This, then, is our second requirement for the ideal of progress. First, it
must be fixed; second, it must be composite. It must not (if it is to satisfy our souls) be the mere victory of some one thing swallowing up
everything else, love or pride or peace or adventure; it must be a definite picture composed of these elements in their best proportion and
relation. I am not concerned at this moment to deny that some such good culmination may be, by the constitution of things, reserved for the human
race. I only point out that if this composite happiness is fixed for us it must be fixed by some mind; for only a mind can place the exact
proportions of a composite happiness. If the beatification of the world is a mere work of nature, then it must be as simple as the freezing of the
world, or
the burning up of the world. But if the beatification of the world is not a work of nature but a work of art, then it involves an artist. And here
again my contemplation was cloven by the ancient voice which said, “I could have told you all this a long time ago. If there is any certain
progress it can only be my kind of progress, the progress towards a complete city of virtues and dominations where righteousness and peace
contrive to kiss each other. An impersonal force might be leading you to a wilderness of perfect flatness or a peak of perfect height. But only a
personal God can possibly be leading you (if, indeed, you are being led) to a city with just streets and architectural proportions, a city in which
each of you can contribute exactly the right amount of your own colour to the many coloured coat of Joseph.” Twice again, therefore, Christianity
had come in with the exact answer that I required. I had said, “The ideal must be fixed,” and the Church had answered, “Mine is literally fixed, for
it existed before anything else.” I said secondly, “It must be artistically combined, like a picture”; and the Church answered, “Mine is
quite literally a picture, for I know who painted it.” Then I went on to the third thing, which, as it seemed to me, was needed for an Utopia or
goal of progress. And of all the three it is infinitely the hardest to express. Perhaps it might be put thus: that we need watchfulness even in
Utopia, lest we fall from Utopia as we fell from Eden.
Orthodoxy, first published in 1908, by G. K. Chesterton, is in the public domain, and available from Project Gutenberg. The previous post in this series is here. Thanks for reading! Read Chesterton.
Musings on science, the Bible, and fantastic literature (and sometimes basketball and other stuff).
God speaks to us through the Bible and the findings of science, and we should listen to both types of revelation.
The title is from Psalm 84:11.
The Wikipedia is usually a pretty good reference. I mostly use the World English Bible (WEB), because it is public domain. I am grateful.
License
I have written an e-book, Does the Bible Really Say That?, which is free to anyone. To download that book, in several formats, go here.
The posts in this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You can copy and use this material, as long as you aren't making money from it. If you give me credit, thanks. If not, OK.
The posts in this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You can copy and use this material, as long as you aren't making money from it. If you give me credit, thanks. If not, OK.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Excerpts from Orthodoxy, by G. K. Chesterton, 42
Labels:
Chesterton,
design,
G. K. Chesterton,
God's creation,
origins,
Orthodoxy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment