A STUDY OF RITUALISM

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22422, 17 November 1934, Page 4

A STUDY OF RITUALISM

“ Christian Myth and Ritual.” By Dr E. 0. James, London: Murray. 18s. Dr E. 0. James, the professor of the philosophy and history of religion in the University of Leeds, has given us, in his “ Christian Myth and Ritual,” a very elaborate discussion of the ritual and associated beliefs which have grown up in the Christian Chtlrch. The book has grown out of a course of lectures delivered at Oxford and in the University of London in 1932. It will make its appeal to students of the Philosophy of Religion, and by them will be read with deep interest. But, despite the fact that the author has a clear enough style, others will find the volume somewhat difficult to follow. In any case, it will require the girt loin and the vigorously alert mind in nnyone who essays to grasp its argument. In the course of the lectures Dr James felt that there were revealed in the religious thought and practice of the Old Testament “certain definite points of contact with a common pattern of myth and ritual in the religions of the Ancient East, representing the things done to and by the king to secure the prosperity of the community.” This hypothesis he has tested, and “Christian Myth and Ritual” contains the conclusions from his examination. In Christian ritual and its associated beliefs, he argues, we are really 'handling a living culture, which is, fully equipped with an extensive literature and yet has, its roots deeply laid in antiquity. One section of his argument demands agreement with the proposition that Christianity is a product of the welter of religious movements that characterised the Graeco-Roman world at the beginning of our era. Such an assumption strikes at foundations, and it will be understood that, for a certain class of reader, it may vitiate the whole argument. Nor can Dr James be unaware of the inadequacy of the statement that the heresies ot the Middle Ages were in the nature oi local rebellions against some particular part of the ecclesiastical not the orgnaisation of a new and rival creed. The point is too loosely stated to _ give satisfaction to Space forbids a more lengthy examination of an interesting and carefully prepared essay which will reveal many things to those who are not able to buy and read the great “source-books” of history. Were it conceded that the Christian religion is not supernatural in its origin, then there would be no great argument upon the general conclusions of the book. But did Christianity evolve from the “welter of religious movements that characterised the Graeco-Roman world at the beginning of our era ” ? There lies the point at issue. G. H. J.