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
knowledge one finds less and less ground for indignation in the conduct
of one’s fellow-men. When the being involved is by definition the very
personification of love the idea of offence becomes ridiculous; it is
impossible for any philosophic mind to admit the bare conception of
offending God, or of drawing down upon one, in the Biblical phrase,
his anger or his vengeance. Fear of an external sanction, or of any
sanction other than that of conscience, is therefore an element that
the progress of the modern mind tends to exclude from morality. It is
in vain for the Bible to say that fear of the Lord is the beginning
of wisdom; morality does not truly begin until fear ceases to exist,
fear being, as Kant said, pathological, not moral. Fear of hell may
have possessed in former times a certain social utility, but it is
essentially a stranger in modern society, and, _a fortiori_, will be
in the society of the future. Moreover, respect for the happiness
of people in general is becoming less and less adulterated by any
admixture of fear. This respect, mingled with love and even engendered
by love, is coming to be an altogether moral, and an altogether
philosophic sentiment, purified of anything in the nature of mysticism,
and in the best sense religious.
[62] See the author’s _Esquisse d’une morale sans obligation ni
sanction_, p. 188, etc.
[63] “If God had consciously created the human will of such
essential perversity as to find its natural expression in
thwarting Him, He would be impotent in the face of it; could
only show Himself compassionate; could only regret His own act
in creating it. His duty would not be to punish mankind but
to the utmost possible degree to lighten their sufferings, to
show Himself gentle and good directly in proportion to this
evil; and the damned, if they were truly incurable, would be in
greater need of the joys of heaven than the elect themselves.
Either the sinner can be reclaimed; and in that event hell
would be nothing more than an immense school, an immense house
of correction for preparing the culpable with the utmost
possible rapidity for heaven; or the sinner is incorrigible,
is analogous to an incurable maniac (which is absurd), and
then he is eternally to be pitied and a supreme Goodness would
endeavour to compensate him for his misery by every imaginable
means by showering upon him every bliss that he was capable of
enjoying. Turn it as one will, the dogma of hell stands thus in
direct opposition to the truth.
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