Islip Collyer on…
November 28, 1999
Dear Friends:
One of my favorite writers is Islip Collyer. He was a man who could state some of the most thought-provoking truths in such simple language. This week I would like to quote some of these insightful comments from his work entitled Conviction and Conduct.
On Writing
There is a tendency to condemn an author as shallow or superficial if his writings are perfectly clear. And conversely, a writer will sometimes gain a reputation for profundity simply because no one can quite make out what he means.
On Faith
Unless a man is prepared to affirm that he knows nothing, believes nothing, and harbours no opinions, unless he is prepared is prepared to condense all his positive belief into one solitary affirmation of his own ignorance, he must of necessity be in some sense a man of faith.
On Doctrine
We frequently hear men say that they do not attach much importance to doctrine; they concentrate attention on the living of a good life. Such sentiment only emanates from a very shallow brain. It is as if a child should enter a garden, and seeing the gardener planting bulbs, should say, ‘I do not care for those ugly bulbs, I like the beautiful flowers.’ The living of a good life without a foundation of good doctrine is impossible, just as it is impossible to grow flowers without roots.
On Societal Pressure
It is always difficult to resist fashions, whether in clothes or theology, and when we think we are quite unmoved by the stream, it often only means we are lagging a little way behind.
On Evolution and Morality
When a modern thinker accepts the doctrine of evolution and repudiates revelation, how can he give us an authoritative moral code?
On Sin
…the depth of a man’s guilt is determined, not by reference to the degree of harm he does to other men, but by the degree of deliberateness with which the law is violated. In other words, sins of presumption are always worse than ’sins of infirmity’.
On Disciplining Children
Nothing could be more demoralizing than for children to be taught that disobedience did not signify so long as no evident harm was done. Yet how often we see parents taking a course which will inevitably give this impression. A child is perhaps meddling with some ornaments which should not be touched. The mother commands him to leave them alone, and comes away. The mandate has to be repeated several times, perhaps with threats, and it may be some kind of bribe. The child is not punished though richly deserving. But now, on the other hand, suppose that, without any deliberate disobedience of this nature, the child turning to come away at the first command, chances to break one of the most precious of the ornaments. The parent becomes a perfect fury, and the erring child is punished with the utmost severity.
Have a great week!
