HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume VII, Issue 391, 8 September 1876, Page 3

HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE.

John "William Draper, M.D., LL.I).

Part 111. We are next privileged with a statement about the Paganisation of Christianity, and about Christian Emperors, at the instigation of Christian bishops, persecuting the pagans ; but in all this there is no conflict between religion and science. Ihe author has been hunting down through more than seven centuries, and, not finding one point of contact, it is quite allowable for him to make or manufacture one. On page 54 we have this attempt at a manufacture of the article. Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria—acknowledged oa all hands to have been a "luxurious, imperious, and violent prelate " —is.religion, and the pagan temple " Serapis " is science. According to Dr. Draper's own account, the pagans were the first to resort to violence, and this because Theophilus was imprudent enough to exhibit in the market place the obscene symbols of the Egyptian worship, which had been discovered in the ruins of an ancient temple of Osiris. A riot ensued; science made the Serapeion its head quarters; the Emperor interfered, and commanded the Patriarch to destroy the Serapeion, "and the great library, which had been collected by the Ptolemies, and had escaped the fire of Julius Csesar, was by that fanatic dispersed." The idea, besides being incorrect in history, is preposterous. This was a conflict not between "religion and science, but between Christians and pagans, and the books in the Serapeion were, if at all, destroyed as a result of this conflict. We have another supposed conflict between sci«nce and religion. Hypatia is science this time, and Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria, is religion. Hear his words, " Hypatia and Cyril! Philosophy and bigotry !" No wonder the author is so fierce. He has been running down through eight centuries, and has never found a real valid conflict, and like a ravening lion, he falls upon Cyril, and tears him to pieces. We do not justify Cyril—far from it; but we ask how the author makes the Alexandrian Patriarch out to be religion, and how, too, be confidently assures his readers, that Cyril was guilty. He also says, " For this frightful crime Cyril was never called to account." It was merely supposed he had to do with it. " A mob of many monks " did the deed—waylaid the noble Hypatia, stripped her, and dragged her into a Church, and . there murdered her. One of Cyril's enemies gravely charged him with Uie orim*. Ho was never called to account, and Uie statement of his guilt should not go forth

as if he had been tried, found guilty, and condemned. Another conflict still (p. 56). Augustine is religion ; PelagiuSj a British monk, is science. .Religion and science both within the pale of the Church. This, according to Draper, is the. sum of the whole controversy : " To affirm that death was in the world before the fall of Adaai was a state crime." We should not have had to Inform Dr. Draper that this was not the point in dispute. He might have known as much, and then we would hare been spared the piece of declamation which we have in the next page. He there says, " Since the question was purely philosophical, one might have supposed that it would have been discussed on natural principles > instead of that, theological considerations alone were introduced." Professor Kurtz says, " The following are the leading outlines of Pelagius' system: Man had originally been created liable to physical death ; eternal, not physical, death was the consequence and punishment of sin " (p. 210 Church History). We hardly know what to do with an author whose disregard of historical truth is so persistent. Augustine comes in for a considerable share of abuse. We have this assertion in p. 58, " As the doctrines of St. Augustine have had the effect of thus placing theology in antagonism with science, it may be interesting to examine briefly some of the more purely philosophical opinions of that great man." This is quite new. Augustine passed through philosophy into the Christian church. For eleven years lie sought rest* in Manichasan philosophy. JN T ot being able to find any, he next entered the school: and, his search there proving equally unsatisfactory, he entered the Christian church in the thirty-third year of his age. His training, you would imagine, should have enabled him to do justice both to science and religion. He placed them, to believe our author, in antagonism. We are next favored with this churchman's philosophical views. The book called " Confessions " is selected, and a few extracts are given, ending in this fashion : " Considering the eminent authority which has been, attributed to the writings of St. Augustine by the religious world for nearly fifteen centuries, it ia proper to speak of them with respect. And, indeed, it is not necessary to do otherwise. The paragraphs here quoted criticise themselves." A sneer, on a par with the sentiments of the author. Why did he go to the " Confessions " for the more pure philosophy of Augustine? "The 'Confessions,' a deep, earnest, sacred autobiography of one of the greatest intellects the world has eve<* seen. Passages in it have no parallel, except in the Psalms of " (writer in Chambers Encyclopaedia). Augustine wrote many books, not a few of them upon pure philosophy, and any other more likely to contain science than this one. His "de civitate Dei," with all its errors and mistakes —and where is the production who has not any of these?—is said to be "one of the most profound and lasting monuments of human genius." Draper's treatment of Augustine is merely abuse. We pass over chapters 3, 4, and 5. The 3rd is a eulogislic and brief history of the rise and progress of Mohammedanism. The fourth is a somewhat one-sided account of the state of learning under Mohammedan dominion, and the fifth is a rather discursive examination of Averroisin in which, "active intellect," "Eniin-a-tion " and " apsorption " play important parts. We say rather discursive, because the author flits up and down the centuries as if these were as many months. He , seems a stranger aud a pilgrim among the j the ages. Throughout these hundred pages of the book, and thousand years of ■ the existence of the world, ouly one conI flict is found. It happened in Spain, over Averroism, in which Dominicians, Jews, j and Moors took a part—a kind of general skirmish. j {To be continued.)