Religious Opinion

This may be described as an anthology of religious verse and prose, admirable as a bedside book. The somnolent reader makes a lucky dip, and there, presto, is one of Rilke’s shorter poems, a passage from Kierkegaard, or less happily, a rhapsody by Edward Carpenter. Since the author disclaims in his preface any intention to expound or illustrate a theological position, he cannot be accused of inconsistency when neighbouring extracts are contradictory.

The main virtue of the book, apart from the anecdotal liveliness inevitable in a selection from first-rate philosophers, poets, and theologians, lies in the fact that it does in some measure reconcile differing religious attitudes under the common blanket of charity; the main fault is that Mr Gollancz has not formed a clear enough idea of what his message shall be. A ‘mood’ is not sufficient to bind together attitudes superficially similar but fundamentally diverse – for example, Traherne and Wordsworth. The mingling of many voices becomes at times a distressing hubbub, not a harmony. One is left mildly exalted but still uncertain whom to believe. Like Huxley’s more ambitious Perennial Philosophy, Mr Gollancz’s book attempts a synthesis of discordant religious opinion and achieves it only by blurring basic distinctions.

Many readers nevertheless will be grateful to him for introducing them to new fields. The excellent selections from Hasidic sayings point to the book which Mr Gollancz could have written if he had not spread his net so wide. The combination of dry wit and profound moral insight shown in these fables, sandwiched here between passages of theological dissertation, would have been a warrant of greater unity of mood. But A Year of Grace, conceived page 64with the best intentions, is imperfect in execution, and lacks this necessary unity.

1951 (44)