symbol　of　this　epochthe　man　who　is　theoretically　a　practical　man；
  and　practically　more　unpractical　than　any　theorist。　　Nothing　in　this
  universe　is　so　unwise　as　that　kind　of　worship　of　worldly　wisdom。
  A　man　who　is　perpetually　thinking　of　whether　this　race　or　that　race
  is　strong；　of　whether　this　cause　or　that　cause　is　promising；　is　the　man
  who　will　never　believe　in　anything　long　enough　to　make　it　succeed。
  The　opportunist　politician　is　like　a　man　who　should　abandon　billiards
  because　he　was　beaten　at　billiards；　and　abandon　golf　because　he　was
  beaten　at　golf。　　There　is　nothing　which　is　so　weak　for　working
  purposes　as　this　enormous　importance　attached　to　immediate　victory。
  There　is　nothing　that　fails　like　success。
  And　having　discovered　that　opportunism　does　fail；　I　have　been　induced
  to　look　at　it　more　largely；　and　in　consequence　to　see　that　it　must　fail。
  I　perceive　that　it　is　far　more　practical　to　begin　at　the　beginning
  and　discuss　theories。　　I　see　that　the　men　who　killed　each　other
  about　the　orthodoxy　of　the　Homoousion　were　far　more　sensible
  than　the　people　who　are　quarrelling　about　the　Education　Act。
  For　the　Christian　dogmatists　were　trying　to　establish　a　reign　of　holiness；
  and　trying　to　get　defined；　first　of　all；　what　was　really　holy。
  But　our　modern　educationists　are　trying　to　bring　about　a　religious
  liberty　without　attempting　to　settle　what　is　religion　or　what
  is　liberty。　　If　the　old　priests　forced　a　statement　on　mankind；
  at　least　they　previously　took　some　trouble　to　make　it　lucid。
  It　has　been　left　for　the　modern　mobs　of　Anglicans　and　Nonconformists
  to　persecute　for　a　doctrine　without　even　stating　it。
  For　these　reasons；　and　for　many　more；　I　for　one　have　come
  to　believe　in　going　back　to　fundamentals。　　Such　is　the　general
  idea　of　this　book。　　I　wish　to　deal　with　my　most　distinguished
  contemporaries；　not　personally　or　in　a　merely　literary　manner；
  but　in　relation　to　the　real　body　of　doctrine　which　they　teach。
  I　am　not　concerned　with　Mr。　Rudyard　Kipling　as　a　vivid　artist
  or　a　vigorous　personality；　I　am　concerned　with　him　as　a　Heretic
  that　is　to　say；　a　man　whose　view　of　things　has　the　hardihood
  to　differ　from　mine。　　I　am　not　concerned　with　Mr。　Bernard　Shaw
  as　one　of　the　most　brilliant　and　one　of　the　most　honest　men　alive；
  I　am　concerned　with　him　as　a　Hereticthat　is　to　say；　a　man　whose
  philosophy　is　quite　solid；　quite　coherent；　and　quite　wrong。
  I　revert　to　the　doctrinal　methods　of　the　thirteenth　century；
  inspired　by　the　general　hope　of　getting　something　done。
  Suppose　that　a　great　commotion　arises　in　the　street　about　something；
  let　us　say　a　lamp…post；　which　many　influential　persons　desire　to
  pull　down。　　A　grey…clad　monk；　who　is　the　spirit　of　the　Middle　Ages；
  is　approached　upon　the　matter；　and　begins　to　say；　in　the　arid　manner
  of　the　Schoolmen；　〃Let　us　first　of　all　consider；　my　brethren；
  the　value　of　Light。　　If　Light　be　in　itself　good〃　At　this　point
  he　is　somewhat　excusably　knocked　down。　　All　the　people　make　a　rush
  for　the　lamp…post；　the　lamp…post　is　down　in　ten　minutes；　and　they　go
  about　congratulating　each　other　on　their　unmediaeval　practicality。
  But　as　things　go　on　they　do　not　work　out　so　easily。　　Some　people
  have　pulled　the　lamp…post　down　because　they　wanted　the　electric　light；
  some　because　they　wanted　old　iron；　some　because　they　wanted　darkness；
  because　their　deeds　were　evil。　　Some　thought　it　not　enough　of　a
  lamp…post；　some　too　much；　some　acted　because　they　wanted　to　smash
  municipal　machinery；　some　because　they　wanted　to　smash　something。
  And　there　is　war　in　the　night；　no　man　knowing　whom　he　strikes。
  So；　gradually　and　inevitably；　to…day；　to…morrow；　or　the　next　day；
  there　comes　back　the　conviction　that　the　monk　was　right　after　all；
  and　that　all　depends　on　what　is　the　philosophy　of　Light。
  Only　what　we　might　have　discussed　under　the　gas…lamp；　we　now　must
  discuss　in　the　dark。
  II。　　On　the　negative　spirit
  Much　has　been　said；　and　said　truly；　of　the　monkish　morbidity；
  of　the　hysteria　which　as　often　gone　with　the　visions　of　hermits　or　nuns。
  But　let　us　never　forget　that　this　visionary　religion　is；　in　one　sense；
  necessarily　more　wholesome　than　our　modern　and　reasonable　morality。
  It　is　more　wholesome　for　this　reason；　that　it　can　contemplate　the　idea
  of　success　or　triumph　in　the　hopeless　fight　towards　the　ethical　ideal；
  in　what　Stevenson　called；　with　his　usual　startling　felicity；
  〃the　lost　fight　of　virtue。〃　　A　modern　morality；　on　the　other　hand；
  can　only　point　with　absolute　conviction　to　the　horrors　that　follow
  breaches　of　law；　its　only　certainty　is　a　certainty　of　ill。
  It　can　only　point　to　imperfection。　　It　has　no　perfection　to　point　to。
  But　the　monk　meditating　upon　Christ　or　Buddha　has　in　his　mind
  an　image　of　perfect　health；　a　thing　of　clear　colours　and　clean　air。
  He　may　contemplate　this　ideal　wholeness　and　happiness　far　more　than　he　ought；
  he　may　contemplate　it　to　the　neglect　of　exclusion　of　essential　THINGS
  he　may　contemplate　it　until　he　has　become　a　dreamer　or　a　driveller；
  but　still　it　is　wholeness　and　happiness　that　he　is　contemplating。
  He　may　even　go　mad；　but　he　is　going　mad　for　the　love　of　sanity。
  But　the　modern　student　of　ethics；　even　if　he　remains　sane；　remains　sane
  from　an　insane　dread　of　insanity。
  The　anchorite　rolling　on　the　stones　in　a　frenzy　of　submission
  is　a　healthier　person　fundamentally　than　many　a　sober　man
  in　a　silk　hat　who　is　walking　down　Cheapside。　　For　many
  such　are　good　only　through　a　withering　knowledge　of　evil。
  I　am　not　at　this　moment　claiming　for　the　devotee　anything
  more　than　this　primary　advantage；　that　though　he　may　be　making
  himself　personally　weak　and　miserable；　he　is　still　fixing
  his　thoughts　largely　on　gigantic　strength　and　happiness；
  on　a　strength　that　has　no　limits；　and　a　happiness　that　has　no　end。
  Doubtless　there　are　other　objections　which　can　be　urged　without
  unreason　against　the　influence　of　gods　and　visions　in　morality；
  whether　in　the　cell　or　street。　　But　this　advantage　the　mystic
  morality　must　always　haveit　is　always　jollier。　　A　young　man
  may　keep　himself　from　vice　by　continually　thinking　of　disease。
  He　may　keep　himself　from　it　also　by　continually　thinking　of
  the　Virgin　Mary。　　There　may　be　question　about　which　method　is
  the　more　reasonable；　or　even　about　which　is　the　more　efficient。
  But　surely　there　can　be　no　question　about　which　is　the　more　wholesome。
  I　remember　a　pamphlet　by　that　able　and　sincere　secularist；
  Mr。　G。　W。　Foote；　which　contained　a　phrase　sharply　symbolizing　and
  dividing　these　two　methods。　　The　pamphlet　was　called　BEER　AND　BIBLE；
  those　two　very　noble　things；　all　the　nobler　for　a　conjunction　which
  Mr。　Foote；　in　his　stern　old　Puritan　way；　seemed　to　think　sardonic；
  but　which　I　confess　to　thinking　appropriate　and　charming。
  I　have　not　the　work　by　me；　but　I　remember　that　Mr。　Foote　dismissed
  very　contemptuously　any　attempts　to　deal　with　the　problem
  of　strong　drink　by　religious　offices　or　intercessions；　and　said
  that　a　picture　of　a　drunkard's　liver　would　be　more　efficacious
  in　the　matter　of　temperance　than　any　prayer　or　praise。
  In　that　picturesque　expression；　it　seems　to　me；　is　perfectly
  embodied　the　incurable　morbidity　of　modern　ethics。
  In　that　temple　the　lights　are　low；　the　crowds　kneel；　the　solemn
  anthems　are　uplifted。　　But　that　upon　the　altar　to　which　all　men
  kneel　is　no　longer　the　perfect　flesh；　the　body　and　substance
  of　the　perfect　man；　it　is　still　flesh；　but　it　is　diseased。
  It　is　the　drunkard's　liver　of　the　New　Testament　that　is　marred
  for　us；　which　which　we　take　in　remembrance　of　him。
  Now；　it　is　this　great　gap　in　modern　ethics；　the　absence　of　vivid
  pictures　of　purity　and　spiritual　triumph；　which　lies　at　the　back
  of　the　real　objection　felt　by　so　many　sane　men　to　the　realistic
  literature　of　the　nineteenth　century。　　If　any　ordinary　man　ever
  said　that　he　was　horrified　by　the　subjects　discussed　in　Ibsen
  or　Maupassant；　or　by　the　plain　language　in　which　they　are　spoken　of；
  that　ordinary　man　was　lying。　　The　average　conversation　of　average
  men　throughout　the　whole　of　modern　civilization　in　every　class
  or　trade　is　such　as　Zola　would　never　dream　of　printing。
  Nor　is　the　habit　of　writing　thus　of　these　things　a　new　habit。
  On　the　contrary；　it　is　the　Victorian　prudery　and　silence　which　is
  new　still；　though　it　is　already　dying。　　The　tradition　of　calling
  a　spade　a　spade　starts　very　early　in　our　literature　and　comes
  down　very　late。