THE DISBELIEF OR BERTRAND RUSSELL

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28471, 28 December 1957, Page 3

THE DISBELIEF OR BERTRAND RUSSELL

[Reviewed by L.G.W.} Why I Am Not a Christian. By Bertrand Russell. Allen and Unwin. 225 pp. There are 15 lectures and essays in this book, most of them having already been published. The appendix contains an account of how Lord Russell was prevented from teaching at City College in New York, in 1940. The first four chapters are entitled: “Why I am not a Christian,” “Has Religion made useful contributions to Civilisation” ‘‘What I believe,” and “Do we survive Death?” We are told that “historically it is doubtful whether Christ ever existed -at all, and if He did' we do not know anything about Him.” No authority or evidence is produced to establish the truth of this statement. Again Lord Russell writes. “Religion is based, I think, primarily and mainly upon fear.” “The whole conception of God is a conception derived from the ancient Oriental despotisms.” r ear, no doubt, has its place in religion, but even in primitive communities it is a complex of emotions, including the germ of awe and reverence not merely slavish terror which Lord Russell makes the main foundation of religion. It is not true that the idea of God is derived from Oriental despotisms, because men believed in God before such despotisms were ever heard of.

One fundamental reason why Lord Russell is not a Christian is that “you will find as you look around the world that every bit of progress in humane feeling, every improvement in the criminal- law, every step towards the diminution of war, every step towards' the better treatment of the coloured races, or every mitigation of slavery, every moral progress that there has been in the world, has been consistently opposed by the organised churches of the world.” This statement is simply not true. Has Lord Russell never heard of the Quakers? Most of the work done to abolish negro slavery in British possessions was done by the Evangelicals of the Church of England. Speaking of the argument from design, Lord Russell says: “Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku Klux Klan, the Fascist! [and Mr Winston Churchill?!” The words in brackets are not in this book, but they wdre in the original lecture. They are prudently omitted. The Deity has hot done so badly with Sir Winston Churchill after all.

In considering the useful contributions of religion to civilisation, the author informs us that religion helped in early days to fix the calendar, and so Egyptian priests could predict eclipses. ‘‘These two services I am prepared to acknowledge, but I do, not know of any others.” One might have supposed that as this was the limit of his knowledge the essay would finish at this point. But no! Some 19 outmoded pages of “rationalism” follow. In these the whole Subject of religion’s harmful contributions to civilisation is dealt with on the usual lines of distortion and exaggeration. The third chapter contains the statement: “I believe that when

I die I shall rot, and nothing of my ego will? survive—l should scorn to shiver with terror at the thought of annihilation.” When a man says that science cannot prove human Immortality, he can be listened to? with respect. But when Earl Rujssell claims that it can prove we; shall perish totally at death we (cannot agree that science is yet advanced enough to pronounce on jthe subject in one way or another. Years ago Bishop Gope called Lord Russell ’a child of genius. This is indeed the case; there is more of the cqild than the genius in this book. For example, he tells us that “millions of unfortunate women wefe burnt as witches,” just, as a small boy sees millions of cats in the backyard. |

Professor Pa pl Edwards, of New York, is the editor of the book, and in his preface he writes, somewhat naively, that it is ‘‘the most moving land most graceful presentation of the free-thinker's position since : ,the days of Hume and Voltaire.” * It is much needed because rgligipus intolerance is increasing in !the United States. But it is to be feared that if this is the best “re-statement of the unbeliever’s , lease,” secularism must be in aj bad way. Lord Russell| has written a preface to the book reaffirming his belief in all the sweeping generalisations anq rash statements contained therein. j-