In theology the interval is small indeed between Aristotle and a child, between Archimedes and a naked savage. It is not strange, therefore, that wise men, weary of investigation, tormented by uncertainty, longing to believe something, and yet seeing objections to every thing, should submit themselves absolutely to teachers who, with firm and undoubting faith, lay claim to a supernatural commission. Thus we frequently see inquisitive and restless spirits take refuge from their own scepticism in the bosom of a church which pretends to infallibility, and, after questioning the existence of a Deity, bring themselves to worship a wafer. And thus it was that Fox made some converts to whom he was immeasurably inferior in every thing except the energy of his convictions.
Thomas Babington Macaulay
writing of George Fox, the founder of the Religious Society of Friends, commonly known as the Quakers. He was a 17th-century English Dissenter who challenged the religious and political norms of his time. Fox emphasized the “inner light” as a direct connection with God, rejecting the need for intermediaries like priests or elaborate rituals.
In 1660, English Quaker Mary Dyer was hanged near Boston Common for repeatedly defying a Puritan law banning Quakers from the colony. She was one of the four executed Quakers known as the Boston martyrs. In 1661, King Charles II forbade Massachusetts from executing anyone for professing Quakerism. In 1684, England revoked the Massachusetts charter, sent over a royal governor to enforce English laws in 1686 and, in 1689, passed a broad Toleration Act.
The connection between uniformity and government is well documented throughout history. We humans are an intolerant lot. Regrettably the relief from this inadequacy is perceived by many to be its abuse of existing beliefs and replacement of them with others. It is merely one pack of rubbish followed by another – never addressing either the credibility or legitimacy of the claims. What matters in the end is neither truth nor fact but submission and dominance. The arena of convictions are cluttered with obstacles and fabrications designed only to create a new source of governance (especially devoted to the ulterior interests of those in the lead).
And why should it not be so? My prompt suspicion is that, if either you or I were in control, we’d be pushing for more than an axiomatic truth. The depth of vulgarity of the promoters is surpassed only by the depths of their imagination and their insatiability for power. The mere assertion that one has “seen the light” is a distraction of the first order!
As improbable as it may be, the world is changing for the better. There is in my opinion no longer a global contest between powers (a difference which time and again has proven to be preposterous). Rather the relevance of knowledge has insinuated the fabric of the universe as we know it. Intellectualism – albeit in its base model of comparative experience – is gradually fomenting its indisputable affection among people everywhere. The conviction in the end is not similarity but difference. It is a persuasive model because it is patently true and unquestionably legitimate.
Yet it is a wide and rugged road to the object of achievement. Until we overtake that granular platform there will be many more bumps along the way. Knowing this however enables us to recoil from the instant reaction disrupted by our inner confusion. The answer is not negativity but positivity. This fundamental rule is not fortified by whimsical prophesies; it is as instinctive a choice to an adult or a child – a recognition requiring not supernatural magic but elemental human conviction and training. And we need training. This means we need leaders with capacity not impotency.
The alternative to heresy is not another prescription from beyond the stars. We have the material at hand before us. The balance of self-interest and government will – like the human creation in the middle – require work. But so long as we allow that work to be directed by power we contaminate the process with poison. Simplicity is a uniformity not of mere procedure – quelling objection by rising above the din; rather it is an identification of elemental needs and addressing their resolution. Having superior authority to contradict debate is no answer. The debate will linger long after the so-called superior authority is gone. Until then the enterprise is one of deceit and manipulation.
Regrettably for most it will be far easier to ignore the dilemma. The complication of thinking will dissolve like dust in a glass of water, either clouding the whole or removing itself to the bottom where it shall lie undisturbed and forgotten, hardening with time to the appearance of mud. Once again, the need for leadership and intelligence is manifest. The strength of us each is not to fulfill the impossible. The required conviction is the belief in our own mind. We needn’t imagine that belief to be exotic or incalculable in order to be authentic. The clarity is not written on stone; it is within our hearts.