FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126  
127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   >>   >|  
d to me, by a sort of instinct, in connection with this discussion. Certainly _I_ would rather be a pagan whose religion was actual, earnest, continual--for week days, work days, and song days--than I would be a _Christian_ who, from whatever motive, shrank from hearing or uttering the name of Christ out of a 'church.' I am no fanatic, but I like truth and earnestness in all things, and I cannot choose but believe that such a Christian shows but ill beside such a pagan. What pagan poet ever thought of casting his gods out of his poetry? In what pagan poem do they not shine and thunder? And if _I_--to approach the point in question--if _I_, writing a poem the end of which is the extolment of what I consider to be Christian truth over the pagan myths shrank even _there_ from naming the name of my God lest it should not meet the sympathies of some readers, or lest it should offend the delicacies of other readers, or lest, generally, it should be unfit for the purposes of poetry in what more forcible manner than by that act (I appeal to Philip against Philip) can I controvert my own poem, or secure to myself and my argument a logical and unanswerable shame? If Christ's name is improperly spoken in that poem, then indeed is Schiller right, and the true gods of poetry are to be sighed for mournfully. For be sure that _Burns_ was right, and that a poet without devotion is below his own order, and that poetry without religion will gradually lose its elevation. And then, my dear friend, we do not live among dreams. The Christian religion is true or it is not, and if it is true it offers the highest and purest objects of contemplation. And the poetical faculty, which expresses the highest moods of the mind, passes naturally to the highest objects. Who can separate these things? Did Dante? Did Tasso? Did Petrarch? Did Calderon? Did Chaucer? Did the poets of our best British days? Did any one of these shrink from speaking out Divine names when the occasion came? Chaucer, with all his jubilee of spirit and resounding laughter, had the name of Jesus Christ and God as frequently to familiarity on his lips as a child has its father's name. You say 'our religion is not vital--not week-day--enough.' Forgive me, but _that_ is a confession of a wrong, not an argument. And if a poet be a poet, it is his business to work for the elevation and purification of the public mind, rather than for his own popularity! while if he be not a poet, no sa
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126  
127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
poetry
 

Christian

 

religion

 

highest

 
Christ
 

objects

 
Philip
 

Chaucer

 
things
 
readers

elevation

 

shrank

 

argument

 

naturally

 

devotion

 
passes
 
separate
 

gradually

 

faculty

 
purest

offers

 

friend

 

contemplation

 

expresses

 

dreams

 

poetical

 

father

 

frequently

 
familiarity
 
public

business

 
confession
 

Forgive

 

popularity

 

British

 

shrink

 

Petrarch

 
Calderon
 

speaking

 
Divine

jubilee

 

spirit

 

resounding

 
laughter
 
occasion
 

purification

 

purposes

 

choose

 

earnestness

 

thought