Editorial October 31, 1925 Issue

Moral Courage

Ella W. Hoag

When some one wrote that "moral may refer to the Science or practice of right conduct," he certainly gave a concise definition of the word "moral." An equally terse statement of the meaning of "courage" was made when it was said that "courage is that quality of mind which enables one to encounter danger and difficulty with firmness or without fear." Mankind, however, has not always seen that only as these two are united can perfect firmness, with an accompanying freedom from fear, be realized under whatever stress.

Men have believed all down through the ages that there could be courage which had power, but which had little if anything to do with morality. This sense of courage has been merely a belief in animality or human might, and has more often ended in positive wrong than in a negative something which was miscalled right. Because such so-called courage has generally been based on a desire to strike back or resent the danger or difficulty with which it was confronted—hoping thus to win freedom—it has not been strange that the evil in the premise has appeared in the conclusion. Animal courage has therefore come to be seen by Christian thinkers to be weakness rather than strength, and they have naturally desired to replace it with that moral courage which has its foundation in "the Science or practice of right conduct."

In "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures" (p. 514) Mrs. Eddy writes: "Moral courage is 'the lion of the tribe of Juda,' the king of the mental realm. Free and fearless it roams in the forest. Undisturbed it lies in the openfield, or rests in 'green pastures, ... beside the still waters.'" Now although moral courage is a quality so much respected by mankind, it has not been understood to be so triumphant as Mrs. Eddy pictures it. While men have believed in its desirability, at the same time they have imagined it was frequently unsuccessful in its attempts to stand for the right: that it might, indeed, often be overthrown. As a consequence, the efforts to use it have lacked both firmness and fearlessness; there has been associated with its use too much of the sense that one may do right now, but must wait for his reward until some indefinite future time.

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

Editorial

Destroying "the popular gods"