OCR Text |
Show . FAITH, FATE AND FATALISM. 'A good 'many people speak of fate in a careless care-less way. They can give no proof of, and never think of being asked to provfe, such a proposition as belief in fate. Many writers have the same fault. They use" the word "fate" to round a sentence, sen-tence, indolently assuming that it applies to nothing in particular, but in some way carries the mind to , the pagan belief in the power of their gods. We are notkcertaiiv:that Fate, as-well, as Fortune, flourished flour-ished as a god in the garden of Olympus, and incense in-cense was offered to Fate centuries before .Calvin and Knox and the Covenanters preached the creed of predestination. ; . - Judge Goodwin, in his Weekly, writing of the Chicago horror, says it "reads as though the hand-of hand-of Fate was hi it." He deduces this conclusion because be-cause "every care was taken in the plan and construction con-struction of the theatre." Hence what did happen; was to happen. We hardly believe Judge Goodwin Good-win meant to go so far. His allusion to the hand of Fate, in all likelihood, was written" to adorn a sentence. Those r.ho put faith in the idea, theory, philosophy, philoso-phy, or whatever head it may come under, that what is to be, will be, are set down as fatalists. Many times thoy are named such by writers who do not distinguish between fate, and faith. For example, ex-ample, Mohammedans are often railed fatalists, whereas the reverse is true. The fatalist belief in what is to be, will be, makes man an irresponsible agent. He shifts the credit or blame for his conduct con-duct upon the Creator. This being so, it is argued that fatalism begets recklessness of life, and that recklessness of life, indifference to bodily harm, are the factors which go to make courage. Therefore There-fore fatalists are the bravest, most impetuous and daring soldiers in battle. The soundness of this argument, or statement, is not established by such plausible conclusion Military authorities agree that the Turk is the fiercest fierc-est fighter in Europe, and in the same breath explain ex-plain that this is so because he is a Mohammedan and a fatalist, ine ,J.urK. is not a iatanst. npea:c-ing npea:c-ing of faith in the abstract, many affirm that this attribute of man beats stronger in the breast of the Turk than it does in the soul of the Christian, the Christian saint and martyr excepted. With the Turk, faith is fanaticism. To kill an enemy, if that enemy be a Christian, is to him a command from God. If, in the attempt to kill the Christian, the Turk is slain upon the field of battle, his spirit assumes bodily form in ths Mohammedan paradise, and he enjoys all the carnal pleasures of the flesh and delights of the senses. His religion, based upon the carnal, is fulfilled. This is the faith which makes the Turk such a spectacular fighter. A writer in Everybody's Magazine, discussing thc" merit3 of the Japanese and the Russian soldier, sol-dier, supriscs us with the statement, that both are fatalists. Inasmuch as fatalism is against all Christian theology, the author's statement is not easily reconciled to the orthodoxy of the Greek church, to which the Russian belongs. To sustain his statement, the writer explains that the Russian soldier "has no care whatever for himself. By nature he is a fighting animal, and he enjoys the struggle. If it is his time to lose his life, he will . lose it, and there is little use- of trying to save it. He might a3 well go to one place as another, and it make3 no difference whether he goes into a fight or keeps out of it." We fail to see where the magazine writer sustains sus-tains his allegation in the above quotation. Rather docs he make it clear that the Russian soldiers conduct con-duct is entirely in harmony with ths instincts and environments of military life. He "fights as a Christian soldier should fight, and falls a3 a Christ-I Christ-I ian soldier falls in the line of duty. This is j not fatalism. . ,What the magazine writer says about the Japanese soldier, who is either a-Buddhist or Ccnfucianist, is more to the point, yet not sufficient suffi-cient to justify the allegation of fatalism. '- As between the adherents of Christian faith and those who are called fatalists, history sheds some light upon the prowess of both upon the battlefield. The battle of Lepanto between the Christians and Turks, the overwhelming victory of John Sobieski over Soliman at Vienna, disprove the pagan idea of the p6tency of fatalism in sanguinary encounter. Xot. only disprove the pagan Idea, but establish the fact that a soldier fortified by the sacraments of the church fears nothing in front of him. The charge of the. Light Brigade at Balaklava will be told in song as long as language lasts; the charge of the Scotch Highlanders against the fanatical . dervishes in the Soudan, marks the brightest page of British history; the battle of Franklin and Antie-tam Antie-tam furnished magnificent examples of American courage and intrepid bravery. Who is it will say that these battles were fought and won by fatalists? Who is.it .will say the fatalist surpasses the Christian soldier in courage? "Really, is it not silly to speak of fate? - Do we mean what we say when we call a. man a fatal- At the time of the Fenian invasion, a young man named Sullivan, who lived in Buffalo", crossed the Xiagara river with the little army of Irish. , Sullivan" Sul-livan" was intensely patriotic and intensely religious. He had a faith which would move mountains. Before Be-fore crossing the river, he received the sacrament of the Eucharist. While the battle of Ridgeway was on, Sullivan was observed to be away in the front, loading and firing his rifle as cooly as though he were making a barrel in the cooper shop at Buffalo. When it was all over, a fellow .Fenian asked Sulli-. van if he did not fear death in his exposed position posi-tion at the front. "Xot a bit of it," replied Sullivan. Sulli-van. "Those fellows could not hit me with their bullets. You see, I wear the scapular !" This is an example of Catholic faith running to extremes, made glorious on the field of battle. But there are literary men who would call Sullivan a fatalist. . . a : i |