THE author of this book tells us that in his youth he had “what might be considered an extremely heavy dose of religion." Yet because he "possessed a genuine craving for knowledge and truth" he found the intellectual atmosphere of the small college he entered stifling. This small college was "known for the fact that eighty per cent of its graduates entered the ministry." The following year he entered "one of our great Eastern colleges, as a sophomore.” Two of his first courses were the history of philosophy and religious education. "The history of philosophy was the story of man's intellectual emancipation from the superstitions and blinding beliefs of religion. It described the birth of science through the martyrdom of men who dared to defy the dogmas of the church." Of this course the author says further: "It was about the most illuminating and stimulating course I have ever taken. It was the perfect answer to certain doubts about religion previously aroused in my mind. It gave me a tremendous respect for the powers of reason and for the revelations of science, and it left religion without a leg to stand on." (p. 8.) The course in religious education, the author tells us, made all his previous conceptions of the Bible seem childish.
In order to complete the picture of the ruin of his early religious convictions, the author adds a word about the course in anthropology. "Its high point was the lecture, in which the professor drew a small circle on the blackboard and a large circle around it.
"'This small circle,' he explained, ‘includes the realm of scientific facts, the things we really know and can prove, the facts of physics, chemistry, mathematics, etc. Between this larger circle and the smaller circle,' he said, 'lies the field of partly proven facts, of half-knowledge… Outside of this area of half-knowledge lies the whole realm of superstitions, beliefs, and notions for which we have no proof of any kind. The idea of God and the beliefs of religion fall in this indeterminate area. We cannot prove the existence of God, neither can we prove that he does not exist. In respect to this great field, the truly intellectual man can only say, 'I don't know.’''
What was the result of this instruction on the beliefs of the college students? To this question the author replies as follows: "The students divided themselves roughly into two groups, those who did not take their professors too seriously or were too stupid to understand the full significance of what was being taught, and those who were earnest seekers after truth or possessed good minds. The duller the student, the more likely it was that his religion would remain intact, in a logic-tight compartment which his studies failed to penetrate. The more analytic a student, the more penetrating his search for truth, the higher his I.Q., the more likely he was to be stripped of his religious beliefs. I was a Phi Beta Kappa student, and the higher education left me a complete and powerfully fortified agnostic” (p. 10).
But now the author has come back to a belief in religion. Moreover, he has come back to religion because of the "discoveries of scientific psychology.” This sounds very encouraging. We are anxious to hear of these “discoveries." Many a Christian parent whose sons or daughters have, like Dr. Link, become "powerfully fortified” agnostics, will hastily turn the pages of this book for help. Their sons and daughters were unwilling to listen to their arguments, but surely they will listen to the "discoveries of scientific psychology.”
Unfortunately, however, such parents will discover, ere they have finished the first chapter, that the “discoveries of scientific psychology" have not led the author back to historic Christianity. Says Dr. Link: “However, in so far as I can sum up what I mean by religion, it includes the belief in God as a Supreme Being; the belief in a divine moral order expressed in the Ten Commandments and in the life of Christ, and the acceptance of the Church as the chief, even though imperfect, vehicle of religious truths that are greater than science, and values that are higher than reason" (p. 14).
Now we do certainly rejoice that the author's work in psychology has led him back to this much of religion. To have this sort of religion is better than to have no religion at all. Yet this religion is not the Christian religion. The "discoveries of psychology,” as described and interpreted by the author, do not lead guilty sinners to the foot of the cross of Christ to escape the wrath of God.
Thus our high expectations drop. As orthodox Christians we may indeed get some help from such a book as this. We may learn from it that bold rationalistic interpretations of the universe have failed to satisfy many leading scientists. We may learn from it that many scientists today admit the fact of Mystery, But all this can only bring to the brink of despair, unless we may surely believe in a positive revelation of God! When you are lost in the' woods it is better to know it than not to know It. But to know that you are lost and to know of no way of escape is surely nothing to be desired, and this knowledge that "reason" is lost in the woods is all that the author offers.