Dawkins-Dennett-Harris-Hitchens
We have become accustomed to regarding Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens as a new breed of anti-religious scientists. Some call them "The Four Horsemen" of the New Atheist movement.
But way back in the misty origins of modern science - which is only mid 1800s - a group of 9 "scientists" formed an alliance with an agenda to gain for science authority and influence which "the church" then possessed.
Who were the X Club?
The X club - hoped to be 10 but only 9 in the end - consisted of the following men:
- Joseph Dalton Hooker
- Thomas Huxley (probably the most famous and most outspoken)
- John Tyndall
- John Lubbock
- William Spottiswoode
- Edward Frankland
- George Busk
- Thomas Archer Hirst
- Herbert Spencer
By the 1850s they were all in London. Back then it was nigh on impossible to gain a living through scientific employment, as we now know it, so many of these men ended up supporting themselves by other means, whether pensions, journalism or translation.
“few leading scientific men had paid employment in science, and landed gentlemen, lawyers and medical men and businessmen devoted their considerable spare time to science.” (page 41)
All of them were religious to some degree - no-one in those days England admitted to being an atheist, but their religious convictions varied from sincere to liberal.
Their main influence was between a 15 year window from mid 1860s to 1880s.
Here's how they gained influence for themselves and for science:
- they hob-nobbed with the good and the great, hanging out at the many clubs that characterised Victorian London
- they used religious terms to describe their work; they were evangelists and missionaries for example, seeking converts to to the faith of science
- they ran Sunday evening science lectures - rather direct and provocative competition in a Sabbatarian culture!
- they used every human title they could muster to bolster their authority, whether Dr, Baron, Professor, you name it, they claimed it
- they ran lectures for working men - reminiscent of evangelists Wesley and Whitfield
- they used journalism and books to gain influence
- they promoted evolution and were openly sceptical about the power of prayer
By the 1880s their star had fallen and disagreements among them along with old age and ill-health brought their rein to an end - much like our modern four horsemen whose star has largely waned.
I draw comparison between the two groups of scientists, though separated by 150 years, because, according to the author, Ruth Barton:
“X Club members were distinctly militant.” (page 371)
Lessons
I so enjoyed reading this book and wholly commend it to you - if you have the time for the 500 pages!
But this is what I take away from the book, and that period of time, for today:
Religion can be a real hindrance to true Christianity
Unfortunately, England was filled with much (false) religion which lacked any real spiritual power. And right throughout the country the curse of Christendom - the unbiblical (and unholy) alliance between church and state - proved a vast hindrance to the true Gospel.
No churchmen should have had "authority" in the land. No scientists should have thought of the church as an institution which possessed secular power which could be envied.
The animosity this group of men felt was wholly unnecssary and has left us with the legacy of "science vs religion."
All oppostion falls one day
In just a short season of time - a mere eyeblink of 15 years - their power was gone. Why do we fret over enemies of the Gospel, when ill health and mortality will take them all away?
All scientists are biased
It's in the nature of the beast. We begin with presuppositions, assumptions, presumptions before we enter the lab. Even metaphysical presuppositions influence the study of the material world (which is the domain of science).
Science is a noble occupation and a wonderful endeavour. It is very much the friend of true Christianity and never its foe.
No comments:
Post a Comment