HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume VII, Issue 393, 22 September 1876, Page 3

HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE.

John William Draper, M.D., LL.D.

Part V. Giordano Bmno is Dr. Draper's next martyr. He was a veritablo martyr. He died for his Pantheism burnt in the streets of Rome, 1600 A.D. A few more sentences and our work, as we apprehend it, is done. Dr. Draper„puts this into the mouth of Tertullian (p. 45), " He labors to show that the Scriptures are the standard and measure of all truth, and whatever is inconsistent with them must necessarily be false." A few pages further on that statement is transformed into this (p. 52 ), "The Christian party asserted that all knowledge is to be found in the Scriptures and in the traditions of the Church; that, in the written revelation, God had not only given a criterion of truth, but had furnished us all He intended us to know." Does Draper mean to say that these statements are synonymous ? In p. 62 the statement now is, "A divine revelation of science admits of no improvement, no change, no advance." We don't car© to trace the same assertion farther. We give it as an instance of how his statements accumulate falsehood, and grow into what he would like them to avo been at first. We have merely to demand his authority for making such a charge against any Church. We have asserted that Dr. Draper selects the extreme best in science. As an evidence of this we direct the attention of his readers to the fact that astrology, is only barely mentioned, and never as a hobby of those scientific heroes whose praises he has sounded so loudly. Why did he not tell us that astronomy was cultivated for many hundreds of years with a view to astrology, and that Ptolemy, to whom " belongs the singular distinction of being the sole existing authority on the subject of ancient astronomy," was himself a devoted astrologist, and that his " successors were men of no mark, confining themselves for the most part to astrology.'? Why does he not tell that this devotion to astrology retarded the progress of the science for more than a thousand years, and that astronomy is, in the main, a mere accidental outcome of astrology p Again he is as silent upon alchymy as he is upon astrology, and it is well known that alchymy alone furnished motive power to those Arabs, the result of whose labors was Chemistry, We are amazed at the audacity of the man, and yet he calls himself an impartial scientific historian. We have just one word upon an artful device of his. His science is by no means a system. It is a mere conglomeration of items. He breaks the ball into pieces, and fills the book with infinitesimal items. When reading we often wondered if ever there was to be an end to the employment of this sleight-of-hand device. It is the plan of the book. He runs over the items again and again, as if he were an automatic machine. What Hallam has put into one sentence or so covers many many pages of Draper's book. Thus Draper beats thinner than the finest of gold leaf this, " The Ehalif Almamun, especially, was distinguished for his patronage of letters; the philosophical writings of Greece were eagerly sought and translated; the stars were numbered, the course of the planets was measured ; the Arabians improved upon the science they borrowed,- and returned it with abundant interest to Europe in the communication of numeral figures, and the intellectual language of algebra." This one sentence is made to cover furlongs in Draper's book, and you will never hear him speak of the Arabs as Hallam does in the very next sentence, "Yet the merit oi Abassides has been exaggerated by adulation or gratitude (The Middle Ages, p. 391). 6 1 We find ourselves now asking, What is the meaning of all this ? What is the|intention of the author? Does he mean to servescience by detracting Christianity, or what object can he have in view? yye seem to find some clue to his intention in this, which we find in the preface, " When the old mjthological religion of Europe broke down under the weight of its own inconsistencies, neither the Roman Emperors nor the philosophers of those times did anything adequate for the guidance of public opinion. They left religious affairs to take their chance." There is no truth in this statement. We refer the author to section 44, Kurtz Church History, where he may find an account of the efforts made to prop up the mythological religion. There was in the Augustan age first Neo-Pythagoreanism, propped up by theurgy and magic. Apollonius of Tyana was the principle representative of this direction. "In the second century an attempt was made to revive the secret rites of the ancient mysteries of the Dea Syra and of Mythvas. But all this proved insufficient." And when it was still seen that heathenism must die, a desperate effort was made by the Neo-Platonists, in the commencement of the third century, to combine the best in the philosophy of the East and of tbo West, to exhibit a universal religion, so complete that Christianity might appear " one-sided, poor, and defective." The noblest spirits in the heathen world took part in this movement. Plutarch of Chaeronea led the van, Ammonius Sacchus became, properly speaking, the founder, and the development fell to the lot of Plotinus, Porphyrius, and Jamblychus. Still, though Draper's stikuneni has little truth in it, there we find what he considers his effort to be — an adequate effort to ghide public opinion in this, the nge of the decline and death of Christianity. We think we may now leave others to judge how "adequate" the effort is. In our estimation tlie ef-

forfc ia a failure in more ways than one. there is no contribution to science, and the history of the conflict has yet to be written. In our estimation, we have said, Dr. Draper-has not written the history of the conflict, and, what is still as apparent, could not have written it. He knows and he believes in science. He neither knows what Christianity is nor believes in it. You cannot read one- single page of Lis work without being convinced of his profound knowledge of science, and of his profound ignorance of Christianity. How could the man, so ignorant of Christianity, and so unbelieving, form an estimate of the immense benefits of the religion of Jesus P That there are accretions gathered in the course ©f ages, and adhering to Christianity, is a recognised fact. But we are perfectly able to distinguish the dross from the golden ore, and to understand how beneficial in 'all ages Christianity has been, and how much of our present is due to it, and how glorious our future may under its banner yet be. " The Christian Church is that divine institution for the salvation of men, which Jesus Christ has founded, upon earth. The object and end of the Church is, that the salvation wrought out by Jesus should be communicated to, and appointed by, every nation and every individual." M.S. (Conclusion?)