THE CHURCHES AND MODERN THOUGHT.

AGNOSTICISM AGGRESSIVE.

'The Churches and Modern Thought,' by Philip Vivian; Watts & Co., London.—
 In this second edition of a book embodying an enquiry into the grounds of unbelief and an appeal for candour, the author confesses to the charge of having been brought up in an unquestioning acceptance of the orthodox doctrines of Christianity, and of now occupying a position in the extreme of Rationalism, but he denies that he has drifted there. To judge by his clear, forceful, fair, and temperate statement of his views his conversion was (as he says) gradual and reluctant. He pleads eloquently for an honest and impartial examination of the foundations of Christianity, and expresses his amazement at the indifference displayed on a matter which should be of vital interest. Though his arguments are not new, they are strengthened by putting the case for the other side generously, and quoting freely and fully from his opponents; while his reading appears to he wide and reflective. No subject more than that of religious controversy affecting undoubted problems of great magnitude lends itself to destructive criticism, especially where the critics seek to make points by contrasting the varying methods adopted by apologists, and compelling them to give evidence one against another, and thus to neutralize both. Mr. Vivian has not resisted the temptation offered by the conflicting attitudes of divergent schools of Christian thought to score off his adversaries: but like strategy directed against Rationalists would expose them also to ridicule. Mr. Vivian shows that the modern or scientific agnostic is thoroughly conscientious, and has no sympathy with loose conduct. He prescribes a high standard of ethics, though his motive for morality is based on a sense of self-interest and on the sway of social instincts, and is needily utilitarian. One weakness of the extreme Rationalist view is that, while it subordinates the emotions to a strict logical discipline, it omits to take into consideration the facts that one-half of the human family — woman— is constituted with sentiment enthroned, and that a considerable portion of the other moiety are accustomed to trust their intuitions. Utilitarianism, dependent upon a keen personal philosophic appreciation of things, a fine individual analysis of causes and effects, and a coldly reasoned habit of provident renunciation, will never answer as a popular rule of conduct, at least, in the present state of human development. Room must be found for religious faith because man has a heart which cannot pulsate vigorously except through celestial visions and altruistic service.
The Register 13 April 1907

"The Churches and Modern Thought."— "Vivian Philips," Canterbury, England (author of the above-mentioned book),writes:—"Your review of "The Churches and Modern Thought"—(in The Register of April 13) closes with the following remark: —'Room must be, found for religious faith, because, man has a heart which cannot pulsate vigorously; except through celestial visions and altruistic service,' This might lead your readers to suppose that the Rationalist sets no store by altruistic service, whereas (in chapter viii.)I have insisted— as Ingersoll insisted, and all ethicists and Rationalists insist— that 'the way to be happy is to make other people happy.' Moreover, I have discussed the origin and nature of the psychological truth. Where I differ from your reviewer is in his assumption that altruism is—can only be— the outcome of religious faith. Surely we have but to pause for a moment and scores of instances will occur to us where such an assumption is untenable. Take, for example, the late M. Berthelot and his wife. They were 'extreme' Rationalists (M. Berthelot was an honorary associate of the Rationalist Press Association). Were they not devoted to one another? Were they not devoted to the service of men? The Register 27 July 1907

THE HIGHER CRITICISM

DEFENCE AND EXPOSITION.

"The Churches and Modern Thought." By Philip Vivian. London: Watts & Co.

The sub-title of this volume describes it as an investigation into "the grounds of Unbelief and an appeal for Candor." The decay of religious belief among educated men is assumed by the author as beyond contradiction, and is attributed to various causes, the chief being the failure of miracles to retain the credence they enjoyed in a pre-scientific age, the difficulties raised by the evolutionary hypothesis in the way of the acceptance of the Genesis account of creation and the destructive character of modern biblical criticism.

The author has evidently given long and close study to the subjects he discusses, and the range of his reading is shown by the footnotes appended to almost every page. One of the most interesting chapters is that which summarises the results of Bible criticism. The four massive volumes of the "Encyclopedia Biblica" are not generally accessible; and no doubt many will learn from Mr. Vivian's pages for the first time what the Higher Criticism claims to have accomplished. Among other achievements with which the author credits it is the assimilation of the Genesis story of the creation with the stock of primitive myths common to the Semitic races. Only after the exile in the sixth century B.C. did the story take its present shape. The authority of such men as Canon Cheyne, and the Rev. Dr. Peters, a New York episcopal rector, is quoted for the statement that the stories of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and to some extent of Joseph, are mere myths. The story of the deluge was a Babylonian epic which only assumed a Hebrew garb in the seventh century B.C. The Higher Criticism still hesitates as to whether Moses was a man or a clan; but is fairly certain that the Ten Commandments were not framed earlier than the time of Amos. That David wrote a single one of the Psalms is regarded by the higher critics, as problematical, and they are inclined to dismiss Jonah from the ranks of historical beings, and to relegate him to the society of Tobit and Susanna. The Book of Daniel, according to the same authorities, was not written till five centuries after the death of its supposed author, if he ever existed, and the adventures of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego are as baseless as any one of Æsop's fables. If anyone wants a clear account of what the higher critics are saying they may be recommended to Mr. Vivian's lucid pages, as also for one of the simplest expositions of the evolutionary hypothesis we have yet encountered.

The author meets with a quotation from "Supernatural Religion." the objection that before an existing belief is disturbed the iconoclast is bound to provide a substitute for the shattered idol. The answer given is that the truth remains the same whether the belief be disturbed or not, and that anything is better than "conscious imposture." The author is eloquent as to the debt which the world owes to the simple morality of Christianity, apart from its supernatural dogmas, and is emphatic as to the need of engrafting moral teaching upon the curriculum of the elementary schools. As Cardinal Newman believed that he could convert all England to Roman Catholicism if given control of the schools, so Mr. Vivian holds that good citizenship is a thing that may be taught, and that there is no better time than the school-going age for inculcating those habits of self-restraint, conscientiousness, honor, and kindness, which are essential alike to self-respect and national well-being.
The Advertiser 29 February 1908

THE CHURCHES AND MODERN THOUGHT.

Leslie Stephen somewhere remarks that ethical problems require to be discussed anew in each generation with change of dialect. The same might be said of apologetics. At present several sets of tendencies make for obscurity of thought as to the claims of Christianity: (I) The unwillingness of the Church to recognise the strength of the frontal attack; (2) the determination of the Church to maintain the old formulas for popular use, though in the mind of the preacher their "content" may have wholly changed, thus giving rise to all the confusion of a "dual doctrine"; (3) the widespread indifferentism of the educated and uneducated classes alike— by reason of which very few unbelievers can give a reason for their lack of faith. Yet if clearness of thought is anywhere needed it is needed in the judgment we form on the claims of Christianity—if only because the traditional ethics and morality of the West are so closely bound up with its ideals. Those are direct factors in social development, and if a "transvaluing" of our moral ideas is to be undertaken the result will be far-reaching indeed. Yet such a "transvaluing" is a direct implication in that "modern thought" of which we hear so much, but so indefinitely from either side. It is not unfair to say that writers of apologetics do not face the fundamental issues; and on the other hand there are hardly any books suited for popular use that state the case against Christianity with that cold detachment from partisanship which should be the essence of a critical inquiry.
In "The Churches and Modern Thought" (Watts and Co.), Mr. Philip Vivian states the grounds of unbelief, and appeals for candour in the consideration of them. He has not written an exhaustive or a very learned book. But he seems familiar with the vast field of controversy, and he appears to state in the main correctly the position of the best-informed present day opponents of Christianity. He writes with absolute frankness and with commendable restraint. His exposition is not overburdened with detail, and it is written for those who have no expert knowledge of theological controversy. All clergymen who wish to realise the full incidence of modern criticism would do well to follow Mr. Vivian's arguments and it is very desirable that some such book should be included in the curriculum of young divinity students as early in their course as possible. By the plainness and simplicity of its style the book further appeals to a much wider audience.
Perhaps it is well to briefly indicate the main lines of Mr. Vivian's statement. He shows firstly the real extent of the movement which the Church is called on to meet, and he repudiates the suggestion that there has been, or can be, any reconciliation between religion and science. He proceeds to point out some of the issues that confuse the problem—the theory, for instance, that religion is the necessary basis of morals, against which he quotes the non-religious ethical system of Japan.
His next section is devoted to a plain statement of the case against miracles from the modern standpoint. He stresses the very confused state of apologetics in this quarter, and he examines what he regard, as the insufficient evidence for some fundamental miracles. Passing to modern Biblical criticism, he sums up fairly the main admissions of liberal Christian writers as (a) the unhistorical character of the creation story, the patriarchs, Exodus, and Deuteronomy; (b) the weakness of the Gospel evidence of the virgin birth of Christ; (c) Schmiedel's statement that there are only nine passages in the Gospels which can be used as foundations for a "truly scientific" life of Jesus; (d) the same higher critic's hostile criticism of resurrection evidence; (e) the exceedingly severe handling of gospels and epistles by the contributors to the Encyclopedia Biblica—from which source, in fact, Mr. Vivian has taken most of this section.
But what the author regards as the really fatal criticism of Christianity as a specifically revealed religion is the establishment of continuity between its doctrines and ideals and those of its past and concurrent environment. He claims that the historic method has shown that no Christian doctrine is sui generis; but that, on the contrary, an origin for each specific Christian belief can be found in a pre-existing system. If that were true the body of Christian doctrine would represent merely a fusion and modification of pagan religious cults, and its evolution would be fully accounted for on "naturalistic" grounds. It is only fair to Mr. Vivian to say that at this point he merely follows Dr. J. G. Frazer, the author of "The Golden Bough" and the most eminent living authority on comparative mythology. The extent to which this line of argument can be developed will doubtless come as a surprise to many readers.
A section is then devoted to alleged clerical misstatements of the doctrine of evolution, and the writer endeavours to show that the doctrines of the Fall and the Atonement are absolutely irreconcilable with the fact of evolution. The effect of science on teleology—the theological postulates of directivity and design—is then considered, and the author is unflinching in his statement of the Determinist position. A number of more popular arguments for the tolerance of Christianity are then examined—and the author finds them all wanting. Finally, following John Morley's famous volume "On Compromise," the author pleads earnestly against obscurantism in religion, and urges that, so far as the best informed persons know it, we should be told the truth—and all the truth. It is somewhat surprising that he did not add a chapter directed against the Christian ethic, following, say, something like the line of Friedrich Nietzsche—but perhaps he thought he had done enough!
The Sydney Morning Herald 29 February 1908