We have seen that Bergson holds no special brief for science, for, as has been shown, he opposes many of the hypotheses to which science clings.  Consequently, some persons possessing only a superficial acquaintance with Bergson, and having minds which still think in the exclusive and opposing terms of the conflict of science and religion of a generation past, have enthusiastically hailed him as an ally of their religion.  We must examine carefully how far this is justifiable.  It is perfectly natural and just that many people, unable to devote time or energy to the study of his works, want to know, in regard to Bergson, as about every other great thinker, what is the bearing of his thought on their practical theory of life, upon their ideals of existence, upon the courage, faith, and hope which enable them to work and live, feeling that life is worth while.  We must, however, guard against misuse of Bergson, particularly such misuse of him as that made in another sphere, by the Syndicalists.  We find that in France he has been welcomed by the Modernists of the Roman Catholic Church as an ally, and by not a few liberal and progressive Christian theologians in this country.

At the outset, we must note that Bergson avoids theological forms of expression, because he is well aware that these—­especially in a philosophical treatise—­may give rise to misconceptions.  He does not, like Kant, attack any specific or traditional argument for Theism; he does not enter into theological controversy.  He has not formulated, with any strictness, his conception of God; for he has recognized that an examination of Theism would be of little or no value, which was not prefaced by a refutation of mechanism and materialism, and by the assertion of some spiritual value in the universe.  It is to such a labour that Bergson has applied himself; it is only incidentally that we find him making remarks on religious or theological conceptions.  His whole philosophy, however, involves some very important religious conceptions and theological standpoints.  In France, Bergson has had a considerable amount of discussion on the theological implications of his philosophy with the Jesuit Fathers, notably Father de Tonquedec.  These arise particularly from his views concerning Change, Time, Freedom, Evolution and Intuition.

Bergson has been cited as a “Mystic” because he preaches a doctrine of Intuition.  But his metaphysical Intuition bears no relation to the mysticism of the saint or of the fervid religious mind.  He expressly says, “The doctrine I hold is a protest against mysticism since it professes to reconstruct the bridge (broken since Kant) between metaphysics and science.”  Yet, if by mysticism one means a certain appeal to the inner and profound life, then his philosophy is mystical—­ but so is all philosophy.  We must beware of any attempts to run Bergson’s thought into moulds for which it was never intended, and guard against its being strained and falsely interpreted in the interests of