第53章

teachingofpriestscannotbetheultimatecauseofmoralimprovement。Yetnoone，itmightbesupposed，couldexplainthehistoryofthewarlikesentimentinEuropewithouttakingintoaccounttheinfluenceembodiedinthechurch。ThattheCatholicchurchrepresentedagreatprincipleofcohesion；thatitwasanorganisationwhichenabledthemenofintellecttoexerciseaninfluenceoversemi-barbarouswarriors，areadmittedfactswhichthehistorianisatleastboundtoconsider。Atwhateverperiodthebodymayhavebecomecorrupt，itisanessentialfactinthesocialprocesseswhichprecededtheinventionofgunpowder，andcertainlythediscoveriesofWattandAdamSmith。Buckle，asarule，treatsthechurchsimplyasanupholderofsuperstition。Heridiculesthehistorianswhobelievedinabsurdmiraclesin’whatarerightlytermedthedarkages，’(52*)anddeclaressummarilythat’untildoubtbegan，progresswasimpossible。’YetBucklewouldcertainlyhaveadmittedthattherewassomeprogressbetweentheheptarchyandthereformation。

Thetruthwhichhismethodcompelshimtoneglectseemstobeobvious。Themovementofreligiousthoughtrepresentsforcesnottobemeasuredbythequantityofeffetesuperstitionswhichitcontains。Thereligioncorrespondstothedevelopmentoftheinstinctswhichdeterminethewholesocialstructure。Thegeneralmoralaxioms——loveyourneighbour，andsoforth——may，asBuckleurges，remainunaltered；butthechangeintheidealsoflifeandthewholeattitudeofmentoeachothertakesplaceinthereligioussphere。IfChristianitydoesnotcorrespondtoaforceimposedfromwithout，itmaystillcorrespondtotheprocessesofthoughtbywhichsympathyhasextendedandmenbeendrawnintocomparativeunityandharmony。Totreatthepowerofreligionassimplyaproductofignorantsuperstitionistobeunabletounderstandthehistoryoftheworld。SomuchBucklemighthavelearnedfromComteinspiteofthelatervagariesofpositivism。

AnothercollateralconclusionmarksBuckle’sposition。Asahistorianofpoliticalprogressheisconstantlydwellingupontheimportanceofindividualaction。ThetolerantpolicyofRichelieu，thedespoticsystemofLouisXIV，andsoforth，arethegreataidsorimpedimentstohumanprogress。Howisthisreconcilablewiththedoctrinesthatindividualactionisnothingandthespontaneousgrowthofknowledgeeverything？Inanswerwearereferredtothegreatgeneralcauses，ortotheprotectivespiritorthespiritoftheage，whichreallygovernthewholeprocessinspiteofsuperficialandtransitorycauses。Whatpreciselyismeantbytheseabstractions？Towhatdoestheprotectivespiritinpoliticsoweitsmalignpersistence？What，inshort，isthesourceandtruenatureofthepowerofgovernment？Theansweris，thattoSuckle，astotheUtilitarians，governmentrepresentsakindofexternalforce；

somethingimposeduponthepeoplefromwithout；a’sovereign，’inAustin’ssense，whocanneveroriginateorimpel，thoughhecancoerceandsuppress。HechoosesthehistoryofEnglandforhissubject，ashetellsus，becauseEnglandhasbeen’lessaffectedthananyothercountrybythetwomainsourcesofinterference，namely，theauthorityofgovernmentandtheinfluenceofforeigners。’(53*)Botharetreatedas’interferences’fromwithout，whichdistortthenaturaldevelopment。Englishhistoryisinterestingnotbecauseitspoliticalconstitutionisamostcharacteristicoutgrowthofitssocialstate，butbecauseallgovernmentissimplyaninterference，andinEnglandhashadaminimuminfluence。Consistentlywiththis，heattackstheopinionthatprogresshaseverbeenduetogovernment。Governmentis，ofcourse，necessarytopunishcrimeandpreventanarchy；(54*)butevenitssuccessfuleffortsare’altogethernegative’；and，evenwhereitsintentionshavebeengood，ithasbeengenerallyinjurious。Briefly，governmentispowerfulforevil，andtheoneprincipleisthatrulersshouldhavea’verylittle’powerandexerciseit’verysparingly。’(55*)Attimesheisinclinedtodenyallinfluencetogovernment。SpeakingofScotland，heremarksthatthoughbadgovernmentcanbeextremelyinjuriousforatime，itcan’producenopermanentmischief。’(56*)’Solongasthepeoplearesound，’hesays，’thereislifeandwillbereaction……Butifthepeopleareunsoundallhopeisgoneandthenationperishes。’What，then，makesthepeople’sound’？Isnotthisatacitadmissionoftheimportanceofthemoralfactor？

Hasnotthereligionofanationsomeinfluence，andsometimesperhapsaninfluenceforgood，uponitsmorality？PuritanisminScotlandwasassociatedwithgrosssuperstition；wasitnotalsoanexpressionofthemoralconvictionswhich