogmas and certain
authorities in question he is committing a sin. Thus, faith gives a
certain sacred and inviolable character to what it sanctions,—converts
it into a sacred ark that one may not touch without sacrilege or
danger, neither may one look at it too closely nor touch it with one’s
fingers, even to lend it support now and then when it seems ready
to fall. Free-thought and science never consider a thing as true
except provisionally, and so long as it is not seriously doubted by
someone. Dogmatic faith, on the contrary, affirms as true not only the
things that are uncontested, but those which, according to it, are
conclusively presumed, and therefore above discussion. It follows that,
if reasons for belief diminish, faith must be none the less strong. It
was this that Pascal endeavoured to demonstrate. In effect, the less
a belief seems rational to our finite minds, the more merit there is
in lending credence to “divine authority.” It would be too simple to
believe no more than what one sees or what sounds probable to one; to
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