CONSISTENCY

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 393, 30 November 1932, Page 7

CONSISTENCY

Frederick

Stubbs,

OVERATED VIRTUE unchangeable minds are stupid and not strong CONVERSION NO CRIME

(By

F.R.G.S.

(All Rights Reserved) I re-read Emerson's great essay on Self-reliance last week, to my mind the finest as it is the most stimulating of all his writings. In two paragraphs he speaks frankly and powerfully of the demand for consistency, which he calls "the hobgoblin of little minds, adored hy little statesmen and philosophers and divines." "I hope," he says, "that it these days we have heard the last of consistency. Let the ! word he gazetted , and ridiculous 1 henceforward." That was 100 years ago, and the word has not yet been gazetted and is still in frequent use. Politicians An able politican is being carpeted by his constituents at the present moment and many are clamouring for his resignation on the ground of his alleg'ed inconsistency. If a mem- ' ber of Parliament advocates a measI ure from the platf orm and then delibi erately votes against it, as has some- ; times occurred owing to the exigen- | cies of the party machine, those who ' sent him into Parliament have good reason to complain. But if he has ; changed his views simply owing to ! fresh evidence that has been forth- ; coming he is surely bound in common | honesty to vote accordingly and exi plain the reasons to his constituents. What would be the use of debating a measure if no change of views were : permitted? With increasing knowledge and experience it is impossible that a man's opinions should remain precisely the same as in the past. "Seulement Dieu et les sots changent jamais," (Only God and stupid fellows never change), says a popular French novelist. And the same holds good in regard to another important class which is frequent accused of inconsistency. A clergyman is usually required to hold and preach at 50 the same doctrinal views that he held at 20. There must be no growth in knowledge, no development of ideas, no change of opinion. The views he preaches in his mature manhood must be the same as those he held in his inmature youth. There must be no departure. from the Creed to which he subscribed 30 or 40 years ago. Is it reasonable? Is it possible for a clex-gyman who is also a student, or for any other man, to hold the same theological views throughout his entire career? He may feel incumbent upon him to say i that he does, but does he? Men ' were consistent enough in their opinions 500 years ago, but it was the consistency; — not of conviction — but of fear. Where the charge of inconsistency is made, not on the ground of opinion but of conduct, the ease is of course very different, 1 and it is unfortunateiy on this ground rather than the former, that charges ' of inconsistency are usually made. 1 It is sometimes alleged that a j clergyman preaches one thing and practiees another, and if he really j does this the charge must be allowed. ' Should a clergyman, e.g. advocate j sympathy, kindness, generosity, yet 1 himself be notoriously hard and illib- j eral; or denounce the love of money | and yet exhibit a special regard for those possessing money, and even seek more and more money himself, mak- i ing the getting of money a prominent feature of his ministry, a Christian congregation might justifiably accuse him of inconsistency. And this applies of course, not only to clergymen but to all men who profess a lofty idealism, though it must be admitted that it applies with greatest force to those who not only hold ideals but urge them upon others. Our views and opinions must inevitably change ' with the changing years, but in the sphere of conduct consistency may reasonably be demanded. Honesty, truth, justice, sympathy, praetical kindness, must always remain obligatory. Obviously, we must not profess one creed on Sunday and then 1 live by quite another creed during the remainder of the week. In Social Lafe Charges of inconsistency are sometimes brought against us in social life. Our mood and therefore our manner varies. It is said that we are not always the same. This is doubtless true, but how could it be otherwise? We are not always in the same condition of body or of mind: our health, our mental states, are constantly changing. Sometimes Fortune smiles on us: all things seem to conspire to make us happy. Then we are naturally and easily in cheerful, generous, mood whilst at other times, unfortunateiy, the contrary is the case. We must make allowances for one another. Circumstances have changed, and we are temporarly changed too, though fundamentally the same. The experiences of life teach most of us a wise tolerance and charity in judging others. In the Passion-Play which I witnessed at Oberammergau some years ago, I was told that the man who acts the Christ one year may in some future year act Judas. It is certainly so in ordinary life. Few always act as Christs. It is hopeless to expect perfect consistency from human nature. When Christians ceased to be Martyrs on account of their faith, they martyred those who held a different creed. Even the Puritan Fathers (whom nevertheless I greatly admire) who left England in order to escape persocution, persecuted the Qualcers. The possession of power malces all the differenee. We find no difficulty .in abstaining from an act which we have not the power to perform. It is easy to be good in the absense of any temptation to be otherwise. A reasonable consistency may, however, he justly demanded from each one of us. We must speak today the truth which we 'see and helieve to-day, even though it is not precisely the "truth" of yesterday and we must not pretend to admire and love people whom we really des-

pise and dislike. He wonld be a bold man to assert that this is never done. We may be polite without being hypocrites. -