History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science by John
William Draper

HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT
BETWEEN
RELIGION AND SCIENCE

BY
JOHN WILLIAM DRAPER, M. D., LL. D.
PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK,
AUTHOR OF
A TREATISE ON HUMAN PHYSIOLOGY, HISTORY OF THE INTELLECTUAL
DEVELOPMENT OF EUROPE, HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR,
AND OF MANY EXPERIMENTAL MEMOIRS ON CHEMICAL
AND OTHER SCIENTIFIC SUBJECTS

PREFACE.

WHOEVER has had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the
mental condition of the intelligent classes in Europe and
America, must have perceived that there is a great and
rapidly-increasing departure from the public religious faith, and
that, while among the more frank this divergence is not
concealed, there is a far more extensive and far more dangerous
secession, private and unacknowledged.

So wide-spread and so powerful is this secession, that it can
neither be treated with contempt nor with punishment. It cannot
be extinguished by derision, by vituperation, or by force. The
time is rapidly approaching when it will give rise to serious
political results.

Ecclesiastical spirit no longer inspires the policy of the world.
Military fervor in behalf of faith has disappeared. Its only
souvenirs are the marble effigies of crusading knights, reposing
in the silent crypts of churches on their tombs.

That a crisis is impending is shown by the attitude of the great
powers toward the papacy. The papacy represents the ideas and
aspirations of two-thirds of the population of Europe. It insists
on a political supremacy in accordance with its claims to a
divine origin and mission, and a restoration of the mediaeval
order of things, loudly declaring that it will accept no
reconciliation with modern civilization.

The antagonism we thus witness between Religion and Science is
the continuation of a struggle that commenced when Christianity
began to attain political power. A divine revelation must
necessarily be intolerant of contradiction; it must repudiate all
improvement in itself, and view with disdain that arising from
the progressive intellectual development of man. But our opinions
on every subject are continually liable to modification, from the
irresistible advance of human knowledge.

Can we exaggerate the importance of a contention in which every
thoughtful person must take part whether he will or not? In a
matter so solemn as that of religion, all men, whose temporal
interests are not involved in existing institutions, earnestly
desire to find the truth. They seek information as to the
subjects in dispute, and as to the conduct of the disputants.

The history of Science is not a mere record of isolated
discoveries; it is a narrative of the conflict of two contending
powers, the expansive force of the human intellect on one side,
and the compression arising from traditionary faith and human
interests on the other.

No one has hitherto treated the subject from this point of view.
Yet from this point it presents itself to us as a living
issue--in fact, as the most important of all living issues.

A few years ago, it was the politic and therefore the proper
course to abstain from all allusion to this controversy, and to
keep it as far as possible in the background. The tranquillity of
society depends so much on the stability of its religious
convictions, that no one can be justified in wantonly disturbing
them. But faith is in its nature unchangeable, stationary;
Science is in its nature progressive; and eventually a divergence
between them, impossible to conceal, must take place. It then
becomes the duty of those whose lives have made them familiar
with both modes of thought, to present modestly, but firmly,
their views; to compare the antagonistic pretensions calmly,
impartially, philosophically. History shows that, if this be not
done, social misfortunes, disastrous and enduring, will ensue.
When the old mythological religion of Europe broke down under the
weight of its own inconsistencies, neither the Roman emperors nor
the philosophers of those times did any thing adequate for the
guidance of public opinion. They left religious affairs to take
their chance, and accordingly those affairs fell into the hands
of ignorant and infuriated ecclesiastics, parasites, eunuchs, and
slaves.

The intellectual night which settled on Europe, in consequence of
that great neglect of duty, is passing away; we live in the
daybreak of better things. Society is anxiously expecting light,
to see in what direction it is drifting. It plainly discerns that
the track along which the voyage of civilization has thus far
been made, has been left; and that a new departure, on all
unknown sea, has been taken.

Though deeply impressed with such thoughts, I should not have
presumed to write this book, or to intrude on the public the
ideas it presents, had I not made the facts with which it deals a
subject of long and earnest meditation. And I have gathered a
strong incentive to undertake this duty from the circumstance
that a "History of the Intellectual Development of Europe,"
published by me several years ago, which has passed through many
editions in America, and has been reprinted in numerous European
languages, English, French, German, Russian, Polish, Servian,
etc., is everywhere received with favor.

In collecting and arranging the materials for the volumes I
published under the title of "A History of the American Civil
War," a work of very great labor, I had become accustomed to the
comparison of conflicting statements, the adjustment of
conflicting claims. The approval with which that book has been
received by the American public, a critical judge of the events
considered, has inspired me with additional confidence. I had
also devoted much attention to the experimental investigation of
natural phenomena, and had published many well-known memoirs on
such subjects. And perhaps no one can give himself to these
pursuits, and spend a large part of his life in the public
teaching of science, without partaking of that love of
impartiality and truth which Philosophy incites. She inspires us
with a desire to dedicate our days to the good of our race, so
that in the fading light of life's evening we may not, on looking
back, be forced to acknowledge how unsubstantial and useless are
the objects that we have pursued.

Though I have spared no pains in the composition of this book, I
am very sensible how unequal it is to the subject, to do justice
to which a knowledge of science, history, theology, politics, is
required; every page should be alive with intelligence and
glistening with facts. But then I have remembered that this is
only as it were the preface, or forerunner, of a body of
literature, which the events and wants of our times will call
forth. We have come to the brink of a great intellectual change.
Much of the frivolous reading of the present will be supplanted
by a thoughtful and austere literature, vivified by endangered
interests, and made fervid by ecclesiastical passion.

What I have sought to do is, to present a clear and impartial
statement of the views and acts of the two contending parties. In
one sense I have tried to identify myself with each, so as to
comprehend thoroughly their motives; but in another and higher
sense I have endeavored to stand aloof, and relate with
impartiality their actions.

I therefore trust that those, who may be disposed to criticise
this book, will bear in mind that its object is not to advocate
the views and pretensions of either party, but to explain
clearly, and without shrinking those of both. In the management
of each chapter I have usually set forth the orthodox view first,
and then followed it with that of its opponents.

In thus treating the subject it has not been necessary to pay
much regard to more moderate or intermediate opinions, for,
though they may be intrinsically of great value, in conflicts of
this kind it is not with the moderates but with the extremists
that the impartial reader is mainly concerned. Their movements
determine the issue.

For this reason I have had little to say respecting the two great
Christian confessions, the Protestant and Greek Churches. As to
the latter, it has never, since the restoration of science,
arrayed itself in opposition to the advancement of knowledge. On
the contrary, it has always met it with welcome. It has observed
a reverential attitude to truth, from whatever quarter it might
come. Recognizing the apparent discrepancies between its
interpretations of revealed truth and the discoveries of science,
it has always expected that satisfactory explanations and
reconciliations would ensue, and in this it has not been
disappointed. It would have been well for modern civilization if
the Roman Church had done the same.

In speaking of Christianity, reference is generally made to the
Roman Church, partly because its adherents compose the majority
of Christendom, partly because its demands are the most
pretentious, and partly because it has commonly sought to enforce
those demands by the civil power. None of the Protestant Churches
has ever occupied a position so imperious--none has ever had such
wide-spread political influence. For the most part they have been
averse to constraint, and except in very few instances their
opposition has not passed beyond the exciting of theological
odium.

As to Science, she has never sought to ally herself to civil
power. She has never attempted to throw odium or inflict social
ruin on any human being. She has never subjected any one to
mental torment, physical torture, least of all to death, for the
purpose of upholding or promoting her ideas. She presents herself
unstained by cruelties and crimes. But in the Vatican-- we have
only to recall the Inquisition--the hands that are now raised in
appeals to the Most Merciful are crimsoned. They have been
steeped in blood!

There are two modes of historical composition, the artistic and
the scientific. The former implies that men give origin to
events; it therefore selects some prominent individual, pictures
him under a fanciful form, and makes him the hero of a romance.