RELIGION AS ADJUSTMENT 



ally, in the common acceptation of that term, 

 and something more beside. For there are many- 

 actions which, as immediately concerning none 

 but the individual, are technically neither moral 

 nor immoral, but which nevertheless are right 

 or wrong. Overeating, for example, which can 

 hardly be termed immoral, and which the cur- 

 rent hedonism mildly characterizes as impru- 

 dent, may from a religious point of view be 

 regarded as wrong or sinful. I cite this homely 

 illustration because it leads directly to the pith 

 and centre of the truth which I am seeking to 

 explain. Hedonism, of which the highest prin- 

 ciple of action is personal selfishness, regards the 

 individual as having a right to do what he likes 

 with his own body. Religion declares that he 

 has no such right, but on the other hand has 

 duties toward himself which he is as much bound 

 to discharge as if they directly concerned other 

 people. Religion, therefore, extends the rules of 

 right and wrong primarily derived from the re- 

 lations of the individual to the community, until 

 they cover even the self-regarding actions of the 

 individual. And what is this but establishing 

 rules of action concerning the individual in his 

 relations to what we call Nature or the Uni- 

 verse ? Finally, as the organized moral sense 

 takes cognizance of actions injurious to the com- 

 munity, visiting them with the stings of self- 

 reproach without any direct or conscious tracing 



311 



