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
Intolerance is only an outward realization of the tyranny exercised
within by dogmatic faith. Belief in a _revelation_, which all religion
rests upon, is the very opposite of progressive _discovery_; the
instant one affirms that the first exists, the latter becomes useless,
dangerous, and ends in being condemned. Intolerance, first theoretic,
then practical, is the legitimate offspring of absolute faith of every
kind. In all revealed religion doctrine first appears in the form of
_dogma_, then of dogmatic and categorical commandment. There have
always been things that must be believed, and practices that must be
observed, under pain of perdition. The sphere of dogmas and sacred
rites may be widened or narrowed, the discipline may be loose or so
strict that it extends to the very items of one’s diet; but there is
always at least a minimum of dogma that is absolute and of practice
that is rigidly obligatory, without which no truly religious church
could exist. And this is not all. Theological sanction is by its
very nature always in extremes; it presents one with no mean between
absolute good and absolute evil, both conceived as eternal. And this
being granted, how should believers, who are dominated by an exclusive
preoccupation with an ardent and profound faith, hesitate to employ
constraint in case of need when the matter at stake is so great—is of
absolute and eternal good or of absolute and eternal evil? For them the
only value of free-will lies in its use—in its use toward its proper
object, which is the fulfilment of the divine will. In the presence of
an eternity of penalties to be avoided, everything seems permissible;
any means seems good provided it be successful. Possessed of that
implicit certitude which is inseparable from an absolute and explicit
faith, what really enthusiastic soul would hold back before the
employment of force? Accordingly, as a matter of fact, every religion
which is at once new and powerful is intolerant. The appearance of
tolerance marks a decline of faith; a religion which allows for the
existence of another is a religion in decay. One cannot believe
anything “with all one’s heart” without a sentiment of pity and even of
horror for those who believe differently. If I were absolutely certain
of possessing the supreme and ultimate verity, should I hesitate to
turn the world upside-down to make it prevail? One puts blinkers on a
horse to keep him from seeing to the right or left; he looks straight
ahead and runs forward under the whip with the hardiness and vigour of
ignorance; it is in the same fashion that the partisans of an absolute
dogma move through life. “Every positive religion, every immutable
form,” says Benjamin Constant, “leads directly to intolerance,
providing one reasons logically.”
[Sidenote: Use of force as justifiable in a priest as in a physician.]
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