a blush in solitude; then think of the best, the purest, the most disinterested of the feelings which have ever been given to your soul; and try again to apply the rule of the modern savant, and to affirm that all this is equally good, and that all that is has the right to be.  I know very well that in general these doctrines are applied to things looked at in the mass, and to the far-off past of history; but this is a poor subterfuge for the defenders of these monstrous theses.  Things viewed in the mass are only the assemblage of things viewed in detail.  If the distinction of good and evil do not exist for general facts, how should it exist for particular facts?  And how can we apply to the past a rule which we refuse to apply to the present, seeing that the present is nothing else than the past of the future, and that the facts of our own time are matter for history to our posterity?  These, I repeat, are but vain subterfuges.  If humanity is always adorable, it is so in the faults of the meanest of men as in the splendid sins of the magnates of the earth; it is so to-day as it was thirty centuries ago; the god in growing old does not cease to be the same.

When the mind is engaged in these pernicious ways, the spring of the moral life is broken, and the practical consequence is not long in appearing.  The philosophers of success, having become the philosophers of the fait accompli, accept all and endure all; but in another sense than that in which charity accepts all, that it may transform all by the power of love.  It is the morality of Philinte: 

     I take men quietly, and as they are: 
     And what they do I train my soul to bear.[151]

These instructions are not very necessary.  There will always be people enough found ready to applaud victory, and to fall in with the fait accompli.  But is it not sad to see men of mind, men of heart too, perhaps, making themselves the theorists of baseness, and the philosophers of cowardice?

There is still more to be said.  From the glorification of success the mind passes necessarily, as we have just seen, to the glorification alike of all that is.  It would appear at first sight that the adept in the doctrine must find himself in a condition of indifference with regard to what prejudiced men continue to call good and evil.  This indifference however is only apparent.  When it is granted that nothing is evil, the part of good disappears in the end.  There had been formed in ancient Rome, under pretence of religion, a secret society, which had as its fundamental dogma the aphorism that nothing is evil.[152] The members of the society did not practise good and evil, it appears, with equal indifference, for the magistrates of the republic took alarm, and smothered, by a free employment of death and imprisonment, a focus of murders, violations, false witness, and forged signatures.  This fact reveals, with ominous clearness, a movement of thought on the nature of which it is easy to speculate.