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 mentalcondition of the intelligent classes in Europe and America, must haveperceived that there is a great and rapidly-increasing departure fromthe public religious faith, and that, while among the more frank thisdivergence is not concealed, there is a far more extensive and far moredangerous secession, private and unacknowledged. 

So wide-spread and so powerful is this secession, that it can neither betreated with contempt nor with punishment. It cannot be extinguished byderision, by vituperation, or by force. The time is rapidly approachingwhen 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 souvenirsare the marble effigies of crusading knights, reposing in the silentcrypts of churches on their tombs. 

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

The antagonism we thus witness between Religion and Science is thecontinuation of a struggle that commenced when Christianity beganto attain political power. A divine revelation must necessarily beintolerant of contradiction; it must repudiate all improvement initself, and view with disdain that arising from the progressiveintellectual development of man. But our opinions on every subject arecontinually liable to modification, from the irresistible advance ofhuman knowledge. 

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

The history of Science is not a mere record of isolated discoveries; itis a narrative of the conflict of two contending powers, the expansiveforce of the human intellect on one side, and the compression arisingfrom traditionary faith and human interests on the other. 

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

A few years ago, it was the politic and therefore the proper course toabstain from all allusion to this controversy, and to keep it as far aspossible in the background. The tranquillity of society depends somuch on the stability of its religious convictions, that no one canbe justified in wantonly disturbing them. But faith is in its natureunchangeable, stationary; Science is in its nature progressive; andeventually a divergence between them, impossible to conceal, must takeplace. It then becomes the duty of those whose lives have made themfamiliar with both modes of thought, to present modestly, butfirmly, 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 oldmythological religion of Europe broke down under the weight of its owninconsistencies, neither the Roman emperors nor the philosophers ofthose times did any thing adequate for the guidance of public opinion. They left religious affairs to take their chance, and accordingly thoseaffairs fell into the hands of ignorant and infuriated ecclesiastics, parasites, eunuchs, and slaves. 

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

Though deeply impressed with such thoughts, I should not have presumedto 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 andearnest meditation. And I have gathered a strong incentive to undertakethis duty from the circumstance that a "History of the IntellectualDevelopment of Europe, " published by me several years ago, which haspassed through many editions in America, and has been reprinted innumerous European languages, English, French, German, Russian, Polish, Servian, etc. , is everywhere received with favor. 

In collecting and arranging the materials for the volumes I publishedunder the title of "A History of the American Civil War, " a work of verygreat labor, I had become accustomed to the comparison of conflictingstatements, the adjustment of conflicting claims. The approval withwhich that book has been received by the American public, a criticaljudge of the events considered, has inspired me with additionalconfidence. I had also devoted much attention to the experimentalinvestigation of natural phenomena, and had published many well-knownmemoirs on such subjects. And perhaps no one can give himself to thesepursuits, and spend a large part of his life in the public teaching ofscience, without partaking of that love of impartiality and truth whichPhilosophy incites. She inspires us with a desire to dedicate our daysto the good of our race, so that in the fading light of life's eveningwe may not, on looking back, be forced to acknowledge how unsubstantialand useless are the objects that we have pursued. 

Though I have spared no pains in the composition of this book, I amvery sensible how unequal it is to the subject, to do justice to whicha knowledge of science, history, theology, politics, is required; everypage should be alive with intelligence and glistening with facts. Butthen I have remembered that this is only as it were the preface, orforerunner, of a body of literature, which the events and wants of ourtimes will call forth. We have come to the brink of a great intellectualchange. Much of the frivolous reading of the present will be supplantedby a thoughtful and austere literature, vivified by endangeredinterests, and made fervid by ecclesiastical passion. 

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

I therefore trust that those, who may be disposed to criticise thisbook, will bear in mind that its object is not to advocate the viewsand pretensions of either party, but to explain clearly, and withoutshrinking those of both. In the management of each chapter I haveusually set forth the orthodox view first, and then followed it withthat of its opponents. 

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

For this reason I have had little to say respecting the two greatChristian confessions, the Protestant and Greek Churches. As to thelatter, it has never, since the restoration of science, arrayed itselfin opposition to the advancement of knowledge. On the contrary, it hasalways met it with welcome. It has observed a reverential attitude totruth, from whatever quarter it might come. Recognizing the apparentdiscrepancies between its interpretations of revealed truth and thediscoveries of science, it has always expected that satisfactoryexplanations and reconciliations would ensue, and in this it has notbeen disappointed. It would have been well for modern civilization ifthe Roman Church had done the same. 

In speaking of Christianity, reference is generally made to theRoman Church, partly because its adherents compose the majority ofChristendom, partly because its demands are the most pretentious, andpartly because it has commonly sought to enforce those demands bythe civil power. None of the Protestant Churches has ever occupied aposition so imperious--none has ever had such wide-spread politicalinfluence. For the most part they have been averse to constraint, andexcept in very few instances their opposition has not passed beyond theexciting of theological odium. 

As to Science, she has never sought to ally herself to civil power. Shehas never attempted to throw odium or inflict social ruin on any humanbeing. She has never subjected any one to mental torment, physicaltorture, least of all to death, for the purpose of upholding orpromoting her ideas. She presents herself unstained by cruelties andcrimes. But in the Vatican--we have only to recall the Inquisition--thehands 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 thescientific. The former implies that men give origin to events; ittherefore selects some prominent individual, pictures him undera fanciful form, and makes him the hero of a romance. The latter, insisting that human affairs present an unbroken chain, in which eachfact is the offspring of some preceding fact, and the parent of somesubsequent fact, declares that men do not control events, but thatevents control men. The former gives origin to compositions, which, however much they may interest or delight us, are but a grade abovenovels; the latter is austere, perhaps even repulsive, for it sternlyimpresses us with a conviction of the irresistible dominion of law, andthe insignificance of human exertions. In a subject so solemn as that towhich this book is devoted, the romantic and the popular are altogetherout of place. He who presumes to treat of it must fix his eyessteadfastly on that chain of destiny which universal history displays;he must turn with disdain from the phantom impostures of pontiffs andstatesmen and kings. 

If any thing were needed to show us the untrustworthiness of artistichistorical compositions, our personal experience would furnish it. Howoften do our most intimate friends fail to perceive the real motives ofour every-day actions; how frequently they misinterpret our intentions!If this be the case in what is passing before our eyes, may we notbe satisfied that it is impossible to comprehend justly the doings ofpersons who lived many years ago, and whom we have never seen. 

In selecting and arranging the topics now to be presented, I have beenguided in part by "the Confession" of the late Vatican Council, and inpart by the order of events in history. Not without interest will thereader remark that the subjects offer themselves to us now as they didto the old philosophers of Greece. We still deal with the same questionsabout which they disputed. What is God? What is the soul? What is theworld? How is it governed? Have we any standard or criterion of truth?And the thoughtful reader will earnestly ask, "Are our solutions ofthese problems any better than theirs?"

The general argument of this book, then, is as follows:

I first direct attention to the origin of modern science asdistinguished from ancient, by depending on observation, experiment, and mathematical discussion, instead of mere speculation, and shall showthat it was a consequence of the Macedonian campaigns, which broughtAsia and Europe into contact. A brief sketch of those campaigns, and ofthe Museum of Alexandria, illustrates its character. 

Then with brevity I recall the well-known origin of Christianity, andshow its advance to the attainment of imperial power, the transformationit underwent by its incorporation with paganism, the existing religionof the Roman Empire. A clear conception of its incompatibility withscience caused it to suppress forcibly the Schools of Alexandria. It wasconstrained to this by the political necessities of its position. 

The parties to the conflict thus placed, I next relate the story oftheir first open struggle; it is the first or Southern Reformation. Thepoint in dispute had respect to the nature of God. It involved the riseof Mohammedanism. Its result was, that much of Asia and Africa, with thehistoric cities Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Carthage, were wrenched fromChristendom, and the doctrine of the Unity of God established in thelarger portion of what had been the Roman Empire. 

This political event was followed by the restoration of science, theestablishment of colleges, schools, libraries, throughout the dominionsof the Arabians. Those conquerors, pressing forward rapidly in theirintellectual development, rejected the anthropomorphic ideas of thenature of God remaining in their popular belief, and accepted other morephilosophical ones, akin to those that had long previously been attainedto in India. The result of this was a second conflict, that respectingthe nature of the soul. Under the designation of Averroism, there cameinto prominence the theories of Emanation and Absorption. At theclose of the middle ages the Inquisition succeeded in excluding thosedoctrines from Europe, and now the Vatican Council has formally andsolemnly anathematized them. 

Meantime, through the cultivation of astronomy, geography, and othersciences, correct views had been gained as to the position and relationsof the earth, and as to the structure of the world; and since Religion, resting itself on what was assumed to be the proper interpretationof the Scriptures, insisted that the earth is the central and mostimportant part of the universe, a third conflict broke out. In thisGalileo led the way on the part of Science. Its issue was the overthrowof the Church on the question in dispute. Subsequently a subordinatecontroversy arose respecting the age of the world, the Church insistingthat it is only about six thousand years old. In this she was againoverthrown The light of history and of science had been graduallyspreading over Europe. In the sixteenth century the prestige of RomanChristianity was greatly diminished by the intellectual reverses ithad experienced, and also by its political and moral condition. It wasclearly seen by many pious men that Religion was not accountable forthe false position in which she was found, but that the misfortune wasdirectly traceable to the alliance she had of old contracted with Romanpaganism. The obvious remedy, therefore, was a return to primitivepurity. Thus arose the fourth conflict, known to us as theReformation--the second or Northern Reformation. The special form itassumed was a contest respecting the standard or criterion oftruth, whether it is to be found in the Church or in the Bible. Thedetermination of this involved a settlement of the rights of reason, orintellectual freedom. Luther, who is the conspicuous man of the epoch, carried into effect his intention with no inconsiderable success; and atthe close of the struggle it was found that Northern Europe was lost toRoman Christianity. 

We are now in the midst of a controversy respecting the mode ofgovernment of the world, whether it be by incessant divine intervention, or by the operation of primordial and unchangeable law. The intellectualmovement of Christendom has reached that point which Arabism hadattained to in the tenth and eleventh centuries; and doctrines whichwere then discussed are presenting themselves again for review; such arethose of Evolution, Creation, Development. 

Offered under these general titles, I think it will be found that allthe essential points of this great controversy are included. By groupingunder these comprehensive heads the facts to be considered, and dealingwith each group separately, we shall doubtless acquire clear views oftheir inter-connection and their historical succession. 

I have treated of these conflicts as nearly as I conveniently could intheir proper chronological order, and, for the sake of completeness, have added chapters on--

An examination of what Latin Christianity has done for moderncivilization. 

A corresponding examination of what Science has done. 

The attitude of Roman Christianity in the impending conflict, as definedby the Vatican Council. 

The attention of many truth-seeking persons has been so exclusivelygiven to the details of sectarian dissensions, that the long strife, tothe history of which these pages are devoted, is popularly but littleknown. Having tried to keep steadfastly in view the determination towrite this work in an impartial spirit, to speak with respect of thecontending parties, but never to conceal the truth, I commit it to theconsiderate judgment of the thoughtful reader. 

 JOHN WILLIAM DRAPER

UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK, December, 1878. 

HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE. 

CHAPTER I. 

 THE ORIGIN OF SCIENCE. 

 Religious condition of the Greeks in the fourth century before Christ. --Their invasion of the Persian Empire brings them in contact with new aspects of Nature, and familiarizes them with new religious systems. --The military, engineering, and scientific activity, stimulated by the Macedonian campaigns, leads to the establishment in Alexandria of an institute, the Museum, for the cultivation of knowledge by experiment, observation, and mathematical discussion. --It is the origin of Science. 

GREEK MYTHOLOGY. No spectacle can be presented to the thoughtfulmind more solemn, more mournful, than that of the dying of an ancientreligion, which in its day has given consolation to many generations ofmen. 

Four centuries before the birth of Christ, Greece was fast outgrowingher ancient faith. Her philosophers, in their studies of the world, hadbeen profoundly impressed with the contrast between the majesty of theoperations of Nature and the worthlessness of the divinities of Olympus. Her historians, considering the orderly course of political affairs, the manifest uniformity in the acts of men, and that there was no eventoccurring before their eyes for which they could not find an obviouscause in some preceding event, began to suspect that the miracles andcelestial interventions, with which the old annals were filled, wereonly fictions. They demanded, when the age of the supernatural hadceased, why oracles had become mute, and why there were now no moreprodigies in the world. 

Traditions, descending from immemorial antiquity, and formerly acceptedby pious men as unquestionable truths, had filled the islands ofthe Mediterranean and the conterminous countries with supernaturalwonders--enchantresses, sorcerers, giants, ogres, harpies, gorgons, centaurs, cyclops. The azure vault was the floor of heaven; there Zeus, surrounded by the gods with their wives and mistresses, held his court, engaged in pursuits like those of men, and not refraining from acts ofhuman passion and crime. 

A sea-coast broken by numerous indentations, an archipelago with some ofthe most lovely islands in the world, inspired the Greeks with a tastefor maritime life, for geographical discovery, and colonization. Their ships wandered all over the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Thetime-honored wonders that had been glorified in the "Odyssey, " andsacred in public faith, were found to have no existence. As a betterknowledge of Nature was obtained, the sky was shown to be an illusion;it was discovered that there is no Olympus, nothing above but space andstars. With the vanishing of their habitation, the gods disappeared, both those of the Ionian type of Homer and those of the Doric of Hesiod. 

EFFECTS OF DISCOVERY AND CRITICISM. But this did not take place withoutresistance. At first, the public, and particularly its religiousportion, denounced the rising doubts as atheism. They despoiled someof the offenders of their goods, exiled others; some they put to death. They asserted that what had been believed by pious men in the old times, and had stood the test of ages, must necessarily be true. Then, as theopposing evidence became irresistible, they were content to admit thatthese marvels were allegories under which the wisdom of the ancients hadconcealed many sacred and mysterious things. They tried to reconcile, what now in their misgivings they feared might be myths, with theiradvancing intellectual state. But their efforts were in vain, for thereare predestined phases through which on such an occasion public opinionmust pass. What it has received with veneration it begins to doubt, thenit offers new interpretations, then subsides into dissent, and ends witha rejection of the whole as a mere fable. 

In their secession the philosophers and historians were followed bythe poets. Euripides incurred the odium of heresy. Aeschylus narrowlyescaped being stoned to death for blasphemy. But the frantic effortsof those who are interested in supporting delusions must always end indefeat. The demoralization resistlessly extended through every branch ofliterature, until at length it reached the common people. 

THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. Greek philosophical criticism had lent its aid toGreek philosophical discovery in this destruction of the national faith. It sustained by many arguments the wide-spreading unbelief. It comparedthe doctrines of the different schools with each other, and showed fromtheir contradictions that man has no criterion of truth; that, since hisideas of what is good and what is evil differ according to the countryin which he lives, they can have no foundation in Nature, but must bealtogether the result of education; that right and wrong are nothingmore than fictions created by society for its own purposes. In Athens, some of the more advanced classes had reached such a pass that they notonly denied the unseen, the supernatural, they even affirmed that theworld is only a day-dream, a phantasm, and that nothing at all exists. 

The topographical configuration of Greece gave an impress to herpolitical condition. It divided her people into distinct communitieshaving conflicting interests, and made them incapable of centralization. Incessant domestic wars between the rival states checked heradvancement. She was poor, her leading men had become corrupt. They wereever ready to barter patriotic considerations for foreign gold, to sellthemselves for Persian bribes. Possessing a perception of the beautifulas manifested in sculpture and architecture to a degree neverattained elsewhere either before or since, Greece had lost a practicalappreciation of the Good and the True. 

While European Greece, full of ideas of liberty and independence, rejected the sovereignty of Persia, Asiatic Greece acknowledged itwithout reluctance. At that time the Persian Empire in territorialextent was equal to half of modern Europe. It touched the waters ofthe Mediterranean, the Aegean, the Black, the Caspian, the Indian, thePersian, the Red Seas. Through its territories there flowed six of thegrandest rivers in the world--the Euphrates, the Tigris, the Indus, theJaxartes, the Oxus, the Nile, each more than a thousand miles in length. Its surface reached from thirteen hundred feet below the sea-level totwenty thousand feet above. It yielded, therefore, every agriculturalproduct. Its mineral wealth was boundless. It inherited the prestige ofthe Median, the Babylonian, the Assyrian, the Chaldean Empires, whoseannals reached back through more than twenty centuries. 

THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. Persia had always looked upon European Greece aspolitically insignificant, for it had scarcely half the territorialextent of one of her satrapies. Her expeditions for compelling itsobedience had, however, taught her the military qualities of its people. In her forces were incorporated Greek mercenaries, esteemed the verybest of her troops. She did not hesitate sometimes to give the commandof her armies to Greek generals, of her fleets to Greek captains. In thepolitical convulsions through which she had passed, Greek soldiers hadoften been used by her contending chiefs. These military operations wereattended by a momentous result. They revealed, to the quick eye ofthese warlike mercenaries, the political weakness of the empire andthe possibility of reaching its centre. After the death of Cyrus on thebattle-field of Cunaxa, it was demonstrated, by the immortal retreat ofthe ten thousand under Xenophon, that a Greek army could force its wayto and from the heart of Persia. 

That reverence for the military abilities of Asiatic generals, soprofoundly impressed on the Greeks by such engineering exploits as thebridging of the Hellespont, and the cutting of the isthmus at MountAthos by Xerxes, had been obliterated at Salamis, Platea, Mycale. Toplunder rich Persian provinces had become an irresistible temptation. Such was the expedition of Agesilaus, the Spartan king, whose brilliantsuccesses were, however, checked by the Persian government resorting toits time-proved policy of bribing the neighbors of Sparta to attack her. "I have been conquered by thirty thousand Persian archers, " bitterlyexclaimed Agesilaus, as he re-embarked, alluding to the Persian coin, the Daric, which was stamped with the image of an archer. 

THE INVASION OF PERSIA BY GREECE. At length Philip, the King of Macedon, projected a renewal of these attempts, under a far more formidableorganization, and with a grander object. He managed to have himselfappointed captain-general of all Greece not for the purpose of a mereforay into the Asiatic satrapies, but for the overthrow of the Persiandynasty in the very centre of its power. Assassinated while hispreparations were incomplete, he was succeeded by his son Alexander, then a youth. A general assembly of Greeks at Corinth had unanimouslyelected him in his father's stead. There were some disturbances inIllyria; Alexander had to march his army as far north as the Danube toquell them. During his absence the Thebans with some others conspiredagainst him. On his return he took Thebes by assault. He massacredsix thousand of its inhabitants, sold thirty thousand for slaves, andutterly demolished the city. The military wisdom of this severity wasapparent in his Asiatic campaign. He was not troubled by any revolt inhis rear. 

THE MACEDONIAN CAMPAIGN. In the spring B. C. 334 Alexander crossed theHellespont into Asia. His army consisted of thirty-four thousand footand four thousand horse. He had with him only seventy talents in money. He marched directly on the Persian army, which, vastly exceeding him instrength, was holding the line of the Granicus. He forced the passage ofthe river, routed the enemy, and the possession of all Asia Minor, withits treasures, was the fruit of the victory. The remainder of thatyear he spent in the military organization of the conquered provinces. Meantime Darius, the Persian king, had advanced an army of six hundredthousand men to prevent the passage of the Macedonians into Syria. Ina battle that ensued among the mountain-defiles at Issus, the Persianswere again overthrown. So great was the slaughter that Alexander, andPtolemy, one of his generals, crossed over a ravine choked with deadbodies. It was estimated that the Persian loss was not less than ninetythousand foot and ten thousand horse. The royal pavilion fell into theconqueror's hands, and with it the wife and several of the children ofDarius. Syria was thus added to the Greek conquests. In Damascus werefound many of the concubines of Darius and his chief officers, togetherwith a vast treasure. 

Before venturing into the plains of Mesopotamia for the final struggle, Alexander, to secure his rear and preserve his communications with thesea, marched southward down the Mediterranean coast, reducing the citiesin his way. In his speech before the council of war after Issus, he toldhis generals that they must not pursue Darius with Tyre unsubdued, andPersia in possession of Egypt and Cyprus, for, if Persia should regainher seaports, she would transfer the war into Greece, and that it wasabsolutely necessary for him to be sovereign at sea. With Cyprus andEgypt in his possession he felt no solicitude about Greece. The siegeof Tyre cost him more than half a year. In revenge for this delay, he crucified, it is said, two thousand of his prisoners. Jerusalemvoluntarily surrendered, and therefore was treated leniently: but thepassage of the Macedonian army into Egypt being obstructed at Gaza, thePersian governor of which, Betis, made a most obstinate defense, thatplace, after a siege of two months, was carried by assault, ten thousandof its men were massacred, and the rest, with their wives and children, sold into slavery. Betis himself was dragged alive round the city at thechariot-wheels of the conqueror. There was now no further obstacle. TheEgyptians, who detested the Persian rule, received their invader withopen arms. He organized the country in his own interest, intrustingall its military commands to Macedonian officers, and leaving the civilgovernment in the hands of native Egyptians. 

CONQUEST OF EGYPT. While preparations for the final campaign were beingmade, he undertook a journey to the temple of Jupiter Ammon, which wassituated in an oasis of the Libyan Desert, at a distance of two hundredmiles. The oracle declared him to be a son of that god who, underthe form of a serpent, had beguiled Olympias, his mother. Immaculateconceptions and celestial descents were so currently received in thosedays, that whoever had greatly distinguished himself in the affairs ofmen was thought to be of supernatural lineage. Even in Rome, centurieslater, no one could with safety have denied that the city owed itsfounder, Romulus, to an accidental meeting of the god Mars with thevirgin Rhea Sylvia, as she went with her pitcher for water to thespring. The Egyptian disciples of Plato would have looked with anger onthose who rejected the legend that Perictione, the mother of thatgreat philosopher, a pure virgin, had suffered an immaculate conceptionthrough the influences of Apollo, and that the god had declared toAriston, to whom she was betrothed, the parentage of the child. WhenAlexander issued his letters, orders, and decrees, styling himself "KingAlexander, the son of Jupiter Ammon, " they came to the inhabitants ofEgypt and Syria with an authority that now can hardly be realized. Thefree-thinking Greeks, however, put on such a supernatural pedigree itsproper value. Olympias, who, of course, better than all others knew thefacts of the case, used jestingly to say, that "she wished Alexanderwould cease from incessantly embroiling her with Jupiter's wife. "Arrian, the historian of the Macedonian expedition, observes, "I cannotcondemn him for endeavoring to draw his subjects into the belief of hisdivine origin, nor can I be induced to think it any great crime, for itis very reasonable to imagine that he intended no more by it than merelyto procure the greater authority among his soldiers. "

GREEK CONQUEST OF PERSIA. All things being thus secured in his rear, Alexander, having returned into Syria, directed the march of his army, now consisting of fifty thousand veterans, eastward. After crossing theEuphrates, he kept close to the Masian hills, to avoid the intense heatof the more southerly Mesopotamian plains; more abundant forage couldalso thus be procured for the cavalry. On the left bank of the Tigris, near Arbela, he encountered the great army of eleven hundred thousandmen brought up by Darius from Babylon. The death of the Persian monarch, which soon followed the defeat he suffered, left the Macedonian generalmaster of all the countries from the Danube to the Indus. Eventually heextended his conquest to the Ganges. The treasures he seized are almostbeyond belief. At Susa alone he found--so Arrian says--fifty thousandtalents in money. 

EVENTS OF THE CAMPAIGNS. The modern military student cannot lookupon these wonderful campaigns without admiration. The passage of theHellespont; the forcing of the Granicus; the winter spent in a politicalorganization of conquered Asia Minor; the march of the right wing andcentre of the army along the Syrian Mediterranean coast; the engineeringdifficulties overcome at the siege of Tyre; the storming of Gaza; theisolation of Persia from Greece; the absolute exclusion of her navy fromthe Mediterranean; the check on all her attempts at intriguing withor bribing Athenians or Spartans, heretofore so often resorted to withsuccess; the submission of Egypt; another winter spent in the politicalorganization of that venerable country; the convergence of the wholearmy from the Black and Red Seas toward the nitre-covered plains ofMesopotamia in the ensuing spring; the passage of the Euphrates fringedwith its weeping-willows at the broken bridge of Thapsacus; the crossingof the Tigris; the nocturnal reconnaissance before the great andmemorable battle of Arbela; the oblique movement on the field; thepiercing of the enemy's centre--a manoeuvre destined to be repeatedmany centuries subsequently at Austerlitz; the energetic pursuit ofthe Persian monarch; these are exploits not surpassed by any soldier oflater times. 

A prodigious stimulus was thus given to Greek intellectual activity. There were men who had marched with the Macedonian army from the Danubeto the Nile, from the Nile to the Ganges. They had felt the hyperboreanblasts of the countries beyond the Black Sea, the simooms andsand-tempests of the Egyptian deserts. They had seen the Pyramids whichhad already stood for twenty centuries, the hieroglyph-covered obelisksof Luxor, avenues of silent and mysterious sphinxes, colossi of monarchswho reigned in the morning of the world. In the halls of Esar-haddonthey had stood before the thrones of grim old Assyrian kings, guarded bywinged bulls. In Babylon there still remained its walls, once more thansixty miles in compass, and, after the ravages of three centuries andthree conquerors, still more than eighty feet in height; there werestill the ruins of the temple of cloud encompassed Bel, on its top wasplanted the observatory wherein the weird Chaldean astronomers had heldnocturnal communion with the stars; still there were vestiges of the twopalaces with their hanging gardens in which were great trees growing inmid-air, and the wreck of the hydraulic machinery that had suppliedthem with water from the river. Into the artificial lake with its vastapparatus of aqueducts and sluices the melted snows of the Armenianmountains found their way, and were confined in their course throughthe city by the embankments of the Euphrates. Most wonderful of all, perhaps, was the tunnel under the river-bed. 

EFFECT ON THE GREEK ARMY. If Chaldea, Assyria, Babylon, presentedstupendous and venerable antiquities reaching far back into the night oftime, Persia was not without her wonders of a later date. The pillaredhalls of Persepolis were filled with miracles of art--carvings, sculptures, enamels, alabaster libraries, obelisks, sphinxes, colossalbulls. Ecbatana, the cool summer retreat of the Persian kings, wasdefended by seven encircling walls of hewn and polished blocks, theinterior ones in succession of increasing height, and of differentcolors, in astrological accordance with the seven planets. The palacewas roofed with silver tiles, its beams were plated with gold. Atmidnight, in its halls the sunlight was rivaled by many a row of naphthacressets. A paradise--that luxury of the monarchs of the East--wasplanted in the midst of the city. The Persian Empire, from theHellespont to the Indus, was truly the garden of the world. 

EFFECTS ON THE GREEK ARMY. I have devoted a few pages to the story ofthese marvelous campaigns, for the military talent they fostered ledto the establishment of the mathematical and practical schools ofAlexandria, the true origin of science. We trace back all our exactknowledge to the Macedonian campaigns. Humboldt has well observed thatan introduction to new and grand objects of Nature enlarges the humanmind. The soldiers of Alexander and the hosts of his camp-followersencountered at every march unexpected and picturesque scenery. Of allmen, the Greeks were the most observant, the most readily and profoundlyimpressed. Here there were interminable sandy plains, there mountainswhose peaks were lost above the clouds. In the deserts were mirages, on the hill-sides shadows of fleeting clouds sweeping over the forests. They were in a land of amber-colored date-palms and cypresses, oftamarisks, green myrtles, and oleanders. At Arbela they had foughtagainst Indian elephants; in the thickets of the Caspian they had rousedfrom his lair the lurking royal tiger. They had seen animals which, compared with those of Europe, were not only strange, but colossal--therhinoceros, the hippopotamus, the camel, the crocodiles of the Nileand the Ganges. They had encountered men of many complexions and manycostumes: the swarthy Syrian, the olive-colored Persian, the blackAfrican. Even of Alexander himself it is related that on his death-bedhe caused his admiral, Nearchus, to sit by his side, and foundconsolation in listening to the adventures of that sailor--the story ofhis voyage from the Indus up the Persian Gulf. The conqueror had seenwith astonishment the ebbing and flowing of the tides. He had builtships for the exploration of the Caspian, supposing that it andthe Black Sea might be gulfs of a great ocean, such as Nearchus haddiscovered the Persian and Red Seas to be. He had formed a resolutionthat his fleet should attempt the circumnavigation of Africa, and comeinto the Mediterranean through the Pillars of Hercules--a feat which, itwas affirmed, had once been accomplished by the Pharaohs. 

INTELLECTUAL CONDITION OF PERSIA. Not only her greatest soldiers, butalso her greatest philosophers, found in the conquered empire much thatmight excite the admiration of Greece. Callisthenes obtained in Babylona series of Chaldean astronomical observations ranging back through1, 903 years; these he sent to Aristotle. Perhaps, since they were onburnt bricks, duplicates of them may be recovered by modern researchin the clay libraries of the Assyrian kings. Ptolemy, the Egyptianastronomer, possessed a Babylonian record of eclipses, going back747 years before our era. Long-continued and close observations werenecessary, before some of these astronomical results that have reachedour times could have been ascertained. Thus the Babylonians had fixedthe length of a tropical year within twenty-five seconds of the truth;their estimate of the sidereal year was barely two minutes in excess. They had detected the precession of the equinoxes. They knew the causesof eclipses, and, by the aid of their cycle called Saros, could predictthem. Their estimate of the value of that cycle, which is more than6, 585 days, was within nineteen and a half minutes of the truth. 

INTELLECTUAL CONDITION OF PERSIA. Such facts furnish incontrovertibleproof of the patience and skill with which astronomy had been cultivatedin Mesopotamia, and that, with very inadequate instrumental means, ithad reached no inconsiderable perfection. These old observers had madea catalogue of the stars, had divided the zodiac into twelve signs; theyhad parted the day into twelve hours, the night into twelve. They had, as Alistotle says, for a long time devoted themselves to observations ofstar-occultations by the moon. They had correct views of the structureof the solar system, and knew the order of the emplacement of theplanets. They constructed sundials, clepsydras, astrolabes, gnomons. 

Not without interest do we still look on specimens of their method ofprinting. Upon a revolving roller they engraved, in cuneiform letters, their records, and, running this over plastic clay formed into blocks, produced ineffaceable proofs. From their tile-libraries we are stillto reap a literary and historical harvest. They were not without someknowledge of optics. The convex lens found at Nimroud shows that theywere not unacquainted with magnifying instruments. In arithmetic theyhad detected the value of position in the digits, though they missed thegrand Indian invention of the cipher. 

What a spectacle for the conquering Greeks, who, up to this time, hadneither experimented nor observed! They had contented themselves withmere meditation and useless speculation. 

ITS RELIGIOUS CONDITION. But Greek intellectual development, due thusin part to a more extended view of Nature, was powerfully aided by theknowledge then acquired of the religion of the conquered country. Theidolatry of Greece had always been a horror to Persia, who, in herinvasions, had never failed to destroy the temples and insult the fanesof the bestial gods. The impunity with which these sacrileges hadbeen perpetrated had made a profound impression, and did no little toundermine Hellenic faith. But now the worshiper of the vile Olympiandivinities, whose obscene lives must have been shocking to everypious man, was brought in contact with a grand, a solemn, a consistentreligious system having its foundation on a philosophical basis. Persia, as is the case with all empires of long duration, had passed throughmany changes of religion. She had followed the Monotheism of Zoroaster;had then accepted Dualism, and exchanged that for Magianism. At the timeof the Macedonian expedition, she recognized one universal Intelligence, the Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things, the most holyessence of truth, the giver of all good. He was not to be represented byany image, or any graven form. And, since, in every thing here below, wesee the resultant of two opposing forces, under him were two coequal andcoeternal principles, represented by the imagery of Light and Darkness. These principles are in never-ending conflict. The world is theirbattle-ground, man is their prize. 

In the old legends of Dualism, the Evil Spirit was said to have senta serpent to ruin the paradise which the Good Spirit had made. Theselegends became known to the Jews during their Babylonian captivity. 

The existence of a principle of evil is the necessary incident of theexistence of a principle of good, as a shadow is the necessary incidentof the presence of light. In this manner could be explained theoccurrence of evil in a world, the maker and ruler of which is supremelygood. Each of the personified principles of light and darkness, Ormuzdand Ahriman, had his subordinate angels, his counselors, his armies. Itis the duty of a good man to cultivate truth, purity, and industry. Hemay look forward, when this life is over, to a life in another world, and trust to a resurrection of the body, the immortality of the soul, and a conscious future existence. 

In the later years of the empire, the principles of Magianism hadgradually prevailed more and more over those of Zoroaster. Magianism wasessentially a worship of the elements. Of these, fire was considered asthe most worthy representative of the Supreme Being. On altars erected, not in temples, but under the blue canopy of the sky, perpetual fireswere kept burning, and the rising sun was regarded as the noblest objectof human adoration. In the society of Asia, nothing is visible but themonarch; in the expanse of heaven, all objects vanish in presence of thesun. 

DEATH OF ALEXANDER. Prematurely cut off in the midst of many greatprojects Alexander died at Babylon before he had completed histhirty-third year (B. C. 323). There was a suspicion that he had beenpoisoned. His temper had become so unbridled, his passion so ferocious, that his generals and even his intimate friends lived in continualdread. Clitus, one of the latter, he in a moment of fury had stabbed tothe heart. Callisthenes, the intermedium between himself and Aristotle, he had caused to be hanged, or, as was positively asserted by some whoknew the facts, had had him put upon the rack and then crucified. Itmay have been in self-defense that the conspirators resolved on hisassassination. But surely it was a calumny to associate the name ofAristotle with this transaction. He would have rather borne the worstthat Alexander could inflict, than have joined in the perpetration of sogreat a crime. 

A scene of confusion and bloodshed lasting many years ensued, nor did itcease even after the Macedonian generals had divided the empire. Amongits vicissitudes one incident mainly claims our attention. Ptolemy, whowas a son of King Philip by Arsinoe, a beautiful concubine, and whoin his boyhood had been driven into exile with Alexander, when theyincurred their father's displeasure, who had been Alexander's comradein many of his battles and all his campaigns, became governor andeventually king of Egypt. 

FOUNDATION OF ALEXANDER. At the siege of Rhodes, Ptolemy had been ofsuch signal service to its citizens that in gratitude they paid divinehonors to him, and saluted him with the title of Soter (the Savior). By that designation--Ptolemy Soter--he is distinguished from succeedingkings of the Macedonian dynasty in Egypt. 

He established his seat of government not in any of the old capitalsof the country, but in Alexandria. At the time of the expedition tothe temple of Jupiter Ammon, the Macedonian conqueror had caused thefoundations of that city to be laid, foreseeing that it might bemade the commercial entrepot between Asia and Europe. It is to beparticularly remarked that not only did Alexander himself deport manyJews from Palestine to people the city, and not only did Ptolemy Soterbring one hundred thousand more after his siege of Jerusalem, butPhiladelphus, his successor, redeemed from slavery one hundred andninety-eight thousand of that people, paying their Egyptian owners ajust money equivalent for each. To all these Jews the same privilegeswere accorded as to the Macedonians. In consequence of this consideratetreatment, vast numbers of their compatriots and many Syriansvoluntarily came into Egypt. To them the designation of HellenisticalJews was given. In like manner, tempted by the benign government ofSoter, multitudes of Greeks sought refuge in the country, and theinvasions of Perdiccas and Antigonus showed that Greek soldiers woulddesert from other Macedonian generals to join is armies. 

The population of Alexandria was therefore of three distinctnationalities: 1. Native Egyptians 2. Greeks; 3. Jews--a fact that hasleft an impress on the religious faith of modern Europe. 

Greek architects and Greek engineers had made Alexandria the mostbeautiful city of the ancient world. They had filled it with magnificentpalaces, temples, theatres. In its centre, at the intersection of itstwo grand avenues, which crossed each other at right angles, and in themidst of gardens, fountains, obelisks, stood the mausoleum, inwhich, embalmed after the manner of the Egyptians, rested the body ofAlexander. In a funereal journey of two years it had been brought withgreat pomp from Babylon. At first the coffin was of pure gold, butthis having led to a violation of the tomb, it was replaced by one ofalabaster. But not these, not even the great light-house, Pharos, builtof blocks of white marble and so high that the fire continually burningon its top could be seen many miles off at sea--the Pharos countedas one of the seven wonders of the world--it is not these magnificentachievements of architecture that arrest our attention; the true, themost glorious monument of the Macedonian kings of Egypt is the Museum. Its influences will last when even the Pyramids have passed away. 

THE ALEXANDRIAN MUSEUM. The Alexandrian Museum was commenced by PtolemySoter, and was completed by his son Ptolemy Philadelphus. It wassituated in the Bruchion, the aristocratic quarter of the city, adjoining the king's palace. Built of marble, it was surrounded witha piazza, in which the residents might walk and converse together. Itssculptured apartments contained the Philadelphian library, and werecrowded with the choicest statues and pictures. This library eventuallycomprised four hundred thousand volumes. In the course of time, probablyon account of inadequate accommodation for so many books, an additionallibrary was established in the adjacent quarter Rhacotis, and placedin the Serapion or temple of Serapis. The number of volumes in thislibrary, which was called the Daughter of that in the Museum, waseventually three hundred thousand. There were, therefore, seven hundredthousand volumes in these royal collections. 

Alexandria was not merely the capital of Egypt, it was the intellectualmetropolis of the world. Here it was truly said the Genius of the Eastmet the Genius of the West, and this Paris of antiquity became a focusof fashionable dissipation and universal skepticism. In the allurementsof its bewitching society even the Jews forgot their patriotism. Theyabandoned the language of their forefathers, and adopted Greek. 

In the establishment of the Museum, Ptolemy Soter and his sonPhiladelphus had three objects in view: 1. The perpetuation of suchknowledge as was then in the world; 2. Its increase; 3. Its diffusion. 

1. For the perpetuation of knowledge. Orders were given to the chieflibrarian to buy at the king's expense whatever books he could. A bodyof transcribers was maintained in the Museum, whose duty it was to makecorrect copies of such works as their owners were not disposed to sell. Any books brought by foreigners into Egypt were taken at once to theMuseum, and, when correct copies had been made, the transcript was givento the owner, and the original placed in the library. Often a very largepecuniary indemnity was paid. Thus it is said of Ptolemy Euergetesthat, having obtained from Athens the works of Euripides, Sophocles, and Aeschylus, he sent to their owners transcripts, together with aboutfifteen thousand dollars, as an indemnity. On his return from the Syrianexpedition he carried back in triumph all the Egyptian monuments fromEcbatana and Susa, which Cambyses and other invaders had removed fromEgypt. These he replaced in their original seats, or added as adornmentsto his museums. When works were translated as well as transcribed, sumswhich we should consider as almost incredible were paid, as was thecase with the Septuagint translation of the Bible, ordered by PtolemyPhiladelphus. 

2. For the increase of knowledge. One of the chief objects of the Museumwas that of serving as the home of a body of men who devoted themselvesto study, and were lodged and maintained at the king's expense. Occasionally he himself sat at their table. Anecdotes connected withthose festive occasions have descended to our times. In the originalorganization of the Museum the residents were divided into fourfaculties--literature; mathematics, astronomy, medicine. Minor brancheswere appropriately classified under one of these general heads; thusnatural history was considered to be a branch of medicine. An officer ofvery great distinction presided over the establishment, and had generalcharge of its interests. Demetrius Phalareus, perhaps the most learnedman of his age, who had been governor of Athens for many years, was thefirst so appointed. Under him was the librarian, an office sometimesheld by men whose names have descended to our times, as Eratosthenes, and Apollonius Rhodius. 

ORGANIZATION OF THE MUSEUM. In connection with the Museum were abotanical and a zoological garden. These gardens, as their names import, were for the purpose of facilitating the study of plants and animals. There was also an astronomical observatory containing armillary spheres, globes, solstitial and equatorial armils, astrolabes, parallacticrules, and other apparatus then in use, the graduation on the dividedinstruments being into degrees and sixths. On the floor of thisobservatory a meridian line was drawn. The want of correct means ofmeasuring time and temperature was severely felt; the clepsydra ofCtesibius answered very imperfectly for the former, the hydrometerfloating in a cup of water for the latter; it measured variations oftemperature by variations of density. Philadelphus, who toward the closeof his life was haunted with an intolerable dread of death, devoted muchof his time to the discovery of an elixir. For such pursuits the Museumwas provided with a chemical laboratory. In spite of the prejudices ofthe age, and especially in spite of Egyptian prejudices, there wasin connection with the medical department an anatomical room for thedissection, not only of the dead, but actually of the living, who forcrimes had been condemned. 

3. For the diffusion of knowledge. In the Museum was given, by lectures, conversation, or other appropriate methods instruction in all thevarious departments of human knowledge. There flocked to this greatintellectual centre, students from all countries. It is said that at onetime not fewer than fourteen thousand were in attendance. Subsequentlyeven the Christian church received from it some of the most eminent ofits Fathers, as Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Athanasius. 

The library in the Museum was burnt during the siege of Alexandria byJulius Caesar. To make amends for this great loss, that collectedby Eumenes, King of Pergamus, was presented by Mark Antony to QueenCleopatra. Originally it was founded as a rival to that of thePtolemies. It was added to the collection in the Serapion. 

SCIENTIFIC SCHOOL OF THE MUSEUM. It remains now to describe briefly thephilosophical basis of the Museum, and some of its contributions to thestock of human knowledge. 

In memory of the illustrious founder of this most noble institution--aninstitution which antiquity delighted to call "The divine school ofAlexandria"--we must mention in the first rank his "History of theCampaigns of Alexander. " Great as a soldier and as a sovereign, PtolemySoter added to his glory by being an author. Time, which has not beenable to destroy the memory of our obligations to him, has dealt unjustlyby his work. It is not now extant. 

As might be expected from the friendship that existed between Alexander, Ptolemy, and Aristotle, the Aristotelian philosophy was the intellectualcorner-stone on which the Museum rested. King Philip had committed theeducation of Alexander to Aristotle, and during the Persian campaignsthe conqueror contributed materially, not only in money, but otherwise, toward the "Natural History" then in preparation. 

The essential principle of the Aristotelian philosophy was, to risefrom the study of particulars to a knowledge of general principles oruniversals, advancing to them by induction. The induction is themore certain as the facts on which it is based are more numerous; itscorrectness is established if it should enable us to predict other factsuntil then unknown. This system implies endless toil in the collectionof facts, both by experiment and observation; it implies also a closemeditation on them. It is, therefore, essentially a method of laborand of reason, not a method of imagination. The failures that Aristotlehimself so often exhibits are no proof of its unreliability, butrather of its trustworthiness. They are failures arising from want of asufficiency of facts. 

ETHICAL SCHOOL OF THE MUSEUM. Some of the general results at whichAristotle arrived are very grand. Thus, he concluded that every thing isready to burst into life, and that the various organic forms presentedto us by Nature are those which existing conditions permit. Shouldthe conditions change, the forms will also change. Hence there is anunbroken chain from the simple element through plants and animals up toman, the different groups merging by insensible shades into each other. 

The inductive philosophy thus established by Aristotle is a method ofgreat power. To it all the modern advances in science are due. Inits most improved form it rises by inductions from phenomena to theircauses, and then, imitating the method of the Academy, it descends bydeductions from those causes to the detail of phenomena. 

While thus the Scientific School of Alexandria was founded on the maximsof one great Athenian philosopher, the Ethical School was founded on themaxims of another, for Zeno, though a Cypriote or Phoenician, had formany years been established at Athens. His disciples took the name ofStoics. His doctrines long survived him, and, in times when there was noother consolation for man, offered a support in the hour of trial, andan unwavering guide in the vicissitudes of life, not only to illustriousGreeks, but also to many of the great philosophers, statesmen, generals, and emperors of Rome. 

THE PRINCIPLES OF STOICISM. The aim of Zeno was, to furnish a guidefor the daily practice of life, to make men virtuous. He insisted thateducation is the true foundation of virtue, for, if we know what isgood, we shall incline to do it. We must trust to sense, to furnish thedata of knowledge, and reason will suitably combine them. In this theaffinity of Zeno to Aristotle is plainly seen. Every appetite, lust, desire, springs from imperfect knowledge. Our nature is imposed uponus by Fate, but we must learn to control our passions, and live free, intelligent, virtuous, in all things in accordance with reason. Ourexistence should be intellectual, we should survey with equanimity allpleasures and all pains. We should never forget that we are freemen, notthe slaves of society. "I possess, " said the Stoic, "a treasure whichnot all the world can rob me of--no one can deprive me of death. " Weshould remember that Nature in her operations aims at the universal, andnever spares individuals, but uses them as means for the accomplishmentof her ends. It is, therefore, for us to submit to Destiny, cultivating, as the things necessary to virtue, knowledge, temperance, fortitude, justice. We must remember that every thing around us is in mutation;decay follows reproduction, and reproduction decay, and that it isuseless to repine at death in a world where every thing is dying. As acataract shows from year to year an invariable shape, though the watercomposing it is perpetually changing, so the aspect of Nature is nothingmore than a flow of matter presenting an impermanent form. The universe, considered as a whole, is unchangeable. Nothing is eternal butspace, atoms, force. The forms of Nature that we see are essentiallytransitory, they must all pass away. 

STOICISM IN THE MUSEUM. We must bear in mind that the majority of menare imperfectly educated, and hence we must not needlessly offend thereligious ideas of our age. It is enough for us ourselves to know that, though there is a Supreme Power, there is no Supreme Being. There is aninvisible principle, but not a personal God, to whom it would be notso much blasphemy as absurdity to impute the form, the sentiments, thepassions of man. All revelation is, necessarily, a mere fiction. Thatwhich men call chance is only the effect of an unknown cause. Even ofchances there is a law. There is no such thing as Providence, for Natureproceeds under irresistible laws, and in this respect the universe isonly a vast automatic engine. The vital force which pervades the worldis what the illiterate call God. The modifications through which allthings are running take place in an irresistible way, and hence it maybe said that the progress of the world is, under Destiny, like a seed, it can evolve only in a predetermined mode. 

The soul of man is a spark of the vital flame, the general vitalprinciple. Like heat, it passes from one to another, and is finallyreabsorbed or reunited in the universal principle from which it came. Hence we must not expect annihilation, but reunion; and, as the tiredman looks forward to the insensibility of sleep, so the philosopher, weary of the world, should look forward to the tranquillity ofextinction. Of these things, however, we should think doubtingly, sincethe mind can produce no certain knowledge from its internal resourcesalone. It is unphilosophical to inquire into first causes; we must dealonly with phenomena. Above all, we must never forget that man cannotascertain absolute truth, and that the final result of human inquiryinto the matter is, that we are incapable of perfect knowledge; that, even if the truth be in our possession, we cannot be sure of it. 

What, then, remains for us? Is it not this--the acquisition ofknowledge, the cultivation of virtue and of friendship, the observanceof faith and truth, an unrepining submission to whatever befalls us, alife led in accordance with reason?

PLATONISM IN THE MUSEUM. But, though the Alexandrian Museum wasespecially intended for the cultivation of the Aristotelian philosophy, it must not be supposed that other systems were excluded. Platonism wasnot only carried to its full development, but in the end it supplantedPeripateticism, and through the New Academy left a permanent impress onChristianity. The philosophical method of Plato was the inverse of thatof Aristotle. Its starting-point was universals, the very existence ofwhich was a matter of faith, and from these it descended to particulars, or details. Aristotle, on the contrary, rose from particulars touniversals, advancing to them by inductions. 

Plato, therefore, trusted to the imagination, Aristotle to reason. The former descended from the decomposition of a primitive idea intoparticulars, the latter united particulars into a general conception. Hence the method of Plato was capable of quickly producing what seemedto be splendid, though in reality unsubstantial results; that ofAristotle was more tardy in its operation, but much more solid. Itimplied endless labor in the collection of facts, a tedious resortto experiment and observation, the application of demonstration. Thephilosophy of Plato is a gorgeous castle in the air; that of Aristotlea solid structure, laboriously, and with many failures, founded on thesolid rock. 

An appeal to the imagination is much more alluring than the employmentof reason. In the intellectual decline of Alexandria, indolent methodswere preferred to laborious observation and severe mental exercise. Theschools of Neo-Platonism were crowded with speculative mystics, suchas Ammonius Saccas and Plotinus. These took the place of the severegeometers of the old Museum. 

PHYSICAL SCIENCE IN THE MUSEUM. The Alexandrian school offers the firstexample of that system which, in the hands of modern physicists, hasled to such wonderful results. It rejected imagination, and made itstheories the expression of facts obtained by experiment and observation, aided by mathematical discussion. It enforced the principle that thetrue method of studying Nature is by experimental interrogation. Theresearches of Archimedes in specific gravity, and the works ofPtolemy on optics, resemble our present investigations in experimentalphilosophy, and stand in striking contrast with the speculative vagariesof the older writers. Laplace says that the only observation which thehistory of astronomy offers us, made by the Greeks before the schoolof Alexandria, is that of the summer solstice of the year B. C. 432. By Meton and Euctemon. We have, for the first time, in that school, a combined system of observations made with instruments for themeasurement of angles, and calculated by trigonometrical methods. Astronomy then took a form which subsequent ages could only perfect. 

It does not accord with the compass or the intention of this work togive a detailed account of the contributions of the Alexandrian Museumto the stock of human knowledge. It is sufficient that the reader shouldobtain a general impression of their character. For particulars, Imay refer him to the sixth chapter of my "History of the IntellectualDevelopment of Europe. "

EUCLID--ARCHIMEDES. It has just been remarked that the Stoicalphilosophy doubted whether the mind can ascertain absolute truth. WhileZeno was indulging in such doubts, Euclid was preparing his great work, destined to challenge contradiction from the whole human race. Aftermore than twenty-two centuries it still survives, a model of accuracy, perspicuity, and a standard of exact demonstration. This great geometernot only wrote on other mathematical topics, such as Conic Sections andPorisms, but there are imputed to him treatises on Harmonics and Optics, the latter subject being discussed on the hypothesis of rays issuingfrom the eye to the object. 

With the Alexandrian mathematicians and physicists must be classedArchimedes, though he eventually resided in Sicily. Among hismathematical works were two books on the Sphere and Cylinder, inwhich he gave the demonstration that the solid content of a sphere istwo-thirds that of its circumscribing cylinder. So highly did he esteemthis, that he directed the diagram to be engraved on his tombstone. Healso treated of the quadrature of the circle and of the parabola; hewrote on Conoids and Spheroids, and on the spiral that bears his name, the genesis of which was suggested to him by his friend Conon theAlexandrian. As a mathematician, Europe produced no equal to him fornearly two thousand years. In physical science he laid the foundationof hydrostatics; invented a method for the determination of specificgravities; discussed the equilibrium of floating bodies; discovered thetrue theory of the lever, and invented a screw, which still bearshis name, for raising the water of the Nile. To him also are to beattributed the endless screw, and a peculiar form of burning-mirror, bywhich, at the siege of Syracuse, it is said that he set the Roman fleeton fire. 

ERATOSTHENES--APOLLONIUS--HIPPARCHUS. Eratosthenes, who at one time hadcharge of the library, was the author of many important works. Amongthem may be mentioned his determination of the interval betweenthe tropics, and an attempt to ascertain the size of the earth. Heconsidered the articulation and expansion of continents, the positionof mountain-chains, the action of clouds, the geological submersion oflands, the elevation of ancient sea-beds, the opening of the Dardanellesand the straits of Gibraltar, and the relations of the Euxine Sea. He composed a complete system of the earth, in three books--physical, mathematical, historical--accompanied by a map of all the parts thenknown. It is only of late years that the fragments remaining of his"Chronicles of the Theban Kings" have been justly appreciated. Formany centuries they were thrown into discredit by the authority of ourexisting absurd theological chronology. 

It is unnecessary to adduce the arguments relied upon by theAlexandrians to prove the globular form of the earth. They had correctideas respecting the doctrine of the sphere, its poles, axis, equator, arctic and antarctic circles, equinoctial points, solstices, thedistribution of climates, etc. I cannot do more than merely allude tothe treatises on Conic Sections and on Maxima and Minima by Apollonius, who is said to have been the first to introduce the words ellipse andhyperbola. In like manner I must pass the astronomical observationsof Alistyllus and Timocharis. It was to those of the latter on SpicaVirginis that Hipparchus was indebted for his great discovery of theprecession of the eqninoxes. Hipparchus also determined the firstinequality of the moon, the equation of the centre. He adopted thetheory of epicycles and eccentrics, a geometrical conception for thepurpose of resolving the apparent motions of the heavenly bodies on theprinciple of circular movement. He also undertook to make a catalogueof the stars by the method of alineations--that is, by indicating thosethat are in the same apparent straight line. The number of stars socatalogued was 1, 080. If he thus attempted to depict the aspect ofthe sky, he endeavored to do the same for the surface of the earth, bymarking the position of towns and other places by lines of latitude andlongitude. He was the first to construct tables of the sun and moon. 

THE SYNTAXIS OF PTOLEMY. In the midst of such a brilliant constellationof geometers, astronomers, physicists, conspicuously shines forthPtolemy, the author of the great work, "Syntaxis, " "a Treatise on theMathematical Construction of the Heavens. " It maintained its groundfor nearly fifteen hundred years, and indeed was only displaced by theimmortal "Principia" of Newton. It commences with the doctrine that theearth is globular and fixed in space, it describes the construction of atable of chords, and instruments for observing the solstices, it deducesthe obliquity of the ecliptic, it finds terrestrial latitudes by thegnomon, describes climates, shows how ordinary may be converted intosidereal time, gives reasons for preferring the tropical to the siderealyear, furnishes the solar theory on the principle of the sun's orbitbeing a simple eccentric, explains the equation of time, advances to thediscussion of the motions of the moon, treats of the first inequality, of her eclipses, and the motion of her nodes. It then gives Ptolemy'sown great discovery--that which has made his name immortal--thediscovery of the moon's evection or second inequality, reducing it tothe epicyclic theory. It attempts the determination of the distances ofthe sun and moon from the earth--with, however, only partial success. Itconsiders the precession of the equinoxes, the discovery of Hipparchus, the full period of which is twenty-five thousand years. It gives acatalogue of 1, 022 stars, treats of the nature of the milky-way, anddiscusses in the most masterly manner the motions of the planets. Thispoint constitutes another of Ptolemy's claims to scientific fame. Hisdetermination of the planetary orbits was accomplished by comparinghis own observations with those of former astronomers, among them theobservations of Timocharis on the planet Venus. 

INVENTION OF THE STEAM-ENGINE. In the Museum of Alexandria, Ctesibiusinvented the fire-engine. His pupil, Hero, improved it by giving it twocylinders. There, too, the first steam-engine worked. This also was theinvention of Hero, and was a reaction engine, on the principle ofthe eolipile. The silence of the halls of Serapis was broken by thewater-clocks of Ctesibius and Apollonius, which drop by drop measuredtime. When the Roman calendar had fallen into such confusion that ithad become absolutely necessary to rectify it, Julius Caesar broughtSosigenes the astronomer from Alexandria. By his advice the lunar yearwas abolished, the civil year regulated entirely by the sun, and theJulian calendar introduced. 

The Macedonian rulers of Egypt have been blamed for the manner in whichthey dealt with the religious sentiment of their time. They prostitutedit to the purpose of state-craft, finding in it a means of governingtheir lower classes. To the intelligent they gave philosophy. 

POLICY OF THE PTOLEMIES. But doubtless they defended this policy by theexperience gathered in those great campaigns which had made the Greeksthe foremost nation of the world. They had seen the mythologicalconceptions of their ancestral country dwindle into fables; the wonderswith which the old poets adorned the Mediterranean had been discoveredto be baseless illusions. From Olympus its divinities had disappeared;indeed, Olympus itself had proved to be a phantom of the imagination. Hades had lost its terrors; no place could be found for it. 

From the woods and grottoes and rivers of Asia Minor the local gods andgoddesses had departed; even their devotees began to doubt whether theyhad ever been there. If still the Syrian damsels lamented, in theiramorous ditties, the fate of Adonis, it was only as a recollection, notas a reality. Again and again had Persia changed her national faith. Forthe revelation of Zoroaster she had substituted Dualism; then under newpolitical influences she had adopted Magianism. She had worshiped fire, and kept her altars burning on mountain-tops. She had adored the sun. When Alexander came, she was fast falling into pantheism. 

On a country to which in its political extremity the indigenous godshave been found unable to give any protection, a change of faith isimpending. The venerable divinities of Egypt, to whose glory obeliskshad been raised and temples dedicated, had again and again submittedto the sword of a foreign conqueror. In the land of the Pyramids, theColossi, the Sphinx, the images of the gods had ceased to representliving realities. They had ceased to be objects of faith. Others of morerecent birth were needful, and Serapis confronted Osiris. In the shopsand streets of Alexandria there were thousands of Jews who had forgottenthe God that had made his habitation behind the veil of the temple. 

Tradition, revelation, time, all had lost their influence. Thetraditions of European mythology, the revelations of Asia, thetime-consecrated dogmas of Egypt, all had passed or were fast passingaway. And the Ptolemies recognized how ephemeral are forms of faith. 

But the Ptolemies also recognized that there is something more durablethan forms of faith, which, like the organic forms of geological ages, once gone, are clean gone forever, and have no restoration, no return. They recognized that within this world of transient delusions andunrealities there is a world of eternal truth. 

That world is not to be discovered through the vain traditions thathave brought down to us the opinions of men who lived in the morning ofcivilization, nor in the dreams of mystics who thought that they wereinspired. It is to be discovered by the investigations of geometry, and by the practical interrogation of Nature. These confer on humanitysolid, and innumerable, and inestimable blessings. 

The day will never come when any one of the propositions of Euclid willbe denied; no one henceforth will call in question the globular shape ofthe earth, as recognized by Eratosthenes; the world will not permitthe great physical inventions and discoveries made in Alexandria andSyracuse to be forgotten. The names of Hipparchus, of Apollonius, ofPtolemy, of Archimedes, will be mentioned with reverence by men of everyreligious profession, as long as there are men to speak. 

THE MUSEUM AND MODERN SCIENCE. The Museum of Alexandria was thusthe birthplace of modern science. It is true that, long before itsestablishment, astronomical observations had been made in China andMesopotamia; the mathematics also had been cultivated with a certaindegree of success in India. But in none of these countries hadinvestigation assumed a connected and consistent form; in none wasphysical experimentation resorted to. The characteristic feature ofAlexandrian, as of modern science, is, that it did not restrict itselfto observation, but relied on a practical interrogation of Nature. 

CHAPTER II. 

 THE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY. --ITS TRANSFORMATION ON ATTAINING IMPERIAL POWER. --ITS RELATIONS TO SCIENCE. 

 Religious condition of the Roman Republic. --The adoption of imperialism leads to monotheism. --Christianity spreads over the Roman Empire. --The circumstances under which it attained imperial power make its union with Paganism a political necessity. --Tertullian's description of its doctrines and practices. --Debasing effect of the policy of Constantine on it. --Its alliance with the civil power. --Its incompatibility with science. --Destruction of the Alexandrian Library and prohibition of philosophy. -- Exposition of the Augustinian philosophy and Patristic science generally. --The Scriptures made the standard of science. 

IN a political sense, Christianity is the bequest of the Roman Empire tothe world. 

At the epoch of the transition of Rome from the republican to theimperial form of government, all the independent nationalities aroundthe Mediterranean Sea had been brought under the control of that centralpower. The conquest that had befallen them in succession had been by nomeans a disaster. The perpetual wars they had maintained with eachother came to an end; the miseries their conflicts had engendered wereexchanged for universal peace. 

Not only as a token of the conquest she had made but also as agratification to her pride, the conquering republic brought the godsof the vanquished peoples to Rome. With disdainful toleration, shepermitted the worship of them all. That paramount authority exercised byeach divinity in his original seat disappeared at once in the crowd ofgods and goddesses among whom he had been brought. Already, as we haveseen, through geographical discoveries and philosophical criticism, faith in the religion of the old days had been profoundly shaken. Itwas, by this policy of Rome, brought to an end. 

MONOTHEISM IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. The kings of all the conquered provinceshad vanished; in their stead one emperor had come. The gods also haddisappeared. Considering the connection which in all ages has existedbetween political and religious ideas, it was then not at all strangethat polytheism should manifest a tendency to pass into monotheism. Accordingly, divine honors were paid at first to the deceased and atlength to the living emperor. 

The facility with which gods were thus called into existence had apowerful moral effect. The manufacture of a new one cast ridicule onthe origin of the old Incarnation in the East and apotheosis in the Westwere fast filling Olympus with divinities. In the East, gods descendedfrom heaven, and were made incarnate in men; in the West, men ascendedfrom earth, and took their seat among the gods. It was not theimportation of Greek skepticism that made Rome skeptical. The excessesof religion itself sapped the foundations of faith. 

Not with equal rapidity did all classes of the population adoptmonotheistic views. The merchants and lawyers and soldiers, who by thenature of their pursuits are more familiar with the vicissitudes oflife, and have larger intellectual views, were the first to be affected, the land laborers and farmers the last. 

THE RISE OF CHRISTIANITY When the empire in a military and politicalsense had reached its culmination, in a religious and social aspectit had attained its height of immorality. It had become thoroughlyepicurean; its maxim was, that life should be made a feast, thatvirtue is only the seasoning of pleasure, and temperance the means ofprolonging it. Dining-rooms glittering with gold and incrusted withgems, slaves in superb apparel, the fascinations of female society whereall the women were dissolute, magnificent baths, theatres, gladiators, such were the objects of Roman desire. The conquerors of the world haddiscovered that the only thing worth worshiping is Force. By it allthings might be secured, all that toil and trade had laboriouslyobtained. The confiscation of goods and lands, the taxation ofprovinces, were the reward of successful warfare; and the emperorwas the symbol of force. There was a social splendor, but it was thephosphorescent corruption of the ancient Mediterranean world. 

In one of the Eastern provinces, Syria, some persons in very humblelife had associated themselves together for benevolent and religiouspurposes. The doctrines they held were in harmony with that sentimentof universal brotherhood arising from the coalescence of the conqueredkingdoms. They were doctrines inculcated by Jesus. 

The Jewish people at that time entertained a belief, founded on oldtraditions, that a deliverer would arise among them, who would restorethem to their ancient splendor. The disciples of Jesus regarded himas this long-expected Messiah. But the priesthood, believing that thedoctrines he taught were prejudicial to their interests, denouncedhim to the Roman governor, who, to satisfy their clamors, reluctantlydelivered him over to death. 

His doctrines of benevolence and human brotherhood outlasted thatevent. The disciples, instead of scattering, organized. They associatedthemselves on a principle of communism, each throwing into the commonstock whatever property he possessed, and all his gains. The widowsand orphans of the community were thus supported, the poor and the sicksustained. From this germ was developed a new, and as the events proved, all-powerful society--the Church; new, for nothing of the kind hadexisted in antiquity; powerful, for the local churches, at firstisolated, soon began to confederate for their common interest. Throughthis organization Christianity achieved all her political triumphs. 

As we have said, the military domination of Rome had brought aboutuniversal peace, and had generated a sentiment of brotherhood among thevanquished nations. Things were, therefore, propitious for the rapiddiffusion of the newly-established--the Christian--principlethroughout the empire. It spread from Syria through all Asia Minor, and successively reached Cyprus, Greece, Italy, eventually extendingwestward as far as Gaul and Britain. 

Its propagation was hastened by missionaries who made it known in alldirections. None of the ancient classical philosophies had ever takenadvantage of such a means. 

Political conditions determined the boundaries of the new religion. Itslimits were eventually those of the Roman Empire; Rome, doubtfully theplace of death of Peter, not Jerusalem, indisputably the place of thedeath of our Savior, became the religious capital. It was better to havepossession of the imperial seven hilled city, than of Gethsemane andCalvary with all their holy souvenirs. 

IT GATHERS POLITICAL POWER. For many years Christianity manifesteditself as a system enjoining three things--toward God veneration, inpersonal life purity, in social life benevolence. In its early days offeebleness it made proselytes only by persuasion, but, as it increasedin numbers and influence, it began to exhibit political tendencies, adisposition to form a government within the government, an empire withinthe empire. These tendencies it has never since lost. They are, intruth, the logical result of its development. The Roman emperors, discovering that it was absolutely incompatible with the imperialsystem, tried to put it down by force. This was in accordance with thespirit of their military maxims, which had no other means but force forthe establishment of conformity. 

In the winter A. D. 302-'3, the Christian soldiers in some of the legionsrefused to join in the time-honored solemnities for propitiating thegods. The mutiny spread so quickly, the emergency became so pressing, that the Emperor Diocletian was compelled to hold a council for thepurpose of determining what should be done. The difficulty of theposition may perhaps be appreciated when it is understood that the wifeand the daughter of Diocletian himself were Christians. He was a manof great capacity and large political views; he recognized in theopposition that must be made to the new party a political necessity, yet he expressly enjoined that there should be no bloodshed. But who cancontrol an infuriated civil commotion? The church of Nicomedia was razedto the ground; in retaliation the imperial palace was set on fire, anedict was openly insulted and torn down. The Christian officers in thearmy were cashiered; in all directions, martyrdoms and massacres weretaking place. So resistless was the march of events, that not even theemperor himself could stop the persecution. 

THE FIRST CHRISTIAN EMPEROR. It had now become evident that theChristians constituted a powerful party in the state, animated withindignation at the atrocities they had suffered, and determined toendure them no longer. After the abdication of Diocletian (A. D. 305), Constantine, one of the competitors for the purple, perceiving theadvantages that would accrue to him from such a policy, put himselfforth as the head of the Christian party. This gave him, in every partof the empire, men and women ready to encounter fire and sword in hisbehalf; it gave him unwavering adherents in every legion of the armies. In a decisive battle, near the Milvian bridge, victory crowned hisschemes. The death of Maximin, and subsequently that of Licinius, removed all obstacles. He ascended the throne of the Caesars--the firstChristian emperor. 

Place, profit, power--these were in view of whoever now joined theconquering sect. Crowds of worldly persons, who cared nothing about itsreligious ideas, became its warmest supporters. Pagans at heart, theirinfluence was soon manifested in the paganization of Christianity thatforthwith ensued. The emperor, no better than they, did nothing to checktheir proceedings. But he did not personally conform to the ceremonialrequirements of the Church until the close of his evil life, A. D. 337. 

TERTULLIAN'S EXPOSITION OF CHRISTIANITY. That we may clearly appreciatethe modifications now impressed on Christianity--modifications whicheventually brought it in conflict with science--we must have, as ameans of comparison, a statement of what it was in its purer days. Such, fortunately, we find in the "Apology or Defense of the Christiansagainst the Accusations of the Gentiles, " written by Tertullian, atRome, during the persecution of Severus. He addressed it, not to theemperor, but to the magistrates who sat in judgment on the accused. Itis a solemn and most earnest expostulation, setting forth all that couldbe said in explanation of the subject, a representation of the beliefand cause of the Christians made in the imperial city in the face of thewhole world, not a querulous or passionate ecclesiastical appeal, buta grave historical document. It has ever been looked upon as one of theablest of the early Christian works. Its date is about A. D. 200. 

With no inconsiderable skill Tertullian opens his argument. He tellsthe magistrates that Christianity is a stranger upon earth, and that sheexpects to meet with enemies in a country which is not her own. She onlyasks that she may not be condemned unheard, and that Roman magistrateswill permit her to defend herself; that the laws of the empire willgather lustre, if judgment be passed upon her after she has been triedbut not if she is sentenced without a hearing of her cause; that it isunjust to hate a thing of which we are ignorant, even though it may be athing worthy of hate; that the laws of Rome deal with actions, not withmere names; but that, notwithstanding this, persons have been punishedbecause they were called Christians, and that without any accusation ofcrime. 

He then advances to an exposition of the origin, the nature, and theeffects of Christianity, stating that it is founded on the HebrewScriptures, which are the most venerable of all books. He says to themagistrates: "The books of Moses, in which God has inclosed, as ina treasure, all the religion of the Jews, and consequently all theChristian religion, reach far beyond the oldest you have, even beyondall your public monuments, the establishment of your state, thefoundation of many great cities--all that is most advanced by you in allages of history, and memory of times; the invention of letters, whichare the interpreters of sciences and the guardians of all excellentthings. I think I may say more--beyond your gods, your temples, youroracles and sacrifices. The author of those books lived a thousand yearsbefore the siege of Troy, and more than fifteen hundred before Homer. "Time is the ally of truth, and wise men believe nothing but what iscertain, and what has been verified by time. The principal authorityof these Scriptures is derived from their venerable antiquity. The mostlearned of the Ptolemies, who was surnamed Philadelphus, an accomplishedprince, by the advice of Demetrius Phalareus, obtained a copy of theseholy books. It may be found at this day in his library. The divinity ofthese Scriptures is proved by this, that all that is done in our daysmay be found predicted in them; they contain all that has since passedin the view of men. 

Is not the accomplishment of a prophecy a testimony to its truth? Seeingthat events which are past have vindicated these prophecies, shall we beblamed for trusting them in events that are to come? Now, as we believethings that have been prophesied and have come to pass, so we believethings that have been told us, but not yet come to pass, because theyhave all been foretold by the same Scriptures, as well those that areverified every day as those that still remain to be fulfilled. 

These Holy Scriptures teach us that there is one God, who made the worldout of nothing, who, though daily seen, is invisible; his infinitenessis known only to himself; his immensity conceals, but at the sametime discovers him. He has ordained for men, according to their lives, rewards and punishments; he will raise all the dead that have ever livedfrom the creation of the world, will command them to reassume theirbodies, and thereupon adjudge them to felicity that has so end, or toeternal flames. The fires of hell are those hidden flames which theearth shuts up in her bosom. He has in past times sent into the worldpreachers or prophets. The prophets of those old times were Jews; theyaddressed their oracles, for such they were, to the Jews, whohave stored them up in the Scriptures. On them, as has been said, Christianity is founded, though the Christian differs in his ceremoniesfrom the Jew. We are accused of worshiping a man, and not the God ofthe Jews. Not so. The honor we bear to Christ does not derogate from thehonor we bear to God. 

On account of the merit of these ancient patriarchs, the Jews were theonly beloved people of God; he delighted to be in communication withthem by his own mouth. By him they were raised to admirable greatness. But with perversity they wickedly ceased to regard him; they changedhis laws into a profane worship. He warned them that he would take tohimself servants more faithful than they, and, for their crime, punishedthem by driving them forth from their country. They are now spread allover the world; they wander in all parts; they cannot enjoy the air theybreathed at their birth; they have neither man nor God for their king. As he threatened them, so he has done. He has taken, in all nationsand countries of the earth, people more faithful than they. Through hisprophets he had declared that these should have greater favors, and thata Messiah should come, to publish a new law among them. This Messiah wasJesus, who is also God. For God may be derived from God, as the lightof a candle may be derived from the light of another candle. God and hisSon are the self-same God--a light is the same light as that from whichit was taken. 

The Scriptures make known two comings of the Son of God; the first inhumility, the second at the day of judgment, in power. The Jews mighthave known all this from the prophets, but their sins have so blindedthem that they did not recognize him at his first coming, and are stillvainly expecting him. They believed that all the miracles wrought byhim were the work of magic. The doctors of the law and the chief priestswere envious of him; they denounced him to Pilate. He was crucified, died, was buried, and after three days rose again. For forty days heremained among his disciples. Then he was environed in a cloud, androse up to heaven--a truth far more certain than any human testimoniestouching the ascension of Romulus or of any other Roman prince mountingup to the same place. 

Tertullian then describes the origin and nature of devils, who, underSatan, their prince, produce diseases, irregularities of the air, plagues, and the blighting of the blossoms of the earth, who seduce mento offer sacrifices, that they may have the blood of the victims, whichis their food. They are as nimble as the birds, and hence know everything that is passing upon earth; they live in the air, and hence canspy what is going on in heaven; for this reason they can impose on menreigned prophecies, and deliver oracles. Thus they announced in Romethat a victory would be obtained over King Perseus, when in truth theyknew that the battle was already won. They falsely cure diseases; for, taking possession of the body of a man, they produce in him a distemper, and then ordaining some remedy to be used, they cease to afflict him, and men think that a cure has taken place. 

Though Christians deny that the emperor is a god, they nevertheless prayfor his prosperity, because the general dissolution that threatens theuniverse, the conflagration of the world, is retarded so long as theglorious majesty of the triumphant Roman Empire shall last. They desirenot to be present at the subversion of all Nature. They acknowledgeonly one republic, but it is the whole world; they constitute one body, worship one God, and all look forward to eternal happiness. Not only dothey pray for the emperor and the magistrates, but also for peace. Theyread the Scriptures to nourish their faith, lift up their hope, andstrengthen the confidence they have in God. They assemble to exhort oneanother; they remove sinners from their societies; they have bishops whopreside over them, approved by the suffrages of those whom they are toconduct. At the end of each month every one contributes if he will, butno one is constrained to give; the money gathered in this manner isthe pledge of piety; it is not consumed in eating and drinking, butin feeding the poor, and burying them, in comforting children that aredestitute of parents and goods, in helping old men who have spent thebest of their days in the service of the faithful, in assisting thosewho have lost by shipwreck what they had, and those who are condemnedto the mines, or have been banished to islands, or shut up in prisons, because they professed the religion of the true God. There is but onething that Christians have not in common, and that one thing is theirwives. They do not feast as if they should die to-morrow, nor buildas if they should never die. The objects of their life are innocence, justice, patience, temperance, chastity. 

To this noble exposition of Christian belief and life in his day, Tertullian does not hesitate to add an ominous warning to themagistrates he is addressing--ominous, for it was a forecast of a greatevent soon to come to pass: "Our origin is but recent, yet already wefill all that your power acknowledges--cities, fortresses, islands, provinces, the assemblies of the people, the wards of Rome, the palace, the senate, the public places, and especially the armies. We haveleft you nothing but your temples. Reflect what wars we are able toundertake! With what promptitude might we not arm ourselves were we notrestrained by our religion, which teaches us that it is better to bekilled than to kill!"

Before he closes his defense, Tertullian renews an assertion which, carried into practice, as it subsequently was, affected the intellectualdevelopment of all Europe. He declares that the Holy Scriptures are atreasure from which all the true wisdom in the world has been drawn;that every philosopher and every poet is indebted to them. He laborsto show that they are the standard and measure of all truth, and thatwhatever is inconsistent with them must necessarily be false. 

From Tertullian's able work we see what Christianity was while it wassuffering persecution and struggling for existence. We have now tosee what it became when in possession of imperial power. Great is thedifference between Christianity under Severus and Christianity afterConstantine. Many of the doctrines which at the latter period werepreeminent, in the former were unknown. 

PAGANIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY. Two causes led to the amalgamation ofChristianity with paganism: 1. The political necessities of the newdynasty; 2. The policy adopted by the new religion to insure its spread. 

1. Though the Christian party had proved itself sufficiently strong togive a master to the empire, it was never sufficiently strong to destroyits antagonist, paganism. The issue of the struggle between them was anamalgamation of the principles of both. In this, Christianity differedfrom Mohammedanism, which absolutely annihilated its antagonist, andspread its own doctrines without adulteration. 

Constantine continually showed by his acts that he felt he must be theimpartial sovereign of all his people, not merely the representativeof a successful faction. Hence, if he built Christian churches, he alsorestored pagan temples; if he listened to the clergy, he also consultedthe haruspices; if he summoned the Council of Nicea, he also honored thestatue of Fortune; if he accepted the rite of baptism, he also strucka medal bearing his title of "God. " His statue, on the top of the greatporphyry pillar at Constantinople, consisted of an ancient image ofApollo, whose features were replaced by those of the emperor, andits head surrounded by the nails feigned to have been used at thecrucifixion of Christ, arranged so as to form a crown of glory. 

Feeling that there must be concessions to the defeated pagan party, in accordance with its ideas, he looked with favor on the idolatrousmovements of his court. In fact, the leaders of these movements werepersons of his own family. 

CHRISTIANITY UNDER CONSTANTINE. 2. To the emperor--a mere worldling--aman without any religious convictions, doubtless it appeared best forhimself, best for the empire, and best for the contending parties, Christian and pagan, to promote their union or amalgamation as much aspossible. Even sincere Christians do not seem to have been averse tothis; perhaps they believed that the new doctrines would diffuse mostthoroughly by incorporating in themselves ideas borrowed from the old, that Truth would assert her self in the end, and the impurity be castoff. In accomplishing this amalgamation, Helena, the empress-mother, aided by the court ladies, led the way. For her gratification there werediscovered, in a cavern at Jerusalem, wherein they had lain buried formore than three centuries, the Savior's cross, and those of the twothieves, the inscription, and the nails that had been used. They wereidentified by miracle. A true relic-worship set in. The superstition ofthe old Greek times reappeared; the times when the tools with which theTrojan horse was made might still be seen at Metapontum, the sceptre ofPelops at Chaeroneia, the spear of Achilles at Phaselis, the swordof Memnon at Nicomedia, when the Tegeates could show the hide of theCalydonian boar and very many cities boasted their possession of thetrue palladium of Troy; when there were statues of Minerva that couldbrandish spears, paintings that could blush, images that could sweat, and endless shrines and sanctuaries at which miracle-cures could beperformed. 

As years passed on, the faith described by Tertullian was transmutedinto one more fashionable and more debased. It was incorporated withthe old Greek mythology. Olympus was restored, but the divinities passedunder other names. The more powerful provinces insisted on the adoptionof their time-honored conceptions. Views of the Trinity, in accordancewith Egyptian traditions, were established. Not only was the adorationof Isis under a new name restored, but even her image, standing on thecrescent moon, reappeared. The well-known effigy of that goddess, with the infant Horus in her arms, has descended to our days inthe beautiful, artistic creations of the Madonna and Child. Suchrestorations of old conceptions under novel forms were everywherereceived with delight. When it was announced to the Ephesians that theCouncil of that place, headed by Cyril, had decreed that the Virginshould be called "the Mother of God, " with tears of joy they embracedthe knees of their bishop; it was the old instinct peeping out; theirancestors would have done the same for Diana. 

This attempt to conciliate worldly converts, by adopting their ideasand practices, did not pass without remonstrance from those whoseintelligence discerned the motive. "You have, " says Faustus toAugustine, "substituted your agapae for the sacrifices of the pagans;for their idols your martyrs, whom you serve with the very same honors. You appease the shades of the dead with wine and feasts; you celebratethe solemn festivities of the Gentiles, their calends, and theirsolstices; and, as to their manners, those you have retained without anyalteration. Nothing distinguishes you from the pagans, except that youhold your assemblies apart from them. " Pagan observances were everywhereintroduced. At weddings it was the custom to sing hymns to Venus. 

INTRODUCTION OF ROMAN RITES. Let us pause here a moment, and see, inanticipation, to what a depth of intellectual degradation this policy ofpaganization eventually led. Heathen rites were adopted, a pompousand splendid ritual, gorgeous robes, mitres, tiaras, wax-tapers, processional services, lustrations, gold and silver vases, wereintroduced. The Roman lituus, the chief ensign of the augurs, became thecrozier. Churches were built over the tombs of martyrs, and consecratedwith rites borrowed from the ancient laws of the Roman pontiffs. Festivals and commemorations of martyrs multiplied with the numberlessfictitious discoveries of their remains. Fasting became the grand meansof repelling the devil and appeasing God; celibacy the greatest ofthe virtues. Pilgrimages were made to Palestine and the tombs of themartyrs. Quantities of dust and earth were brought from the Holy Landand sold at enormous prices, as antidotes against devils. The virtuesof consecrated water were upheld. Images and relics were introduced intothe churches, and worshiped after the fashion of the heathen gods. Itwas given out that prodigies and miracles were to be seen in certainplaces, as in the heathen times. The happy souls of departed Christianswere invoked; it was believed that they were wandering about the world, or haunting their graves. There was a multiplication of temples, altars, and penitential garments. The festival of the purification of the Virginwas invented to remove the uneasiness of heathen converts on account ofthe loss of their Lupercalia, or feasts of Pan. The worship of images, of fragments of the cross, or bones, nails, and other relics, a truefetich worship, was cultivated. Two arguments were relied on for theauthenticity of these objects--the authority of the Church, and theworking of miracles. Even the worn-out clothing of the saints and theearth of their graves were venerated. From Palestine were brought whatwere affirmed to be the skeletons of St. Mark and St. James, and otherancient worthies. The apotheosis of the old Roman times was replaced bycanonization; tutelary saints succeed to local mythological divinities. Then came the mystery of transubstantiation, or the conversion of breadand wine by the priest into the flesh and blood of Christ. As centuriespassed, the paganization became more and more complete. Festivals sacredto the memory of the lance with which the Savior's side was pierced, the nails that fastened him to the cross, and the crown of thorns, wereinstituted. Though there were several abbeys that possessed this lastpeerless relic, no one dared to say that it was impossible they couldall be authentic. 

We may read with advantage the remarks made by Bishop Newton on thispaganization of Christianity. He asks: "Is not the worship of saints andangels now in all respects the same that the worship of demons was informer times? The name only is different, the thing is identicallythe same, . . . The deified men of the Christians are substituted for thedeified men of the heathens. The promoters of this worship were sensiblethat it was the same, and that the one succeeded to the other; and, as the worship is the same, so likewise it is performed with the sameceremonies. The burning of incense or perfumes on several altars at oneand the same time; the sprinkling of holy water, or a mixture of saltand common water, at going into and coming out of places of publicworship; the lighting up of a great number of lamps and wax-candles inbroad daylight before altars and statues of these deities; the hangingup of votive offerings and rich presents as attestations of so manymiraculous cures and deliverances from diseases and dangers; thecanonization or deification of deceased worthies; the assigning ofdistinct provinces or prefectures to departed heroes and saints; theworshiping and adoring of the dead in their sepulchres, shrines, andrelics; the consecrating and bowing down to images; the attributingof miraculous powers and virtues to idols; the setting up of littleoratories, altars, and statues in the streets and highways, and onthe tops of mountains; the carrying of images and relics in pompousprocession, with numerous lights and with music and singing;flagellations at solemn seasons under the notion of penance; a greatvariety of religious orders and fraternities of priests; the shaving ofpriests, or the tonsure as it is called, on the crown of their heads;the imposing of celibacy and vows of chastity on the religious of bothsexes--all these and many more rites and ceremonies are equally parts ofpagan and popish superstition. Nay, the very same temples, the very sameimages, which were once consecrated to Jupiter and the other demons, arenow consecrated to the Virgin Mary and the other saints. The very samerites and inscriptions are ascribed to both, the very same prodigies andmiracles are related of these as of those. In short, almost the wholeof paganism is converted and applied to popery; the one is manifestlyformed upon the same plan and principles as the other; so that there isnot only a conformity, but even a uniformity, in the worship of ancientand modern, of heathen and Christian Rome. "

DEBASEMENT OF CHRISTIANITY. Thus far Bishop Newton; but to return to thetimes of Constantine: though these concessions to old and popular ideaswere permitted and even encouraged, the dominant religious party neverfor a moment hesitated to enforce its decisions by the aid of the civilpower--an aid which was freely given. Constantine thus carried intoeffect the acts of the Council of Nicea. In the affair of Arius, he evenordered that whoever should find a book of that heretic, and not burnit, should be put to death. In like manner Nestor was by Theodosius theYounger banished to an Egyptian oasis. 

The pagan party included many of the old aristocratic families of theempire; it counted among its adherents all the disciples of the oldphilosophical schools. It looked down on its antagonist with contempt. It asserted that knowledge is to be obtained only by the laboriousexercise of human observation and human reason. 

The Christian party asserted that all knowledge is to be found in theScriptures and in the traditions of the Church; that, in the writtenrevelation, God had not only given a criterion of truth, but hadfurnished us all that he intended us to know. The Scriptures, therefore, contain the sum, the end of all knowledge. The clergy, with the emperorat their back, would endure no intellectual competition. 

Thus came into prominence what were termed sacred and profane knowledge;thus came into presence of each other two opposing parties, one relyingon human reason as its guide, the other on revelation. Paganism leanedfor support on the learning of its philosophers, Christianity on theinspiration of its Fathers. 

The Church thus set herself forth as the depository and arbiter ofknowledge; she was ever ready to resort to the civil power to compelobedience to her decisions. She thus took a course which determined herwhole future career: she became a stumbling-block in the intellectualadvancement of Europe for more than a thousand years. 

The reign of Constantine marks the epoch of the transformation ofChristianity from a religion into a political system; and though, inone sense, that system was degraded into an idolatry, in another it hadrisen into a development of the old Greek mythology. The maxim holdsgood in the social as well as in the mechanical world, that, when twobodies strike, the form of both is changed. Paganism was modified byChristianity; Christianity by Paganism. 

THE TRINITARIAN DISPUTE. In the Trinitarian controversy, which firstbroke out in Egypt--Egypt, the land of Trinities--the chief point indiscussion was to define the position of "the Son. " There lived inAlexandria a presbyter of the name of Arius, a disappointed candidatefor the office of bishop. He took the ground that there was a time when, from the very nature of sonship, the Son did not exist, and a time atwhich he commenced to be, asserting that it is the necessary conditionof the filial relation that a father must be older than his son. Butthis assertion evidently denied the coeternity of the three persons ofthe Trinity; it suggested a subordination or inequality among them, and indeed implied a time when the Trinity did not exist. Hereupon, thebishop, who had been the successful competitor against Arius, displayedhis rhetorical powers in public debates on the question, and, the strifespreading, the Jews and pagans, who formed a very large portion ofthe population of Alexandria, amused themselves with theatricalrepresentations of the contest on the stage--the point of theirburlesques being the equality of age of the Father and his Son. 

Such was the violence the controversy at length assumed, that the matterhad to be referred to the emperor. At first he looked upon the disputeas altogether frivolous, and perhaps in truth inclined to the assertionof Arius, that in the very nature of the thing a father must be olderthan his son. So great, however, was the pressure laid upon him, thathe was eventually compelled to summon the Council of Nicea, which, todispose of the conflict, set forth a formulary or creed, and attached toit this anathema: "The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizesthose who say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, andthat, before he was begotten, he was not, and that he was made out ofnothing, or out of another substance or essence, and is created, orchangeable, or alterable. " Constantine at once enforced the decision ofthe council by the civil power. 

A few years subsequently the Emperor Theodosius prohibited sacrifices, made the inspection of the entrails of animals a capital offense, andforbade any one entering a temple. He instituted Inquisitors of Faith, and ordained that all who did not accord with the belief of Damasus, theBishop of Rome, and Peter, the Bishop of Alexandria, should be driveninto exile, and deprived of civil rights. Those who presumed tocelebrate Easter on the same day as the Jews, he condemned to death. The Greek language was now ceasing to be known in the West, and truelearning was becoming extinct. 

At this time the bishopric of Alexandria was held by one Theophilus. Anancient temple of Osiris having been given to the Christians of the cityfor the site of a church, it happened that, in digging the foundationfor the new edifice, the obscene symbols of the former worship chancedto be found. These, with more zeal than modesty, Theophilus exhibitedin the market-place to public derision. With less forbearance than theChristian party showed when it was insulted in the theatre during theTrinitarian dispute, the pagans resorted to violence, and a riot ensued. They held the Serapion as their headquarters. Such were the disorder andbloodshed that the emperor had to interfere. He dispatched a rescript toAlexandria, enjoining the bishop, Theophilus, to destroy the Serapion;and the great library, which had been collected by the Ptolemies, andhad escaped the fire of Julius Caesar, was by that fanatic dispersed. 

THE MURDER OF HYPATIA. The bishopric thus held by Theophilus was in duetime occupied by his nephew St. Cyril, who had commended himself tothe approval of the Alexandrian congregations as a successful andfashionable preacher. It was he who had so much to do with theintroduction of the worship of the Virgin Mary. His hold upon theaudiences of the giddy city was, however, much weakened by Hypatia, thedaughter of Theon, the mathematician, who not only distinguished herselfby her expositions of the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle, but also byher comments on the writings of Apollonius and other geometers. Each daybefore her academy stood a long train of chariots; her lecture-room wascrowded with the wealth and fashion of Alexandria. They came to listento her discourses on those questions which man in all ages has asked, but which never yet have been answered: "What am I? Where am I? What canI know?"

Hypatia and Cyril! Philosophy and bigotry. They cannot exist together. So Cyril felt, and on that feeling he acted. As Hypatia repaired to heracademy, she was assaulted by Cyril's mob--a mob of many monks. Strippednaked in the street, she was dragged into a church, and there killed bythe club of Peter the Reader. The corpse was cut to pieces, the fleshwas scraped from the bones with shells, and the remnants cast into afire. For this frightful crime Cyril was never called to account. Itseemed to be admitted that the end sanctified the means. 

So ended Greek philosophy in Alexandria, so came to an untimely closethe learning that the Ptolemies had done so much to promote. The"Daughter Library, " that of the Serapion, had been dispersed. The fateof Hypatia was a warning to all who would cultivate profane knowledge. Henceforth there was to be no freedom for human thought. Every one mustthink as the ecclesiastical authority ordered him, A. D. 414. In Athensitself philosophy awaited its doom. Justinian at length prohibited itsteaching, and caused all its schools in that city to be closed. 

PELAGIUS. While these events were transpiring in the Eastern provincesof the Roman Empire, the spirit that had produced them was displayingitself in the West. A British monk, who had assumed the name ofPelagius, passed through Western Europe and Northern Africa, teachingthat death was not introduced into the world by the sin of Adam; thaton the contrary he was necessarily and by nature mortal, and had he notsinned he would nevertheless have died; that the consequences of hissins were confined to himself, and did not affect his posterity. Fromthese premises Pelagius drew certain important theological conclusions. 

At Rome, Pelagius had been received with favor; at Carthage, at theinstigation of St. Augustine, he was denounced. By a synod, held atDiospolis, he was acquitted of heresy, but, on referring the matter tothe Bishop of Rome, Innocent I. , he was, on the contrary, condemned. Ithappened that at this moment Innocent died, and his successor, Zosimus, annulled his judgment and declared the opinions of Pelagius to beorthodox. These contradictory decisions are still often referred toby the opponents of papal infallibility. Things were in this state ofconfusion, when the wily African bishops, through the influence of CountValerius, procured from the emperor an edict denouncing Pelagins asa heretic; he and his accomplices were condemned to exile and theforfeiture of their goods. To affirm that death was in the world beforethe fall of Adam, was a state crime. 

CONDEMNATION OF PELAGIUS. It is very instructive to consider theprinciples on which this strange decision was founded. Since thequestion was purely philosophical, one might suppose that it wouldhave been discussed on natural principles; instead of that, theologicalconsiderations alone were adduced. The attentive reader will haveremarked, in Tertullian's statement of the principles of Christianity, a complete absence of the doctrines of original sin, total depravity, predestination, grace, and atonement. The intention of Christianity, as set forth by him, has nothing in common with the plan of salvationupheld two centuries subsequently. It is to St. Augustine, aCarthaginian, that we are indebted for the precision of our views onthese important points. 

In deciding whether death had been in the world before the fall of Adam, or whether it was the penalty inflicted on the world for his sin, the course taken was to ascertain whether the views of Pelagius wereaccordant or discordant not with Nature but with the theologicaldoctrines of St. Augustine. And the result has been such as mightbe expected. The doctrine declared to be orthodox by ecclesiasticalauthority is overthrown by the unquestionable discoveries of modernscience. Long before a human being had appeared upon earth, millions ofindividuals--nay, more, thousands of species and even genera--had died;those which remain with us are an insignificant fraction of the vasthosts that have passed away. 

A consequence of great importance issued from the decision of thePelagian controversy. The book of Genesis had been made the basis ofChristianity. If, in a theological point of view, to its account of thesin in the garden of Eden, and the transgression and punishment of Adam, so much weight had been attached, it also in a philosophical pointof view became the grand authority of Patristic science. Astronomy, geology, geography, anthropology, chronology, and indeed all the variousdepartments of human knowledge, were made to conform to it. 

ST. AUGUSTINE. As the doctrines of St. Augustine have had the effect ofthus placing theology in antagonism with science, it may be interestingto examine briefly some of the more purely philosophical views of thatgreat man. For this purpose, we may appropriately select portions ofhis study of the first chapter of Genesis, as contained in the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth books of his "Confessions. "

These consist of philosophical discussions, largely interspersedwith rhapsodies. He prays that God will give him to understand theScriptures, and will open their meaning to him; he declares that inthem there is nothing superfluous, but that the words have a manifoldmeaning. 

The face of creation testifies that there has been a Creator; but atonce arises the question, "How and when did he make heaven and earth?They could not have been made IN heaven and earth, the world could nothave been made IN the world, nor could they have been made when therewas nothing to make them of. " The solution of this fundamental inquirySt. Augustine finds in saying, "Thou spakest, and they were made. "

But the difficulty does not end here. St. Augustine goes on to remarkthat the syllables thus uttered by God came forth in succession, andthere must have been some created thing to express the words. Thiscreated thing must, therefore, have existed before heaven and earth, andyet there could have been no corporeal thing before heaven and earth. Itmust have been a creature, because the words passed away and came to anend but we know that "the word of the Lord endureth forever. "

Moreover, it is plain that the words thus spoken could not have beenspoken successively, but simultaneously, else there would have been timeand change--succession in its nature implying time; whereas there wasthen nothing but eternity and immortality. God knows and says eternallywhat takes place in time. 

CRITICISM OF ST. AUGUSTINE. St. Augustine then defines, not withoutmuch mysticism, what is meant by the opening words of Genesis: "Inthe beginning. " He is guided to his conclusion by another scripturalpassage: "How wonderful are thy works, O Lord! in wisdom hast thou madethem all. " This "wisdom" is "the beginning, " and in that beginning theLord created the heaven and the earth. 

"But, " he adds, "some one may ask, 'What was God doing before he madethe heaven and the earth? for, if at any particular moment he beganto employ himself, that means time, not eternity. In eternity nothingtranspires--the whole is present. '" In answering this question, hecannot forbear one of those touches of rhetoric for which he was socelebrated: "I will not answer this question by saying that he waspreparing hell for priers into his mysteries. I say that, before Godmade heaven and earth, he did not make any thing, for no creature couldbe made before any creature was made. Time itself is a creature, andhence it could not possibly exist before creation. 

"What, then, is time? The past is not, the future is not, thepresent--who can tell what it is, unless it be that which has noduration between two nonentities? There is no such thing as 'a longtime, ' or 'a short time, ' for there are no such things as the past andthe future. They have no existence, except in the soul. "

The style in which St. Augustine conveyed his ideas is that of arhapsodical conversation with God. His works are an incoherent dream. That the reader may appreciate this remark, I might copy almost atrandom any of his paragraphs. The following is from the twelfth book:

"This then, is what I conceive, O my God, when I hear thy Scripturesaying, In the beginning God made heaven and earth: and the earth wasinvisible and without form, and darkness was upon the deep, and notmentioning what day thou createdst them; this is what I conceive, that because of the heaven of heavens--that intellectual heaven, whoseintelligences know all at once, not in part, not darkly, not through aglass, but as a whole, in manifestation, face to face; not this thingnow, and that thing anon; but (as I said) know all at once, without anysuccession of times; and because of the earth, invisible and withoutform, without any succession of times, which succession presents 'thisthing now, that thing anon;' because, where there is no form, thereis no distinction of things; it is, then, on account of these two, aprimitive formed, and a primitive formless; the one, heaven, but theheaven of heavens; the other, earth, but the earth movable and withoutform; because of these two do I conceive, did thy Scripture say withoutmention of days, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. For, forthwith it subjoined what earth it spake of; and also in that thefirmament is recorded to be created the second day, and called heaven, it conveys to us of which heaven he before spake, without mention ofdays. 

"Wondrous depth of thy words! whose surface behold! is before us, inviting to little ones; yet are they a wondrous depth, O my God, awondrous depth! It is awful to look therein; an awfulness of honor, anda trembling of love. The enemies thereof I hate vehemently; O that thouwouldst slay them with thy two-edged sword, that they might no longer beenemies to it: for so do I love to have them slain unto themselves, thatthey may live unto thee. "

As an example of the hermeneutical manner in which St. Augustineunfolded the concealed facts of the Scriptures, I may cite the followingfrom the thirteenth book of the "Confessions;" his object is to showthat the doctrine of the Trinity is contained in the Mosaic narrative ofthe creation:

"Lo, now the Trinity appears unto me in a glass darkly, which is thou myGod, because thou, O Father, in him who is the beginning of our wisdom, which is thy wisdom, born of thyself, equal unto thee and coeternal, that is, in thy Son, createdst heaven and earth. Much now have we saidof the heaven of heavens, and of the earth invisible and without form, and of the darksome deep, in reference to the wandering instability ofits spiritual deformity, unless it had been converted unto him, fromwhom it had its then degree of life, and by his enlightening became abeauteous life, and the heaven of that heaven, which was afterwardset between water and water. And under the name of God, I now held theFather, who made these things; and under the name of the beginning, theSon, in whom he made these things; and believing, as I did, my God asthe Trinity, I searched further in his holy words, and lo! thy Spiritmoved upon the waters. Behold the Trinity, my God!--Father, and Son, andHoly Ghost Creator of all creation. "

That I might convey to my reader a just impression of the character ofSt. Augustine's philosophical writings, I have, in the two quotationshere given, substituted for my own translation that of the Rev. Dr. Pusey, as contained in Vol. I. Of the "Library of Fathers of the HolyCatholic Church, " published at Oxford, 1840. 

Considering the eminent authority which has been attributed to thewritings of St. Augustine by the religious world for nearly fifteencenturies, it is proper to speak of them with respect. And indeed itis not necessary to do otherwise. The paragraphs here quoted criticisethemselves. No one did more than this Father to bring science andreligion into antagonism; it was mainly he who diverted the Biblefrom its true office--a guide to purity of life--and placed it in theperilous position of being the arbiter of human knowledge, an audacioustyranny over the mind of man. The example once set, there was no want offollowers; the works of the great Greek philosophers were stigmatizedas profane; the transcendently glorious achievements of the Museum ofAlexandria were hidden from sight by a cloud of ignorance, mysticism, and unintelligible jargon, out of which there too often flashed thedestroying lightnings of ecclesiastical vengeance. 

A divine revelation of science admits of no improvement, no change, noadvance. It discourages as needless, and indeed as presumptuous, all newdiscovery, considering it as an unlawful prying into things which it wasthe intention of God to conceal. 

What, then, is that sacred, that revealed science, declared by theFathers to be the sum of all knowledge?

It likened all phenomena, natural and spiritual, to human acts. It sawin the Almighty, the Eternal, only a gigantic man. 

THE PATRISTIC PHILOSOPHY. As to the earth, it affirmed that it is a flatsurface, over which the sky is spread like a dome, or, as St. Augustinetells us, is stretched like a skin. In this the sun and moon and starsmove, so that they may give light by day and by night to man. The earthwas made of matter created by God out of nothing, and, with all thetribes of animals and plants inhabiting it, was finished in six days. Above the sky or firmament is heaven; in the dark and fiery spacebeneath the earth is hell. The earth is the central and most importantbody of the universe, all other things being intended for andsubservient to it. 

As to man, he was made out of the dust of the earth. At first he wasalone, but subsequently woman was formed from one of his ribs. He is thegreatest and choicest of the works of God. He was placed in a paradisenear the banks of the Euphrates, and was very wise and very pure; but, having tasted of the forbidden fruit, and thereby broken the commandmentgiven to him, he was condemned to labor and to death. 

The descendants of the first man, undeterred by his punishment, pursuedsuch a career of wickedness that it became necessary to destroy them. Adeluge, therefore, flooded the face of the earth, and rose over the topsof the mountains. Having accomplished its purpose, the water was driedup by a wind. 

From this catastrophe Noah and his three sons, with their wives, weresaved in an ark. Of these sons, Shem remained in Asia and repeopled it. Ham peopled Africa; Japhet, Europe. As the Fathers were not acquaintedwith the existence of America, they did not provide an ancestor for itspeople. 

Let us listen to what some of these authorities say in support of theirassertions. Thus Lactantius, referring to the heretical doctrine of theglobular form of the earth, remarks: "Is it possible that men can be soabsurd as to believe that the crops and the trees on the other side ofthe earth hang downward, and that men have their feet higher than theirheads? If you ask them how they defend these monstrosities, how thingsdo not fall away from the earth on that side, they reply that the natureof things is such that heavy bodies tend toward the centre, like thespokes of a wheel, while light bodies, as clouds, smoke, fire, tend fromthe centre to the heavens on all sides. Now, I am really at a loss whatto say of those who, when they have once gone wrong, steadily perseverein their folly, and defend one absurd opinion by another. " On thequestion of the antipodes, St. Augustine asserts that "it is impossiblethere should be inhabitants on the opposite side of the earth, sinceno such race is recorded by Scripture among the descendants of Adam. "Perhaps, however, the most unanswerable argument against the sphericityof the earth was this, that "in the day of judgment, men on the otherside of a globe could not see the Lord descending through the air. "

It is unnecessary for me to say any thing respecting the introduction ofdeath into the world, the continual interventions of spiritual agenciesin the course of events, the offices of angels and devils, the expectedconflagration of the earth, the tower of Babel, the confusion oftongues, the dispersion of mankind, the interpretation of naturalphenomena, as eclipses, the rainbow, etc. Above all, I abstain fromcommenting on the Patristic conceptions of the Almighty; they are tooanthropomorphic, and wanting in sublimity. 

Perhaps, however, I may quote from Cosmas Indicopleustes the viewsthat were entertained in the sixth century. He wrote a work entitled"Christian Topography, " the chief intent of which was to confute theheretical opinion of the globular form of the earth, and the paganassertion that there is a temperate zone on the southern side of thetorrid. He affirms that, according to the true orthodox system ofgeography, the earth is a quadrangular plane, extending four hundreddays' journey east and west, and exactly half as much north and south;that it is inclosed by mountains, on which the sky rests; that one onthe north side, huger than the others, by intercepting the rays of thesun, produces night; and that the plane of the earth is not set exactlyhorizontally, but with a little inclination from the north: hence theEuphrates, Tigris, and other rivers, running southward, are rapid; butthe Nile, having to run up-hill, has necessarily a very slow current. 

The Venerable Bede, writing in the seventh century, tells us that "thecreation was accomplished in six days, and that the earth is its centreand its primary object. The heaven is of a fiery and subtile nature, round, and equidistant in every part, as a canopy from the centre of theearth. It turns round every day with ineffable rapidity, only moderatedby the resistance of the seven planets, three above the sun--Saturn, Jupiter, Mars--then the sun; three below--Venus, Mercury, the moon. Thestars go round in their fixed courses, the northern perform the shortestcircle. The highest heaven has its proper limit; it contains the angelicvirtues who descend upon earth, assume ethereal bodies, perform humanfunctions, and return. The heaven is tempered with glacial waters, lestit should be set on fire. The inferior heaven is called the firmament, because it separates the superincumbent waters from the waters below. The firmamental waters are lower than the spiritual heaven, higher thanall corporeal beings, reserved, some say, for a second deluge; others, more truly, to temper the fire of the fixed stars. "

Was it for this preposterous scheme--this product of ignorance andaudacity--that the works of the Greek philosophers were to be givenup? It was none too soon that the great critics who appeared at theReformation, by comparing the works of these writers with one another, brought them to their proper level, and taught us to look upon them allwith contempt. 

Of this presumptuous system, the strangest part was its logic, thenature of its proofs. It relied upon miracle-evidence. A fact wassupposed to be demonstrated by an astounding illustration of somethingelse! An Arabian writer, referring to this, says: "If a conjurer shouldsay to me, 'Three are more than ten, and in proof of it I will changethis stick into a serpent, ' I might be surprised at his legerdemain, but I certainly should not admit his assertion. " Yet, for more thana thousand years, such was the accepted logic, and all over Europepropositions equally absurd were accepted on equally ridiculous proof. 

Since the party that had become dominant in the empire could not furnishworks capable of intellectual competition with those of the great paganauthors, and since it was impossible for it to accept a position ofinferiority, there arose a political necessity for the discouragement, and even persecution, of profane learning. The persecution of thePlatonists under Valentinian was due to that necessity. They wereaccused of magic, and many of them were put to death. The professionof philosophy had become dangerous--it was a state crime. In its steadthere arose a passion for the marvelous, a spirit of superstition. Egyptexchanged the great men, who had made her Museum immortal, for bands ofsolitary monks and sequestered virgins, with which she was overrun. 

CHAPTER III. 

 CONFLICT RESPECTING THE DOCTRINE OF THE UNITY OF GOD. --THE FIRST OR SOUTHERN REFORMATION. 

 The Egyptians insist on the introduction of the worship of the Virgin Mary--They are resisted by Nestor, the Patriarch of Constantinople, but eventually, through their influence with the emperor, cause Nestor's exile and the dispersion of his followers. 

 Prelude to the Southern Reformation--The Persian attack; its moral effects. 

 The Arabian Reformation. --Mohammed is brought in contact with the Nestorians--He adopts and extends their principles, rejecting the worship of the Virgin, the doctrine of the Trinity, and every thing in opposition to the unity of God. -- He extinguishes idolatry in Arabia, by force, and prepares to make war on the Roman Empire. --His successors conquer Syria, Egypt, Asia Minor, North Africa, Spain, and invade France. 

 As the result of this conflict, the doctrine of the unity of God was established in the greater part of the Roman Empire-- The cultivation of science was restored, and Christendom lost many of her most illustrious capitals, as Alexandria, Carthage, and, above all, Jerusalem. 

THE policy of the Byzantine court had given to primitive Christianity apaganized form, which it had spread over all the idolatrous populationsconstituting the empire. There had been an amalgamation of the twoparties. Christianity had modified paganism, paganism had modifiedChristianity. The limits of this adulterated religion were the confinesof the Roman Empire. With this great extension there had come to theChristian party political influence and wealth. No insignificant portionof the vast public revenues found their way into the treasuries of theChurch. As under such circumstances must ever be the case, there weremany competitors for the spoils--men who, under the mask of zeal for thepredominant faith, sought only the enjoyment of its emoluments. 

ECCLESIASTICAL DISPUTES. Under the early emperors, conquest had reachedits culmination; the empire was completed; there remained no adequateobjects for military life; the days of war-peculation, and theplundering of provinces, were over. For the ambitious, however, anotherpath was open; other objects presented. A successful career in theChurch led to results not unworthy of comparison with those that informer days had been attained by a successful career in the army. 

The ecclesiastical, and indeed, it may be said, much of the politicalhistory of that time, turns on the struggles of the bishops of thethree great metropolitan cities--Constantinople, Alexandria, Rome--forsupremacy: Constantinople based her claims on the fact that she wasthe existing imperial city; Alexandria pointed to her commercialand literary position; Rome, to her souvenirs. But the Patriarch ofConstantinople labored under the disadvantage that he was too closelyunder the eye, and, as he found to his cost, too often under the hand, of the emperor. Distance gave security to the episcopates of Alexandriaand Rome. 

ECCLESIASTICAL DISPUTES. Religious disputations in the East havegenerally turned on diversities of opinion respecting the nature andattributes of God; in the West, on the relations and life of man. Thispeculiarity has been strikingly manifested in the transformations thatChristianity has undergone in Asia and Europe respectively. Accordingly, at the time of which we are speaking, all the Eastern provinces ofthe Roman Empire exhibited an intellectual anarchy. There were fiercequarrels respecting the Trinity, the essence of God, the position of theSon, the nature of the Holy Spirit, the influences of the Virgin Mary. The triumphant clamor first of one then of another sect was confirmed, sometimes by miracle-proof, sometimes by bloodshed. No attempt was evermade to submit the rival opinions to logical examination. All parties, however, agreed in this, that the imposture of the old classical paganforms of faith was demonstrated by the facility with which they had beenoverthrown. The triumphant ecclesiastics proclaimed that the images ofthe gods had failed to defend themselves when the time of trial came. 

Polytheistic ideas have always been held in repute by the southernEuropean races, the Semitic have maintained the unity of God. Perhapsthis is due to the fact, as a recent author has suggested, that adiversified landscape of mountains and valleys, islands, and rivers, andgulfs, predisposes man to a belief in a multitude of divinities. A vastsandy desert, the illimitable ocean, impresses him with an idea of theoneness of God. 

Political reasons had led the emperors to look with favor on theadmixture of Christianity and paganism, and doubtless by this means thebitterness of the rivalry between those antagonists was somewhat abated. The heaven of the popular, the fashionable Christianity was the oldOlympus, from which the venerable Greek divinities had been removed. There, on a great white throne, sat God the Father, on his right theSon, and then the blessed Virgin, clad in a golden robe, and "coveredwith various female adornments;" on the left sat God the Holy Ghost. Surrounding these thrones were hosts of angels with their harps. Thevast expanse beyond was filled with tables, seated at which the happyspirits of the just enjoyed a perpetual banquet. 

If, satisfied with this picture of happiness, illiterate persons neverinquired how the details of such a heaven were carried out, or how muchpleasure there could be in the ennui of such an eternally unchanging, unmoving scene, it was not so with the intelligent. As we are soon tosee, there were among the higher ecclesiastics those who rejected withsentiments of horror these carnal, these materialistic conceptions, andraised their protesting voices in vindication of the attributes of theOmnipresent, the Almighty God. 

EGYPTIAN DOCTRINES. In the paganization of religion, now in alldirections taking place, it became the interest of every bishop toprocure an adoption of the ideas which, time out of mind, had beencurrent in the community under his charge. The Egyptians had alreadythus forced on the Church their peculiar Trinitarian views; and now theywere resolved that, under the form of the adoration of the Virgin Mary, the worship of Isis should be restored. 

THE NESTORIANS. It so happened that Nestor, the Bishop of Antioch, whoentertained the philosophical views of Theodore of Mopsuestia, hadbeen called by the Emperor Theodosius the Younger to the Episcopateof Constantinople (A. D. 427). Nestor rejected the base popularanthropomorphism, looking upon it as little better than blasphemous, and pictured to himself an awful eternal Divinity, who pervaded theuniverse, and had none of the aspects or attributes of man. Nestorwas deeply imbued with the doctrines of Aristotle, and attempted tocoordinate them with what he considered to be orthodox Christian tenets. Between him and Cyril, the Bishop or Patriarch of Alexandria, aquarrel accordingly arose. Cyril represented the paganizing, Nestor thephilosophizing party of the Church. This was that Cyril who had murderedHypatia. Cyril was determined that the worship of the Virgin as theMother of God should be recognized, Nestor was determined that it shouldnot. In a sermon delivered in the metropolitan church at Constantinople, he vindicated the attributes of the Eternal, the Almighty God. "And canthis God have a mother?" he exclaimed. In other sermons and writings, he set forth with more precision his ideas that the Virgin should beconsidered not as the Mother of God, but as the mother of the humanportion of Christ, that portion being as essentially distinct from thedivine as is a temple from its contained deity. 

PERSECUTION AND DEATH OF NESTOR. Instigated by the monks of Alexandria, the monks of Constantinople took up arms in behalf of "the Mother ofGod. " The quarrel rose to such a pitch that the emperor was constrainedto summon a council to meet at Ephesus. In the mean time Cyril hadgiven a bribe of many pounds of gold to the chief eunuch of the imperialcourt, and had thereby obtained the influence of the emperor's sister. "The holy virgin of the court of heaven thus found an ally of her ownsex in the holy virgin of the emperor's court. " Cyril hastened to thecouncil, attended by a mob of men and women of the baser sort. Heat once assumed the presidency, and in the midst of a tumult had theemperor's rescript read before the Syrian bishops could arrive. A singleday served to complete his triumph. All offers of accommodation on thepart of Nestor were refused, his explanations were not read, he wascondemned unheard. On the arrival of the Syrian ecclesiastics, a meetingof protest was held by them. A riot, with much bloodshed, ensued in thecathedral of St. John. Nestor was abandoned by the court, and eventuallyexiled to an Egyptian oasis. His persecutors tormented him as long ashe lived, by every means in their power, and at his death gave out that"his blasphemous tongue had been devoured by worms, and that from theheats of an Egyptian desert he had escaped only into the hotter tormentsof hell!"

The overthrow and punishment of Nestor, however, by no means destroyedhis opinions. He and his followers, insisting on the plain inference ofthe last verse of the first chapter of St. Matthew, together with thefifty-fifth and fifty-sixth verses of the thirteenth of the same gospel, could never be brought to an acknowledgment of the perpetual virginityof the new queen of heaven. Their philosophical tendencies were soonindicated by their actions. While their leader was tormented in anAfrican oasis, many of them emigrated to the Euphrates, and establishedthe Chaldean Church. Under their auspices the college of Edessa wasfounded. From the college of Nisibis issued those doctors who spreadNestor's tenets through Syria, Arabia, India, Tartary, China, Egypt. The Nestorians, of course, adopted the philosophy of Aristotle, andtranslated the works of that great writer into Syriac and Persian. Theyalso made similar translations of later works, such as those ofPliny. In connection with the Jews they founded the medical collegeof Djondesabour. Their missionaries disseminated the Nestorian form ofChristianity to such an extent over Asia, that its worshipers eventuallyoutnumbered all the European Christians of the Greek and Roman Churchescombined. It may be particularly remarked that in Arabia they had abishop. 

THE PERSIAN CAMPAIGN. The dissensions between Constantinople andAlexandria had thus filled all Western Asia with sectaries, ferociousin their contests with each other, and many of them burning with hatredagainst the imperial power for the persecutions it had inflicted onthem. A religious revolution, the consequences of which are felt in ourown times, was the result. It affected the whole world. 

We shall gain a clear view of this great event, if we considerseparately the two acts into which it may be decomposed: 1. Thetemporary overthrow of Asiatic Christianity by the Persians; 2. Thedecisive and final reformation under the Arabians. 

1. It happened (A. D. 590) that, by one of those revolutions so frequentin Oriental courts, Chosroes, the lawful heir to the Persian throne, wascompelled to seek refuge in the Byzantine Empire, and implore the aidof the Emperor Maurice. That aid was cheerfully given. A brief andsuccessful campaign restored Chosroes to the throne of his ancestors. 

But the glories of this generous campaign could not preserve Mauricehimself. A mutiny broke out in the Roman army, headed by Phocas, acenturion. The statues of the emperor were overthrown. The Patriarchof Constantinople, having declared that he had assured himself of theorthodoxy of Phocas, consecrated him emperor. The unfortunate Mauricewas dragged from a sanctuary, in which he had sought refuge; his fivesons were beheaded before his eyes, and then he was put to death. Hisempress was inveigled from the church of St. Sophia, tortured, andwith her three young daughters beheaded. The adherents of the massacredfamily were pursued with ferocious vindictiveness; of some the eyes wereblinded, of others the tongues were torn out, or the feet and hands cutoff, some were whipped to death, others were burnt. 

When the news reached Rome, Pope Gregory received it with exultation, praying that the hands of Phocas might be strengthened against all hisenemies. As an equivalent for this subserviency, he was greeted with thetitle of "Universal Bishop. " The cause of his action, as well as of thatof the Patriarch of Constantinople, was doubtless the fact that Mauricewas suspected of Magrian tendencies, into which he had been lured by thePersians. The mob of Constantinople had hooted after him in the streets, branding him as a Marcionite, a sect which believed in the Magiandoctrine of two conflicting principles. 

With very different sentiments Chosroes heard of the murder of hisfriend. Phocas had sent him the heads of Maurice and his sons. ThePersian king turned from the ghastly spectacle with horror, and at oncemade ready to avenge the wrongs of his benefactor by war. 

THE EXPEDITION OF HERACLIUS. The Exarch of Africa, Heraclius, one ofthe chief officers of the state, also received the shocking tidings withindignation. He was determined that the imperial purple should not beusurped by an obscure centurion of disgusting aspect. "The person ofthis Phocas was diminutive and deformed; the closeness of his shaggyeyebrows, his red hair, his beardless chin, were in keeping with hischeek, disfigured and discolored by a formidable scar. Ignorant ofletters, of laws, and even of arms, he indulged in an ample privilege oflust and drunkenness. " At first Heraclius refused tribute and obedienceto him; then, admonished by age and infirmities, he committed thedangerous enterprise of resistance to his son of the same name. Aprosperous voyage from Carthage soon brought the younger Heraclius infront of Constantinople. The inconstant clergy, senate, and people ofthe city joined him, the usurper was seized in his palace and beheaded. 

INVASION OF CHOSROES. But the revolution that had taken place inConstantinople did not arrest the movements of the Persian king. HisMagian priests had warned him to act independently of the Greeks, whose superstition, they declared, was devoid of all truth and justice. Chosroes, therefore, crossed the Euphrates; his army was received withtransport by the Syrian sectaries, insurrections in his favor everywherebreaking out. In succession, Antioch, Caesarea, Damascus fell; Jerusalemitself was taken by storm; the sepulchre of Christ, the churches ofConstantine and of Helena were given to the flames; the Savior's crosswas sent as a trophy to Persia; the churches were rifled of theirriches; the sacred relics, collected by superstition, were dispersed. Egypt was invaded, conquered, and annexed to the Persian Empire; thePatriarch of Alexandria escaped by flight to Cyprus; the African coastto Tripoli was seized. On the north, Asia Minor was subdued, and forten years the Persian forces encamped on the shores of the Bosporus, infront of Constantinople. 

In his extremity Heraclius begged for peace. "I will never give peaceto the Emperor of Rome, " replied the proud Persian, "till he has abjuredhis crucified God, and embraced the worship of the sun. " After a longdelay terms were, however, secured, and the Roman Empire was ransomed atthe price of "a thousand talents of gold, a thousand talents of silver, a thousand silk robes, a thousand horses, and a thousand virgins. "

But Heraclius submitted only for a moment. He found means not onlyto restore his affairs but to retaliate on the Persian Empire. Theoperations by which he achieved this result were worthy of the mostbrilliant days of Rome. 

INVASION OF CHOSROES Though her military renown was thus recovered, though her territory was regained, there was something that the RomanEmpire had irrecoverably lost. Religious faith could never be restored. In face of the world Magianism had insulted Christianity, by profaningher most sacred places--Bethlehem, Gethsemane, Calvary--by burningthe sepulchre of Christ, by rifling and destroying the churches, byscattering to the winds priceless relics, by carrying off, with shoutsof laughter, the cross. 

Miracles had once abounded in Syria, in Egypt, in Asia Minor; there wasnot a church which had not its long catalogue of them. Very often theywere displayed on unimportant occasions and in insignificant cases. Inthis supreme moment, when such aid was most urgently demanded, not amiracle was worked. 

Amazement filled the Christian populations of the East when theywitnessed these Persian sacrileges perpetrated with impunity. Theheavens should have rolled asunder, the earth should have opened herabysses, the sword of the Almighty should have flashed in the sky, thefate of Sennacherib should have been repeated. But it was not so. In theland of miracles, amazement was followed by consternation--consternationdied out in disbelief. 

2. But, dreadful as it was, the Persian conquest was but a prelude tothe great event, the story of which we have now to relate--the Southernrevolt against Christianity. Its issue was the loss of nine-tenths ofher geographical possessions--Asia, Africa, and part of Europe. 

MOHAMMED. In the summer of 581 of the Christian era, there came toBozrah, a town on the confines of Syria, south of Damascus, a caravanof camels. It was from Mecca, and was laden with the costly products ofSouth Arabia--Arabia the Happy. The conductor of the caravan, one AbouTaleb, and his nephew, a lad of twelve years, were hospitably receivedand entertained at the Nestorian convent of the town. 

The monks of this convent soon found that their young visitor, Halibi orMohammed, was the nephew of the guardian of the Caaba, the sacred templeof the Arabs. One of them, by name Bahira, spared no pains to secure hisconversion from the idolatry in which he had been brought up. He foundthe boy not only precociously intelligent, but eagerly desirous ofinformation, especially on matters relating to religion. 

In Mohammed's own country the chief object of Meccan worship was ablack meteoric stone, kept in the Caaba, with three hundred and sixtysubordinate idols, representing the days of the year, as the year wasthen counted. 

At this time, as we have seen, the Christian Church, through theambition and wickedness of its clergy, had been brought into a conditionof anarchy. Councils had been held on various pretenses, while the realmotives were concealed. Too often they were scenes of violence, bribery, corruption. In the West, such were the temptations of riches, luxury, and power, presented by the episcopates, that the election of a bishopwas often disgraced by frightful murders. In the East, in consequence ofthe policy of the court of Constantinople, the Church had been torn inpieces by contentions and schisms. Among a countless host of disputantsmay be mentioned Arians, Basilidians, Carpocratians, Collyridians, Eutychians, Gnostics, Jacobites, Marcionites, Marionites, Nestorians, Sabellians, Valentinians. Of these, the Marionites regarded the Trinityas consisting of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Virgin Mary;the Collyridians worshiped the Virgin as a divinity, offering hersacrifices of cakes; the Nestorians, as we have seen, denied that Godhad "a mother. " They prided themselves on being the inheritors, thepossessors of the science of old Greece. 

But, though they were irreconcilable in matters of faith, there was onepoint in which all these sects agreed--ferocious hatred and persecutionof each other. Arabia, an unconquered land of liberty, stretching fromthe Indian Ocean to the Desert of Syria, gave them all, as the tideof fortune successively turned, a refuge. It had been so from the oldtimes. Thither, after the Roman conquest of Palestine, vast numbers ofJews escaped; thither, immediately after his conversion, St. Paultells the Galatians that he retired. The deserts were now filled withChristian anchorites, and among the chief tribes of the Arabs manyproselytes had been made. Here and there churches had been built. TheChristian princes of Abyssinia, who were Nestorians, held the southernprovince of Arabia--Yemen--in possession. 

By the monk Bahira, in the convent at Bozrah, Mohammed was taught thetenets of the Nestorians; from them the young Arab learned the story oftheir persecutions. It was these interviews which engendered in him ahatred of the idolatrous practices of the Eastern Church, and indeed ofall idolatry; that taught him, in his wonderful career, never to speakof Jesus as the Son of God, but always as "Jesus, the son of Mary. " Hisuntutored but active mind could not fail to be profoundly impressed notonly with the religious but also with the philosophical ideas ofhis instructors, who gloried in being the living representatives ofAristotelian science. His subsequent career shows how completely theirreligious thoughts had taken possession of him, and repeated actsmanifest his affectionate regard for them. His own life was devoted tothe expansion and extension of their theological doctrine, and, thatonce effectually established, his successors energetically adopted anddiffused their scientific, their Aristotelian opinions. 

As Mohammed grew to manhood, he made other expeditions to Syria. Perhaps, we may suppose, that on these occasions the convent and itshospitable in mates were not forgotten. He had a mysterious reverencefor that country. A wealthy Meccan widow Chadizah, had intrusted himwith the care of her Syrian trade. She was charmed with his capacityand fidelity, and (since he is said to have been characterized by thepossession of singular manly beauty and a most courteous demeanor)charmed with his person. The female heart in all ages and countries isthe same. She caused a slave to intimate to him what was passing in hermind, and, for the remaining twenty-four years of her life, Mohammed washer faithful husband. In a land of polygamy, he never insulted her bythe presence of a rival. Many years subsequently, in the height of hispower, Ayesha, who was one of the most beautiful women in Arabia, saidto him: "Was she not old? Did not God give you in me a better wife inher place?" "No, by God!" exclaimed Mohammed, and with a burst of honestgratitude, "there never can be a better. She believed in me when mendespised me, she relieved me when I was poor and persecuted by theworld. "

His marriage with Chadizah placed him in circumstances of ease, and gavehim an opportunity of indulging his inclination to religious meditation. It so happened that her cousin Waraka, who was a Jew, had turnedChristian. He was the first to translate the Bible into Arabic. By hisconversation Mohammed's detestation of idolatry was confirmed. 

After the example of the Christian anchorites in their hermitages inthe desert, Mohammed retired to a grotto in Mount Hera, a few miles fromMecca, giving himself up to meditation and prayer. In this seclusion, contemplating the awful attributes of the Omnipotent and Eternal God, headdressed to his conscience the solemn inquiry, whether he could adoptthe dogmas then held in Asiatic Christendom respecting the Trinity, thesonship of Jesus as begotten by the Almighty, the character of Mary asat once a virgin, a mother, and the queen of heaven, without incurringthe guilt and the peril of blasphemy. 

By his solitary meditations in the grotto Mohammed was drawn to theconclusion that, through the cloud of dogmas and disputations aroundhim, one great truth might be discerned--the unity of God. Leaningagainst the stem of a palm-tree, he unfolded his views on this subjectto his neighbors and friends, and announced to them that he shoulddedicate his life to the preaching of that truth. Again and again, inhis sermons and in the Koran, he declared: "I am nothing but a publicpreacher. . . . I preach the oneness of God. " Such was his own conceptionof his so-called apostleship. Henceforth, to the day of his death, hewore on his finger a seal-ring on which was engraved, "Mohammed, themessenger of God. "

VICTORIES OF MOHAMMED. It is well known among physicians that prolongedfasting and mental anxiety inevitably give rise to hallucination. Perhaps there never has been any religious system introduced byself-denying, earnest men that did not offer examples of supernaturaltemptations and supernatural commands. Mysterious voices encouraged theArabian preacher to persist in his determination; shadows of strangeforms passed before him. He heard sounds in the air like those of adistant bell. In a nocturnal dream he was carried by Gabriel from Meccato Jerusalem, and thence in succession through the six heavens. Into theseventh the angel feared to intrude and Mohammed alone passed into thedread cloud that forever enshrouds the Almighty. "A shiver thrilled hisheart as he felt upon his shoulder the touch of the cold hand of God. "

His public ministrations met with much resistance and little success atfirst. Expelled from Mecca by the upholders of the prevalent idolatry, he sought refuge in Medina, a town in which there were many Jews andNestorians; the latter at once became proselytes to his faith. He hadalready been compelled to send his daughter and others of his disciplesto Abyssinia, the king of which was a Nestorian Christian. At the end ofsix years he had made only fifteen hundred converts. But in three littleskirmishes, magnified in subsequent times by the designation of thebattles of Beder, of Ohud, and of the Nations, Mohammed discovered thathis most convincing argument was his sword. Afterward, with Orientaleloquence, he said, "Paradise will be found in the shadow of thecrossing of swords. " By a series of well-conducted military operations, his enemies were completely overthrown. Arabian idolatry was absolutelyexterminated; the doctrine he proclaimed, that "there is but one God, "was universally adopted by his countrymen, and his own apostleshipaccepted. 

DEATH OF MOHAMMED. Let us pass over his stormy life, and hear whathe says when, on the pinnacle of earthly power and glory, he wasapproaching its close. 

Steadfast in his declaration of the unity of God, he departed fromMedina on his last pilgrimage to Mecca, at the head of one hundredand fourteen thousand devotees, with camels decorated with garlands offlowers and fluttering streamers. When he approached the holy city, heuttered the solemn invocation: "Here am I in thy service, O God! Thouhast no companion. To thee alone belongeth worship. Thine alone is thekingdom. There is none to share it with thee. "

With his own hand he offered up the camels in sacrifice. He consideredthat primeval institution to be equally sacred as prayer, and that noreason can be alleged in support of the one which is not equally strongin support of the other. 

From the pulpit of the Caaba he reiterated, "O my hearers, I am only aman like yourselves. " They remembered that he had once said to one whoapproached him with timid steps: "Of what dost thou stand in awe? I amno king. I am nothing but the son of an Arab woman, who ate flesh driedin the sun. "

He returned to Medina to die. In his farewell to his congregation, hesaid: "Every thing happens according to the will of God, and has itsappointed time, which can neither be hastened nor avoided. I return tohim who sent me, and my last command to you is, that ye love, honor, anduphold each other, that ye exhort each other to faith and constancy inbelief, and to the performance of pious deeds. My life has been for yourgood, and so will be my death. "

In his dying agony, his head was reclined on the lap of Ayesha. Fromtime to time he had dipped his hand in a vase of water, and moistenedhis face. At last he ceased, and, gazing steadfastly upward, said, inbroken accents: "O God--forgive my sins--be it so. I come. "

Shall we speak of this man with disrespect? His precepts are, at thisday, the religious guide of one-third of the human race. 

DOCTRINES OF MOHAMMED. In Mohammed, who had already broken away from theancient idolatrous worship of his native country, preparation had beenmade for the rejection of those tenets which his Nestorian teachershad communicated to him, inconsistent with reason and conscience. And, though, in the first pages of the Koran, he declares his belief in whatwas delivered to Moses and Jesus, and his reverence for them personally, his veneration for the Almighty is perpetually displayed. He ishorror-stricken at the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus, the Worship ofMary as the mother of God, the adoration of images and paintings, inhis eyes a base idolatry. He absolutely rejects the Trinity, of whichhe seems to have entertained the idea that it could not be interpretedotherwise than as presenting three distinct Gods. 

His first and ruling idea was simply religious reform--to overthrowArabian idolatry, and put an end to the wild sectarianism ofChristianity. That he proposed to set up a new religion was a calumnyinvented against him in Constantinople, where he was looked upon withdetestation, like that with which in after ages Luther was regarded inRome. 

But, though he rejected with indignation whatever might seem todisparage the doctrine of the unity of God, he was not able toemancipate himself from anthropomorphic conceptions. The God of theKoran is altogether human, both corporeally and mentally, if suchexpressions may with propriety be used. Very soon, however, thefollowers of Mohammed divested themselves of these base ideas and roseto nobler ones. 

The view here presented of the primitive character of Mohammedanismhas long been adopted by many competent authorities. Sir WilliamJones, following Locke, regards the main point in the divergence ofMohammedanism from Christianity to consist "in denying vehemently thecharacter of our Savior as the Son, and his equality as God with theFather, of whose unity and attributes the Mohammedans entertain andexpress the most awful ideas. " This opinion has been largely entertainedin Italy. Dante regarded Mohammed only as the author of a schism, andsaw in Islamism only an Arian sect. In England, Whately views it as acorruption of Christianity. It was an offshoot of Nestorianism, and notuntil it had overthrown Greek Christianity in many great battles, wasspreading rapidly over Asia and Africa, and had become intoxicatedwith its wonderful successes, did it repudiate its primitive limitedintentions, and assert itself to be founded on a separate and distinctrevelation. 

THE FIRST KHALIF. Mohammed's life had been almost entirely consumedin the conversion or conquest of his native country. Toward its close, however, he felt himself strong enough to threaten the invasion of Syriaand Persia. He had made no provision for the perpetuation of his owndominion, and hence it was not without a struggle that a successor wasappointed. At length Abubeker, the father of Ayesha, was selected. Hewas proclaimed the first khalif, or successor of the Prophet. 

There is a very important difference between the spread of Mohammedanismand the spread of Christianity. The latter was never sufficientlystrong to over throw and extirpate idolatry in the Roman Empire. As itadvanced, there was an amalgamation, a union. The old forms of the onewere vivified by the new spirit of the other, and that paganization towhich reference has already been made was the result. 

THE MOHAMMEDAN HEAVEN. But, in Arabia, Mohammed overthrew and absolutelyannihilated the old idolatry. No trace of it is found in the doctrinespreached by him and his successors. The black stone that had fallen fromheaven--the meteorite of the Caaba--and its encircling idols, passedtotally out of view. The essential dogma of the new faith--"There is butone God"--spread without any adulteration. Military successes had, in aworldly sense made the religion of the Koran profitable; and, no matterwhat dogmas may be, when that is the case, there will be plenty ofconverts. 

As to the popular doctrines of Mohammedanism, I shall here have nothingto say. The reader who is interested in that matter will find an accountof them in a review of the Koran in the eleventh chapter of my "Historyof the Intellectual Development of Europe. " It is enough now to remarkthat their heaven was arranged in seven stories, and was only a palaceof Oriental carnal delight. It was filled with black-eyed concubinesand servants. The form of God was, perhaps, more awful than thatof paganized Christianity. Anthropomorphism will, however, never beobliterated from the ideas of the unintellectual. Their God, at thebest, will never be any thing more than the gigantic shadow of a man--avast phantom of humanity--like one of those Alpine spectres seen in themidst of the clouds by him who turns his back on the sun. 

Abubeker had scarcely seated himself in the khalifate, when he put forththe following proclamation:

In the name of the most merciful God! Abubeker to the rest of the truebelievers, health and happiness. The mercy and blessing of God be uponyou. I praise the most high God. I pray for his prophet Mohammed. 

INVASION OF SYRIA. "This is to inform you that I intend to send the truebelievers into Syria, to take it out of the hands of the infidels. AndI would have you know that the fighting for religion is an act ofobedience to God. "

On the first encounter, Khaled, the Saracen general, hard pressed, lifted up his hands in the midst of his army and said: "O God! thesevile wretches pray with idolatrous expressions and take to themselvesanother God besides thee, but we acknowledge thy unity and affirm thatthere is no other God but thee alone. Help us, we beseech thee, for thesake of thy prophet Mohammed, against these idolaters. " On the part ofthe Saracens the conquest of Syria was conducted with ferocious piety. The belief of the Syrian Christians aroused in their antagonistssentiments of horror and indignation. "I will cleave the skull of anyblaspheming idolater who says that the Most Holy God, the Almightyand Eternal, has begotten a son. " The Khalif Omar, who took Jerusalem, commences a letter to Heraclius, the Roman emperor: "In the name of themost merciful God! Praise be to God, the Lord of this and of the otherworld, who has neither female consort nor son. " The Saracens nicknamedthe Christians "Associators, " because they joined Mary and Jesus aspartners with the Almighty and Most Holy God. 

It was not the intention of the khalif to command his army; that dutywas devolved on Abou Obeidah nominally, on Khaled in reality. In aparting review the khalif enjoined on his troops justice, mercy, and theobservance of fidelity in their engagements he commanded them to abstainfrom all frivolous conversation and from wine, and rigorously to observethe hours of prayer; to be kind to the common people among whom theypassed, but to show no mercy to their priests. 

FALL OF BOZRAH. Eastward of the river Jordan is Bozrah, a strong townwhere Mohammed had first met his Nestorian Christian instructors. It wasone of the Roman forts with which the country was dotted over. Beforethis place the Saracen army encamped. The garrison was strong, theramparts were covered with holy crosses and consecrated banners. Itmight have made a long defense. But its governor, Romanus, betrayed histrust, and stealthily opened its gates to the besiegers. His conductshows to what a deplorable condition the population of Syria had come. After the surrender, in a speech he made to the people he had betrayed, he said: "I renounce your society, both in this world and that to come. And I deny him that was crucified, and whosoever worships him. And Ichoose God for my Lord, Islam for my faith, Mecca for my temple, theMoslems for my brethren, Mohammed for my prophet, who was sent to leadus in the right way, and to exalt the true religion in spite of thosewho join partners with God. " Since the Persian invasion, Asia Minor, Syria, and even Palestine, were full of traitors and apostates, ready tojoin the Saracens. Romanus was but one of many thousands who had falleninto disbelief through the victories of the Persians. 

FALL OF DAMASCUS. From Bozrah it was only seventy miles northward toDamascus, the capital of Syria. Thither, without delay, the Saracen armymarched. The city was at once summoned to take its option--conversion, tribute, or the sword. In his palace at Antioch, barely one hundred andfifty miles still farther north, the Emperor Heraclius received tidingsof the alarming advance of his assailants. He at once dispatched an armyof seventy thousand men. The Saracens were compelled to raise thesiege. A battle took place in the plains of Aiznadin, the Roman armywas overthrown and dispersed. Khaled reappeared before Damascus with hisstandard of the black eagle, and after a renewed investment of seventydays Damascus surrendered. 

From the Arabian historians of these events we may gather that thus farthe Saracen armies were little better than a fanatic mob. Many of themen fought naked. It was not unusual for a warrior to stand forth infront and challenge an antagonist to mortal duel. Nay, more, even thewomen engaged in the combats. Picturesque narratives have beenhanded down to us relating the gallant manner in which they acquittedthemselves. 

FALL OF JERUSALEM. From Damascus the Saracen army advanced northward, guided by the snow-clad peaks of Libanus and the beautiful riverOrontes. It captured on its way Baalbec, the capital of the Syrianvalley, and Emesa, the chief city of the eastern plain. To resist itsfurther progress, Heraclius collected an army of one hundred and fortythousand men. A battle took place at Yermuck; the right wing of theSaracens was broken, but the soldiers were driven back to the field bythe fanatic expostulations of their women. The conflict ended inthe complete overthrow of the Roman army. Forty thousand were takenprisoners, and a vast number killed. The whole country now lay open tothe victors. The advance of their army had been east of the Jordan. It was clear that, before Asia Minor could be touched, the strong andimportant cities of Palestine, which was now in their rear, must besecured. There was a difference of opinion among the generals in thefield as to whether Caesarea or Jerusalem should be assailed first. Thematter was referred to the khalif, who, rightly preferring the moraladvantages of the capture of Jerusalem to the military advantages of thecapture of Caesarea, ordered the Holy City to be taken, and that at anycost. Close siege was therefore laid to it. The inhabitants, rememberingthe atrocities inflicted by the Persians, and the indignities that hadbeen offered to the Savior's sepulchre, prepared now for a vigorousdefense. But, after an investment of four months, the PatriarchSophronius appeared on the wall, asking terms of capitulation. There hadbeen misunderstandings among the generals at the capture of Damascus, followed by a massacre of the fleeing inhabitants. Sophronius, therefore, stipulated that the surrender of Jerusalem should take placein presence of the khalif himself Accordingly, Omar, the khalif, camefrom Medina for that purpose. He journeyed on a red camel, carryinga bag of corn and one of dates, a wooden dish, and a leathernwater-bottle. The Arab conqueror entered the Holy City riding by theside of the Christian patriarch and the transference of the capital ofChristianity to the representative of Mohammedanism was effected withouttumult or outrage. Having ordered that a mosque should be built on thesite of the temple of Solomon, the khalif returned to the tomb of theProphet at Medina. 

Heraclius saw plainly that the disasters which were fast settling onChristianity were due to the dissensions of its conflicting sects; andhence, while he endeavored to defend the empire with his armies, hesedulously tried to compose those differences. With this view he pressedfor acceptance the Monothelite doctrine of the nature of Christ. But itwas now too late. Aleppo and Antioch were taken. Nothing could preventthe Saracens from overrunning Asia Minor. Heraclius himself had to seeksafety in flight. Syria, which had been added by Pompey the Great, the rival of Caesar, to the provinces of Rome, seven hundred yearspreviously--Syria, the birthplace of Christianity, the scene of its mostsacred and precious souvenirs, the land from which Heraclius himself hadonce expelled the Persian intruder--was irretrievably lost. Apostatesand traitors had wrought this calamity. We are told that, as the shipwhich bore him to Constantinople parted from the shore, Heracliusgazed intently on the receding hills, and in the bitterness of anguishexclaimed, "Farewell, Syria, forever farewell!"

It is needless to dwell on the remaining details of the Saracenconquest: how Tripoli and Tyre were betrayed; how Caesarea was captured;how with the trees of Libanus and the sailors of Phoenicia a Saraeenfleet was equipped, which drove the Roman navy into the Hellespont; howCyprus, Rhodes, and the Cyclades, were ravaged, and the Colossus, whichwas counted as one of the wonders of the world, sold to a Jew, wholoaded nine hundred camels with its brass; how the armies of the khalifadvanced to the Black Sea, and even lay in front of Constantinople--allthis was as nothing after the fall of Jerusalem. 

OVERTHROW OF THE PERSIANS. The fall of Jerusalem! the loss ofthe metropolis of Christianity! In the ideas of that age the twoantagonistic forms of faith had submitted themselves to the ordeal ofthe judgment of God. Victory had awarded the prize of battle, Jerusalem, to the Mohammedan; and, notwithstanding the temporary successes of theCrusaders, after much more than a thousand years in his hands it remainsto this day. The Byzantine historians are not without excuse for thecourse they are condemned for taking: "They have wholly neglected thegreat topic of the ruin of the Eastern Church. " And as for the WesternChurch, even the debased popes of the middle ages--the ages of theCrusades--could not see without indignation that they were compelledto rest the claims of Rome as the metropolis of Christendom on a falselegendary story of a visit of St. Peter to that city; while the truemetropolis, the grand, the sacred place of the birth, the life, thedeath of Christ himself, was in the hands of the infidels! It has notbeen the Byzantine historians alone who have tried to conceal this greatcatastrophe. The Christian writers of Europe on all manner of subjects, whether of history, religion, or science, have followed a similarcourse against their conquering antagonists. It has been their constantpractice to hide what they could not depreciate, and depreciate whatthey could not hide. 

INVASION OF EGYPT. I have not space, nor indeed does it comport with theintention of this work, to relate, in such detail as I have given tothe fall of Jerusalem, other conquests of the Saracens--conquests whicheventually established a Mohammedan empire far exceeding in geographicalextent that of Alexander, and even that of Rome. But, devoting a fewwords to this subject, it may be said that Magianism received a worseblow than that which had been inflicted on Christianity; The fate ofPersia was settled at the battle of Cadesia. At the sack of Ctesiphon, the treasury, the royal arms, and an unlimited spoil, fell into thehands of the Saracens. Not without reason do they call the battle ofNehavend the "victory of victories. " In one direction they advanced tothe Caspian, in the other southward along the Tigris to Persepolis. The Persian king fled for his life over the great Salt Desert, from thecolumns and statues of that city which had lain in ruins since the nightof the riotous banquet of Alexander. One division of the Arabian armyforced the Persian monarch over the Oxus. He was assassinated by theTurks. His son was driven into China, and became a captain in theChinese emperor's guards. The country beyond the Oxus was reduced. It paid a tribute of two million pieces of gold. While the emperorat Peking was demanding the friendship of the khalif at Medina, thestandard of the Prophet was displayed on the banks of the Indus. 

Among the generals who had greatly distinguished themselves in theSyrian wars was Amrou, destined to be the conqueror of Egypt; for thekhalifs, not content with their victories on the North and East, nowturned their eyes to the West, and prepared for the annexation ofAfrica. As in the former cases, so in this, sectarian treason assistedthem. The Saracen army was hailed as the deliverer of the JacobiteChurch; the Monophysite Christians of Egypt, that is, they who, in thelanguage of the Athanasian Creed, confounded the substance of theSon, proclaimed, through their leader, Mokaukas, that they desired nocommunion with the Greeks, either in this world or the next, that theyabjured forever the Byzantine tyrant and his synod of Chalcedon. Theyhastened to pay tribute to the khalif, to repair the roads and bridges, and to supply provisions and intelligence to the invading army. 

FALL OF ALEXANDRIA. Memphis, one of the old Pharaonic capitals, soonfell, and Alexandria was invested. The open sea behind gave opportunityto Heraclius to reenforce the garrison continually. On his part, Omar, who was now khalif sent to the succor of the besieging army the veterantroops of Syria. There were many assaults and many sallies. In one Amrouhimself was taken prisoner by the besieged, but, through the dexterityof a slave, made his escape. After a siege of fourteen months, and aloss of twenty-three thousand men, the Saracens captured the city. Inhis dispatch to the Khalif, Amrou enumerated the splendors of the greatcity of the West "its four thousand palaces, four thousand baths, fourhundred theatres, twelve thousand shops for the sale of vegetable food, and forty thousand tributary Jews. "

So fell the second great city of Christendom--the fate of Jerusalem hadfallen on Alexandria, the city of Athanasius, and Arius, and Cyril; thecity that had imposed Trinitarian ideas and Mariolatry on the Church. In his palace at Constantinople Heraclius received the fatal tidings. He was overwhelmed with grief. It seemed as if his reign was to bedisgraced by the downfall of Christianity. He lived scarcely a monthafter the loss of the town. 

But if Alexandria had been essential to Constantinople in the supplyof orthodox faith, she was also essential in the supply of daily food. Egypt was the granary of the Byzantines. For this reason two attemptswere made by powerful fleets and armies for the recovery of the place, and twice had Amrou to renew his conquest. He saw with what facilitythese attacks could be made, the place being open to the sea; he sawthat there was but one and that a fatal remedy. "By the living God, ifthis thing be repeated a third time I will make Alexandria as open toanybody as is the house of a prostitute!" He was better than his word, for he forthwith dismantled its fortifications, and made it an untenableplace. 

FALL OF CARTHAGE. It was not the intention of the khalifs to limit theirconquest to Egypt. Othman contemplated the annexation of the entireNorth-African coast. His general, Abdallah, set out from Memphis withforty thousand men, passed through the desert of Barca, and besiegedTripoli. But, the plague breaking out in his army, he was compelled toretreat to Egypt. 

All attempts were now suspended for more than twenty years. Then Akbahforced his way from the Nile to the Atlantic Ocean. In front of theCanary Islands he rode his horse into the sea, exclaiming: "Great God!if my course were not stopped by this sea, I would still go on to theunknown kingdoms of the West, preaching the unity of thy holy name, andputting to the sword the rebellious nations who worship any other godsthan thee. "

These Saracen expeditions had been through the interior of the country, for the Byzantine emperors, controlling for the time the Mediterranean, had retained possession of the cities on the coast. The KhalifAbdalmalek at length resolved on the reduction of Carthage, the mostimportant of those cities, and indeed the capital of North Africa. His general, Hassan, carried it by escalade; but reenforcements fromConstantinople, aided by some Sicilian and Gothic troops, compelledhim to retreat. The relief was, however, only temporary. Hassan, in thecourse of a few months renewed his attack. It proved successful, and hedelivered Carthage to the flames. 

Jerusalem, Alexandria, Carthage, three out of the five great Christiancapitals, were lost. The fall of Constantinople was only a question oftime. After its fall, Rome alone remained. 

In the development of Christianity, Carthage had played no insignificantpart. It had given to Europe its Latin form of faith, and some of itsgreatest theologians. It was the home of St. Augustine. 

Never in the history of the world had there been so rapid and extensivea propagation of any religion as Mohammedanism. It was now dominatingfrom the Altai Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean, from the centre of Asiato the western verge of Africa. 

CONQUEST OF SPAIN. The Khalif Alwalid next authorized the invasion ofEurope, the conquest of Andalusia, or the Region of the Evening. Musa, his general, found, as had so often been the case elsewhere, twoeffective allies sectarianism and treason--the Archbishop of Toledo andCount Julian the Gothic general. Under their lead, in the very crisisof the battle of Xeres, a large portion of the army went over to theinvaders; the Spanish king was compelled to flee from the field, and inthe pursuit he was drowned in the waters of the Guadalquivir. 

With great rapidity Tarik, the lieutenant of Musa, pushed forward fromthe battle-field to Toledo, and thence northward. On the arrival of Musathe reduction of the Spanish peninsula was completed, and the wreck ofthe Gothic army driven beyond the Pyrenees into France. Considering theconquest of Spain as only the first step in his victories, he announcedhis intention of forcing his way into Italy, and preaching the unity ofGod in the Vatican. Thence he would march to Constantinople, and, havingput all end to the Roman Empire and Christianity, would pass into Asiaand lay his victorious sword on the footstool of the khalif at Damascus. 

But this was not to be. Musa, envious of his lieutenant, Tarik, hadtreated him with great indignity. The friends of Tarik at the court ofthe khalif found means of retaliation. An envoy from Damascus arrestedMusa in his camp; he was carried before his sovereign, disgraced by apublic whipping, and died of a broken heart. 

INVASION OF FRANCE. Under other leaders, however, the Saracen conquestof France was attempted. In a preliminary campaign the country from themouth of the Garonne to that of the Loire was secured. Then Abderahman, the Saracen commander, dividing his forces into two columns, with oneon the east passed the Rhone, and laid siege to Arles. A Christian army, attempting the relief of the place, was defeated with heavy loss. His western column, equally successful, passed the Dordogne, defeatedanother Christian army, inflicting on it such dreadful loss that, according to its own fugitives, "God alone could number the slain. " AllCentral France was now overrun; the banks of the Loire were reached;the churches and monasteries were despoiled of their treasures; andthe tutelar saints, who had worked so many miracles when there was nonecessity, were found to want the requisite power when it was so greatlyneeded. 

The progress of the invaders was at length stopped by Charles Martel(A. D. 732). Between Tours and Poictiers, a great battle, which lastedseven days, was fought. Abderahman was killed, the Saracens retreated, and soon afterward were compelled to recross the Pyrenees. 

The banks of the Loire, therefore, mark the boundary of the Mohammedanadvance in Western Europe. Gibbon, in his narrative of these greatevents, makes this remark: "A victorious line of march had beenprolonged above a thousand miles from the rock of Gibraltar to the banksof the Loire--a repetition of an equal space would have carried theSaracens to the confines of Poland and the Highlands of Scotland. "

INSULT TO ROME. It is not necessary for me to add to this sketch of themilitary diffusion of Mohammedanism, the operations of the Saracens onthe Mediterranean Sea, their conquest of Crete and Sicily, their insultto Rome. It will be found, however, that their presence in Sicilyand the south of Italy exerted a marked influence on the intellectualdevelopment of Europe. 

Their insult to Rome! What could be more humiliating than thecircumstances under which it took place (A. D. 846)? An insignificantSaracen expedition entered the Tiber and appeared before the walls ofthe city. Too weak to force an entrance, it insulted and plundered theprecincts, sacrilegiously violating the tombs of St. Peter and St. Paul. Had the city itself been sacked, the moral effect could not have beengreater. From the church of St. Peter its altar of silver was tornaway and sent to Africa--St. Peter's altar, the very emblem of RomanChristianity!

Constantinople had already been besieged by the Saracens more than once;its fall was predestined, and only postponed. Rome had received thedirest insult, the greatest loss that could be inflicted upon it;the venerable churches of Asia Minor had passed out of existence; noChristian could set his foot in Jerusalem without permission; the Mosqueof Omar stood on the site of the Temple of Solomon. Among the ruins ofAlexandria the Mosque of Mercy marked the spot where a Saracen general, satiated with massacre, had, in contemptuous compassion, spared thefugitive relics of the enemies of Mohammed; nothing remained of Carthagebut her blackened ruins. The most powerful religious empire that theworld had ever seen had suddenly come into existence. It stretched fromthe Atlantic Ocean to the Chinese Wall, from the shores of the Caspianto those of the Indian Ocean, and yet, in one sense, it had not reachedits culmination. The day was to come when it was to expel the successorsof the Caesars from their capital, and hold the peninsula of Greece insubjection, to dispute with Christianity the empire of Europe in thevery centre of that continent, and in Africa to extend its dogmas andfaith across burning deserts and through pestilential forests from theMediterranean to regions southward far beyond the equinoetial line. 

DISSENSIONS OF THE ARABS. But, though Mohammedanism had not reached itsculmination, the dominion of the khalifs had. Not the sword of CharlesMartel, but the internal dissension of the vast Arabian Empire, was thesalvation of Europe. Though the Ommiade Khalifs were popular in Syria, elsewhere they were looked upon as intruders or usurpers; the kindredof the apostle was considered to be the rightful representative of hisfaith. Three parties, distinguished by their colors, tore the khalifateasunder with their disputes, and disgraced it by their atrocities. Thecolor of the Ommiades was white, that of the Fatimites green, that ofthe Abassides black; the last represented the party of Abbas, the uncleof Mohammed. The result of these discords was a tripartite divisionof the Mohammedan Empire in the tenth century into the khalifates ofBagdad, of Cairoan, and of Cordova. Unity in Mohammedan political actionwas at an end, and Christendom found its safeguard, not in supernaturalhelp, but in the quarrels of the rival potentates. To internalanimosities foreign pressures were eventually added and Arabism, whichhad done so much for the intellectual advancement of the world, came toan end when the Turks and the Berbers attained to power. 

The Saracens had become totally regardless of European opposition--theywere wholly taken up with their domestic quarrels. Ockley says withtruth, in his history: "The Saracens had scarce a deputy lieutenant orgeneral that would not have thought it the greatest affront, and suchas ought to stigmatize him with indelible disgrace, if he should havesuffered himself to have been insulted by the united forces of allEurope. And if any one asks why the Greeks did not exert themselvesmore, in order to the extirpation of these insolent invaders, it is asufficient answer to any person that is acquainted with the charactersof those men to say that Amrou kept his residence at Alexandria, andMoawyah at Damascus. "

As to their contempt, this instance may suffice: Nicephorus, the Romanemperor, had sent to the Khalif Haroun-al-Raschid a threateningletter, and this was the reply: "In the name of the most merciful God, Haroun-al-Raschid, commander of the faithful, to Nicephorus, the Romandog! I have read thy letter, O thou son of an unbelieving mother. Thoushalt not hear, thou shalt behold my reply!" It was written in lettersof blood and fire on the plains of Phrygia. 

POLITICAL EFFECT OF POLYGAMY. A nation may recover the confiscationof its provinces, the confiscation of its wealth; it may survive theimposition of enormous war-fines; but it never can recover from thatmost frightful of all war-acts, the confiscation of its women. WhenAbou Obeidah sent to Omar news of his capture of Antioch, Omar gentlyupbraided him that he had not let the troops have the women. "If theywant to marry in Syria, let them; and let them have as many femaleslaves as they have occasion for. " It was the institution of polygamy, based upon the confiscation of the women in the vanquished countries, that secured forever the Mohammedan rule. The children of these unionsgloried in their descent from their conquering fathers. No better proofcan be given of the efficacy of this policy than that which is furnishedby North Africa. The irresistible effect of polygamy in consolidatingthe new order of things was very striking. In little more than a singlegeneration, the Khalif was informed by his officers that the tributemust cease, for all the children born in that region were Mohammedans, and all spoke Arabic. 

MOHAMMEDANISM. Mohammedanism, as left by its founder, was ananthropomorphic religion. Its God was only a gigantic man, its heavena mansion of carnal pleasures. From these imperfect ideas its moreintelligent classes very soon freed themselves, substituting for themothers more philosophical, more correct. Eventually they attained to anaccordance with those that have been pronounced in our own times by theVatican Council as orthodox. Thus Al-Gazzali says: "A knowledge of Godcannot be obtained by means of the knowledge a man has of himself, orof his own soul. The attributes of God cannot be determined fromthe attributes of man. His sovereignty and government can neither becompared nor measured. "

CHAPTER IV. 

 THE RESTORATION OF SCIENCE IN THE SOUTH. 

 By the influence of the Nestorians and Jews, the Arabians are turned to the cultivation of Science. --They modify their views as to the destiny of man, and obtain true conceptions respecting the structure of the world. --They ascertain the size of the earth, and determine its shape. -- Their khalifs collect great libraries, patronize every department of science and literature, establish astronomical observatories. --They develop the mathematical sciences, invent algebra, and improve geometry and trigonometry. --They collect and translate the old Greek mathematical and astronomical works, and adopt the inductive method of Aristotle. --They establish many colleges, and, with the aid of the Nestorians, organize a public-school system. --They introduce the Arabic numerals and arithmetic, and catalogue and give names to the stars. --They lay the foundation of modern astronomy, chemistry, and physics, and introduce great improvements in agriculture and manufactures. 

"IN the course of my long life, " said the Khalif Ali, "I have oftenobserved that men are more like the times they live in than theyare like their fathers. " This profoundly philosophical remark of theson-in-law of Mohammed is strictly true; for, though the personal, thebodily lineaments of a man may indicate his parentage, the constitutionof his mind, and therefore the direction of his thoughts, is determinedby the environment in which he lives. 

When Amrou, the lieutenant of the Khalif Omar, conquered Egypt, andannexed it to the Saracenic Empire, he found in Alexandria a Greekgrammarian, John surnamed Philoponus, or the Labor-lover. Presuming onthe friendship which had arisen between them, the Greek solicited as agift the remnant of the great library--a remnant which war and time andbigotry had spared. Amrou, therefore, sent to the khalif to ascertainhis pleasure. "If, " replied the khalif, "the books agree with the Koran, the Word of God, they are useless, and need not be preserved; ifthey disagree with it, they are pernicious. Let them be destroyed. "Accordingly, they were distributed among the baths of Alexandria, and itis said that six months were barely sufficient to consume them. 

Although the fact has been denied, there can be little doubt that Omargave this order. The khalif was an illiterate man; his environmentwas an environment of fanaticism and ignorance. Omar's act was anillustration of Ali's remark. 

THE ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY BURNT. But it must not be supposed that thebooks which John the Labor-lover coveted were those which constitutedthe great library of the Ptolemies, and that of Eumenes, King ofPergamus. Nearly a thousand years had elapsed since Philadelphus beganhis collection. Julius Caesar had burnt more than half; the Patriarchsof Alexandria had not only permitted but superintended the dispersionof almost all the rest. Orosius expressly states that he saw the emptycases or shelves of the library twenty years after Theophilus, the uncleof St. Cyril, had procured from the Emperor Theodosius a rescript forits destruction. Even had this once noble collection never endured suchacts of violence, the mere wear and tear, and perhaps, I may add, thepilfering of a thousand years, would have diminished it sadly. Though John, as the surname he received indicates, might rejoice in asuperfluity of occupation, we may be certain that the care of a libraryof half a million books would transcend even his well-tried powers; andthe cost of preserving and supporting it, that had demanded the ampleresources of the Ptolemies and the Caesars, was beyond the means of agrammarian. Nor is the time required for its combustion or destructionany indication of the extent of the collection. Of all articles offuel, parchment is, perhaps, the most wretched. Paper and papyrus doexcellently well as kindling-materials, but we may be sure that thebath-men of Alexandria did not resort to parchment so long as they couldfind any thing else, and of parchment a very large portion of thesebooks was composed. 

There can, then, be no more doubt that Omar did order the destruction ofthis library, under an impression of its uselessness or its irreligioustendency, than that the Crusaders burnt the library of Tripoli, fancifully said to have consisted of three million volumes. The firstapartment entered being found to contain nothing but the Koran, all theother books were supposed to be the works of the Arabian impostor, and were consequently committed to the flames. In both cases the storycontains some truth and much exaggeration. Bigotry, however, has oftendistinguished itself by such exploits. The Spaniards burnt in Mexicovast piles of American picture-writings, an irretrievable loss; andCardinal Ximenes delivered to the flames, in the squares of Granada, eighty thousand Arabic manuscripts, many of them translations ofclassical authors. 

We have seen how engineering talent, stimulated by Alexander's Persiancampaign, led to a wonderful development of pure science under thePtolemies; a similar effect may be noted as the result of the Saracenicmilitary operations. 

The friendship contracted by Amrou, the conqueror of Egypt, with Johnthe Grammarian, indicates how much the Arabian mind was predisposed toliberal ideas. Its step from the idolatry of the Caaba to the monotheismof Mohammed prepared it to expatiate in the wide and pleasing fieldsof literature and philosophy. There were two influences to which itwas continually exposed. They conspired in determining its path. Thesewere--1. That of the Nestorians in Syria; 2. That of the Jews in Egypt. 

INFLUENCE OF THE NESTORIANS AND JEWS. In the last chapter I have brieflyrelated the persecution of Nestor and his disciples. They bore testimonyto the oneness of God, through many sufferings and martyrdoms. Theyutterly repudiated an Olympus filled with gods and goddesses. "Away fromus a queen of heaven!"

Such being their special views, the Nestorians found no difficulty inaffiliating with their Saracen conquerors, by whom they were treatednot only with the highest respect, but intrusted with some of the mostimportant offices of the state. Mohammed, in the strongest manner, prohibited his followers from committing any injuries against them. Jesuiabbas, their pontiff, concluded treaties both with the Prophet andwith Omar, and subsequently the Khalif Haroun-al-Raschid placed all hispublic schools under the superintendence of John Masue, a Nestorian. 

To the influence of the Nestorians that of the Jews was added. WhenChristianity displayed a tendency to unite itself with paganism, theconversion of the Jews was arrested; it totally ceased when Trinitarianideas were introduced. The cities of Syria and Egypt were full of Jews. In Alexandria alone, at the time of its capture by Amrou, there wereforty thousand who paid tribute. Centuries of misfortune and persecutionhad served only to confirm them in their monotheism, and to strengthenthat implacable hatred of idolatry which they had cherished eversince the Babylonian captivity. Associated with the Nestorians, theytranslated into Syriac many Greek and Latin philosophical works, whichwere retranslated into Arabic. While the Nestorian was occupied withthe education of the children of the great Mohammedan families, the Jewfound his way into them in the character of a physician. 

FATALISM OF THE ARABIANS. Under these influences the ferociousfanaticism of the Saracens abated, their manners were polished, theirthoughts elevated. They overran the realms of Philosophy and Scienceas quickly as they had overrun the provinces of the Roman Empire. Theyabandoned the fallacies of vulgar Mohammedanism, accepting in theirstead scientific truth. 

In a world devoted to idolatry, the sword of the Saracen had vindicatedthe majesty of God. The doctrine of fatalism, inculcated by the Koran, had powerfully contributed to that result. "No man can anticipate orpostpone his predetermined end. Death will overtake us even in loftytowers. From the beginning God hath settled the place in which each manshall die. " In his figurative language the Arab said: "No man can byflight escape his fate. The Destinies ride their horses by night. . . . Whether asleep in bed or in the storm of battle, the angel of death willfind thee. " "I am convinced, " said Ali, to whose wisdom we have alreadyreferred--"I am convinced that the affairs of men go by divine decree, and not by our administration. " The Mussulmen are those who submissivelyresign themselves to the will of God. They reconciled fate and free-willby saying, "The outline is given us, we color the picture of life as wewill. " They said that, if we would overcome the laws of Nature, we mustnot resist, we must balance them against each other. 

This dark doctrine prepared its devotees for the accomplishment of greatthings--things such as the Saracens did accomplish. It converted despairinto resignation, and taught men to disdain hope. There was a proverbamong them that "Despair is a freeman, Hope is a slave. "

But many of the incidents of war showed plainly that medicinesmay assuage pain, that skill may close wounds, that those who areincontestably dying may be snatched from the grave. The Jewish physicianbecame a living, an accepted protest against the fatalism of the Koran. By degrees the sternness of predestination was mitigated, and it wasadmitted that in individual life there is an effect due to free-will;that by his voluntary acts man may within certain limits determine hisown course. But, so far as nations are concerned, since they can yieldno personal accountability to God, they are placed under the control ofimmutable law. 

In this respect the contrast between the Christian and the Mohammedannations was very striking: The Christian was convinced of incessantprovidential interventions; he believed that there was no such thing aslaw in the government of the world. By prayers and entreaties he mightprevail with God to change the current of affairs, or, if that failed, he might succeed with Christ, or perhaps with the Virgin Mary, orthrough the intercession of the saints, or by the influence of theirrelics or bones. If his own supplications were unavailing, he mightobtain his desire through the intervention of his priest, or throughthat of the holy men of the Church, and especially if oblations or giftsof money were added. Christendom believed that she could change thecourse of affairs by influencing the conduct of superior beings. Islamrested in a pious resignation to the unchangeable will of God. Theprayer of the Christian was mainly an earnest intercession for benefitshoped for, that of the Saracen a devout expression of gratitude for thepast. Both substituted prayer for the ecstatic meditation of India. To the Christian the progress of the world was an exhibition ofdisconnected impulses, of sudden surprises. To the Mohammedan thatprogress presented a very different aspect. Every corporeal motion wasdue to some preceding motion; every thought to some preceding thought;every historical event was the offspring of some preceding event; everyhuman action was the result of some foregone and accomplished action. Inthe long annals of our race, nothing has ever been abruptly introduced. There has been an orderly, an inevitable sequence from event to event. There is an iron chain of destiny, of which the links are facts; eachstands in its preordained place--not one has ever been disturbed, notone has ever been removed. Every man came into the world without his ownknowledge, he is to depart from it perhaps against his own wishes. Thenlet him calmly fold his hands, and expect the issues of fate. 

Coincidently with this change of opinion as to the government ofindividual life, there came a change as respects the mechanicalconstruction of the world. According to the Koran, the earth is a squareplane, edged with vast mountains, which serve the double purpose ofbalancing it in its seat, and of sustaining the dome of the sky. Ourdevout admiration of the power and wisdom of God should be excited bythe spectacle of this vast crystalline brittle expanse, which has beensafely set in its position without so much as a crack or any otherinjury. Above the sky, and resting on it, is heaven, built in sevenstories, the uppermost being the habitation of God, who, under the formof a gigantic man, sits on a throne, having on either side winged bulls, like those in the palaces of old Assyrian kings. 

THEY MEASURE THE EARTH. These ideas, which indeed are not peculiar toMohammedanism, but are entertained by all men in a certain stage oftheir intellectual development as religious revelations, werevery quickly exchanged by the more advanced Mohammedans for othersscientifically correct. Yet, as has been the case in Christiancountries, the advance was not made without resistance on the partof the defenders of revealed truth. Thus when Al-Mamun, having becomeacquainted with the globular form of the earth, gave orders to hismathematicians and astronomers to measure a degree of a great circleupon it, Takyuddin, one of the most celebrated doctors of divinityof that time, denounced the wicked khalif, declaring that God wouldassuredly punish him for presumptuously interrupting the devotionsof the faithful by encouraging and diffusing a false and atheisticalphilosophy among them. Al-Mamun, however, persisted. On the shores ofthe Red Sea, in the plains of Shinar, by the aid of an astrolabe, theelevation of the pole above the horizon was determined at two stationson the same meridian, exactly one degree apart. The distance betweenthe two stations was then measured, and found to be two hundred thousandHashemite cubits; this gave for the entire circumference of the earthabout twenty-four thousand of our miles, a determination not farfrom the truth. But, since the spherical form could not be positivelyasserted from one such measurement, the khalif caused another to be madenear Cufa in Mesopotamia. His astronomers divided themselves into twoparties, and, starting from a given point, each party measured an arcof one degree, the one northward, the other southward. Their resultis given in cubits. If the cubit employed was that known as the royalcubit, the length of a degree was ascertained within one-third of a mileof its true value. From these measures the khalif concluded that theglobular form was established. 

THEIR PASSION FOR SCIENCE. It is remarkable how quickly the ferociousfanaticism of the Saracens was transformed into a passion forintellectual pursuits. At first the Koran was an obstacle toliterature and science. Mohammed had extolled it as the grandest of allcompositions, and had adduced its unapproachable excellence as a proofof his divine mission. But, in little more than twenty years after hisdeath, the experience that had been acquired in Syria, Persia, AsiaMinor, Egypt, had produced a striking effect, and Ali the khalifreigning at that time, avowedly encouraged all kinds of literarypursuits. Moawyah, the founder of the Ommiade dynasty, who followed in661, revolutionized the government. It had been elective, he made ithereditary. He removed its seat from Medina to a more central positionat Damascus, and entered on a career of luxury and magnificence. Hebroke the bonds of a stern fanaticism, and put himself forth as acultivator and patron of letters. Thirty years had wrought a wonderfulchange. A Persian satrap who had occasion to pay homage to Omar, thesecond khalif, found him asleep among the beggars on the steps of theMosque of Medina; but foreign envoys who had occasion to seek Moawyah, the sixth khalif, were presented to him in a magnificent palace, decorated with exquisite arabesques, and adorned with flower-gardens andfountains. 

THEIR LITERATURE. In less than a century after the death of Mohammed, translations of the chief Greek philosophical authors had been made intoArabic; poems such as the "Iliad" and the "Odyssey, " being consideredto have an irreligious tendency from their mythological allusions, wererendered into Syriac, to gratify the curiosity of the learned. Almansor, during his khalifate (A. D. 753-775), transferred the seat of governmentto Bagdad, which he converted into a splendid metropolis; he gave muchof his time to the study and promotion of astronomy, and establishedschools of medicine and law. His grandson, Haroun-al-Raschid (A. D. 786), followed his example, and ordered that to every mosque in his dominionsa school should be attached. But the Augustan age of Asiatic learningwas during the khalifate of Al-Mamun (A. D. 813-832). He made Bagdad thecentre of science, collected great libraries, and surrounded himselfwith learned men. 

The elevated taste thus cultivated continued after the division of theSaracen Empire by internal dissensions into three parts. The Abassidedynasty in Asia, the Fatimite in Egypt, and the Ommiade in Spain, becamerivals not merely in politics, but also in letters and science. 

THEY ORIGINATE CHEMISTRY. In letters the Saracens embraced every topicthat can amuse or edify the mind. In later times, it was their boastthat they had produced more poets than all other nations combined. Inscience their great merit consists in this, that they cultivated itafter the manner of the Alexandrian Greeks, not after the manner of theEuropean Greeks. They perceived that it can never be advanced by merespeculation; its only sure progress is by the practical interrogation ofNature. The essential characteristics of their method are experiment andobservation. Geometry and the mathematical sciences they looked uponas instruments of reasoning. In their numerous writings on mechanics, hydrostatics, optics, it is interesting to remark that the solution ofa problem is always obtained by performing an experiment, or by aninstrumental observation. It was this that made them the originators ofchemistry, that led them to the invention of all kinds of apparatus fordistillation, sublimation, fusion, filtration, etc. ; that in astronomycaused them to appeal to divided instruments, as quadrants andastrolabes; in chemistry, to employ the balance, the theory of whichthey were perfectly familiar with; to construct tables of specificgravities and astronomical tables, as those of Bagdad, Spain, Samarcand;that produced their great improvements in geometry, trigonometry, theinvention of algebra, and the adoption of the Indian numeration inarithmetic. Such were the results of their preference of the inductivemethod of Aristotle, their declining the reveries of Plato. 

THEIR GREAT LIBRARIES. For the establishment and extension of the publiclibraries, books were sedulously collected. Thus the khalif Al-Mamunis reported to have brought into Bagdad hundreds of camel-loads ofmanuscripts. In a treaty he made with the Greek emperor, Michael III. , he stipulated that one of the Constantinople libraries should be givenup to him. Among the treasures he thus acquired was the treatise ofPtolemy on the mathematical construction of the heavens. He had itforthwith translated into Arabic, under the title of "Al-magest. " Thecollections thus acquired sometimes became very large; thus the FatimiteLibrary at Cairo contained one hundred thousand volumes, elegantlytranscribed and bound. Among these, there were six thousand five hundredmanuscripts on astronomy and medicine alone. The rules of this librarypermitted the lending out of books to students resident at Cairo. Italso contained two globes, one of massive silver and one of brass; thelatter was said to have been constructed by Ptolemy, the former costthree thousand golden crowns. The great library of the Spanish khalifseventually numbered six hundred thousand volumes; its catalogue aloneoccupied forty-four. Besides this, there were seventy public librariesin Andalusia. The collections in the possession of individuals weresometimes very extensive. A private doctor refused the invitation of aSultan of Bokhara because the carriage of his books would have requiredfour hundred camels. 

There was in every great library a department for the copying ormanufacture of translations. Such manufactures were also often anaffair of private enterprise. Honian, a Nestorian physician, had anestablishment of the kind at Bagdad (A. D. 850). He issued versions ofAristotle, Plato, Hippocrates, Galen, etc. As to original works, it wasthe custom of the authorities of colleges to require their professorsto prepare treatises on prescribed topics. Every khalif had his ownhistorian. Books of romances and tales, such as "The Thousand and OneArabian Nights' Entertainments, " bear testimony to the creative fancyof the Saracens. Besides these, there were works on all kinds ofsubjects--history, jurisprudence, politics, philosophy, biographies notonly of illustrious men, but also of celebrated horses and camels. Thesewere issued without any censorship or restraint, though, in later times, works on theology required a license for publication. Books of referenceabounded, geographical, statistical, medical, historical dictionaries, and even abridgments or condensations of them, as the "EncyclopedicDictionary of all the Sciences, " by Mohammed Abu Abdallah. Much pridewas taken in the purity and whiteness of the paper, in the skillfulintermixture of variously-colored inks, and in the illumination oftitles by gilding and other adornments. 

The Saracen Empire was dotted all over with colleges. They wereestablished in Mongolia, Tartary, Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Egypt, North Africa, Morocco, Fez, Spain. At one extremity of this vast region, which far exceeded the Roman Empire in geographical extent, were thecollege and astronomical observatory of Samarcand, at the other theGiralda in Spain. Gibbon, referring to this patronage of learning, says:"The same royal prerogative was claimed by the independent emirs of theprovinces, and their emulation diffused the taste and the rewards ofscience from Samarcand and Bokhara to Fez and Cordova. The vizier of asultan consecrated a sum of two hundred thousand pieces of gold tothe foundation of a college at Bagdad, which he endowed with an annualrevenue of fifteen thousand dinars. The fruits of instruction werecommunicated, perhaps, at different times, to six thousand disciplesof every degree, from the son of the noble to that of the mechanic; asufficient allowance was provided for the indigent scholars, and themerit or industry of the professors was repaid with adequate stipends. In every city the productions of Arabic literature were copied andcollected, by the curiosity of the studious and the vanity of the rich. "The superintendence of these schools was committed with noble liberalitysometimes to Nestorians, sometimes to Jews. It mattered not in whatcountry a man was born, nor what were his religious opinions; hisattainment in learning was the only thing to be considered. The greatKhalif Al-Mamun had declared that "they are the elect of God, his bestand most useful servants, whose lives are devoted to the improvementof their rational faculties; that the teachers of wisdom are the trueluminaries and legislators of this world, which, without their aid, would again sink into ignorance and barbarism. "

After the example of the medical college of Cairo, other medicalcolleges required their students to pass a rigid examination. Thecandidate then received authority to enter on the practice of hisprofession. The first medical college established in Europe was thatfounded by the Saracens at Salerno, in Italy. The first astronomicalobservatory was that erected by them at Seville, in Spain. 

THE ARABIAN SCIENTIFIC MOVEMENT. It would far transcend the limits ofthis book to give an adequate statement of the results of this imposingscientific movement. The ancient sciences were greatly extended--newones were brought into existence. The Indian method of arithmetic wasintroduced, a beautiful invention, which expresses all numbers by tencharacters, giving them an absolute value, and a value by position, and furnishing simple rules for the easy performance of all kindsof calculations. Algebra, or universal arithmetic--the method ofcalculating indeterminate quantities, or investigating the relationsthat subsist among quantities of all kinds, whether arithmetical orgeometrical--was developed from the germ that Diophantus had left. Mohammed Ben Musa furnished the solution of quadratic equations, Omar Ben Ibra him that of cubic equations. The Saracens also gave totrigonometry its modern form, substituting sines for chords, which hadbeen previously used; they elevated it into a separate science. Musa, above mentioned, was the author of a "Treatise on SphericalTrigonometry. " Al-Baghadadi left one on land-surveying, so excellent, that by some it has been declared to be a copy of Euclid's lost work onthat subject. 

ARABIAN ASTRONOMY. In astronomy, they not only made catalogues, butmaps of the stars visible in their skies, giving to those of the largermagnitudes the Arabic names they still bear on our celestial globes. They ascertained, as we have seen, the size of the earth by themeasurement of a degree on her surface, determined the obliquity ofthe ecliptic, published corrected tables of the sun and moon fixedthe length of the year, verified the precession of the equinoxes. Thetreatise of Albategnius on "The Science of the Stars" is spoken of byLaplace with respect; he also draws attention to an important fragmentof Ibn-Junis, the astronomer of Hakem, the Khalif of Egypt, A. D. 1000, as containing a long series of observations from the time of Almansor, of eclipses, equinoxes, solstices, conjunctions of planets, occultationsof stars--observations which have cast much light on the greatvariations of the system of the world. The Arabian astronomers alsodevoted themselves to the construction and perfection of astronomicalinstruments, to the measurement of time by clocks of various kinds, byclepsydras and sun-dials. They were the first to introduce, for thispurpose, the use of the pendulum. 

In the experimental sciences, they originated chemistry; they discoveredsome of its most important reagents--sulphuric acid, nitric acid, alcohol. They applied that science in the practice of medicine, beingthe first to publish pharmacopoeias or dispensatories, and to include inthem mineral preparations. In mechanics, they had determined the lawsof falling bodies, had ideas, by no means indistinct, of the nature ofgravity; they were familiar with the theory of the mechanical powers. Inhydrostatics they constructed the first tables of the specific gravitiesof bodies, and wrote treatises on the flotation and sinking of bodiesin water. In optics, they corrected the Greek misconception, that aray proceeds from the eye, and touches the object seen, introducingthe hypothesis that the ray passes from the object to the eye. Theyunderstood the phenomena of the reflection and refraction of light. Alhazen made the great discovery of the curvilinear path of a ray oflight through the atmosphere, and proved that we see the sun and moonbefore they have risen, and after they have set. 

AGRICULTURE AND MANUFACTURE. The effects of this scientific activity areplainly perceived in the great improvements that took place in manyof the industrial arts. Agriculture shows it in better methods ofirrigation, the skillful employment of manures, the raising of improvedbreeds of cattle, the enactment of wise codes of rural laws, theintroduction of the culture of rice, and that of sugar and coffee. Themanufactures show it in the great extension of the industries of silk, cotton, wool; in the fabrication of cordova and morocco leather, andpaper; in mining, casting, and various metallurgic operations; in themaking of Toledo blades. 

Passionate lovers of poetry and music, they dedicated much of theirleisure time to those elegant pursuits. They taught Europe the game ofchess; they gave it its taste for works of fiction--romances and novels. In the graver domains of literature they took delight: they had manyadmirable compositions on such subjects as the instability of humangreatness; the consequences of irreligion; the reverses of fortune; theorigin, duration, and end of the world. Sometimes, not without surprise, we meet with ideas which we flatter ourselves have originated in ourown times. Thus our modern doctrines of evolution and development weretaught in their schools. In fact, they carried them much farther than weare disposed to do, extending them even to inorganic or mineralthings. The fundamental principle of alchemy was the natural process ofdevelopment of metalline bodies. "When common people, " says Al-Khazini, writing in the twelfth century, "hear from natural philosophers thatgold is a body which has attained to perfection of maturity, to thegoal of completeness, they firmly believe that it is something which hasgradually come to that perfection by passing through the forms of allother metallic bodies, so that its gold nature was originally lead, afterward it became tin, then brass, then silver, and finally reachedthe development of gold; not knowing that the natural philosophers mean, in saying this, only something like what they mean when they speak ofman, and attribute to him a completeness and equilibrium in nature andconstitution--not that man was once a bull, and was changed into anass, and afterward into a horse, and after that into an ape, and finallybecame a man. "

CHAPTER V. 

 CONFLICT RESPECTING THE NATURE OF THE SOUL. --DOCTRINE OF EMANATION AND ABSORPTION. 

 European ideas respecting the soul. --It resembles the form of the body. 

 Philosophical views of the Orientals. --The Vedic theology and Buddhism assert the doctrine of emanation and absorption. --It is advocated by Aristotle, who is followed by the Alexandrian school, and subsequently by the Jews and Arabians. --It is found in the writings of Erigena. 

 Connection of this doctrine with the theory of conservation and correlation of force. --Parallel between the origin and destiny of the body and the soul. --The necessity of founding human on comparative psychology. 

 Averroism, which is based on these facts, is brought into Christendom through Spain and Sicily. 

 History of the repression of Averroism. --Revolt of Islam against it. --Antagonism of the Jewish synagogues. --Its destruction undertaken by the papacy. --Institution of the Inquisition in Spain. --Frightful persecutions and their results. --Expulsion of the Jews and Moors. --Overthrow of Averroism in Europe. --Decisive action of the late Vatican Council. 

THE pagan Greeks and Romans believed that the spirit of man resembleshis bodily form, varying its appearance with his variations, and growingwith his growth. Heroes, to whom it had been permitted to descend intoHades, had therefore without difficulty recognized their former friends. Not only had the corporeal aspect been retained, but even the customaryraiment. 

THE SOUL. The primitive Christians, whose conceptions of a future lifeand of heaven and hell, the abodes of the blessed and the sinful, werefar more vivid than those of their pagan predecessors, accepted andintensified these ancient ideas. They did not doubt that in the worldto come they should meet their friends, and hold converse with them, asthey had done here upon earth--an expectation that gives consolation tothe human heart, reconciling it to the most sorrowful bereavements, andrestoring to it its dead. 

In the uncertainty as to what becomes of the soul in the intervalbetween its separation from the body and the judgment-day, manydifferent opinions were held. Some thought that it hovered over thegrave, some that it wandered disconsolate through the air. In thepopular belief, St. Peter sat as a door-keeper at the gate of heaven. Tohim it had been given to bind or to loose. He admitted or excluded theSpirits of men at his pleasure. Many persons, however, were disposed todeny him this power, since his decisions would be anticipatory of thejudgment-day, which would thus be rendered needless. After the timeof Gregory the Great, the doctrine of purgatory met with generalacceptance. A resting-place was provided for departed spirits. 

That the spirits of the dead occasionally revisit the living, or haunttheir former abodes, has been in all ages, in all European countries, a fixed belief, not confined to rustics, but participated in by theintelligent. A pleasing terror gathers round the winter's-eveningfireside at the stories of apparitions, goblins, ghosts. In the oldtimes the Romans had their lares, or spirits of those who had ledvirtuous lives; their larvae or lemures, the spirits of the wicked;their manes, the spirits of those of whom the merits were doubtful. Ifhuman testimony on such subjects can be of any value, there is a bodyof evidence reaching from the remotest ages to the present time, asextensive and unimpeachable as is to be found in support of any thingwhatever, that these shades of the dead congregate near tombstones, or take up their secret abode in the gloomy chambers of dilapidatedcastles, or walk by moonlight in moody solitude. 

ASIATIC PSYCHOLOGICAL VIEWS. While these opinions have universally foundpopular acceptance in Europe, others of a very different nature haveprevailed extensively in Asia, and indeed very generally in the higherregions of thought. Ecclesiastical authority succeeded in repressingthem in the sixteenth century, but they never altogether disappeared. In our own times so silently and extensively have they been diffused inEurope, that it was found expedient in the papal Syllabus to drawthem in a very conspicuous manner into the open light; and the VaticanCouncil, agreeing in that view of their obnoxious tendency and secretspread, has in an equally prominent and signal manner among its firstcanons anathematized all persons who hold them. "Let him be anathema whosays that spiritual things are emanations of the divine substance, orthat the divine essence by manifestation or development becomes allthings. " In view of this authoritative action, it is necessary now toconsider the character and history of these opinions. 

Ideas respecting the nature of God necessarily influence ideasrespecting the nature of the soul. The eastern Asiatics had adopted theconception of an impersonal God, and, as regards the soul, its necessaryconsequence, the doctrine of emanation and absorption. 

EMANATION AND ABSORPTION. Thus the Vedic theology is based on theacknowledgment of a universal spirit pervading all things. "There is intruth but one Deity, the supreme Spirit; he is of the same nature as thesoul of man. " Both the Vedas and the Institutes of Menu affirm thatthe soul is an emanation of the all-pervading Intellect, and that it isnecessarily destined to be reabsorbed. They consider it to be withoutform, and that visible Nature, with all its beauties and harmonies, isonly the shadow of God. 

Vedaism developed itself into Buddhism, which has become the faith ofa majority of the human race. This system acknowledges that there is asupreme Power, but denies that there is a supreme Being. It contemplatesthe existence of Force, giving rise as its manifestation to matter. Itadopts the theory of emanation and absorption. In a burning taper itsees an effigy of man--an embodiment of matter, and an evolution offorce. If we interrogate it respecting the destiny of the soul, itdemands of us what has become of the flame when it is blown out, and inwhat condition it was before the taper was lighted. Was it a nonentity?Has it been annihilated? It admits that the idea of personality whichhas deluded us through life may not be instantaneously extinguished atdeath, but may be lost by slow degrees. On this is founded the doctrineof transmigration. But at length reunion with the universal Intellecttakes place, Nirwana is reached, oblivion is attained, a state that hasno relation to matter, space, or time, the state into which the departedflame of the extinguished taper has gone, the state in which we werebefore we were born. This is the end that we ought to hope for; it isreabsorption in the universal Force--supreme bliss, eternal rest. 

Through Aristotle these doctrines were first introduced into EasternEurope; indeed, eventually, as we shall see, he was regarded as theauthor of them. They exerted a dominating influence in the later periodof the Alexandrian school. Philo, the Jew, who lived in the time ofCaligula, based his philosophy on the theory of emanation. Plotinusnot only accepted that theory as applicable to the soul of man, but asaffording an illustration of the nature of the Trinity. For, as a beamof light emanates from the sun, and as warmth emanates from the beamwhen it touches material bodies, so from the Father the Son emanates, and thence the Holy Ghost. From these views Plotinus derived a practicalreligious system, teaching the devout how to pass into a condition ofecstasy, a foretaste of absorption into the universal mundane soul. In that condition the soul loses its individual consciousness. In likemanner Porphyry sought absorption in or union with God. He was a Tyrianby birth, established a school at Rome, and wrote against Christianity;his treatise on that subject was answered by Eusebius and St. Jerome, but the Emperor Theodosius silenced it more effectually by causing allthe copies to be burnt. Porphyry bewails his own unworthiness, sayingthat he had been united to God in ecstasy but once in eighty-six years, whereas his master Plotinus had been so united six times in sixty years. A complete system of theology, based on the theory of emanation, wasconstructed by Proclus, who speculated on the manner in which absorptiontakes place: whether the soul is instantly reabsorbed and reunited inthe moment of death, or whether it retains the sentiment of personalityfor a time, and subsides into complete reunion by successive steps. 

ARABIC PSYCHOLOGY. From the Alexandrian Greeks these ideas passed tothe Saracen philosophers, who very soon after the capture of the greatEgyptian city abandoned to the lower orders their anthropomorphicnotions of the nature of God and the simulachral form of the spirit ofman. As Arabism developed itself into a distinct scientific system, the theories of emanation and absorption were among its characteristicfeatures. In this abandonment of vulgar Mohammedanism, the example ofthe Jews greatly assisted. They, too, had given up the anthropomorphismof their ancestors; they had exchanged the God who of old lived behindthe veil of the temple for an infinite Intelligence pervading theuniverse, and, avowing their inability to conceive that any thingwhich had on a sudden been called into existence should be capable ofimmortality, they affirmed that the soul of man is connected with a pastof which there was no beginning, and with a future to which there is noend. 

In the intellectual history of Arabism the Jew and the Saracen arecontinually seen together. It was the same in their political history, whether we consider it in Syria, in Egypt, or in Spain. From themconjointly Western Europe derived its philosophical ideas, which inthe course of time culminated in Averroism; Averroism is philosophicalIslamism. Europeans generally regarded Averroes as the author of theseheresies, and the orthodox branded him accordingly, but he was nothingmore than their collector and commentator. His works invaded Christendomby two routes: from Spain through Southern France they reached UpperItaly, engendering numerous heresies on their way; from Sicily theypassed to Naples and South Italy, under the auspices of Frederick II. 

But, long before Europe suffered this great intellectual invasion, therewere what might, perhaps, be termed sporadic instances of Orientalism. As an example I may quote the views of John Erigena (A. D. 800) He hadadopted and taught the philosophy of Aristotle had made a pilgrimageto the birthplace of that philosopher, and indulged a hope of unitingphilosophy and religion in the manner proposed by the Christianecclesiastics who were then studying in the Mohammedan universities ofSpain. He was a native of Britain. 

In a letter to Charles the Bald, Anastasius expresses his astonishment"how such a barbarian man, coming from the very ends of the earth, andremote from human conversation, could comprehend things so clearly, andtransfer them into another language so well. " The general intention ofhis writings was, as we have said, to unite philosophy with religion, but his treatment of these subjects brought him under ecclesiasticalcensure, and some of his works were adjudged to the flames. His mostimportant book is entitled "De Divisione Nature. "

Erigena's philosophy rests upon the observed and admitted fact thatevery living thing comes from something that had previously lived. Thevisible world, being a world of life, has therefore emanated necessarilyfrom some primordial existence, and that existence is God, who is thusthe originator and conservator of all. Whatever we see maintains itselfas a visible thing through force derived from him, and, were that forcewithdrawn, it must necessarily disappear. Erigena thus conceives ofthe Deity as an unceasing participator in Nature, being its preserver, maintainer, upholder, and in that respect answering to the soul of theworld of the Greeks. The particular life of individuals is therefore apart of general existence, that is, of the mundane soul. 

If ever there were a withdrawal of the maintaining power, all thingsmust return to the source from which they issued--that is, they mustreturn to God, and be absorbed in him. All visible Nature must thuspass back into "the Intellect" at last. "The death of the flesh is theauspices of the restitution of things, and of a return to their ancientconservation. So sounds revert back to the air in which they were born, and by which they were maintained, and they are heard no more; no manknows what has become of them. In that final absorption which, aftera lapse of time, must necessarily come, God will be all in all, andnothing exist but him alone. " "I contemplate him as the beginning andcause of all things; all things that are and those that have been, butnow are not, were created from him, and by him, and in him. I also viewhim as the end and intransgressible term of all things. . . . There is afourfold conception of universal Nature--two views of divine Nature, asorigin and end; two also of framed Nature, causes and effects. There isnothing eternal but God. "

The return of the soul to the universal Intellect is designated byErigena as Theosis, or Deification. In that final absorption allremembrance of its past experiences is lost. The soul reverts to thecondition in which it was before it animated the body. Necessarily, therefore, Erigena fell under the displeasure of the Church. 

It was in India that men first recognized the fact that force isindestructible and eternal. This implies ideas more or less distinctof that which we now term its "correlation and conservation. "Considerations connected with the stability of the universe givestrength to this view, since it is clear that, were there eitheran increase or a diminution, the order of the world must cease. Thedefinite and invariable amount of energy in the universe must thereforebe accepted as a scientific fact. The changes we witness are in itsdistribution. 

But, since the soul must be regarded as an active principle, to call anew one into existence out of nothing is necessarily to add to the forcepreviously in the world. And, if this has been done in the case of everyindividual who has been born, and is to be repeated for every individualhereafter, the totality of force must be continually increasing. 

Moreover, to many devout persons there is something very revolting inthe suggestion that the Almighty is a servitor to the caprices and lustsof man, and that, at a certain term after its origin, it is necessaryfor him to create for the embryo a soul. 

Considering man as composed of two portions, a soul and a body, theobvious relations of the latter may cast much light on the mysterious, the obscure relations of the former. Now, the substance of which thebody consists is obtained from the general mass of matter around us, and after death to that general mass it is restored. Has Nature, then, displayed before our eyes in the origin, mutations, and destiny of thematerial part, the body, a revelation that may guide us to a knowledgeof the origin and destiny of the companion, the spiritual part, thesoul?

Let us listen for a moment to one of the most powerful of Mohammedanwriters:

"God has created the spirit of man out of a drop of his own light;its destiny is to return to him. Do not deceive yourself with the vainimagination that it will die when the body dies. The form you had onyour entrance into this world, and your present form, are not thesame; hence there is no necessity of your perishing, on account of theperishing of your body. Your spirit came into this world a stranger, itis only sojourning, in a temporary home. From the trials and tempestsof this troublesome life, our refuge is in God. In reunion with him weshall find eternal rest--a rest without sorrow, a joy without pain, astrength without infirmity, a knowledge without doubt, a tranquil andyet an ecstatic vision of the source of life and light and glory, thesource from which we came. " So says the Saracen philosopher, Al-Gazzali(A. D. 1010). 

In a stone the material particles are in a state of stable equilibrium;it may, therefore, endure forever. An animal is in reality only a formthrough which a stream of matter is incessantly flowing. It receives itssupplies, and dismisses its wastes. In this it resembles a cataract, a river, a flame. The particles that compose it at one instant havedeparted from it the next. It depends for its continuance on exteriorsupplies. It has a definite duration in time, and an inevitable momentcomes in which it must die. 

In the great problem of psychology we cannot expect to reach ascientific result, if we persist in restricting ourselves to thecontemplation of one fact. We must avail ourselves of all accessiblefacts. Human psychology can never be completely resolved except throughcomparative psychology. With Descartes, we must inquire whether thesouls of animals be relations of the human soul, less perfect members inthe same series of development. We must take account of what we discoverin the intelligent principle of the ant, as well as what we discern inthe intelligent principle of man. Where would human physiology be, ifit were not illuminated by the bright irradiations of comparativephysiology?

Brodie, after an exhaustive consideration of the facts, affirms thatthe mind of animals is essentially the same as that of man. Every onefamiliar with the dog will admit that that creature knows right fromwrong, and is conscious when he has committed a fault. Many domesticanimals have reasoning powers, and employ proper means for theattainment of ends. How numerous are the anecdotes related of theintentional actions of the elephant and the ape! Nor is this apparentintelligence due to imitation, to their association with man, forwild animals that have no such relation exhibit similar properties. Indifferent species, the capacity and character greatly vary. Thus the dogis not only more intelligent, but has social and moral qualities thatthe cat does not possess; the former loves his master, the latter herhome. 

Du Bois-Reymond makes this striking remark: "With awe and wonder mustthe student of Nature regard that microscopic molecule of nervoussubstance which is the seat of the laborious, constructive, orderly, loyal, dauntless soul of the ant. It has developed itself to its presentstate through a countless series of generations. " What an impressiveinference we may draw from the statement of Huber, who has written sowell on this subject: "If you will watch a single ant at work, you cantell what he will next do!" He is considering the matter, and reasoningas you are doing. Listen to one of the many anecdotes which Huber, atonce truthful and artless, relates: "On the visit of an overseer ant tothe works, when the laborers had begun the roof too soon, he examined itand had it taken down, the wall raised to the proper height, and a newceiling constructed with the fragments of the old one. " Surely theseinsects are not automata, they show intention. They recognize their oldcompanions, who have been shut up from them for many months, and exhibitsentiments of joy at their return. Their antennal language is capableof manifold expression; it suits the interior of the nest, where all isdark. 

While solitary insects do not live to raise their young, social insectshave a longer term, they exhibit moral affections and educatetheir offspring. Patterns of patience and industry, some of theseinsignificant creatures will work sixteen or eighteen hours a day. Fewmen are capable of sustained mental application more than four or fivehours. 

Similarity of effects indicates similarity of causes; similarity ofactions demands similarity of organs. I would ask the reader of theseparagraphs, who is familiar with the habits of animals, and especiallywith the social relations of that wonderful insect to which referencehas been made, to turn to the nineteenth chapter of my work onthe "Intellectual Development of Europe, " in which he will find adescription of the social system of the Incas of Peru. Perhaps, then, inview of the similarity of the social institutions and personal conductof the insect, and the social institutions and personal conduct of thecivilized Indian--the one an insignificant speck, the other a man--hewill not be disposed to disagree with me in the opinion that "from bees, and wasps, and ants, and birds, from all that low animal life on whichhe looks with supercilious contempt, man is destined one day to learnwhat in truth he really is. "

The views of Descartes, who regarded all insects as automata, canscarcely be accepted without modification. Insects are automata onlyso far as the action of their ventral cord, and that portion of theircephalic ganglia which deals with contemporaneous impressions, isconcerned. 

It is one of the functions of vesicular-nervous material to retaintraces or relics of impressions brought to it by the organs of sense;hence, nervous ganglia, being composed of that material, may beconsidered as registering apparatus. They also introduce the elementof time into the action of the nervous mechanism. An impression, whichwithout them might have forthwith ended in reflex action, is delayed, and with this duration come all those important effects arising throughthe interaction of many impressions, old and new, upon each other. 

There is no such thing as a spontaneous, or self-originated, thought. Every intellectual act is the consequence of some preceding act. Itcomes into existence in virtue of something that has gone before. Twominds constituted precisely alike, and placed under the influence ofprecisely the same environment, must give rise to precisely the samethought. To such sameness of action we allude in the popular expression"common-sense"--a term full of meaning. In the origination of athought there are two distinct conditions: the state of the organismas dependent on antecedent impressions, and on the existing physicalcircumstances. 

In the cephalic ganglia of insects are stored up the relics ofimpressions that have been made upon the common peripheral nerves, andin them are kept those which are brought in by the organs of specialsense--the visual, olfactive, auditory. The interaction of these raisesinsects above mere mechanical automata, in which the reaction instantlyfollows the impression. 

In all cases the action of every nerve-centre, no matter what its stageof development may be, high or low, depends upon an essential chemicalcondition--oxidation. Even in man, if the supply of arterial bloodbe stopped but for a moment, the nerve-mechanism loses its power; ifdiminished, it correspondingly declines; if, on the contrary, itbe increased--as when nitrogen monoxide is breathed--there is moreenergetic action. Hence there arises a need of repair, a necessity forrest and sleep. 

Two fundamental ideas are essentially attached to all our perceptionsof external things: they are SPACE and TIME, and for these provision ismade in the nervous mechanism while it is yet in an almost rudimentarystate. The eye is the organ of space, the ear of time; the perceptionsof which by the elaborate mechanism of these structures becomeinfinitely more precise than would be possible if the sense of touchalone were resorted to. 

There are some simple experiments which illustrate the vestiges ofganglionic impressions. If on a cold, polished metal, as a new razor, any object, such as a wafer, be laid, and the metal be then breathedupon, and, when the moisture has had time to disappear, the wafer bethrown off, though now the most critical inspection of the polishedsurface can discover no trace of any form, if we breathe once more uponit, a spectral image of the wafer comes plainly into view; and this maybe done again and again. Nay, more, if the polished metal be carefullyput aside where nothing can deteriorate its surface, and be so kept formany months, on breathing again upon it the shadowy form emerges. 

Such an illustration shows how trivial an impression may be thusregistered and preserved. But, if, on such an inorganic surface, animpression may thus be indelibly marked, how much more likely in thepurposely-constructed ganglion! A shadow never falls upon a wall withoutleaving thereupon a permanent trace, a trace which might be made visibleby resorting to proper processes. Photographic operations are cases inpoint. The portraits of our friends, or landscape views, may be hiddenon the sensitive surface from the eye, but they are ready to make theirappearance as soon as proper developers are resorted to. A spectre isconcealed on a silver or glassy surface until, by our necromancy, wemake it come forth into the visible world. Upon the walls of our mostprivate apartments, where we think the eye of intrusion is altogethershut out and our retirement can never be profaned, there exist thevestiges of all our acts, silhouettes of whatever we have done. 

If, after the eyelids have been closed for some time, as when wefirst awake in the morning, we suddenly and steadfastly gaze at abrightly-illuminated object and then quickly close the lids again, aphantom image is perceived in the indefinite darkness beyond us. We maysatisfy ourselves that this is not a fiction, but a reality, for manydetails that we had not time to identify in the momentary glance maybe contemplated at our leisure in the phantom. We may thus make out thepattern of such an object as a lace curtain hanging in the window, orthe branches of a tree beyond. By degrees the image becomes less andless distinct; in a minute or two it has disappeared. It seems to have atendency to float away in the vacancy before us. If we attempt to followit by moving the eyeball, it suddenly vanishes. 

Such a duration of impressions on the retina proves that the effect ofexternal influences on nerve-vesicles is not necessarily transitory. In this there is a correspondence to the duration, the emergence, theextinction, of impressions on photographic preparations. Thus, I haveseen landscapes and architectural views taken in Mexico developed, asartists say, months subsequently in New York--the images coming out, after the long voyage, in all their proper forms and in all their propercontrast of light and shade. The photograph had forgotten nothing. Ithad equally preserved the contour of the everlasting mountains and thepassing smoke of a bandit-fire. 

Are there, then, contained in the brain more permanently, as in theretina more transiently, the vestiges of impressions that have beengathered by the sensory organs? Is this the explanation of memory--theMind contemplating such pictures of past things and events as havebeen committed to her custody. In her silent galleries are there hungmicrographs of the living and the dead, of scenes that we havevisited, of incidents in which we have borne a part? Are these abidingimpressions mere signal-marks, like the letters of a book, which impartideas to the mind? or are they actual picture-images, inconceivablysmaller than those made for us by artists, in which, by the aid of amicroscope, we can see, in a space not bigger than a pinhole, a wholefamily group at a glance?

The phantom images of the retina are not perceptible in the light of theday. Those that exist in the sensorium in like manner do not attract ourattention so long as the sensory organs are in vigorous operation, andoccupied in bringing new impressions in. But, when those organs becomeweary or dull, or when we experience hours of great anxiety, or arein twilight reveries, or are asleep, the latent apparitions have theirvividness increased by the contrast, and obtrude themselves on themind. For the same reason they occupy us in the delirium of fevers, anddoubtless also in the solemn moments of death. During a third part ofour life, in sleep, we are withdrawn from external influences; hearingand sight and the other senses are inactive, but the never-sleeping Mind, that pensive, that veiled enchantress, in her mysterious retirement, looks over the ambrotypes she has collected--ambrotypes, for they aretruly unfading impressions--and, combining them together, as they chanceto occur, constructs from them the panorama of a dream. 

Nature has thus implanted in the organization of every man means whichimpressively suggest to him the immortality of the soul and a futurelife. Even the benighted savage thus sees in his visions the fadingforms of landscapes, which are, perhaps, connected with some of hismost pleasant recollections; and what other conclusion can be possiblyextract from those unreal pictures than that they are the foreshadowingsof another land beyond that in which his lot is cast? At intervals he isvisited in his dreams by the resemblances of those whom he has lovedor hated while they were alive; and these manifestations are to himincontrovertible proofs of the existence and immortality of the soul. In our most refined social conditions we are never able to shake off theimpressions of these occurrences, and are perpetually drawing fromthem the same conclusions that our uncivilized ancestors did. Our moreelevated condition of life in no respect relieves us from the inevitableoperation of our own organization, any more than it relieves us frominfirmities and disease. In these respects, all over the globe men areon an equality. Savage or civilized, we carry within us a mechanismwhich presents us with mementoes of the most solemn facts with which wecan be concerned. It wants only moments of repose or sickness, when theinfluence of external things is diminished, to come into full play, andthese are precisely the moments when we are best prepared for the truthsit is going to suggest. That mechanism is no respecter of persons. Itneither permits the haughtiest to be free from the monitions, nor leavesthe humblest without the consolation of a knowledge of another life. Open to no opportunities of being tampered with by the designing orinterested, requiring no extraneous human agency for its effect, out always present with every man wherever he may go, it marvelouslyextracts from vestiges of the impressions of the past overwhelmingproofs of the realities of the future, and, gathering its power fromwhat would seem to be a most unlikely source, it insensibly leads us, nomatter who or where we may be, to a profound belief in the immortal andimperishable, from phantoms which have scarcely made their appearancebefore they are ready to vanish away. 

The insect differs from a mere automaton in this, that it is influencedby old, by registered impressions. In the higher forms of animated lifethat registration becomes more and more complete, memory becomes moreperfect. There is not any necessary resemblance between an external formand its ganglionic impression, any more than there is between the wordsof a message delivered in a telegraphic office and the signals whichthe telegraph may give to the distant station; any more than thereis between the letters of a printed page and the acts or scenes theydescribe, but the letters call up with clearness to the mind of thereader the events and scenes. 

An animal without any apparatus for the retention of impressions mustbe a pure automaton--it cannot have memory. From insignificant anduncertain beginnings, such an apparatus is gradually evolved, and, asits development advances, the intellectual capacity increases. In man, this retention or registration reaches perfection; he guides, himself bypast as well as by present impressions; he is influenced by experience;his conduct is determined by reason. 

A most important advance is made when the capability is acquired by anyanimal of imparting a knowledge of the impressions stored up in its ownnerve-centres to another of the same kind. This marks the extension ofindividual into social life, and indeed is essential thereto. In thehigher insects it is accomplished by antennal contacts, in man byspeech. Humanity, in its earlier, its savage stages, was limited tothis: the knowledge of one person could be transmitted to another byconversation. The acts and thoughts of one generation could be impartedto another, and influence its acts and thoughts. 

But tradition has its limit. The faculty of speech makes societypossible--nothing more. 

Not without interest do we remark the progress of development ofthis function. The invention of the art of writing gave extension anddurability to the registration or record of impressions. These, whichhad hitherto been stored up in the brain of one man, might now beimparted to the whole human race, and be made to endure forever. Civilization became possible--for civilization cannot exist withoutwriting, or the means of record in some shape. 

From this psychological point of view we perceive the real significanceof the invention of printing--a development of writing which, byincreasing the rapidity of the diffusion of ideas, and insuring theirpermanence, tends to promote civilization and to unify the human race. 

In the foregoing paragraphs, relating to nervous impressions, theirregistry, and the consequences, that spring from them, I have given anabstract of views presented in my work on "Human Physiology, " publishedin 1856, and may, therefore, refer the reader to the chapter on "InverseVision, or Cerebral Sight;" to Chapter XIV. , Book I. ; and to ChapterVIII. , Book II. ; of that work, for other particulars. 

The only path to scientific human psychology is through comparativepsychology. It is a long and wearisome path, but it leads to truth. 

Is there, then, a vast spiritual existence pervading the universe, evenas there is a vast existence of matter pervading it--a spirit which, as a great German author tells us, "sleeps in the stone, dreams in theanimal, awakes in man?" Does the soul arise from the one as the bodyarises from the other? Do they in like manner return, each to the sourcefrom which it has come? If so, we can interpret human existence, and ourideas may still be in unison with scientific truth, and in accord withour conception of the stability, the unchangeability of the universe. 

To this spiritual existence the Saracens, following Eastern nations, gave the designation "the Active Intellect. " They believed that the soulof man emanated from it, as a rain-drop comes from the sea, and, after aseason, returns. So arose among them the imposing doctrines of emanationand absorption. The active intellect is God. 

In one of its forms, as we have seen, this idea was developed by ChakiaMouni, in India, in a most masterly manner, and embodied in the vastpractical system of Buddhism; in another, it was with less powerpresented among the Saracens by Averroes. 

But, perhaps we ought rather to say that Europeans hold Averroes asthe author of this doctrine, because they saw him isolated from hisantecedents. But Mohammedans gave him little credit for originality. He stood to them in the light of a commentator on Aristotle, and aspresenting the opinions of the Alexandrian and other philosophicalschools up to his time. The following excerpts from the "HistoricalEssay on Averroism, " by M. Renan, will show how closely the Sarscenicideas approached those presented above:

This system supposes that, at the death of an individual, hisintelligent principle or soul no longer possesses a separate existence, but returns to or is absorbed in the universal mind, the activeintelligence, the mundane soul, which is God; from whom, indeed, it hadoriginally emanated or issued forth. 

The universal, or active, or objective intellect, is uncreated, impassible, incorruptible, has neither beginning nor end; nor does itincrease as the number of individual souls increases. It is altogetherseparate from matter. It is, as it were, a cosmic principle. Thisoneness of the active intellect, or reason, is the essential principleof the Averroistic theory, and is in harmony with the cardinal doctrineof Mohammedanism--the unity of God. 

The individual, or passive, or subjective intellect, is an emanationfrom the universal, and constitutes what is termed the soul of man. Inone sense it is perishable and ends with the body, but in a highersense it endures; for, after death, it returns to or is absorbed in theuniversal soul, and thus of all human souls there remains at lastbut one--the aggregate of them all, life is not the property of theindividual, it belongs to Nature. The end of, man is to enter into unionmore and more complete with the active intellect--reason. In that thehappiness of the soul consists. Our destiny is quietude. It was theopinion of Averroes that the transition from the individual to theuniversal is instantaneous at death, but the Buddhists maintain thathuman personality continues in a declining manner for a certain termbefore nonentity, or Nirwana, is attained. 

Philosophy has never proposed but two hypotheses to explain the systemof the world: first, a personal God existing apart, and a human soulcalled into existence or created, and thenceforth immortal; second, animpersonal intelligence, or indeterminate God, and a soul emerging fromand returning to him. As to the origin of beings, there are two oppositeopinions: first, that they are created from nothing; second, that theycome by development from pre-existing forms. The theory of creationbelongs to the first of the above hypotheses, that of evolution to thelast. 

Philosophy among the Arabs thus took the same direction that it hadtaken in China, in India, and indeed throughout the East. Its wholespirit depended on the admission of the indestructibility of matter andforce. It saw an analogy between the gathering of the material of whichthe body of man consists from the vast store of matter in Nature, andits final restoration to that store, and the emanation of the spiritof man from the universal Intellect, the Divinity, and its finalreabsorption. 

Having thus indicated in sufficient detail the philosophicalcharacteristics of the doctrine of emanation and absorption, I have inthe next place to relate its history. It was introduced into Europe bythe Spanish Arabs. Spain was the focal point from which, issuing forth, it affected the ranks of intelligence and fashion all over Europe, andin Spain it had a melancholy end. 

The Spanish khalifs had surrounded themselves with all the luxuriesof Oriental life. They had magnificent palaces, enchanting gardens, seraglios filled with beautiful women. Europe at the present day doesnot offer more taste, more refinement, more elegance, than might havebeen seen, at the epoch of which we are speaking, in the capitals of theSpanish Arabs. Their streets were lighted and solidly paved. The houseswere frescoed and carpeted; they were warmed in winter by furnaces, andcooled in summer with perfumed air brought by underground pipes fromflower-beds. They had baths, and libraries, and dining-halls, fountainsof quicksilver and water. City and country were full of conviviality, and of dancing to the lute and mandolin. Instead of the drunken andgluttonous wassail orgies of their Northern neighbors, the feasts of theSaracens were marked by sobriety. Wine was prohibited. The enchantingmoonlight evenings of Andalusia were spent by the Moors in sequestered, fairy-like gardens or in orange-groves, listening to the romances ofthe story-teller, or engaged in philosophical discourse; consolingthemselves for the disappointments of this life by such reflectionsas that, if virtue were rewarded in this world, we should be withoutexpectations in the life to come; and reconciling themselves to theirdaily toil by the expectation that rest will be found after death--arest never to be succeeded by labor. 

In the tenth century the Khalif Hakein II. Had made beautiful Andalusiathe paradise of the world. Christians, Mussulmen, Jews, mixed togetherwithout restraint. There, among many celebrated names that havedescended to our times, was Gerbert, destined subsequently tobecome pope. There, too, was Peter the Venerable, and many Christianecclesiastics. Peter says that he found learned men even from Britainpursuing astronomy. All learned men, no matter from what country theycame, or what their religious views, were welcomed. The khalif had inhis palace a manufactory of books, and copyists, binders, illuminators. He kept book-buyers in all the great cities of Asia and Africa. Hislibrary contained four hundred thousand volumes, superbly bound andilluminated. 

Throughout the Mohammedan dominions in Asia, in Africa, and in Spain, the lower order of Mussulmen entertained a fanatical hatred againstlearning. Among the more devout--those who claimed to be orthodox--therewere painful doubts as to the salvation of the great KhalifAl-Mamun--the wicked khalif, as they called him--for he had not onlydisturbed the people by introducing the writings of Aristotle and otherGreek heathens, but had even struck at the existence of heaven andhell by saying that the earth is a globe, and pretending that he couldmeasure its size. These persons, from their numbers, constituted apolitical power. 

Almansor, who usurped the khalifate to the prejudice of Hakem's son, thought that his usurpation would be sustained if he put himself atthe head of the orthodox party. He therefore had the library of Hakemsearched, and all works of a scientific or philosophical nature carriedinto the public places and burnt, or thrown into the cisterns of thepalace. By a similar court revolution Averroes, in his old age--he diedA. D. 1193--was expelled from Spain; the religious party had triumphedover the philosophical. He was denounced as a traitor to religion. An opposition to philosophy had been organized all over the Mussulmanworld. There was hardly a philosopher who was not punished. Somewere put to death, and the consequence was, that Islam was full ofhypocrites. 

Into Italy, Germany, England, Averroism had silently made its way. It found favor in the eyes of the Franciscans, and a focus in theUniversity of Paris. By very many of the leading minds it had beenaccepted. But at length the Dominicans, the rivals of the Franciscans, sounded an alarm. They said it destroys all personality, conductsto fatalism, and renders inexplicable the difference and progressof individual intelligences. The declaration that there is but oneintellect is an error subversive of the merits of the saints, it isan assertion that there is no difference among men. What! is there nodifference between the holy soul of Peter and the damned soul of Judas?are they identical? Averroes in this his blasphemous doctrine deniescreation, providence, revelation, the Trinity, the efficacy of prayers, of alms, and of litanies; he disbelieves in the resurrection andimmortality; he places the summum bonum in mere pleasure. 

So, too, among the Jews who were then the leading intellects of theworld, Averroism had been largely propagated. Their great writerMaimonides had thoroughly accepted it; his school was spreading it inall directions. A furious persecution arose on the part of the orthodoxJews. Of Maimonides it had been formerly their delight to declare thathe was "the Eagle of the Doctors, the Great Sage, the Glory of the West, the Light of the East, second only to Moses. " Now, they proclaimed thathe had abandoned the faith of Abraham; had denied the possibility ofcreation, believed in the eternity of the world; had given himself up tothe manufacture of atheists; had deprived God of his attributes; made avacuum of him; had declared him inaccessible to prayer, and a strangerto the government of the world. The works of Maimonides were committedto the flames by the synagogues of Montpellier, Barcelona, and Toledo. 

Scarcely had the conquering arms of Ferdinand and Isabella overthrownthe Arabian dominion in Spain, when measures were taken by the papacyto extinguish these opinions, which, it was believed, were underminingEuropean Christianity. 

Until Innocent IV. (1243), there was no special tribunal againstheretics, distinct from those of the bishops. The Inquisition, thenintroduced, in accordance with the centralization of the times, wasa general and papal tribunal, which displaced the old local ones. The bishops, therefore, viewed the innovation with great dislike, considering it as an intrusion on their rights. It was established inItaly, Spain, Germany, and the southern provinces of France. 

The temporal sovereigns were only too desirous to make use of thispowerful engine for their own political purposes. Against this the popesstrongly protested. They were not willing that its use should pass outof the ecclesiastical hand. 

The Inquisition, having already been tried in the south of France, hadthere proved to be very effective for the suppression of heresy. It hadbeen introduced into Aragon. Now was assigned to it the duty of dealingwith the Jews. 

In the old times under Visigothic rule these people had greatlyprospered, but the leniency that had been shown to them was succeeded byatrocious persecution, when the Visigoths abandoned their Arianism andbecame orthodox. The most inhuman ordinances were issued against them--alaw was enacted condemning them all to be slaves. It was not to bewondered at that, when the Saracen invasion took place, the Jews didwhatever they could to promote its success. They, like the Arabs, werean Oriental people, both traced their lineage to Abraham, their commonancestor; both were believers in the unity of God. It was theirdefense of that doctrine that had brought upon them the hatred of theirVisigothic masters. 

Under the Saracen rule they were treated with the highest consideration. They became distinguished for their wealth and their learning. Forthe most part they were Aristotelians. They founded many schools andcolleges. Their mercantile interests led them to travel all over theworld. They particularly studied the science of medicine. Throughout themiddle ages they were the physicians and bankers of Europe. Of all menthey saw the course of human affairs from the most elevated point ofview. Among the special sciences they became proficient in mathematicsand astronomy; they composed the tables of Alfonso, and were the causeof the voyage of De Gama. They distinguished themselves greatly in lightliterature. From the tenth to the fourteenth century their literaturewas the first in Europe. They were to be found in the courts of princesas physicians, or as treasurers managing the public finances. 

The orthodox clergy in Navarre had excited popular prejudices againstthem. To escape the persecutions that arose, many of them feigned toturn Christians, and of these many apostatized to their formerfaith. The papal nuncio at the court of Castile raised a cry for theestablishment of the Inquisition. The poorer Jews were accused ofsacrificing Christian children at the Passover, in mockery of thecrucifixion; the richer were denounced as Averroists. Under theinfluence of Torquemada, a Dominican monk, the confessor of QueenIsabella, that princess solicited a bull from the pope for theestablishment of the Holy Office. A bull was accordingly issued inNovember, 1478, for the detection and suppression of heresy. In thefirst year of the operation of the Inquisition, 1481, two thousandvictims were burnt in Andalusia; besides these, many thousands were dugup from their graves and burnt; seventeen thousand were fined orimprisoned for life. Whoever of the persecuted race could flee, escapedfor his life. Torquemada, now appointed inquisitor-general for Castileand Leon, illustrated his office by his ferocity. Anonymous accusationswere received, the accused was not confronted by witnesses, torture wasrelied upon for conviction; it was inflicted in vaults where no onecould hear the cries of the tormented. As, in pretended mercy, it wasforbidden to inflict torture a second time, with horrible duplicity itwas affirmed that the torment had not been completed at first, but hadonly been suspended out of charity until the following day! The familiesof the convicted were plunged into irretrievable ruin. Llorente, thehistorian of the Inquisition, computes that Torquemada and hiscollaborators, in the course of eighteen years, burnt at the stake tenthousand two hundred and twenty persons, six thousand eight hundred andsixty in effigy, and otherwise punished ninety-seven thousand threehundred and twenty-one. This frantic priest destroyed Hebrew Bibleswherever he could find them, And burnt six thousand volumes of Orientalliterature at Salamanca, under an imputation that they inculcatedJudaism. With unutterable disgust and indignation, we learn that thepapal government realized much money by selling to the richdispensations to secure them from the Inquisition. 

But all these frightful atrocities proved failures. The conversionswere few. Torquemada, therefore, insisted on the immediate banishmentof every unbaptized Jew. On March 30, 1492, the edict of expulsion wassigned. All unbaptized Jews, of whatever age, sex, or condition, wereordered to leave the realm by the end of the following July. If theyrevisited it, they should suffer death. They might sell their effectsand take the proceeds in merchandise or bills of exchange, but not ingold or silver. Exiled thus suddenly from the land of their birth, theland of their ancestors for hundreds of years, they could not inthe glutted market that arose sell what they possessed. Nobody wouldpurchase what could be got for nothing after July. The Spanish clergyoccupied themselves by preaching in the public squares sermons filledwith denunciations against their victims, who, when the time forexpatriation came, swarmed in the roads and filled the air with theircries of despair. Even the Spanish onlookers wept at the scene of agony. Torquemada, however, enforced the ordinance that no one should affordthem any help. 

Of the banished persons some made their way into Africa, some intoItaly; the latter carried with them to Naples ship-fever, whichdestroyed not fewer than twenty thousand in that city, and devastatedthat peninsula; some reached Turkey, a few England. Thousands, especially mothers with nursing children, infants, and old people, diedby the way; many of them in the agonies of thirst. 

This action against the Jews was soon followed by one against the Moors. A pragmatica was issued at Seville, February, 1502, setting forth theobligations of the Castilians to drive the enemies of God from the land, and ordering that all unbaptized Moors in the kingdoms of Castile andLeon above the age of infancy should leave the country by the end ofApril. They might sell their property, but not take away any gold orsilver; they were forbidden to emigrate to the Mohammedan dominions; thepenalty of disobedience was death. Their condition was thus worse thanthat of the Jews, who had been permitted to go where they chose. Suchwas the fiendish intolerance of the Spaniards, that they asserted thegovernment would be justified in taking the lives of all the Moors fortheir shameless infidelity. 

What an ungrateful return for the toleration that the Moors in theirday of power had given to the Christians! No faith was kept with thevictims. Granada had surrendered under the solemn guarantee of the fullenjoyment of civil and religious liberty. At the instigation ofCardinal Ximenes that pledge was broken, and, after a residence of eightcenturies, the Mohammedans were driven out of the land. 

The coexistence of three religions in Andalusia--the Christian, theMohammedan, the Mosaic--had given opportunity for the development ofAverroism or philosophical Arabism. This was a repetition of what hadoccurred at Rome, when the gods of all the conquered countries wereconfronted in that capital, and universal disbelief in them all ensued. Averroes himself was accused of having been first a Mussulman, then aChristian, then a Jew, and finally a misbeliever. It was affirmed thathe was the author of the mysterious book "De Tribus Impostoribus. "

In the middle ages there were two celebrated heretical books, "TheEverlasting Gospel, " and the "De Tribus Impostoribus. " The latter wasvariously imputed to Pope Gerbert, to Frederick II. , and to Averroes. In their unrelenting hatred the Dominicans fastened all the blasphemiescurrent in those times on Averroes; they never tired of recalling thecelebrated and outrageous one respecting the eucharist. His writings hadfirst been generally made known to Christian Europe by the translationof Michael Scot in the beginning of the thirteenth century, but longbefore his time the literature of the West, like that of Asia, was fullof these ideas. We have seen how broadly they were set forth by Erigena. The Arabians, from their first cultivation of philosophy, had beeninfected by them; they were current in all the colleges of the threekhalifates. Considered not as a mode of thought, that will spontaneouslyoccur to all men at a certain stage of intellectual development, but ashaving originated with Aristotle, they continually found favor with menof the highest culture. We see them in Robert Grostete, in Roger Bacon, and eventually in Spinoza. Averroes was not their inventor, he merelygave them clearness and expression. Among the Jews of the thirteenthcentury, he had completely supplanted his imputed master. Aristotle hadpassed away from their eyes; his great commentator, Averroes, stood inhis place. So numerous were the converts to the doctrine of emanationin Christendom, that Pope Alexander IV. (1255) found it necessary tointerfere. By his order, Albertus Magnus composed a work against the"Unity of the Intellect. " Treating of the origin and nature of thesoul, he attempted to prove that the theory of "a separate intellect, enlightening man by irradiation anterior to the individual and survivingthe individual, is a detestable error. " But the most illustriousantagonist of the great commentator was St. Thomas Aquinas, thedestroyer of all such heresies as the unity of the intellect, the denialof Providence, the impossibility of creation; the victories of "theAngelic Doctor" were celebrated not only in the disputations of theDominicans, but also in the works of art of the painters of Florenceand Pisa. The indignation of that saint knew no bounds when Christiansbecame the disciples of an infidel, who was worse than a Mohammedan. The wrath of the Dominicans, the order to which St. Thomas belonged, wassharpened by the fact that their rivals, the Franciscans, inclined toAverroistic views; and Dante, who leaned to the Dominicans, denouncedAverroes as the author of a most dangerous system. The theological odiumof all three dominant religions was put upon him; he was pointed outas the originator of the atrocious maxim that "all religions are false, although all are probably useful. " An attempt was made at the Councilof Vienne to have his writings absolutely suppressed, and to forbid allChristians reading them. The Dominicans, armed with the weapons ofthe Inquisition, terrified Christian Europe with their unrelentingpersecutions. They imputed all the infidelity of the times to theArabian philosopher. But he was not without support. In Paris and in thecities of Northern Italy the Franciscans sustained his views, and allChristendom was agitated with these disputes. 

Under the inspiration of the Dominicans, Averroes oceanic to the Italianpainters the emblem of unbelief. Many of the Italian towns had picturesor frescoes of the Day of Judgment and of Hell. In these Averroes notunfrequently appears. Thus, in one at Pisa, he figures with Arius, Mohammed, and Antichrist. In another he is represented as overthrown bySt. Thomas. He had become an essential element in the triumphs of thegreat Dominican doctor. He continued thus to be familiar to the Italianpainters until the sixteenth century. His doctrines were maintained inthe University of Padua until the seventeenth. 

Such is, in brief, the history of Averroism as it invaded Europe fromSpain. Under the auspices of Frederick II. , it, in a less imposingmanner, issued from Sicily. That sovereign bad adopted it fully. In his"Sicilian Questions" he had demanded light on the eternity of the world, and on the nature of the soul, and supposed he had found it in thereplies of Ibn Sabin, an upholder of these doctrines. But in hisconflict with the papacy be was overthrown, and with him these heresieswere destroyed. 

In Upper Italy, Averroism long maintained its ground. It was sofashionable in high Venetian society that every gentleman feltconstrained to profess it. At length the Church took decisive actionagainst it. The Lateran Council, A. D. 1512, condemned the abettors ofthese detestable doctrines to be held as heretics and infidels. Aswe have seen, the late Vatican Council has anathematized them. Notwithstanding that stigma, it is to be borne in mind that theseopinions are held to be true by a majority of the human race. 

CHAPTER VI. 

 CONFLICT RESPECTING THE NATURE OF THE WORLD. 

 Scriptural view of the world: the earth a flat surface; location of heaven and hell. 

 Scientific view: the earth a globe; its size determined; its position in and relations to the solar system. --The three great voyages. --Columbus, De Gama, Magellan. -- Circumnavigation of the earth. --Determination of its curvature by the measurement of a degree and by the pendulum. 

 The discoveries of Copernicus. --Invention of the telescope. -- Galileo brought before the Inquisition. --His punishment. -- Victory over the Church. 

 Attempts to ascertain the dimensions of the solar system. -- Determination of the sun's parallax by the transits of Venus. --Insignificance, of the earth and man. 

 Ideas respecting the dimensions of the universe. --Parallax of the stars. --The plurality of worlds asserted by Bruno. -- He is seized and murdered by the Inquisition. 

I HAVE now to present the discussions that arose respecting the thirdgreat philosophical problem--the nature of the world. 

An uncritical observation of the aspect of Nature persuades us that theearth is an extended level surface which sustains the dome of the sky, a firmament dividing the waters above from the waters beneath; that theheavenly bodies--the sun, the moon, the stars--pursue their way, moving from east to west, their insignificant size and motion round themotionless earth proclaiming their inferiority. Of the various organicforms surrounding man none rival him in dignity, and hence he seemsjustified in concluding that every thing has been created for hisuse--the sun for the purpose of giving him light by day, the moon andstars by night. 

Comparative theology shows us that this is the conception of Natureuniversally adopted in the early phase of intellectual life. It is thebelief of all nations in all parts of the world in the beginning oftheir civilization: geocentric, for it makes the earth the centre of theuniverse; anthropocentric, for it makes man the central object of theearth. And not only is this the conclusion spontaneously come to frominconsiderate glimpses of the world, it is also the philosophical basisof various religious revelations, vouchsafed to man from time to time. These revelations, moreover, declare to him that above the crystallinedome of the sky is a region of eternal light and happiness--heaven--theabode of God and the angelic hosts, perhaps also his own abode afterdeath; and beneath the earth a region of eternal darkness and misery, the habitation of those that are evil. In the visible world is thus seena picture of the invisible. 

On the basis of this view of the structure of the world great religioussystems have been founded, and hence powerful material interests havebeen engaged in its support. These have resisted, sometimes by resortingto bloodshed, attempts that have been made to correct its incontestableerrors--a resistance grounded on the suspicion that the localization ofheaven and hell and the supreme value of man in the universe might beaffected. 

That such attempts would be made was inevitable. As soon as men beganto reason on the subject at all, they could not fail to discredit theassertion that the earth is an indefinite plane. No one can doubt thatthe sun we see to-day is the self-same sun that we saw yesterday. Hisreappearance each morning irresistibly suggests that he has passed onthe underside of the earth. But this is incompatible with the reign ofnight in those regions. It presents more or less distinctly the idea ofthe globular form of the earth. 

The earth cannot extend indefinitely downward; for the sun cannot gothrough it, nor through any crevice or passage in it, Since he rises andsets in different positions at different seasons of the year. The starsalso move under it in countless courses. There must, therefore, be aclear way beneath. 

To reconcile revelation with these innovating facts, schemes, suchas that of Cosmas Indicopleustes in his Christian Topography, weredoubtless often adopted. To this in particular we have had occasion on aformer page to refer. It asserted that in the northern parts of the flatearth there is an immense mountain, behind which the sun passes, andthus produces night. 

At a very remote historical period the mechanism of eclipses had beendiscovered. Those of the moon demonstrated that the shadow of the earthis always circular. The form of the earth must therefore be globular. A body which in all positions casts a circular shadow must itself bespherical. Other considerations, with which every one is now familiar, could not fail to establish that such is her figure. 

But the determination of the shape of the earth by no means deposedher from her position of superiority. Apparently vastly larger than allother things, it was fitting that she should be considered not merely asthe centre of the world, but, in truth, as--the world. All other objectsin their aggregate seemed utterly unimportant in comparison with her. 

Though the consequences flowing from an admission of the globular figureof the earth affected very profoundly existing theological ideas, theywere of much less moment than those depending on a determination of hersize. It needed but an elementary knowledge of geometry to perceive thatcorrect ideas on this point could be readily obtained by measuring adegree on her surface. Probably there were early attempts to accomplishthis object, the results of which have been lost. But Eratosthenesexecuted one between Syene and Alexandria, in Egypt, Syene beingsupposed to be exactly under the tropic of Cancer. The two places are, however, not on the same meridian, and the distance between them wasestimated, not measured. Two centuries later, Posidonius made anotherattempt between Alexandria and Rhodes; the bright star Canopus justgrazed the horizon at the latter place, at Alexandria it rose 7 1/2degrees. In this instance, also, since the direction lay across the sea, the distance was estimated, not measured. Finally, as we have alreadyrelated, the Khalif Al-Mamun made two sets of measures, one on the shoreof the Red Sea, the other near Cufa, in Mesopotamia. The general resultof these various observations gave for the earth's diameter betweenseven and eight thousand miles. 

This approximate determination of the size of the earth tended todepose her from her dominating position, and gave rise to very serioustheological results. In this the ancient investigations of Aristarchusof Samos, one of the Alexandrian school, 280 B. C. , powerfully aided. In his treatise on the magnitudes and distances of the sun and moon, heexplains the ingenious though imperfect method to which he had resortedfor the solution of that problem. Many ages previously a speculation hadbeen brought from India to Europe by Pythagoras. It presented the sunas the centre of the system. Around him the planets revolved in circularorbits, their order of position being Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, each of them being supposed to rotate on its axis as itrevolved round the sun. According to Cicero, Nicetas suggested that, if it were admitted that the earth revolves on her axis, the difficultypresented by the inconceivable velocity of the heavens would be avoided. 

There is reason to believe that the works of Aristarchus, in theAlexandrian Library, were burnt at the time of the fire of Caesar. Theonly treatise of his that has come down to us is that above mentioned, on the size and distance of the sun and moon. 

Aristarchus adopted the Pythagorean system as representing the actualfacts. This was the result of a recognition of the sun's amazingdistance, and therefore of his enormous size. The heliocentric system, thus regarding the sun as the central orb, degraded the earth to a verysubordinate rank, making her only one of a company of six revolvingbodies. 

But this is not the only contribution conferred on astronomy byAristarchus, for, considering that the movement of the earth does notsensibly affect the apparent position of the stars, he inferred thatthey are incomparably more distant from us than the sun. He, therefore, of all the ancients, as Laplace remarks, had the most correct ideas ofthe grandeur of the universe. He saw that the earth is of absolutelyinsignificant size, when compared with the stellar distances. He saw, too, that there is nothing above us but space and stars. 

But the views of Aristarchus, as respects the emplacement of theplanetary bodies, were not accepted by antiquity; the system proposed byPtolemy, and incorporated in his "Syntaxis, " was universally preferred. The physical philosophy of those times was very imperfect--one ofPtolemy's objections to the Pythagorean system being that, if the earthwere in motion, it would leave the air and other light bodies behind it. He therefore placed the earth in the central position, and in successionrevolved round her the Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn; beyond the orbit of Saturn came the firmament of the fixedstars. As to the solid crystalline spheres, one moving from east towest, the other from north to south, these were a fancy of Eudoxus, towhich Ptolemy does not allude. 

The Ptolemaic system is, therefore, essentially a geocentric system. Itleft the earth in her position of superiority, and hence gave no causeof umbrage to religious opinions, Christian or Mohammedan. The immensereputation of its author, the signal ability of his great work on themechanism of the heavens, sustained it for almost fourteen hundredyears--that is, from the second to the sixteenth century. 

In Christendom, the greater part of this long period was consumedin disputes respecting the nature of God, and in struggles forecclesiastical power. The authority of the Fathers, and the prevailingbelief that the Scriptures contain the sum, of all knowledge, discouraged any investigation of Nature. If by chance a passing interestwas taken in some astronomical question, it was at once settled bya reference to such authorities as the writings of Augustine orLactantius, not by an appeal to the phenomena of the heavens. Sogreat was the preference given to sacred over profane learning thatChristianity had been in existence fifteen hundred years, and had notproduced a single astronomer. 

The Mohammedan nations did much better. Their cultivation of sciencedates from the capture of Alexandria, A. D. 638. This was only six yearsafter the death of the Prophet. In less than two centuries they hadnot only become acquainted with, but correctly appreciated, the Greekscientific writers. As we have already mentioned, by his treaty withMichael III. , the khalif Al-Mamun had obtained a copy of the "Syntaxis"of Ptolemy. He had it forthwith translated into Arabic. It became atonce the great authority of Saracen astronomy. From this basis theSaracens had advanced to the solution of some of the most importantscientific problems. They had ascertained the dimensions of the earth;they had registered or catalogued all the stars visible in theirheavens, giving to those of the larger magnitudes the names they stillbear on our maps and globes; they determined the true length of theyear, discovered astronomical refraction, invented the pendulum-clock, improved the photometry of the stars, ascertained the curvilinearpath of a ray of light through the air, explained the phenomena of thehorizontal sun and moon, and why we see those bodies before they haverisen and after they have set; measured the height of the atmosphere, determining it to be fifty-eight miles; given the true theory of thetwilight, and of the twinkling of the stars. They had built the firstobservatory in Europe. So accurate were they in their observations, thatthe ablest modern mathematicians have made use of their results. Thus Laplace, in his "Systeme du Monde, " adduces the observations ofAl-Batagni as affording incontestable proof of the diminution of theeccentricity of the earth's orbit. He uses those of Ibn-Junis in hisdiscussion of the obliquity of the ecliptic, and also in the case of theproblems of the greater inequalities of Jupiter and Saturn. 

These represent but a part, and indeed but a small part, of the servicesrendered by the Arabian astronomers, in the solution of the problem ofthe nature of the world. Meanwhile, such was the benighted condition ofChristendom, such its deplorable ignorance, that it cared nothingabout the matter. Its attention was engrossed by image-worship, transubstantiation, the merits of the saints, miracles, shrine-cures. 

This indifference continued until the close of the fifteenth century. Even then there was no scientific inducement. The inciting motives werealtogether of a different kind. They originated in commercial rivalries, and the question of the shape of the earth was finally settled by threesailors, Columbus, De Gama, and, above all, by Ferdinand Magellan. 

The trade of Eastern Asia has always been a source of immense wealth tothe Western nations who in succession have obtained it. In the middleages it had centred in Upper Italy. It was conducted along two lines--anorthern, by way of the Black and Caspian Seas, and camel-caravansbeyond--the headquarters of this were at Genoa; and a southern, throughthe Syrian and Egyptian ports, and by the Arabian Sea, the headquartersof this being at Venice. The merchants engaged in the latter traffic hadalso made great gains in the transport service of the Crusade-wars. 

The Venetians had managed to maintain amicable relations with theMohammedan powers of Syria and Egypt; they were permitted to haveconsulates at Alexandria and Damascus, and, notwithstanding the militarycommotions of which those countries had been the scene, the trade wasstill maintained in a comparatively flourishing condition. But thenorthern or Genoese line had been completely broken up by theirruptions of the Tartars and the Turks, and the military and politicaldisturbances of the countries through which it passed. The Eastern tradeof Genoa was not merely in a precarious condition--it was on the brinkof destruction. 

The circular visible horizon and its dip at sea, the gradual appearanceand disappearance of ships in the offing, cannot fail to inclineintelligent sailors to a belief in the globular figure of the earth. The writings of the Mohammedan astronomers and philosophers had givencurrency to that doctrine throughout Western Europe, but, as might beexpected, it was received with disfavor by theologians. When Genoa wasthus on the very brink of ruin, it occurred to some of her marinersthat, if this view were correct, her affairs might be re-established. A ship sailing through the straits of Gibraltar westward, across theAtlantic, would not fail to reach the East Indies. There were apparentlyother great advantages. Heavy cargoes might be transported withouttedious and expensive land-carriage, and without breaking bulk. 

Among the Genoese sailors who entertained these views was ChristopherColumbus. 

He tells us that his attention was drawn to this subject by the writingsof Averroes, but among his friends he numbered Toscanelli, a Florentine, who had turned his attention to astronomy, and had become a strongadvocate of the globular form. In Genoa itself Columbus met with butlittle encouragement. He then spent many years in trying to interestdifferent princes in his proposed attempt. Its irreligious tendency waspointed out by the Spanish ecclesiastics, and condemned by the Councilof Salamanca; its orthodoxy was confuted from the Pentateuch, thePsalms, the Prophecies, the Gospels, the Epistles, and the writings ofthe Fathers--St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, St. Gregory, St. Basil, St Ambrose. 

At length, however, encouraged by the Spanish Queen Isabella, andsubstantially aided by a wealthy seafaring family, the Pinzons of Palos, some of whom joined him personally, he sailed on August 3, 1492, withthree small ships, from Palos, carrying with him a letter from KingFerdinand to the Grand-Khan of Tartary, and also a chart, or map, constructed on the basis of that of Toscanelli. A little beforemidnight, October 11, 1492, he saw from the forecastle of his ship amoving light at a distance. Two hours subsequently a signal-gun fromanother of the ships announced that they had descried land. At sunriseColumbus landed in the New World. 

On his return to Europe it was universally supposed that he had reachedthe eastern parts of Asia, and that therefore his voyage bad beentheoretically successful. Columbus himself died in that belief. Butnumerous voyages which were soon undertaken made known the generalcontour of the American coast-line, and the discovery of the Great SouthSea by Balboa revealed at length the true facts of the case, and themistake into which both Toscanelli and Columbus had fallen, that in avoyage to the West the distance from Europe to Asia could not exceedthe distance passed over in a voyage from Italy to the Gulf of Guinea--avoyage that Columbus had repeatedly made. 

In his first voyage, at nightfall on September 13, 1492, being then twoand a half degrees east of Corvo, one of the Azores, Columbus observedthat the compass needles of the ships no longer pointed a little to theeast of north, but were varying to the west. The deviation became moreand more marked as the expedition advanced. He was not the first todetect the fact of variation, but he was incontestably the first todiscover the line of no variation. On the return-voyage the reversewas observed; the variation westward diminished until the meridian inquestion was reached, when the needles again pointed due north. Thence, as the coast of Europe was approached, the variation was to theeast. Columbus, therefore, came to the conclusion that the line ofno variation was a fixed geographical line, or boundary, betweenthe Eastern and Western Hemispheres. In the bull of May, 1493, PopeAlexander VI. Accordingly adopted this line as the perpetual boundarybetween the possessions of Spain and Portugal, in his settlement of thedisputes of those nations. Subsequently, however, it was discovered thatthe line was moving eastward. It coincided with the meridian of Londonin 1662. 

By the papal bull the Portuguese possessions were limited to the east ofthe line of no variation. Information derived from certain EgyptianJews had reached that government, that it was possible to sail round thecontinent of Africa, there being at its extreme south a cape which couldbe easily doubled. An expedition of three ships under Vasco de Gama setsail, July 9, 1497; it doubled the cape on November 20th, and reachedCalicut, on the coast of India, May 19, 1498. Under the bull, thisvoyage to the East gave to the Portuguese the right to the India trade. 

Until the cape was doubled, the course of De Gama's ships was in ageneral manner southward. Very soon, it was noticed that the elevationof the pole-star above the horizon was diminishing, and, soon after theequator was reached, that star had ceased to be visible. Meantime otherstars, some of them forming magnificent constellations, had come intoview--the stars of the Southern Hemisphere. All this was in conformityto theoretical expectations founded on the admission of the globularform of the earth. 

The political consequences that at once ensued placed the PapalGovernment in a position of great embarrassment. Its traditions andpolicy forbade it to admit any other than the flat figure of the earth, as revealed in the Scriptures. Concealment of the facts was impossible, sophistry was unavailing. Commercial prosperity now left Venice as wellas Genoa. The front of Europe was changed. Maritime power had departedfrom the Mediterranean countries, and passed to those upon the Atlanticcoast. 

But the Spanish Government did not submit to the advantage thusgained by its commercial rival without an effort. It listened to therepresentations of one Ferdinand Magellan, that India and the SpiceIslands could be reached by sailing to the west, if only a strait orpassage through what had now been recognized as "the American Continent"could be discovered; and, if this should be accomplished, Spain, under the papal bull, would have as good a right to the India trade asPortugal. Under the command of Magellan, an expedition of five ships, carrying two hundred and thirty-seven men, was dispatched from Seville, August 10, 1519. 

Magellan at once struck boldly for the South American coast, hoping tofind some cleft or passage through the continent by which he might reachthe great South Sea. For seventy days he was becalmed on the line; hissailors were appalled by the apprehension that they had drifted into aregion where the winds never blew, and that it was impossible for themto escape. Calms, tempests, mutiny, desertion, could not shake hisresolution. After more than a year he discovered the strait whichnow bears his name, and, as Pigafetti, an Italian, who was with him, relates, he shed fears of joy when he found that it had pleased God atlength to bring him where he might grapple with the unknown dangers ofthe South Sea, "the Great and Pacific Ocean. "

Driven by famine to eat scraps of skin and leather with which hisrigging was here and there bound, to drink water that had gone putrid, his crew dying of hunger and scurvy, this man, firm in his belief of theglobular figure of the earth, steered steadily to the northwest, and fornearly four months never saw inhabited land. He estimated that he hadsailed over the Pacific not less than twelve thousand miles. He crossedthe equator, saw once more the pole-star, and at length made land--theLadrones. Here he met with adventurers from Sumatra. Among these islandshe was killed, either by the savages or by his own men. His lieutenant, Sebastian d'Elcano, now took command of the ship, directing her coursefor the Cape of Good Hope, and encountering frightful hardships. Hedoubled the cape at last, and then for the fourth time crossed theequator. On September 7, 1522, after a voyage of more than three years, he brought his ship, the San Vittoria, to anchor in the port of St. Lucar, near Seville. She had accomplished the greatest achievement inthe history of the human race. She had circumnavigated the earth. 

The San Vittoria, sailing westward, had come back to her starting-point. Henceforth the theological doctrine of the flatness of the earth wasirretrievably overthrown. 

Five years after the completion of the voyage of Magellan, was made thefirst attempt in Christendom to ascertain the size of the earth. Thiswas by Fernel, a French physician, who, having observed the height ofthe pole at Paris, went thence northward until he came to a place wherethe height of the pole was exactly one degree more than at that city. He measured the distance between the two stations by the number ofrevolutions of one of the wheels of his carriage, to which a properindicator bad been attached, and came to the conclusion that the earth'scircumference is about twenty-four thousand four hundred and eightyItalian miles. 

Measures executed more and more carefully were made in many countries:by Snell in Holland; by Norwood between London and York in England; byPicard, under the auspices of the French Academy of Sciences, in France. Picard's plan was to connect two points by a series of triangles, and, thus ascertaining the length of the arc of a meridian interceptedbetween them, to compare it with the difference of latitudes found fromcelestial observations. The stations were Malvoisine in the vicinityof Paris, and Sourdon near Amiens. The difference of latitudes wasdetermined by observing the zenith-distances, of delta Cassiopeia. Thereare two points of interest connected with Picard's operation: it was thefirst in which instruments furnished with telescopes were employed;and its result, as we shall shortly see, was to Newton the firstconfirmation of the theory of universal gravitation. 

At this time it had become clear from mechanical considerations, moreespecially such as had been deduced by Newton, that, since the earth isa rotating body, her form cannot be that of a perfect sphere, butmust be that of a spheroid, oblate or flattened at the poles. It wouldfollow, from this, that the length of a degree must be greater near thepoles than at the equator. 

The French Academy resolved to extend Picard's operation, by prolongingthe measures in each direction, and making the result the basis of amore accurate map of France. Delays, however, took place, and it was notuntil 1718 that the measures, from Dunkirk on the north to the southernextremity of France, were completed. A discussion arose as to theinterpretation of these measures, some affirming that they indicated aprolate, others an oblate spheroid; the former figure may be popularlyrepresented by a lemon, the latter by an orange. To settle this, theFrench Government, aided by the Academy, sent out two expeditions tomeasure degrees of the meridian--one under the equator, the other asfar north as possible; the former went to Peru, the latter to SwedishLapland. Very great difficulties were encountered by both parties. TheLapland commission, however, completed its observations long before thePeruvian, which consumed not less than nine years. The results of themeasures thus obtained confirmed the theoretical expectation of theoblate form. Since that time many extensive and exact repetitions of theobservation have been made, among which may be mentioned those of theEnglish in England and in India, and particularly that of the Frenchon the occasion of the introduction of the metric system of weightsand measures. It was begun by Delambre and Mechain, from Dunkirk toBarcelona, and thence extended, by Biot and Arago, to the islandof Formentera near Minorea. Its length was nearly twelve and a halfdegrees. 

Besides this method of direct measurement, the figure of the earthmay be determined from the observed number of oscillations made by apendulum of invariable length in different latitudes. These, though theyconfirm the foregoing results, give a somewhat greater ellipticityto the earth than that found by the measurement of degrees. Pendulumsvibrate more slowly the nearer they are to the equator. It follows, therefore, that they are there farther from the centre of the earth. 

From the most reliable measures that have been made, the dimensions ofthe earth may be thus stated:

 Greater or equatorial diameter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 925 miles. Less or polar diameter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 899 " Difference or polar compression. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 "

Such was the result of the discussion respecting the figure and sizeof the earth. While it was yet undetermined, another controversy arose, fraught with even more serious consequences. This was the conflictrespecting the earth's position with regard to the sun and the planetarybodies. 

Copernicus, a Prussian, about the year 1507, had completed a book "Onthe Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies. " He had journeyed to Italyin his youth, had devoted his attention to astronomy, and had taughtmathematics at Rome. From a profound study of the Ptolemaic andPythagorean systems, he had come to a conclusion in favor of the latter, the object of his book being to sustain it. Aware that his doctrineswere totally opposed to revealed truth, and foreseeing that they wouldbring upon him the punishments of the Church, he expressed himself ina cautious and apologetic manner, saying that he had only taken theliberty of trying whether, on the supposition of the earth's motion, itwas possible to find better explanations than the ancient ones of therevolutions of the celestial orbs; that in doing this he had onlytaken the privilege that had been allowed to others, of feigning whathypothesis they chose. The preface was addressed to Pope Paul III. 

Full of misgivings as to what might be the result, he refrained frompublishing his book for thirty-six years, thinking that "perhaps itmight be better to follow the examples of the Pythagoreans and others, who delivered their doctrine only by tradition and to friends. " At theentreaty of Cardinal Schomberg he at length published it in 1543. A copyof it was brought to him on his death-bed. Its fate was such as he hadanticipated. The Inquisition condemned it as heretical. In their decree, prohibiting it, the Congregation of the Index denounced his systemas "that false Pythagorean doctrine utterly contrary to the HolyScriptures. "

Astronomers justly affirm that the book of Copernicus, "DeRevolutionibus, " changed the face of their science. It incontestablyestablished the heliocentric theory. It showed that the distance of thefixed stars is infinitely great, and that the earth is a mere point inthe heavens. Anticipating Newton, Copernicus imputed gravity to the sun, the moon, and heavenly bodies, but he was led astray by assuming thatthe celestial motions must be circular. Observations on the orbit ofMars, and his different diameters at different times, had led Copernicusto his theory. 

In thus denouncing the Copernican system as being in contradiction torevelation, the ecclesiastical authorities were doubtless deeply movedby inferential considerations. To dethrone the earth from her centraldominating position, to give her many equals and not a few superiors, seemed to diminish her claims upon the Divine regard. If each of thecountless myriads of stars was a sun, surrounded by revolving globes, peopled with responsible beings like ourselves, if we had fallen soeasily and had been redeemed at so stupendous a price as the death ofthe Son of God, how was it with them? Of them were there none who hadfallen or might fall like us? Where, then, for them could a Savior befound?

During the year 1608 one Lippershey, a Hollander, discovered that, bylooking through two glass lenses, combined in a certain manner together, distant objects were magnified and rendered very plain. He had inventedthe telescope. In the following year Galileo, a Florentine, greatlydistinguished by his mathematical and scientific writings, hearingof the circumstance, but without knowing the particulars of theconstruction, invented a form of the instrument for himself. Improvingit gradually, he succeeded in making one that could magnify thirtytimes. Examining the moon, he found that she had valleys like those ofthe earth, and mountains casting shadows. It had been said in the oldtimes that in the Pleiades there were formerly seven stars, but a legendrelated that one of them had mysteriously disappeared. On turning histelescope toward them, Galileo found that he could easily count notfewer than forty. In whatever direction he looked, he discovered starsthat were totally invisible to the naked eye. 

On the night of January 7, 1610, he perceived three small stars ina straight line, adjacent to the planet Jupiter, and, a few eveningslater, a fourth. He found that these were revolving in orbits round thebody of the planet, and, with transport, recognized that they presenteda miniature representation of the Copernican system. 

The announcement of these wonders at once attracted universal attention. The spiritual authorities were not slow to detect their tendency, asendangering the doctrine that the universe was made for man. In thecreation of myriads of stars, hitherto invisible, there must surely havebeen some other motive than that of illuminating the nights for him. 

It had been objected to the Copernican theory that, if the planetsMercury and Venus move round the sun in orbits interior to that of theearth, they ought to show phases like those of the moon; and that inthe case of Venus, which is so brilliant and conspicuous, these phasesshould be very obvious. Copernicus himself had admitted the force ofthe objection, and had vainly tried to find an explanation. Galileo, onturning his telescope to the planet, discovered that the expected phasesactually exist; now she was a crescent, then half-moon, then gibbous, then full. Previously to Copernicus, it was supposed that the planetsshine by their own light, but the phases of Venus and Mars proved thattheir light is reflected. The Aristotelian notion, that celestial differfrom terrestrial bodies in being incorruptible, received a rude shockfrom the discoveries of Galileo, that there are mountains and valleys inthe moon like those of the earth, that the sun is not perfect, but hasspots on his face, and that he turns on his axis instead of being in astate of majestic rest. The apparition of new stars had already thrownserious doubts on this theory of incorruptibility. 

These and many other beautiful telescopic discoveries tended to theestablishment of the truth of the Copernican theory and gave unboundedalarm to the Church. By the low and ignorant ecclesiastics they weredenounced as deceptions or frauds. Some affirmed that the telescopemight be relied on well enough for terrestrial objects, but with theheavenly bodies it was altogether a different affair. Others declaredthat its invention was a mere application of Aristotle's remark thatstars could be seen in the daytime from the bottom of a deep well. Galileo was accused of imposture, heresy, blasphemy, atheism. With aview of defending himself, he addressed a letter to the Abbe Castelli, suggesting that the Scriptures were never intended to be a scientificauthority, but only a moral guide. This made matters worse. He wassummoned before the Holy Inquisition, under an accusation of havingtaught that the earth moves round the sun, a doctrine "utterly contraryto the Scriptures. " He was ordered to renounce that heresy, on pain ofbeing imprisoned. He was directed to desist from teaching and advocatingthe Copernican theory, and pledge himself that he would neither publishnor defend it for the future. Knowing well that Truth has no need ofmartyrs, he assented to the required recantation, and gave the promisedemanded. 

For sixteen years the Church had rest. But in 1632 Galileo venturedon the publication of his work entitled "The System of the World, " itsobject being the vindication of the Copernican doctrine. He was againsummoned before the Inquisition at Rome, accused of having assertedthat the earth moves round the sun. He was declared to have broughtupon himself the penalties of heresy. On his knees, with his hand on theBible, he was compelled to abjure and curse the doctrine of the movementof the earth. What a spectacle! This venerable man, the most illustriousof his age, forced by the threat of death to deny facts which his judgesas well as himself knew to be true! He was then committed to prison, treated with remorseless severity during the remaining ten years ofhis life, and was denied burial in consecrated ground. Must not thatbe false which requires for its support so much imposture, so muchbarbarity? The opinions thus defended by the Inquisition are now objectsof derision to the whole civilized world. 

One of the greatest of modern mathematicians, referring to this subject, says that the point here contested was one which is for mankind of thehighest interest, because of the rank it assigns to the globe that weinhabit. If the earth be immovable in the midst of the universe, man hasa right to regard himself as the principal object of the care of Nature. But if the earth be only one of the planets revolving round the sun, aninsignificant body in the solar system, she will disappear entirelyin the immensity of the heavens, in which this system, vast as it mayappear to us, is nothing but an insensible point. 

The triumphant establishment of the Copernican doctrine dates from theinvention of the telescope. Soon there was not to be found in all European astronomer who had not accepted the heliocentric theory with itsessential postulate, the double motion of the earth--movement ofrotation on her axis, and a movement of revolution round the sun. If additional proof of the latter were needed, it was furnished byBradley's great discovery of the aberration of the fixed stars, anaberration depending partly on the progressive motion of light, andpartly on the revolution of the earth. Bradley's discovery rankedin importance with that of the precession of the equinoxes. Roemer'sdiscovery of the progressive motion of light, though denounced byFontenelle as a seductive error, and not admitted by Cassini, at lengthforced its way to universal acceptance. 

Next it was necessary to obtain correct ideas of the dimensions of thesolar system, or, putting the problem under a more limited form, todetermine the distance of the earth from the sun. 

In the time of Copernicus it was supposed that the sun's distance couldnot exceed five million miles, and indeed there were many who thoughtthat estimate very extravagant. From a review of the observations ofTycho Brahe, Kepler, however, concluded that the error was actually inthe opposite direction, and that the estimate must be raised to atleast thirteen million. In 1670 Cassini showed that these numbers werealtogether inconsistent with the facts, and gave as his conclusioneighty-five million. 

The transit of Venus over the face of the sun, June 3, 1769, had beenforeseen, and its great value in the solution of this fundamentalproblem in astronomy appreciated. With commendable alacrity variousgovernments contributed their assistance in making observations, so thatin Europe there were fifty stations, in Asia six, in America seventeen. It was for this purpose that the English Government dispatched CaptainCook on his celebrated first voyage. He went to Otaheite. His voyagewas crowned with success. The sun rose without a cloud, and the skycontinued equally clear throughout the day. The transit at Cook'sstation lasted from about half-past nine in the morning until abouthalf-past three in the afternoon, and all the observations were made ina satisfactory manner. 

But, on the discussion of the observations made at the differentstations, it was found that there was not the accordance that could havebeen desired--the result varying from eighty-eight to one hundred andnine million. The celebrated mathematician, Encke, therefore reviewedthem in 1822-'24, and came to the conclusion that the sun's horizontalparallax, that is, the angle under which the semi-diameter of the earthis seen from the sun, is 8 576/1000 seconds; this gave as the distance95, 274, 000 miles. Subsequently the observations were reconsideredby Hansen, who gave as their result 91, 659, 000 miles. Still later, Leverrier made it 91, 759, 000. Airy and Stone, by another method, madeit 91, 400, 000; Stone alone, by a revision of the old observations, 91, 730, 000; and finally, Foucault and Fizeau, from physical experiments, determining the velocity of light, and therefore in their naturealtogether differing from transit observations, 91, 400, 000. Until theresults of the transit of next year (1874) are ascertained, it musttherefore be admitted that the distance of the earth from the sun issomewhat less than ninety-two million miles. 

This distance once determined, the dimensions of the solar system maybe ascertained with ease and precision. It is enough to mention thatthe distance of Neptune from the sun, the most remote of the planets atpresent known, is about thirty times that of the earth. 

By the aid of these numbers we may begin to gain a just appreciation ofthe doctrine of the human destiny of the universe--the doctrine that allthings were made for man. Seen from the sun, the earth dwindles away toa mere speck, a mere dust-mote glistening in his beams. If the readerwishes a more precise valuation, let him hold a page of this book acouple of feet from his eye; then let him consider one of its dots orfull stops; that dot is several hundred times larger in surface than isthe earth as seen from the sun!

Of what consequence, then, can such an almost imperceptible particle be?One might think that it could be removed or even annihilated, and yetnever be missed. Of what consequence is one of those human monads, ofwhom more than a thousand millions swarm on the surface of this allbut invisible speck, and of a million of whom scarcely one will leavea trace that he has ever existed? Of what consequence is man, hispleasures or his pains?

Among the arguments brought forward against the Copernican system at thetime of its promulgation, was one by the great Danish astronomer, TychoBrahe, originally urged by Aristarchus against the Pythagorean system, to the effect that, if, as was alleged, the earth moves round the sun, there ought to be a change of the direction in which the fixed starsappear. At one time we are nearer to a particular region of the heavensby a distance equal to the whole diameter of the earth's orbit than wewere six months previously, and hence there ought to be a change inthe relative position of the stars; they should seem to separate as weapproach them, and to close together as we recede from them; or, to usethe astronomical expression, these stars should have a yearly parallax. 

The parallax of a star is the angle contained between two lines drawnfrom it--one to the sun, the other to the earth. 

At that time, the earth's distance from the sun was greatlyunder-estimated. Had it been known, as it is now, that that distanceexceeds ninety million miles, or that the diameter of the orbit is morethan one hundred and eighty million, that argument would doubtless havehad very great weight. 

In reply to Tycho, it was said that, since the parallax of a bodydiminishes as its distance increases, a star may be so far off that itsparallax may be imperceptible. This answer proved to be correct. Thedetection of the parallax of the stars depended on the improvement ofinstruments for the measurement of angles. 

The parallax of alpha Centauri, a fine double star of the SouthernHemisphere, at present considered to be the nearest of the fixed stars, was first determined by Henderson and Maclear at the Cape of Good Hopein 1832-'33. It is about nine-tenths of a second. Hence this star isalmost two hundred and thirty thousand times as far from us as the sun. Seen from it, if the sun were even large enough to fill the whole orbitof the earth, or one hundred and eighty million miles in diameter, he would be a mere point. With its companion, it revolves round theircommon centre of gravity in eighty-one years, and hence it would seemthat their conjoint mass is less than that of the sun. 

The star 61 Cygni is of the sixth magnitude. Its parallax was firstfound by Bessel in 1838, and is about one-third of a second. Thedistance from us is, therefore, much more than five hundred thousandtimes that of the sun. With its companion, it revolves round theircommon centre of gravity in five hundred and twenty years. Theirconjoint weight is about one-third that of the sun. 

There is reason to believe that the great star Sirius, the brightestin the heavens, is about six times as far off as alpha Centauri. Hisprobable diameter is twelve million miles, and the light he emits twohundred times more brilliant than that of the sun. Yet, even through thetelescope, he has no measurable diameter; he looks merely like a verybright spark. 

The stars, then, differ not merely in visible magnitude, but also inactual size. As the spectroscope shows, they differ greatly in chemicaland physical constitution. That instrument is also revealing to us theduration of the life of a star, through changes in the refrangibility ofthe emitted light. Though, as we have seen, the nearest to us is atan enormous and all but immeasurable distance, this is but the firststep--there are others the rays of which have taken thousands, perhapsmillions, of years to reach us! The limits of our own system are farbeyond the range of our greatest telescopes; what, then, shall we say ofother systems beyond? Worlds are scattered like dust in the abysses inspace. 

Have these gigantic bodies--myriads of which are placed at so vast adistance that our unassisted eyes cannot perceive them--have these noother purpose than that assigned by theologians, to give light to us?Does not their enormous size demonstrate that, as they are centres offorce, so they must be centres of motion--suns for other systems ofworlds?

While yet these facts were very imperfectly known--indeed, were ratherspeculations than facts--Giordano Bruno, an Italian, born seven yearsafter the death of Copernicus, published a work on the "Infinity ofthe Universe and of Worlds;" he was also the author of "EveningConversations on Ash-Wednesday, " an apology for the Copernican system, and of "The One Sole Cause of Things. " To these may be added an allegorypublished in 1584, "The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast. " He had alsocollected, for the use of future astronomers, all the observations hecould find respecting the new star that suddenly appeared in Cassiopeia, A. D. 1572, and increased in brilliancy, until it surpassed all the otherstars. It could be plainly seen in the daytime. On a sudden, November11th, it was as bright as Venus at her brightest. In the following Marchit was of the first magnitude. It exhibited various hues of color in afew months, and disappeared in March, 1574. 

The star that suddenly appeared in Serpentarius, in Kepler's time(1604), was at first brighter than Venus. It lasted more than a year, and, passing through various tints of purple, yellow, red, becameextinguished. 

Originally, Bruno was intended for the Church. He had become aDominican, but was led into doubt by his meditations on the subjects oftransubstantiation and the immaculate conception. Not caring toconceal his opinions, he soon fell under the censure of the spiritualauthorities, and found it necessary to seek refuge successively inSwitzerland, France, England, Germany. The cold-scented sleuth-hounds ofthe Inquisition followed his track remorselessly, and eventually huntedhim back to Italy. He was arrested in Venice, and confined in the Piombifor six years, without books, or paper, or friends. 

In England he had given lectures on the plurality of worlds, and in thatcountry had written, in Italian, his most important works. It addednot a little to the exasperation against him, that he was perpetuallydeclaiming against the insincerity; the impostures, of hispersecutors--that wherever he went he found skepticism varnished overand concealed by hypocrisy; and that it was not against the belief ofmen, but against their pretended belief, that he was fighting; that hewas struggling with an orthodoxy that had neither morality nor faith. 

In his "Evening Conversations" he had insisted that the Scriptures werenever intended to teach science, but morals only; and that they cannotbe received as of any authority on astronomical and physical subjects. Especially must we reject the view they reveal to us of the constitutionof the world, that the earth is a flat surface, supported on pillars;that the sky is a firmament--the floor of heaven. On the contrary, wemust believe that the universe is infinite, and that it is filled withself-luminous and opaque worlds, many of them inhabited; that thereis nothing above and around us but space and stars. His meditationson these subjects had brought him to the conclusion that the views ofAverroes are not far from the truth--that there is an Intellect whichanimates the universe, and of this Intellect the visible world is onlyan emanation or manifestation, originated and sustained by force derivedfrom it, and, were that force withdrawn, all things would disappear. This ever-present, all-pervading Intellect is God, who lives in allthings, even such as seem not to live; that every thing is ready tobecome organized, to burst into life. God is, therefore, "the One SoleCause of Things, " "the All in All. "

Bruno may hence be considered among philosophical writers asintermediate between Averroes and Spinoza. The latter held that God andthe Universe are the same, that all events happen by an immutable lawof Nature, by an unconquerable necessity; that God is the Universe, producing a series of necessary movements or acts, in consequence ofintrinsic, unchangeable, and irresistible energy. 

On the demand of the spiritual authorities, Bruno was removed fromVenice to Rome, and confined in the prison of the Inquisition, accusednot only of being a heretic, but also a heresiarch, who had writtenthings unseemly concerning religion; the special charge against himbeing that he had taught the plurality of worlds, a doctrine repugnantto the whole tenor of Scripture and inimical to revealed religion, especially as regards the plan of salvation. After an imprisonment oftwo years he was brought before his judges, declared guilty of theacts alleged, excommunicated, and, on his nobly refusing to recant, wasdelivered over to the secular authorities to be punished "as mercifullyas possible, and without the shedding of his blood, " the horribleformula for burning a prisoner at the stake. Knowing well that thoughhis tormentors might destroy his body, his thoughts would still liveamong men, he said to his judges, "Perhaps it is with greater fearthat you pass the sentence upon me than I receive it. " The sentence wascarried into effect, and he was burnt at Rome, February 16th, A. D. 1600. 

No one can recall without sentiments of pity the sufferings of thosecountless martyrs, who first by one party, and then by another, havebeen brought for their religious opinions to the stake. But each ofthese had in his supreme moment a powerful and unfailing support. Thepassage from this life to the next, though through a hard trial, was thepassage from a transient trouble to eternal happiness, an escape fromthe cruelty of earth to the charity of heaven. On his way through thedark valley the martyr believed that there was an invisible hand thatwould lead him, a friend that would guide him all the more gently andfirmly because of the terrors of the flames. For Bruno there was nosuch support. The philosophical opinions, for the sake of which hesurrendered his life, could give him no consolation. He must fight thelast fight alone. Is there not something very grand in the attitude ofthis solitary man, something which human nature cannot help admiring, ashe stands in the gloomy hall before his inexorable judges? No accuser, no witness, no advocate is present, but the familiars of the HolyOffice, clad in black, are stealthily moving about. The tormentors andthe rack are in the vaults below. He is simply told that he has broughtupon himself strong suspicions of heresy, since he has said that thereare other worlds than ours. He is asked if he will recant and abjurehis error. He cannot and will not deny what he knows to be true, andperhaps--for he had often done so before--he tells his judges that they, too, in their hearts are of the same belief. What a contrast betweenthis scene of manly honor, of unshaken firmness, of inflexible adherenceto the truth, and that other scene which took place more than fifteencenturies previously by the fireside in the hall of Caiaphas thehigh-priest, when the cock crew, and "the Lord turned and looked uponPeter" (Luke xxii. 61)! And yet it is upon Peter that the Church hasgrounded her right to act as she did to Bruno. But perhaps the dayapproaches when posterity will offer an expiation for this greatecclesiastical crime, and a statue of Bruno be unveiled under the domeof St. Peter's at Rome. 

CHAPTER VII. 

 CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE AGE OF THE EARTH. 

 Scriptural view that the Earth is only six thousand years old, and that it was made in a week. --Patristic chronology founded on the ages of the patriarchs. --Difficulties arising from different estimates in different versions of the Bible. 

 Legend of the Deluge. --The repeopling. --The Tower of Babel; the confusion of tongues. --The primitive language. 

 Discovery by Cassini of the oblateness of the planet Jupiter. --Discovery by Newton of the oblateness of the Earth. --Deduction that she has been modeled by mechanical causes. --Confirmation of this by geological discoveries respecting aqueous rocks; corroboration by organic remains. -- The necessity of admitting enormously long periods of time. --Displacement of the doctrine of Creation by that of Evolution--Discoveries respecting the Antiquity of Man. 

 The time-scale and space-scale of the world are infinite. -- Moderation with which the discussion of the Age of the World has been conducted. 

THE true position of the earth in the universe was established onlyafter a long and severe conflict. The Church used whatever power shehad, even to the infliction of death, for sustaining her ideas. Butit was in vain. The evidence in behalf of the Copernican theory becameirresistible. It was at length universally admitted that the sun is thecentral, the ruling body of our system; the earth only one, and by nomeans the largest, of a family of encircling planets. Taught by theissue of that dispute, when the question of the age of the worldpresented itself for consideration, the Church did not exhibit theactive resistance she had displayed on the former occasion. For, though her traditions were again put in jeopardy, they were not, in herjudgment, so vitally assailed. To dethrone the Earth from her dominatingposition was, so the spiritual authorities declared, to undermine thevery foundation of revealed truth; but discussions respecting the dateof creation might within certain limits be permitted. Those limits were, however, very quickly overpassed, and thus the controversy became asdangerous as the former one had been. 

It was not possible to adopt the advice given by Plato in his "Timaeus, "when treating of this subject--the origin of the universe: "It is properthat both I who speak and you who judge should remember that we are butmen, and therefore, receiving the probable mythological tradition, itis meet that we inquire no further into it. " Since the time of St. Augustine the Scriptures had been made the great and final authority inall matters of science, and theologians had deduced from them schemes ofchronology and cosmogony which had proved to be stumbling-blocks to theadvance of real knowledge. 

It is not necessary for us to do more than to allude to some of theleading features of these schemes; their peculiarities will be easilydiscerned with sufficient clearness. Thus, from the six days of creationand the Sabbath-day of rest, since we are told that a day is with theLord as a thousand years, it was inferred that the duration of theworld will be through six thousand years of suffering, and an additionalthousand, a millennium of rest. It was generally admitted that theearth was about four thousand years old at the birth of Christ, but, socareless had Europe been in the study of its annals, that not UntilA. D. 627 had it a proper chronology of its own. A Roman abbot, DionysiusExiguus, or Dennis the Less, then fixed the vulgar era, and gave Europeits present Christian chronology. 

The method followed in obtaining the earliest chronological dates wasby computations, mainly founded on the lives of the patriarchs. Muchdifficulty was encountered in reconciling numerical discrepancies. Evenif, as was taken for granted in those uncritical ages, Moses was theauthor of the books imputed to him, due weight was not given to the factthat he related events, many of which took place more than two thousandyears before he was born. It scarcely seemed necessary to regard thePentateuch as of plenary inspiration, since no means had been providedto perpetuate its correctness. The different copies which had escapedthe chances of time varied very much; thus the Samaritan made thirteenhundred and seven years from the Creation to the Deluge, the Hebrewsixteen hundred and fifty-six, the Septuagint twenty-two hundred andsixty-three. The Septuagint counted fifteen hundred years more from theCreation to Abraham than the Hebrew. In general, however, there wasan inclination to the supposition that the Deluge took place about twothousand years after the Creation, and, after another interval of twothousand years, Christ was born. Persons who had given much attentionto the subject affirmed that there were not less than one hundredand thirty-two different opinions as to the year in which the Messiahappeared, and hence they declared that it was inexpedient to press foracceptance the Scriptural numbers too closely, since it was plain, from the great differences in different copies, that there had been noprovidential intervention to perpetuate a correct reading, nor was thereany mark by which men could be guided to the only authentic version. Even those held in the highest esteem contained undeniable errors. Thusthe Septuagint made Methuselah live until after the Deluge. 

It was thought that, in the antediluvian world, the year consistedof three hundred and sixty days. Some even affirmed that this wasthe origin of the division of the circle into three hundred and sixtydegrees. At the time of the Deluge, so many theologians declared, themotion of the sun was altered, and the year became five days and sixhours longer. There was a prevalent opinion that that stupendous eventoccurred on November 2d, in the year of the world 1656. Dr. Whiston, however, disposed to greater precision, inclined to postpone it toNovember 28th. Some thought that the rainbow was not seen until afterthe flood; others, apparently with better reason, inferred that it wasthen first established as a sign. On coming forth from the ark, menreceived permission to use flesh as food, the antediluvians having beenherbivorous! It would seem that the Deluge had not occasioned any greatgeographical changes, for Noah, relying on his antediluvian knowledge, proceeded to divide the earth among his three sons, giving to JaphetEurope, to Shem Asia, to Ham Africa. No provision was made for America, as he did not know of its existence. These patriarchs, undeterred by theterrible solitudes to which they were going, by the undrained swampsand untracked forests, journeyed to their allotted possessions, andcommenced the settlement of the continents. 

In seventy years the Asiatic family had increased to several hundred. They had found their way to the plains of Mesopotamia, and there, forsome motive that we cannot divine, began building a tower "whose topmight reach to heaven. " Eusebius informs us that the work continued forforty years. They did not abandon it until a miraculous confusion oftheir language took place and dispersed them all over the earth. St. Ambrose shows that this confusion could not have been brought about bymen. Origen believes that not even the angels accomplished it. 

The confusion of tongues has given rise to many curious speculationsamong divines as to the primitive speech of man. Some have thoughtthat the language of Adam consisted altogether of nouns, that they weremonosyllables, and that the confusion was occasioned by the introductionof polysyllables. But these learned men must surely have overlooked thenumerous conversations reported in Genesis, such as those between theAlmighty and Adam, the serpent and Eve, etc. In these all the variousparts of speech occur. There was, however, a coincidence of opinionthat the primitive language was Hebrew. On the general principles ofpatristicism, it was fitting that this should be the case. 

The Greek Fathers computed that, at the time of the dispersion, seventy-two nations were formed, and in this conclusion St. Augustinecoincides. But difficulties seem to have been recognized in thesecomputations; thus the learned Dr. Shuckford, who has treated veryelaborately on all the foregoing points in his excellent work "On theSacred and Profane History of the World connected, " demonstrates thatthere could not have been more than twenty-one or twenty-two men, women, and children, in each of those kingdoms. 

A very vital point in this system of chronological computation, basedupon the ages of the patriarchs, was the great length of life to whichthose worthies attained. It was generally supposed that before the Flood"there was a perpetual equinox, " and no vicissitudes in Nature. Afterthat event the standard of life diminished one-half, and in the time ofthe Psalmist it had sunk to seventy years, at which it still remains. Austerities of climate were affirmed to have arisen through the shiftingof the earth's axis at the Flood, and to this ill effect were added thenoxious influences of that universal catastrophe, which, "converting thesurface of the earth into a vast swamp, gave rise to fermentations ofthe blood and a weakening of the fibres. "

With a view of avoiding difficulties arising from the extraordinarylength of the patriarchal lives, certain divines suggested that theyears spoken of by the sacred penman were not ordinary but lunar years. This, though it might bring the age of those venerable men withinthe recent term of life, introduced, however, another insuperabledifficulty, since it made them have children when only five or six yearsold. 

Sacred science, as interpreted by the Fathers of the Church, demonstrated these facts: 1. That the date of Creation was comparativelyrecent, not more than four or five thousand years before Christ; 2. Thatthe act of Creation occupied the space of six ordinary days; 3. Thatthe Deluge was universal, and that the animals which survived it werepreserved in an ark; 4. That Adam was created perfect in morality andintelligence, that he fell, and that his descendants have shared in hissin and his fall. 

Of these points and others that might be mentioned there were two onwhich ecclesiastical authority felt that it must insist. These were:1. The recent date of Creation; for, the remoter that event, the moreurgent the necessity of vindicating the justice of God, who apparentlyhad left the majority of our race to its fate, and had reservedsalvation for the few who were living in the closing ages of theworld; 2. The perfect condition of Adam at his creation, since this wasnecessary to the theory of the fall, and the plan of salvation. 

Theological authorities were therefore constrained to look with disfavoron any attempt to carry back the origin of the earth, to an epochindefinitely remote, and on the Mohammedan theory of the evolutionof man from lower forms, or his gradual development to his presentcondition in the long lapse of time. 

From the puerilities, absurdities, and contradictions of the foregoingstatement, we may gather how very unsatisfactory this so-called sacredscience was. And perhaps we may be brought to the conclusion towhich Dr. Shuckford, above quoted, was constrained to come, after hiswearisome and unavailing attempt to coordinate its various parts: "As tothe Fathers of the first ages of the Church, they were good men, but notmen of universal learning. "

Sacred cosmogony regards the formation and modeling of the earth as thedirect act of God; it rejects the intervention of secondary causes inthose events. 

Scientific cosmogony dates from the telescopic discovery made byCassini--an Italian astronomer, under whose care Louis XIV. Placed theObservatory of Paris--that the planet Jupiter is not a sphere, butan oblate spheroid, flattened at the poles. Mechanical philosophydemonstrated that such a figure is the necessary result of the rotationof a yielding mass, and that the more rapid the rotation the greater theflattening, or, what comes to the same thing, the greater the equatorialbulging must be. 

From considerations--purely of a mechanical kind--Newton had foreseenthat such likewise, though to a less striking extent, must be the figureof the earth. To the protuberant mass is due the precession of theequinoxes, which requires twenty-five thousand eight hundred andsixty-eight years for its completion, and also the nutation of theearth's axis, discovered by Bradley. We have already had occasion toremark that the earth's equatorial diameter exceeds the polar by abouttwenty-six miles. 

Two facts are revealed by the oblateness of the earth: 1. That she hasformerly been in a yielding or plastic condition; 2. That she has beenmodeled by a mechanical and therefore a secondary cause. 

But this influence of mechanical causes is manifested not only inthe exterior configuration of the globe of the earth as a spheroid ofrevolution, it also plainly appears on an examination of the arrangementof her substance. 

If we consider the aqueous rocks, their aggregate is many miles inthickness; yet they undeniably have been of slow deposit. The materialof which they consist has been obtained by the disintegration of ancientlands; it has found its way into the water-courses, and by them beendistributed anew. Effects of this kind, taking place before our eyes, require a very considerable lapse of time to produce a well-markedresult--a water deposit may in this manner measure in thickness a fewinches in a century--what, then, shall we say as to the time consumed inthe formation of deposits of many thousand yards?

The position of the coast-line of Egypt has been known for much morethan two thousand years. In that time it has made, by reason of thedetritus brought down by the Nile, a distinctly-marked encroachment onthe Mediterranean. But all Lower Egypt has had a similar origin. Thecoast-line near the mouth of the Mississippi has been well knownfor three hundred years, and during that time has scarcely made aperceptible advance on the Gulf of Mexico; but there was a time when thedelta of that river was at St. Louis, more than seven hundred milesfrom its present position. In Egypt and in America--in fact, in allcountries--the rivers have been inch by inch prolonging the land intothe sea; the slowness of their work and the vastness of its extentsatisfy us that we must concede for the operation enormous periods oftime. 

To the same conclusion we are brought if we consider the filling oflakes, the deposit of travertines, the denudation of hills, thecutting action of the sea on its shores, the undermining of cliffs, theweathering of rocks by atmospheric water and carbonic acid. 

Sedimentary strata must have been originally deposited in planes nearlyhorizontal. Vast numbers of them have been forced, either by paroxysmsat intervals or by gradual movement, into all manner of angularinclinations. Whatever explanations we may offer of these innumerableand immense tilts and fractures, they would seem to demand for theircompletion an inconceivable length of time. 

The coal-bearing strata in Wales, by their gradual submergence, haveattained a thickness of 12, 000 feet; in Nova Scotia of 14, 570 feet. So slow and so steady was this submergence, that erect trees stand oneabove another on successive levels; seventeen such repetitions may becounted in a thickness of 4, 515 feet. The age of the trees is provedby their size, some being four feet in diameter. Round them, as theygradually went down with the subsiding soil, calamites grew, at onelevel after another. In the Sydney coal-field fifty-nine fossil forestsoccur in superposition. 

Marine shells, found on mountain-tops far in the interior of continents, were regarded by theological writers as an indisputable illustration ofthe Deluge. But when, as geological studies became more exact, it wasproved that in the crust of the earth vast fresh-water formations arerepeatedly intercalated with vast marine ones, like the leaves of abook, it became evident that no single cataclysm was sufficientto account for such results; that the same region, through gradualvariations of its level and changes in its topographical surroundings, had sometimes been dry land, sometimes covered with fresh and sometimeswith sea water. It became evident also that, for the completion of thesechanges, tens of thousands of years were required. 

To this evidence of a remote origin of the earth, derived from the vastsuperficial extent, the enormous thickness, and the varied characters ofits strata, was added an imposing body of proof depending on its fossilremains. The relative ages of formations having been ascertained, itwas shown that there has been an advancing physiological progression oforganic forms, both vegetable and animal, from the oldest to the mostrecent; that those which inhabit the surface in our times are but aninsignificant fraction of the prodigious multitude that have inhabitedit heretofore; that for each species now living there are thousandsthat have become extinct. Though special formations are so strikinglycharacterized by some predominating type of life as to justify suchexpressions as the age of mollusks, the age of reptiles, the age ofmammals, the introduction of the new-comers did not take place abruptly. As by sudden creation. They gradually emerged in an antecedent age, reached their culmination in the one which they characterize, and thengradually died out in a succeeding. There is no such thing as asudden creation, a sudden strange appearance--but there is a slowmetamorphosis, a slow development from a preexisting form. Here againwe encounter the necessity of admitting for such results long periodsof time. Within the range of history no well-marked instance of suchdevelopment has been witnessed, and we speak with hesitation of doubtfulinstances of extinction. Yet in geological times myriads of evolutionsand extinctions have occurred. 

Since thus, within the experience of man, no case of metamorphosisor development has been observed, some have been disposed to deny itspossibility altogether, affirming that all the different species havecome into existence by separate creative acts. But surely it is lessunphilosophical to suppose that each species has been evolved from apredecessor by a modification of its parts, than that it has suddenlystarted into existence out of nothing. Nor is there much weight inthe remark that no man has ever witnessed such a transformation takingplace. Let it be remembered that no man has ever witnessed an actof creation, the sudden appearance of an organic form, without anyprogenitor. 

Abrupt, arbitrary, disconnected creative acts may serve to illustratethe Divine power; but that continuous unbroken chain of organisms whichextends from palaeozoic formations to the formations of recent times, achain in which each link hangs on a preceding and sustains a succeedingone, demonstrates to us not only that the production of animated beingsis governed by law, but that it is by law that has undergone no change. In its operation, through myriads of ages, there has been no variation, no suspension. 

The foregoing paragraphs may serve to indicate the character of aportion of the evidence with which we must deal in considering theproblem of the age of the earth. Through the unintermitting labors ofgeologists, so immense a mass has been accumulated, that many volumeswould be required to contain the details. It is drawn from the phenomenapresented by all kinds of rocks, aqueous, igneous, metamorphic. Ofaqueous rocks it investigates the thickness, the inclined positions, and how they rest unconformably on one another; how those that are offresh-water origin are intercalated with those that are marine; howvast masses of material have been removed by slow-acting causes ofdenudation, and extensive geographical surfaces have been remodeled; howcontinents have undergone movements of elevation and depression, theirshores sunk under the ocean, or sea-beaches and sea-cliffs carried farinto the interior. It considers the zoological and botanical facts, thefauna and flora of the successive ages, and how in an orderly manner thechain of organic forms, plants, and animals, has been extended, from itsdim and doubtful beginnings to our own times. From facts presented bythe deposits of coal-coal which, in all its varieties, has originatedfrom the decay of plants--it not only demon strates the changes thathave taken place in the earth's atmosphere, but also universal changesof climate. From other facts it proves that there have been oscillationsof temperature, periods in which the mean heat has risen, and periodsin which the polar ices and snows have covered large portions of theexisting continents--glacial periods, as they are termed. 

One school of geologists, resting its argument on very imposingevidence, teaches that the whole mass of the earth, from being in amolten, or perhaps a vaporous condition, has cooled by radiation in thelapse of millions of ages, until it has reached its present equilibriumof temperature. Astronomical observations give great weight to thisinterpretation, especially so far as the planetary bodies of the solarsystem are concerned. It is also supported by such facts as the smallmean density of the earth, the increasing temperature at increasingdepths, the phenomena of volcanoes and injected veins, and those ofigneous and metamorphic rocks. To satisfy the physical changes whichthis school of geologists contemplates, myriads of centuries arerequired. 

But, with the views that the adoption of the Copernican system has givenus, it is plain that we cannot consider the origin and biography of theearth in an isolated way; we must include with her all the other membersof the system or family to which she belongs. Nay, more, we cannotrestrict ourselves to the solar system; we must embrace in ourdiscussions the starry worlds. And, since we have become familiarizedwith their almost immeasurable distances from one another, we areprepared to accept for their origin an immeasurably remote time. Thereare stars so far off that their light, fast as it travels, has takenthousands of years to reach us, and hence they must have been inexistence many thousands of years ago. 

Geologists having unanimously agreed--for perhaps there is not a singledissenting voice--that the chronology of the earth must be greatlyextended, attempts have been made to give precision to it. Some ofthese have been based on astronomical, some on physical principles. Thuscalculations founded on the known changes of the eccentricity of theearth's orbit, with a view of determining the lapse of time since thebeginning of the last glacial period, have given two hundred andforty thousand years. Though the general postulate of the immensity ofgeological times may be conceded, such calculations are on too uncertaina theoretical basis to furnish incontestable results. 

But, considering the whole subject from the present scientificstand-point, it is very clear that the views presented by theologicalwriters, as derived from the Mosaic record, cannot be admitted. Attemptshave been repeatedly made to reconcile the revealed with the discoveredfacts, but they have proved to be unsatisfactory. The Mosaic time istoo short, the order of creation incorrect, the divine interventionstoo anthropomorphic; and, though the presentment of the subject is inharmony with the ideas that men have entertained, when first theirminds were turned to the acquisition of natural knowledge, it is not inaccordance with their present conceptions of the insignificance of theearth and the grandeur of the universe. 

Among late geological discoveries is one of special interest; it is thedetection of human remains and human works in formations which, thoughgeologically recent, are historically very remote. 

The fossil remains of men, with rude implements of rough or chippedflint, of polished stone, of bone, of bronze, are found in Europe incaves, in drifts, in peat-beds. They indicate a savage life, spent inhunting and fishing. Recent researches give reason to believe that, under low and base grades, the existence of man can be traced back intothe tertiary times. He was contemporary with the southern elephant, the rhinoceros leptorhinus, the great hippopotamus, perhaps even in themiocene contemporary with the mastodon. 

At the close of the Tertiary period, from causes not yet determined, theNorthern Hemisphere underwent a great depression of temperature. Froma torrid it passed to a glacial condition. After a period of prodigiouslength, the temperature again rose, and the glaciers that had soextensively covered the surface receded. Once more there was a declinein the heat, and the glaciers again advanced, but this time not so faras formerly. This ushered in the Quaternary period, during which veryslowly the temperature came to its present degree. The water depositsthat were being made required thousands of centuries for theircompletion. At the beginning of the Quaternary period there werealive the cave-bear, the cave-lion, the amphibious hippopotamus, therhinoceros with chambered nostrils, the mammoth. In fact, the mammothswarmed. He delighted in a boreal climate. By degrees the reindeer, thehorse, the ox, the bison, multiplied, and disputed with him his food. Partly for this reason, and partly because of the increasing heat, hebecame extinct. From middle Europe, also, the reindeer retired. Hisdeparture marks the end of the Quaternary period. 

Since the advent of man on the earth, we have, therefore, to deal withperiods of incalculable length. Vast changes in the climate and faunawere produced by the slow operation of causes such as are in action atthe present day. Figures cannot enable us to appreciate these enormouslapses of time. 

It seems to be satisfactorily established, that a race allied to theBasques may be traced back to the Neolithic age. At that time theBritish Islands were undergoing a change of level, like that at presentoccurring in the Scandinavian Peninsula. Scotland was rising, Englandwas sinking. In the Pleistocene age there existed in Central Europe arude race of hunters and fishers closely allied to the Esquimaux. 

In the old glacial drift of Scotland the relics of man are found alongwith those of the fossil elephant. This carries us back to that timeabove referred to, when a large portion of Europe was covered with ice, which had edged down from the polar regions to southerly latitudes, and, as glaciers, descended from the summits of the mountain-chains into theplains. Countless species of animals perished in this cataclysm of iceand snow, but man survived. 

In his primitive savage condition, living for the most part on fruits, roots, shell-fish, man was in possession of a fact which was certaineventually to insure his civilization. He knew how to make a fire. Inpeat-beds, under the remains of trees that in those localities havelong ago become extinct, his relics are still found, the implementsthat accompany him indicating a distinct chronological order. Near thesurface are those of bronze, lower down those of bone or horn, stilllower those of polished stone, and beneath all those of chipped or roughstone. The date of the origin of some of these beds cannot be estimatedat less than forty or fifty thousand years. 

The caves that have been examined in France and elsewhere have furnishedfor the Stone age axes, knives, lance and arrow points, scrapers, hammers. The change from what may be termed the chipped to the polishedstone period is very gradual. It coincides with the domestication of thedog, an epoch in hunting-life. It embraces thousands of centuries. Theappearance of arrow-heads indicates the invention of the bow, andthe rise of man from a defensive to an offensive mode of life. Theintroduction of barbed arrows shows how inventive talent was displayingitself; bone and horn tips, that the huntsman was including smalleranimals, and perhaps birds, in his chase; bone whistles, hiscompanionship with other huntsmen or with his dog. The scraping-knivesof flint indicate the use of skin for clothing, and rude bodkins andneedles its manufacture. Shells perforated for bracelets and necklacesprove how soon a taste for personal adornment was acquired; theimplements necessary for the preparation of pigments suggest thepainting of the body, and perhaps tattooing; and batons of rank bearwitness to the beginning of a social organization. 

With the utmost interest we look upon the first germs of art among theseprimitive men. They have left its rude sketches on pieces of ivory andflakes of bone, and carvings, of the animals contemporary with them. Inthese prehistoric delineations, sometimes not without spirit, we havemammoths, combats of reindeer. One presents us with a man harpooning afish, another a hunting-scene of naked men armed with the dart. Man isthe only animal who has the propensity of depicting external forms, andof availing himself of the use of fire. 

Shell-mounds, consisting of bones and shells, some of which may bejustly described as of vast extent, and of a date anterior to the Bronzeage, and full of stone implements, bear in all their parts indicationsof the use of fire. These are often adjacent to the existing coastssometimes, however, they are far inland, in certain instances as faras fifty miles. Their contents and position indicate for them a dateposterior to that of the great extinct mammals, but prior to thedomesticated. Some of these, it is said, cannot be less than one hundredthousand years old. 

The lake-dwellings in Switzerland--huts built on piles or logs, wattledwith boughs--were, as may be inferred from the accompanying implements, begun in the Stone age, and continued into that of Bronze. In the latterperiod the evidences become numerous of the adoption of an agriculturallife. 

It must not be supposed that the periods into which geologists havefound it convenient to divide the progress of man in civilization areabrupt epochs, which hold good simultaneously for the whole human race. Thus the wandering Indians of America are only at the present momentemerging from the Stone age. They are still to be seen in many placesarmed with arrows, tipped with flakes of flint. It is but as yesterdaythat some have obtained, from the white man, iron, fire-arms, and thehorse. 

So far as investigations have gone, they indisputably refer theexistence of man to a date remote from us by many hundreds of thousandsof years. It must be borne in mind that these investigations are quiterecent, and confined to a very limited geographical space. No researcheshave yet been made in those regions which might reasonably be regardedas the primitive habitat of man. 

We are thus carried back immeasurably beyond the six thousand years ofPatristic chronology. It is difficult to assign a shorter date for thelast glaciation of Europe than a quarter of a million of years, andhuman existence antedates that. But not only is it this grand fact thatconfronts us, we have to admit also a primitive animalized state, and aslow, a gradual development. But this forlorn, this savage conditionof humanity is in strong contrast to the paradisiacal happiness of thegarden of Eden, and, what is far in ore serious, it is inconsistent withthe theory of the Fall. 

I have been induced to place the subject of this chapter out of itsproper chronological order, for the sake of presenting what I had tosay respecting the nature of the world more completely by itself. Thediscussions that arose as to the age of the earth were long after theconflict as to the criterion of truth--that is, after the Reformation;indeed, they were substantially included in the present century. Theyhave been conducted with so much moderation as to justify the termI have used in the title of this chapter, "Controversy, " rather than"Conflict. " Geology has not had to encounter the vindictive oppositionwith which astronomy was assailed, and, though, on her part, she hasinsisted on a concession of great antiquity for the earth, she hasherself pointed out the unreliability of all numerical estimates thusfar offered. The attentive reader of this chapter cannot have failed toobserve inconsistencies in the numbers quoted. Though wanting themerit of exactness, those numbers, however, justify the claim of vastantiquity, and draw us to the conclusion that the time-scale of theworld answers to the space-scale in magnitude. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

 CONFLICT RESPECTING THE CRITERION OF TRUTH. 

 Ancient philosophy declares that man has no means of ascertaining the truth. 

 Differences of belief arise among the early Christians--An ineffectual attempt is made to remedy them by Councils. -- Miracle and ordeal proof introduced. 

 The papacy resorts to auricular confession and the Inquisition. --It perpetrates frightful atrocities for the suppression of differences of opinion. 

 Effect of the discovery of the Pandects of Justinian and development of the canon law on the nature of evidence. --It becomes more scientific. 

 The Reformation establishes the rights of individual reason. --Catholicism asserts that the criterion of truth is in the Church. It restrains the reading of books by the Index Expurgatorius, and combats dissent by such means as the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve. 

 Examination of the authenticity of the Pentateuch as the Protestant criterion. --Spurious character of those books. 

 For Science the criterion of truth is to be found in the revelations of Nature: for the Protestant, it is in the Scriptures; for the Catholic, in an infallible Pope. 

"WHAT is truth?" was the passionate demand of a Roman procurator on oneof the most momentous occasions in history. And the Divine Person whostood before him, to whom the interrogation was addressed, made noreply--unless, indeed, silence contained the reply. 

Often and vainly had that demand been made before--often and vainly hasit been made since. No one has yet given a satisfactory answer. 

When, at the dawn of science in Greece, the ancient religion wasdisappearing like a mist at sunrise, the pious and thoughtful men ofthat country were thrown into a condition of intellectual despair. Anaxagoras plaintively exclaims, "Nothing can be known, nothing can belearned, nothing can be certain, sense is limited, intellect is weak, life is short. " Xenophanes tells us that it is impossible for us to becertain even when we utter the truth. Parmenides declares that thevery constitution of man prevents him from ascertaining absolute truth. Empedocles affirms that all philosophical and religious systems mustbe unreliable, because we have no criterion by which to test them. Democritus asserts that even things that are true cannot impartcertainty to us; that the final result of human inquiry is the discoverythat man is incapable of absolute knowledge; that, even if the truth bein his possession, he cannot be certain of it. Pyrrho bids us reflecton the necessity of suspending our judgment of things, since we have nocriterion of truth; so deep a distrust did he impart to his followers, that they were in the habit of saying, "We assert nothing; no, not eventhat we assert nothing. " Epicurus taught his disciples that truth cannever be determined by reason. Arcesilaus, denying both intellectual andsensuous knowledge, publicly avowed that he knew nothing, not even hisown ignorance! The general conclusion to which Greek philosophy came wasthis--that, in view of the contradiction of the evidence of thesenses, we cannot distinguish the true from the false; and such is theimperfection of reason, that we cannot affirm the correctness of anyphilosophical deduction. 

It might be supposed that a revelation from God to man would come withsuch force and clearness as to settle all uncertainties and overwhelmall opposition. A Greek philosopher, less despairing than others, hadventured to affirm that the coexistence of two forms of faith, bothclaiming to be revealed by the omnipotent God, proves that neither ofthem is true. But let us remember that it is difficult for men to cometo the same conclusion as regards even material and visible things, unless they stand at the same point of view. If discord and distrustwere the condition of philosophy three hundred years before the birthof Christ, discord and distrust were the condition of religion threehundred years after his death. This is what Hilary, the Bishop ofPoictiers, in his well-known passage written about the time of theNicene Council, says:

"It is a thing equally deplorable and dangerous that there are, as manycreeds as opinions among men, as many doctrines as inclinations, and asmany sources of blasphemy as there are faults among us, because we makecreeds arbitrarily and explain them as arbitrarily. Every year, nay, every moon, we make new creeds to describe invisible mysteries; werepent of what we have done; we defend those who repent; we anathematizethose whom we defend; we condemn either the doctrines of others inourselves, or our own in that of others; and, reciprocally tearing eachother to pieces, we have been the cause of each other's ruin. "

These are not mere words; but the import of this self-accusation canbe realized fully only by such as are familiar with the ecclesiasticalhistory of those times. As soon as the first fervor of Christianity as asystem of benevolence had declined, dissensions appeared. Ecclesiasticalhistorians assert that "as early as the second century began the contestbetween faith and reason, religion and philosophy, piety and genius. " Tocompose these dissensions, to obtain some authoritative expression, somecriterion of truth, assemblies for consultation were resorted to, whicheventually took the form of councils. For a long time they had nothingmore than an advisory authority; but, when, in the fourth century, Christianity had attained to imperial rule, their dictates becamecompulsory, being enforced by the civil power. By this the whole faceof the Church was changed. Oecumenical councils--parliaments ofChristianity--consisting of delegates from all the churches in theworld, were summoned by the authority of the emperor; he presided eitherpersonally or nominally in them--composed all differences, and was, infact, the Pope of Christendom. Mosheim, the historian, to whom I havemore particularly referred above, speaking of these times, remarksthat "there was nothing to exclude the ignorant from ecclesiasticalpreferment; the savage and illiterate party, who looked on all kindsof learning, particularly philosophy, as pernicious to piety, wasincreasing;" and, accordingly, "the disputes carried on in the Councilof Nicea offered a remarkable example of the greatest ignorance andutter confusion of ideas, particularly in the language and explanationsof those who approved of the decisions of that council. " Vast as itsinfluence has been, "the ancient critics are neither agreed concerningthe time nor place in which it was assembled, the number of those whosat in it, nor the bishop who presided. No authentic acts of its famoussentence have been committed to writing, or, at least, none have beentransmitted to our times. " The Church had now become what, in thelanguage of modern politicians, would be called "a confederatedrepublic. " The will of the council was determined by a majority vote, and, to secure that, all manner of intrigues and impositions wereresorted to; the influence of court females, bribery, and violence, werenot spared. The Council of Nicea had scarcely adjourned, --when it wasplain to all impartial men that, as a method of establishing a criterionof truth in religious matters, such councils were a total failure. Theminority had no rights which the majority need respect. The protest ofmany good men, that a mere majority vote given by delegates, whose rightto vote had never been examined and authorized, could not be receivedas ascertaining absolute truth, was passed over with contempt, and theconsequence was, that council was assembled against council, and theirjarring and contradictory decrees spread perplexity and confusionthroughout the Christian world. In the fourth century alone there werethirteen councils adverse to Arius, fifteen in his favor, and seventeenfor the semi-Arians--in all, forty-five. Minorities were perpetuallyattempting to use the weapon which majorities had abused. 

The impartial ecclesiastical historian above quoted, moreover, saysthat "two monstrous and calamitous errors were adopted in this fourthcentury: 1. That it was an act of virtue to deceive and lie when, bythat means, the interests of the Church might be promoted. 2. Thaterrors in religion, when maintained and adhered to after properadmonition, were punishable with civil penalties and corporal tortures. "

Not without astonishment can we look back at what, in those times, werepopularly regarded as criteria of truth. Doctrines were consideredas established by the number of martyrs who had professed them, bymiracles, by the confession of demons, of lunatics, or of personspossessed of evil spirits: thus, St. Ambrose, in his disputes with theArians, produced men possessed by devils, who, on the approach of therelics of certain martyrs, acknowledged, with loud cries, that theNicean doctrine of the three persons of the Godhead was true. Butthe Arians charged him with suborning these infernal witnesses with aweighty bribe. Already, ordeal tribunals were making their appearance. During the following six centuries they were held as a final resort forestablishing guilt or innocence, under the forms of trial by cold water, by duel, by the fire, by the cross. 

What an utter ignorance of the nature of evidence and its laws have wehere! An accused man sinks or swims when thrown into a pond of water;he is burnt or escapes unharmed when he holds a piece of red-hot ironin his hand; a champion whom he has hired is vanquished or vanquishes insingle fight; he can keep his arms outstretched like a cross, or failsto do so longer than his accuser, and his innocence or guilt of someimputed crime is established! Are these criteria of truth?

Is it surprising that all Europe was filled with imposture miraclesduring those ages?--miracles that are a disgrace to the common-sense ofman!

But the inevitable day came at length. Assertions and doctrines basedupon such preposterous evidence were involved in the discredit that fellupon the evidence itself. As the thirteenth century is approached, wefind unbelief in all directions setting in. First, it is plainly seenamong the monastic orders, then it spreads rapidly among the commonpeople. Books, such as "The Everlasting Gospel, " appear among theformer; sects, such as the Catharists, Waldenses, Petrobrussians, ariseamong the latter. They agreed in this, "that the public and establishedreligion was a motley system of errors and superstitions, and that thedominion which the pope had usurped over Christians was unlawful andtyrannical; that the claim put forth by Rome, that the Bishop of Rome isthe supreme lord of the universe, and that neither princes nor bishops, civil governors nor ecclesiastical rulers, have any lawful power inchurch or state but what they receive from him, is utterly withoutfoundation, and a usurpation of the rights of man. "

To withstand this flood of impiety, the papal government established twoinstitutions: 1. The Inquisition; 2. Auricular confession--the latter asa means of detection, the former as a tribunal for punishment. 

In general terms, the commission of the Inquisition was, to extirpatereligious dissent by terrorism, and surround heresy with the mosthorrible associations; this necessarily implied the power of determiningwhat constitutes heresy. The criterion of truth was thus in possessionof this tribunal, which was charged "to discover and bring to judgmentheretics lurking in towns, houses, cellars, woods, caves, and fields. "With such savage alacrity did it carry out its object of protecting theinterests of religion, that between 1481 and 1808 it had punished threehundred and forty thousand persons, and of these nearly thirty-twothousand had been burnt! In its earlier days, when public opinion couldfind no means of protesting against its atrocities, "it often put todeath, without appeal, on the very day that they were accused, nobles, clerks, monks, hermits, and lay persons of every rank. " In whateverdirection thoughtful men looked, the air was full of fearful shadows. Noone could indulge in freedom of thought without expecting punishment. Sodreadful were the proceedings of the Inquisition, that the exclamationof Pagliarici was the exclamation of thousands: "It is hardly possiblefor a man to be a Christian, and die in his bed. "

The Inquisition destroyed the sectaries of Southern France in thethirteenth century. Its unscrupulous atrocities extirpated Protestantismin Italy and Spain. Nor did it confine itself to religious affairs; itengaged in the suppression of political discontent. Nicolas Eymeric, whowas inquisitor-general of the kingdom of Aragon for nearly fifty years, and who died in 1399, has left a frightful statement of its conduct andappalling cruelties in his "Directorium Inquisitorum. "

This disgrace of Christianity, and indeed of the human race, haddifferent constitutions in different countries. The papal Inquisitioncontinued the tyranny, and eventually superseded the old episcopalinquisitions. The authority of the bishops was unceremoniously put asideby the officers of the pope. 

By the action of the fourth Lateran Council, A. D. 1215, the power ofthe Inquisition was frightfully increased, the necessity of privateconfession to a priest--auricular confession--being at that timeformally established. This, so far as domestic life was concerned, gaveomnipresence and omniscience to the Inquisition. Not a man was safe. In the hands of the priest, who, at the confessional, could extract orextort from them their most secret thoughts, his wife and his servantswere turned into spies. Summoned before the dread tribunal, he wassimply informed that he lay under strong suspicions of heresy. Noaccuser was named; but the thumb-screw, the stretching-rope, the bootand wedge, or other enginery of torture, soon supplied that defect, and, innocent or guilty, he accused himself!

Notwithstanding all this power, the Inquisition failed of its purpose. When the heretic could no longer confront it, he evaded it. A dismaldisbelief stealthily pervaded all Europe, --a denial of Providence, of the immortality of the soul, of human free-will, and that man canpossibly resist the absolute necessity, the destiny which envelops him. Ideas such as these were cherished in silence by multitudes of personsdriven to them by the tyrannical acts of ecclesiasticism. In spite ofpersecution, the Waldenses still survived to propagate their declarationthat the Roman Church, since Constantine, had degenerated from itspurity and sanctity; to protest against the sale of indulgences, whichthey said had nearly abolished prayer, fasting, alms; to affirm that itwas utterly useless to pray for the souls of the dead, since they mustalready have gone either to heaven or hell. Though it was generallybelieved that philosophy or science was pernicious to the interests ofChristianity or true piety, the Mohammedan literature then prevailingin Spain was making converts among all classes of society. We see veryplainly its influence in many of the sects that then arose; thus, "theBrethren and Sisters of the Free. Spirit" held that "the universe cameby emanation from God, and would finally return to him by absorption;that rational souls are so many portions of the Supreme Deity; and thatthe universe, considered as one great whole, is God. " These are ideasthat can only be entertained in an advanced intellectual condition. Ofthis sect it is said that many suffered burning with unclouded serenity, with triumphant feelings of cheerfulness and joy. Their orthodox enemiesaccused them of gratifying their passions at midnight assemblages indarkened rooms, to which both sexes in a condition of nudity repaired. Asimilar accusation, as is well known, was brought against the primitiveChristians by the fashionable society of Rome. 

The influences of the Averroistic philosophy were apparent in many ofthese sects. That Mohammedan system, considered from a Christian pointof view, led to the heretical belief that the end of the precepts ofChristianity is the union of the soul with the Supreme Being; that Godand Nature have the same relations to each other as the soul and thebody; that there is but one individual intelligence; and that one soulperforms all the spiritual and rational functions in all the human race. When, subsequently, toward the time of the Reformation, the ItalianAverroists were required by the Inquisition to give an account ofthemselves, they attempted to show that there is a wide distinctionbetween philosophical and religious truth; that things may bephilosophically true, and yet theologically false--an exculpatory devicecondemned at length by the Lateran Council in the time of Leo X. 

But, in spite of auricular confession, and the Inquisition, theseheretical tendencies survived. It has been truly said that, at theepoch of the Reformation, there lay concealed, in many parts of Europe, persons who entertained the most virulent enmity against Christianity. In this pernicious class were many Aristotelians, such as Pomponatius;many philosophers and wits, such as Bodin, Rabelais, Montaigne; manyItalians, as Leo X. , Bembo, Bruno. 

Miracle-evidence began to fall into discredit during the eleventh andtwelfth centuries. The sarcasms of the Hispano-Moorish philosophershad forcibly drawn the attention of many of the more enlightenedecclesiastics to its illusory nature. The discovery of the Pandectsof Justinian, at Amalfi, in 1130, doubtless exerted a very powerfulinfluence in promoting the study of Roman jurisprudence, anddisseminating better notions as to the character of legal orphilosophical evidence. Hallam has cast some doubt on the well-knownstory of this discovery, but he admits that the celebrated copy in theLaurentian library, at Florence, is the only one containing the entirefifty books. Twenty years subsequently, the monk Gratian collectedtogether the various papal edicts, the canons of councils, thedeclarations of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, in a volumecalled "The Decretum, " considered as the earliest authority in canonlaw. In the next century Gregory IX. Published five books of Decretals, and Boniface VIII. Subsequently added a sixth. To these followed theClementine Constitutions, a seventh book of Decretals, and "A Book ofInstitutes, " published together, by Gregory XIII. , in 1580, under thetitle of "Corpus Juris Canonici. " The canon law had gradually gainedenormous power through the control it had obtained over wills, theguardianship of orphans, marriages, and divorces. 

The rejection of miracle-evidence, and the substitution of legalevidence in its stead, accelerated the approach of the Reformation. Nolonger was it possible to admit the requirement which, in former days, Anselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in his treatise, "Cur Deus Homo, "had enforced, that we must first believe without examination, andmay afterward endeavor to understand what we have thus believed. WhenCajetan said to Luther, "Thou must believe that one single drop ofChrist's blood is sufficient to redeem the whole human race, and theremaining quantity that was shed in the garden and on the cross was leftas a legacy to the pope, to be a treasure from which indulgences wereto be drawn, " the soul of the sturdy German monk revolted against sucha monstrous assertion, nor would he have believed it though a thousandmiracles had been worked in its support. This shameful practice ofselling indulgences for the commission of sin originated among thebishops, who, when they had need of money for their private pleasures, obtained it in that way. Abbots and monks, to whom this gainful commercewas denied, raised funds by carrying about relics in solemn procession, and charging a fee for touching them. The popes, in their pecuniarystraits, perceiving how lucrative the practice might become, deprivedthe bishops of the right of making such sales, and appropriated it tothemselves, establishing agencies, chiefly among the mendicant orders, for the traffic. Among these orders there was a sharp competition, eachboasting of the superior value of its indulgences through its greaterinfluence at the court of heaven, its familiar connection with theVirgin Mary and the saints in glory. Even against Luther himself, whohad been an Augustinian monk, a calumny was circulated that he wasfirst alienated from the Church by a traffic of this kind having beenconferred on the Dominicans, instead of on his own order, at the timewhen Leo X. Was raising funds by this means for building St. Peter's, atRome, A. D. 1517. And there is reason to think that Leo himself, in theearlier stages of the Reformation, attached weight to that allegation. 

Indulgences were thus the immediate inciting cause of the Reformation, but very soon there came into light the real principle that wasanimating the controversy. It lay in the question, Does the Bible oweits authenticity to the Church? or does the Church owe her authenticityto the Bible? Where is the criterion of truth?

It is not necessary for me here to relate the well known particulars ofthat controversy, the desolating wars and scenes of blood to which itgave rise: how Luther posted on the door of the cathedral of Wittembergninety-five theses, and was summoned to Rome to answer for his offense;how he appealed from the pope, ill-informed at the time, to the popewhen he should have been better instructed; how he was condemned as aheretic, and thereupon appealed to a general council; how, through thedisputes about purgatory, transubstantiation, auricular confession, absolution, the fundamental idea which lay at the bottom of the wholemovement came into relief, the right of individual judgment; how Lutherwas now excommunicated, A. D. 1520, and in defiance burnt the bull ofexcommunication and the volumes of the canon law, which he denounced asaiming at the subversion of all civil government, and the exaltation ofthe papacy; how by this skillful manoeuvre he brought over many of theGerman princes to his views; how, summoned before the Imperial Diet atWorms, he refused to retract, and, while he was bidden in the castle ofWartburg, his doctrines were spreading, and a reformation under Zwinglibroke out in Switzerland; how the principle of sectarian decompositionembedded in the movement gave rise to rivalries and dissensions betweenthe Germans and the Swiss, and even divided the latter among themselvesunder the leadership of Zwingli and of Calvin; how the Conference ofMarburg, the Diet of Spires, and that at Augsburg, failed to composethe troubles, and eventually the German Reformation assumed a politicalorganization at Smalcalde. The quarrels between the Lutherans and theCalvinists gave hopes to Rome that she might recover her losses. 

Leo was not slow to discern that the Lutheran Reformation was somethingmore serious than a squabble among some monks about the profits ofindulgence-sales, and the papacy set itself seriously at work toovercome the revolters. It instigated the frightful wars that for somany years desolated Europe, and left animosities which neither theTreaty of Westphalia, nor the Council of Trent after eighteen years ofdebate, could compose. No one can read without a shudder the attemptsthat were made to extend the Inquisition in foreign countries. AllEurope, Catholic and Protestant, was horror-stricken at the Huguenotmassacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve (A. D. 1572). For perfidy and atrocityit has no equal in the annals of the world. 

The desperate attempt in which the papacy had been engaged to put downits opponents by instigating civil wars, massacres, and assassinations, proved to be altogether abortive. Nor had the Council of Trent anybetter result. Ostensibly summoned to correct, illustrate, and fix withperspicacity the doctrine of the Church, to restore the vigor ofits discipline, and to reform the lives of its ministers, it was somanipulated that a large majority of its members were Italians, andunder the influence of the pope. Hence the Protestants could notpossibly accept its decisions. 

The issue of the Reformation was the acceptance by all the ProtestantChurches of the dogma that the Bible is a sufficient guide for everyChristian man. Tradition was rejected, and the right of privateinterpretation assured. It was thought that the criterion of truth hadat length been obtained. 

The authority thus imputed to the Scriptures was not restrictedto matters of a purely religious or moral kind; it extended overphilosophical facts and to the interpretation of Nature. Many went asfar as in the old times Epiphanius had done: he believed that the Biblecontained a complete system of mineralogy! The Reformers would tolerateno science that was not in accordance with Genesis. Among them therewere many who maintained that religion and piety could never flourishunless separated from learning and science. The fatal maxim that theBible contained the sum and substance of all knowledge, useful orpossible to man--a maxim employed with such pernicious effect of old byTertullian and by St. Augustine, and which had so often been enforcedby papal authority--was still strictly insisted upon. The leaders ofthe Reformation, Luther and Melanchthon, were determined to banishphilosophy from the Church. Luther declared that the study of Aristotleis wholly useless; his vilification of that Greek philosopher knew nobounds. He is, says Luther, "truly a devil, a horrid calumniator, awicked sycophant, a prince of darkness, a real Apollyon, a beast, amost horrid impostor on mankind, one in whom there is scarcely anyphilosophy, a public and professed liar, a goat, a complete epicure, this twice execrable Aristotle. " The schoolmen were, so Luther said, "locusts, caterpillars, frogs, lice. " He entertained an abhorrencefor them. These opinions, though not so emphatically expressed, wereentertained by Calvin. So far as science is concerned, nothing is owedto the Reformation. The Procrustean bed of the Pentateuch was stillbefore her. 

In the annals of Christianity the most ill-omened day is that in whichshe separated herself from science. She compelled Origen, at that time(A. D. 231) its chief representative and supporter in the Church, toabandon his charge in Alexandria, and retire to Caesarea. In vainthrough many subsequent centuries did her leading men spend themselvesin--as the phrase then went--"drawing forth the internal juice andmarrow of the Scriptures for the explaining of things. " Universalhistory from the third to the sixteenth century shows with what result. The dark ages owe their darkness to this fatal policy. Here and there, it is true, there were great men, such as Frederick II. And Alphonso X. , who, standing at a very elevated and general point of view, had detectedthe value of learning to civilization, and, in the midst of the drearyprospect that ecclesiasticism had created around them, had recognizedthat science alone can improve the social condition of man. 

The infliction of the death-punishment for difference of opinion wasstill resorted to. When Calvin caused Servetus to be burnt at Geneva, itwas obvious to every one that the spirit of persecution was unimpaired. The offense of that philosopher lay in his belief. This was, that thegenuine doctrines of Christianity had been lost even before the time ofthe Council of Nicea; that the Holy Ghost animates the whole system ofNature, like a soul of the world, and that, with the Christ, it willbe absorbed, at the end of all things, into the substance of the Deity, from which they had emanated. For this he was roasted to death over aslow fire. Was there any distinction between this Protestant auto-da-feand the Catholic one of Vanini, who was burnt at Toulouse, by theInquisition, in 1629, for his "Dialogues concerning Nature?"

The invention of printing, the dissemination of books, had introduceda class of dangers which the persecution of the Inquisition could notreach. In 1559, Pope Paul IV. Instituted the Congregation of the IndexExpurgatorius. "Its duty is to examine books and manuscripts intendedfor publication, and to decide whether the people may be permitted toread them; to correct those books of which the errors are not numerous, and which contain certain useful and salutary truths, so as to bringthem into harmony with the doctrines of the Church; to condemn thoseof which the principles are heretical and pernicious; and to grant thepeculiar privilege of perusing heretical books to certain persons. This congregation, which is sometimes held in presence of the pope, butgenerally in the palace of the Cardinal-president, has a more extensivejurisdiction than that of the Inquisition, as it not only takescognizance of those books that contain doctrines contrary to the RomanCatholic faith, but of those that concern the duties of morality, thediscipline of the Church, the interests of society. Its name is derivedfrom the alphabetical tables or indexes of heretical books and authorscomposed by its appointment. "

The Index Expurgatorius of prohibited books at first indicatedthose works which it was unlawful to read; but, on this being foundinsufficient, whatever was not permitted was prohibited--an audaciousattempt to prevent all knowledge, except such as suited the purposes ofthe Church, from reaching the people. 

The two rival divisions of the Christian Church--Protestant andCatholic--were thus in accord on one point: to tolerate no scienceexcept such as they considered to be agreeable to the Scriptures. TheCatholic, being in possession of centralized power, could make itsdecisions respected wherever its sway was acknowledged, and enforce themonitions of the Index Expurgatorius; the Protestant, whose influencewas diffused among many foci in different nations, could not act in sucha direct and resolute manner. Its mode of procedure was, by raising atheological odium against an offender, to put him under a social ban--acourse perhaps not less effectual than the other. 

As we have seen in former chapters, an antagonism between religion andscience had existed from the earliest days of Christianity. On everyoccasion permitting its display it may be detected through successivecenturies. We witness it in the downfall of the Alexandrian Museum, inthe cases of Erigena and Wiclif, in the contemptuous rejection by theheretics of the thirteenth century of the Scriptural account of theCreation; but it was not until the epoch of Copernicus, Kepler, andGalileo, that the efforts of Science to burst from the thraldom in whichshe was fettered became uncontrollable. In all countries the politicalpower of the Church had greatly declined; her leading men perceivedthat the cloudy foundation on which she had stood was dissolving away. Repressive measures against her antagonists, in old times resortedto with effect, could be no longer advantageously employed. To herinterests the burning of a philosopher here and there did more harm thangood. In her great conflict with astronomy, a conflict in which Galileostands as the central figure, she received an utter overthrow; and, aswe have seen, when the immortal work of Newton was printed, she couldoffer no resistance, though Leibnitz affirmed, in the face of Europe, that "Newton had robbed the Deity of some of his most excellentattributes, and had sapped the foundation of natural religion. "

From the time of Newton to our own time, the divergence of science fromthe dogmas of the Church has continually increased. The Church declaredthat the earth is the central and most important body in the universe;that the sun and moon and stars are tributary to it. On these pointsshe was worsted by astronomy. She affirmed that a universal deluge hadcovered the earth; that the only surviving animals were such as hadbeen saved in an ark. In this her error was established by geology. Shetaught that there was a first man, who, some six or eight thousand yearsago, was suddenly created or called into existence in a condition ofphysical and moral perfection, and from that condition he fell. Butanthropology has shown that human beings existed far back in geologicaltime, and in a savage state but little better than that of the brute. 

Many good and well-meaning men have attempted to reconcile thestatements of Genesis with the discoveries of science, but it is invain. The divergence has increased so much, that it has become anabsolute opposition. One of the antagonists must give way. 

May we not, then, be permitted to examine the authenticity of this book, which, since the second century, has been put forth as the criterion ofscientific truth? To maintain itself in a position so exalted, it mustchallenge human criticism. 

In the early Christian ages, many of the most eminent Fathers of theChurch had serious doubts respecting the authorship of the entirePentateuch. I have not space, in the limited compass of these pages, topresent in detail the facts and arguments that were then and have sincebeen adduced. The literature of the subject is now very extensive. Imay, however, refer the reader to the work of the pious and learned DeanPrideaux, on "The Old and New Testament connected, " a work which is oneof the literary ornaments of the last century. He will also find thesubject more recently and exhaustively discussed by Bishop Colenso. Thefollowing paragraphs will convey a sufficiently distinct impression ofthe present state of the controversy:

The Pentateuch is affirmed to have been written by Moses, under theinfluence of divine inspiration. Considered thus, as a record vouchsafedand dictated by the Almighty, it commands not only scientific butuniversal consent. 

But here, in the first place, it may be demanded, Who or what is it thathas put forth this great claim in its behalf?

Not the work itself. It nowhere claims the authorship of one man, ormakes the impious declaration that it is the writing of Almighty God. 

Not until after the second century was there any such extravagantdemand on human credulity. It originated, not among the higher ranks ofChristian philosophers, but among the more fervid Fathers of the Church, whose own writings prove them to have been unlearned and uncriticalpersons. 

Every age, from the second century to our times, has offered men ofgreat ability, both Christian and Jewish, who have altogether repudiatedthese claims. Their decision has been founded upon the intrinsicevidence of the books themselves. These furnish plain indications of atleast two distinct authors, who have been respectively termed Elohisticand Jehovistic. Hupfeld maintains that the Jehovistic narrative bearsmarks of having been a second original record, wholly independent of theElohistic. The two sources from which the narratives have been derivedare, in many respects, contradictory of each other. Moreover, it isasserted that the books of the Pentateuch are never ascribed to Mosesin the inscriptions of Hebrew manuscripts, or in printed copies of theHebrew Bible, nor are they styled "Books of Moses" in the Septuagint orVulgate, but only in modern translations. 

It is clear that they cannot be imputed to the sole authorship of Moses, since they record his death. It is clear that they were not writtenuntil many hundred years after that event, since they contain referencesto facts which did not occur until after the establishment of thegovernment of kings among the Jews. 

No man may dare to impute them to the inspiration of Almighty God--theirinconsistencies, incongruities, contradictions, and impossibilities, asexposed by many learned and pious moderns, both German and English, are so great. It is the decision of these critics that Genesis is anarrative based upon legends; that Exodus is not historically true; thatthe whole Pentateuch is unhistoric and non-Mosaic; it contains the mostextraordinary contradictions and impossibilities, sufficient to involvethe credibility of the whole--imperfections so many and so conspicuousthat they would destroy the authenticity of any modern historical work. 

Hengstenberg, in his "Dissertations on the Genuineness of thePentateuch, " says: "It is the unavoidable fate of a spurious historicalwork of any length to be involved in contradictions. This must be thecase to a very great extent with the Pentateuch, if it be not genuine. If the Pentateuch is spurious, its histories and laws have beenfabricated in successive portions, and were committed to writing in thecourse of many centuries by different individuals. From such a mode oforigination, a mass of contradictions is inseparable, and the improvinghand of a later editor could never be capable of entirely obliteratingthem. "

To the above conclusions I may add that we are expressly told by Ezra(Esdras ii. 14) that he himself, aided by five other persons, wrotethese books in the space of forty days. He says that at the time of theBabylonian captivity the ancient sacred writings of the Jews were burnt, and gives a particular detail of the circumstances under which thesewere composed. He sets forth that he undertook to write all that hadbeen done in the world since the beginning. It may be said that thebooks of Esdras are apocryphal, but in return it may be demanded, Hasthat conclusion been reached on evidence that will withstand moderncriticism? In the early ages of Christianity, when the story of the fallof man was not considered as essential to the Christian system, and thedoctrine of the atonement had not attained that precision which Anselmeventually gave it, it was very generally admitted by the Fathers of theChurch that Ezra probably did so compose the Pentateuch. Thus St. Jeromesays, "Sive Mosem dicere volueris auctorem Pentateuchi, sive Esdramejusdem instauratorem operis, non recuso. " Clemens Alexandrinussays that when these books had been destroyed in the captivity ofNebuchadnezzar, Esdras, having become inspired prophetically, reproducedthem. Irenaeus says the same. 

The incidents contained in Genesis, from the first to the tenth chaptersinclusive (chapters which, in their bearing upon science, are of moreimportance than other portions of the Pentateuch), have been obviouslycompiled from short, fragmentary legends of various authorship. To thecritical eye they all, however, present peculiarities which demonstratethat they were written on the banks of the Euphrates, and not in theDesert of Arabia. They contain many Chaldaisms. An Egyptian would notspeak of the Mediterranean Sea as being west of him, an Assyrian would. Their scenery and machinery, if such expressions may with propriety beused, are altogether Assyrian, not Egyptian. They were such records asone might expect to meet with in the cuneiform impressions of thetile libraries of the Mesopotamian kings. It is affirmed that one suchlegend, that of the Deluge, has already been exhumed, and it is notbeyond the bounds of probability that the remainder may in like mannerbe obtained. 

From such Assyrian sources, the legends of the creation of the earth andheaven, the garden of Eden, the making of man from clay, and of womanfrom one of his ribs, the temptation by the serpent, the naming ofanimals, the cherubim and flaming sword, the Deluge and the ark, thedrying up of the waters by the wind, the building of the Tower ofBabel, and the confusion of tongues, were obtained by Ezra. He commencesabruptly the proper history of the Jews in the eleventh chapter. At thatpoint his universal history ceases; he occupies himself with the storyof one family, the descendants of Shem. 

It is of this restriction that the Duke of Argyll, in his book on"Primeval Man, " very graphically says:

In the genealogy of the family of Shem we have a list of names which arenames, and nothing more to us. It is a genealogy which neither does, norpretends to do, more than to trace the order of succession among a fewfamilies only, out of the millions then already existing in the world. Nothing but this order of succession is given, nor is it at all certainthat this order is consecutive or complete. Nothing is told us of allthat lay behind that curtain of thick darkness, in front of whichthese names are made to pass; and yet there are, as it were, momentaryliftings, through which we have glimpses of great movements which weregoing on, and had been long going on beyond. No shapes are distinctlyseen. Even the direction of those movements can only be guessed. Butvoices are heard which are "as the voices of many waters. " I agree inthe opinion of Hupfeld, that "the discovery that the Pentateuch is puttogether out of various sources, or original documents, is beyondall doubt not only one of the most important and most pregnant withconsequences for the interpretation of the historical books of the OldTestament, or rather for the whole of theology and history, but it isalso one of the most certain discoveries which have been made inthe domain of criticism and the history of literature. Whatever theanticritical party may bring forward to the contrary, it will maintainitself, and not retrograde again through any thing, so long as thereexists such a thing as criticism; and it will not be easy for a readerupon the stage of culture on which we stand in the present day, if hegoes to the examination unprejudiced, and with an uncorrupted power ofappreciating the truth, to be able to ward off its influence. "

What then? shall we give up these books? Does not the admission that thenarrative of the fall in Eden is legendary carry with it the surrenderof that most solemn and sacred of Christian doctrines, the atonement?

Let us reflect on this! Christianity, in its earliest days, when it wasconverting and conquering the world, knew little or nothing about thatdoctrine. We have seen that, in his "Apology, " Tertullian did notthink it worth his while to mention it. It originated among the Gnosticheretics. It was not admitted by the Alexandrian theological school. Itwas never prominently advanced by the Fathers. It was not brought intoits present commanding position until the time of Anselm Philo Judaeusspeaks of the story of the fall as symbolical; Origen regarded it as anallegory. Perhaps some of the Protestant churches may, with reason, beaccused of inconsistency, since in part they consider it as mythical, inpart real. But, if, with them, we admit that the serpent is symbolicalof Satan, does not that cast an air of allegory over the wholenarrative?

It is to be regretted that the Christian Church has burdened itself withthe defense of these books, and voluntarily made itself answerable fortheir manifest contradictions and errors. Their vindication, if itwere possible, should have been resigned to the Jews, among whom theyoriginated, and by whom they have been transmitted to us. Still more, itis to be deeply regretted that the Pentateuch, a production so imperfectas to be unable to stand the touch of modern criticism, should be putforth as the arbiter of science. Let it be remembered that the exposureof the true character of these books has been made, not by captiousenemies, but by pious and learned churchmen, some of them of the highestdignity. 

While thus the Protestant churches have insisted on the acknowledgmentof the Scriptures as the criterion of truth, the Catholic has, in ourown times, declared the infallibility of the pope. It may be said thatthis infallibility applies only to moral or religious things; but whereshall the line of separation be drawn? Onmiscience cannot be limitedto a restricted group of questions; in its very nature it implies theknowledge of all, and infallibility means omniscience. 

Doubtless, if the fundamental principles of Italian Christianity beadmitted, their logical issue is an infallible pope. There is no need todwell on the unphilosophical nature of this conception; it is destroyedby an examination of the political history of the papacy, and thebiography of the popes. The former exhibits all the errors and mistakesto which institutions of a confessedly human character have been foundliable; the latter is only ton frequently a story of sin and shame. 

It was not possible that the authoritative promulgation of the dogma ofpapal infallibility should meet among enlightened Catholics universalacceptance. Serious and wide-spread dissent has been produced. Adoctrine so revolting to common-sense could not find any other result. There are many who affirm that, if infallibility exists anywhere, it isin oecumenical councils, and yet such councils have not always agreedwith each other. There are also many who remember that councilshave deposed popes, and have passed judgment on their clamors andcontentions. Not without reason do Protestants demand, What proof canbe given that infallibility exists in the Church at all? what proof isthere that the Church has ever been fairly or justly represented inany council? and why should the truth be ascertained by the vote of amajority rather than by that of a minority? How often it has happenedthat one man, standing at the right point of view, has descried thetruth, and, after having been denounced and persecuted by all others, they have eventually been constrained to adopt his declarations! Of manygreat discoveries, has not this been the history?

It is not for Science to compose these contesting claims; it is not forher to determine whether the criterion of truth for the religious manshall be found in the Bible, or in the oecumenical council, or in thepope. She only asks the right, which she so willingly accords to others, of adopting a criterion of her own. If she regards unhistoricallegends with disdain; if she considers the vote of a majority in theascertainment of truth with supreme indifference; if she leaves theclaim of infallibility in any human being to be vindicated by the sternlogic of coming events--the cold impassiveness which in these mattersshe maintains is what she displays toward her own doctrines. Withouthesitation she would give up the theories of gravitation or undulations, if she found that they were irreconcilable with facts. For her thevolume of inspiration is the book of Nature, of which the open scrollis ever spread forth before the eyes of every man. Confronting all, itneeds no societies for its dissemination. Infinite in extent, eternalin duration, human ambition and human fanaticism have never been ableto tamper with it. On the earth it is illustrated by all that ismagnificent and beautiful, on the heavens its letters are suns andworlds. 

CHAPTER IX. 

 CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNIVERSE. 

 There are two conceptions of the government of the world: 1. By Providence; 2. By Law. --The former maintained by the priesthood. --Sketch of the introduction of the latter. 

 Kepler discovers the laws that preside over the solar system. --His works are denounced by papal authority. --The foundations of mechanical philosophy are laid by Da Vinci. -- Galileo discovers the fundamental laws of Dynamics. --Newton applies them to the movements of the celestial bodies, and shows that the solar system is governed by mathematical necessity. --Herschel extends that conclusion to the universe. --The nebular hypothesis. --Theological exceptions to it. 

 Evidences of the control of law in the construction of the earth, and in the development of the animal and plant series. --They arose by Evolution, not by Creation. 

 The reign of law is exhibited by the historic career of human societies, and in the case of individual man. 

 Partial adoption of this view by some of the Reformed Churches. 

Two interpretations may be given of the mode of government of the world. It may be by incessant divine interventions, or by the operation ofunvarying law. 

To the adoption of the former a priesthood will always incline, sinceit must desire to be considered as standing between the prayer of thevotary and the providential act. Its importance is magnified by thepower it claims of determining what that act shall be. In the preChristian (Roman) religion, the grand office of the priesthood was thediscovery of future events by oracles, omens, or an inspection of theentrails of animals, and by the offering of sacrifices to propitiate thegods. In the later, the Christian times, a higher power was claimed; theclergy asserting that, by their intercessions, they could regulate thecourse of affairs, avert dangers, secure benefits, work miracles, andeven change the order of Nature. 

Not without reason, therefore, did they look upon the doctrine ofgovernment by unvarying law with disfavor. It seemed to depreciatetheir dignity, to lessen their importance. To them there was somethingshocking in a God who cannot be swayed by human entreaty, a cold, passionless divinity--something frightful in fatalism, destiny. 

But the orderly movement of the heavens could not fail in all ages tomake a deep impression on thoughtful observers--the rising and settingof the sun; the increasing or diminishing light of the day; the waxingand waning of the moon; the return of the seasons in their propercourses; the measured march of the wandering planets in the sky--whatare all these, and a thousand such, but manifestations of an orderly andunchanging procession of events? The faith of early observers in thisinterpretation may perhaps have been shaken by the occurrence of such aphenomenon as an eclipse, a sudden and mysterious breach of the ordinarycourse of natural events; but it would be resumed in tenfold strength assoon as the discovery was made that eclipses themselves recur, and maybe predicted. 

Astronomical predictions of all kinds depend upon the admission of thisfact--that there never has been and never will be any intervention inthe operation of natural laws. The scientific philosopher affirms thatthe condition of the world at any given moment is the direct resultof its condition in the preceding moment, and the direct cause of itscondition in the subsequent moment. Law and chance are only differentnames for mechanical necessity. 

About fifty years after the death of Copernicus, John Kepler, a nativeof Wurtemberg, who had adopted the heliocentric theory, and who wasdeeply impressed with the belief that relationships exist in therevolutions of the planetary bodies round the sun, and that these ifcorrectly examined would reveal the laws under which those movementstake place, devoted himself to the study of the distances, times, andvelocities of the planets, and the form of their orbits. His methodwas, to submit the observations to which he had access, such as thoseof Tycho Brahe, to computations based first on one and then on anotherhypothesis, rejecting the hypothesis if he found that the calculationsdid not accord with the observations. The incredible labor he hadundergone (he says, "I considered, and I computed, until I almost wentmad") was at length rewarded, and in 1609 he published his book, "On theMotions of the Planet Mars. " In this he had attempted to reconcile themovements of that planet to the hypothesis of eccentrics and epicycles, but eventually discovered that the orbit of a planet is not a circle butan ellipse, the sun being in one of the foci, and that the areas sweptover by a line drawn from the planet to the sun are proportional to thetimes. These constitute what are now known as the first and second lawsof Kepler. Eight years subsequently, he was rewarded by the discoveryof a third law, defining the relation between the mean distances of theplanets from the sun and the times of their revolutions; "the squares ofthe periodic times are proportional to the cubes of the distances. " In"An Epitome of the Copernican System, " published in 1618, he announcedthis law, and showed that it holds good for the satellites of Jupiter asregards their primary. Hence it was inferred that the laws which presideover the grand movements of the solar system preside also over the lessmovements of its constituent parts. 

The conception of law which is unmistakably conveyed by Kepler'sdiscoveries, and the evidence they gave in support of the heliocentricas against the geocentric theory, could not fail to incur thereprehension of the Roman authorities. The congregation of the Index, therefore, when they denounced the Copernican system as utterly contraryto the Holy Scriptures, prohibited Kepler's "Epitome" of that system. Itwas on this occasion that Kepler submitted his celebrated remonstrance:"Eighty years have elapsed during which the doctrines of Copernicusregarding the movement of the earth and the immobility of the sun havebeen promulgated without hinderance, because it was deemed allowable todispute concerning natural things, and to elucidate the works of God, and now that new testimony is discovered in proof of the truth of thosedoctrines--testimony which was not known to the spiritual judges--yewould prohibit the promulgation of the true system of the structure ofthe universe. "

None of Kepler's contemporaries believed the law of the areas, nor wasit accepted until the publication of the "Principia" of Newton. In fact, no one in those times understood the philosophical meaning of Kepler'slaws. He himself did not foresee what they must inevitably lead to. Hismistakes showed how far he was from perceiving their result. Thus hethought that each planet is the seat of an intelligent principle, andthat there is a relation between the magnitudes of the orbits of thefive principal planets and the five regular solids of geometry. At firsthe inclined to believe that the orbit of Mars is oval, nor was it untilafter a wearisome study that he detected the grand truth, its ellipticalform. An idea of the incorruptibility of the celestial objects hadled to the adoption of the Aristotelian doctrine of the perfection ofcircular motions, and to the belief that there were none but circularmotions in the heavens. He bitterly complains of this as having been afatal "thief of his time. " His philosophical daring is illustrated inhis breaking through this time-honored tradition. 

In some most important particulars Kepler anticipated Newton. He was thefirst to give clear ideas respecting gravity. He says every particle ofmatter will rest until it is disturbed by some other particle--that theearth attracts a stone more than the stone attracts the earth, and thatbodies move to each other in proportion to their masses; that the earthwould ascend to the moon one-fifty-fourth of the distance, and the moonwould move toward the earth the other fifty-three. He affirms that themoon's attraction causes the tides, and that the planets must impressirregularities on the moon's motions. 

The progress of astronomy is obviously divisible into three periods:

1. The period of observation of the apparent motions of the heavenlybodies. 

2. The period of discovery of their real motions, and particularly ofthe laws of the planetary revolutions; this was signally illustrated byCopernicus and Kepler. 

3. The period of the ascertainment of the causes of those laws. It wasthe epoch of Newton. 

The passage of the second into the third period depended on thedevelopment of the Dynamical branch of mechanics, which had been ina stagnant condition from the time of Archimedes or the AlexandrianSchool. 

In Christian Europe there had not been a cultivator of mechanicalphilosophy until Leonardo da Vinci, who was born A. D. 1452. To him, andnot to Lord Bacon, must be attributed the renaissance of science. Baconwas not only ignorant of mathematics, but depreciated its applicationto physical inquiries. He contemptuously rejected the Copernican system, alleging absurd objections to it. While Galileo was on the brink ofhis great telescopic discoveries, Bacon was publishing doubts as tothe utility of instruments in scientific investigations. To ascribe theinductive method to him is to ignore history. His fanciful philosophicalsuggestions have never been of the slightest practical use. No one hasever thought of employing them. Except among English readers, his nameis almost unknown. 

To Da Vinci I shall have occasion to allude more particularly on asubsequent page. Of his works still remaining in manuscript, two volumesare at Milan, and one in Paris, carried there by Napoleon. After aninterval of about seventy years, Da Vinci was followed by the Dutchengineer, Stevinus, whose work on the principles of equilibrium waspublished in 1586. Six years afterward appeared Galileo's treatise onmechanics. 

To this great Italian is due the establishment of the three fundamentallaws of dynamics, known as the Laws of Motion. 

The consequences of the establishment of these laws were very important. 

It had been supposed that continuous movements, such, for instance, asthose of the celestial bodies, could only be maintained by a perpetualconsumption and perpetual application of force, but the first ofGalileo's laws declared that every body will persevere in its state ofrest, or of uniform motion in a right line, until it is compelled tochange that state by disturbing forces. A clear perception of thisfundamental principle is essential to a comprehension of the elementaryfacts of physical astronomy. Since all the motions that we witnesstaking place on the surface of the earth soon come to an end, we areled to infer that rest is the natural condition of things. We have made, then, a very great advance when we have become satisfied that a body isequally indifferent to rest as to motion, and that it equally perseveresin either state until disturbing forces are applied. Such disturbingforces in the case of common movements are friction and the resistanceof the air. When no such resistances exist, movement must be perpetual, as is the case with the heavenly bodies, which are moving in a void. 

Forces, no matter what their difference of magnitude may be, will exerttheir full influence conjointly, each as though the other did not exist. Thus, when a ball is suffered to drop from the mouth of a cannon, itfalls to the ground in a certain interval of time through the influenceof gravity upon it. If, then, it be fired from the cannon, though nowit may be projected some thousands of feet in a second, the effectof gravity upon it will be precisely the same as before. In theintermingling of forces there is no deterioration; each produces its ownspecific effect. 

In the latter half of the seventeenth century, through the works ofBorelli, Hooke, and Huyghens, it had become plain that circular motionscould be accounted for by the laws of Galileo. Borelli, treating of themotions of Jupiter's satellites, shows how a circular movement may ariseunder the influence of a central force. Hooke exhibited the inflectionof a direct motion into a circular by a supervening central attraction. 

The year 1687 presents, not only an epoch in European science, but alsoin the intellectual development of man. It is marked by the publicationof the "Principia" of Newton, an incomparable, an immortal work. 

On the principle that all bodies attract each other with forces directlyas their masses, and inversely as the squares of their distances, Newtonshowed that all the movements of the celestial bodies may be accountedfor, and that Kepler's laws might all have been predicted--the ellipticmotions--the described areas the relation of the times and distances. Aswe have seen, Newton's contemporaries had perceived how circular motionscould be explained; that was a special case, but Newton furnished thesolution of the general problem, containing all special cases of motionin circles, ellipses, parabolas, hyperbolas--that is, in all the conicsections. 

The Alexandrian mathematicians had shown that the direction of movementof falling bodies is toward the centre of the earth. Newton proved thatthis must necessarily be the case, the general effect of the attractionof all the particles of a sphere being the same as if they were allconcentrated in its centre. To this central force, thus determining thefall of bodies, the designation of gravity was given. Up to this time, no one, except Kepler, had considered how far its influence reached. Itseemed to Newton possible that it might extend as far as the moon, andbe the force that deflects her from a rectilinear path, and makes herrevolve in her orbit round the earth. It was easy to compute, on theprinciple of the law of inverse squares, whether the earth's attractionwas sufficient to produce the observed effect. Employing the measuresof the size of the earth accessible at the time, Newton found that themoon's deflection was only thirteen feet in a minute; whereas, if hishypothesis of gravitation were true, it should be fifteen feet. But in1669 Picard, as we have seen, executed the measurement of a degree morecarefully than had previously been done; this changed the estimate ofthe magnitude of the earth, and, therefore, of the distance of the moon;and, Newton's attention having been directed to it by some discussionsthat took place at the Royal Society in 1679, he obtained Picard'sresults, went home, took out his old papers, and resumed hiscalculations. As they drew to a close, he became so much agitatedthat he was obliged to desire a friend to finish them. The expectedcoincidence was established. It was proved that the moon is retainedin her orbit and made to revolve round the earth by the force ofterrestrial gravity. The genii of Kepler had given place to the vorticesof Descartes, and these in their turn to the central force of Newton. 

In like manner the earth, and each of the planets, are made to movein an elliptic orbit round the sun by his attractive force, andperturbations arise by reason of the disturbing action of the planetarymasses on one another. Knowing the masses and the distances, thesedisturbances may be computed. Later astronomers have even succeeded withthe inverse problem, that is, knowing the perturbations or disturbances, to find the place and the mass of the disturbing body. Thus, from thedeviations of Uranus from his theoretical position, the discovery ofNeptune was accomplished. 

Newton's merit consisted in this, that he applied the laws of dynamicsto the movements of the celestial bodies, and insisted that scientifictheories must be substantiated by the agreement of observations withcalculations. 

When Kepler announced his three laws, they were received withcondemnation by the spiritual authorities, not because of any error theywere supposed to present or to contain, but partly because they gavesupport to the Copernican system, and partly because it was judgedinexpedient to admit the prevalence of law of any kind as opposed toprovidential intervention. The world was regarded as the theatre inwhich the divine will was daily displayed; it was considered derogatoryto the majesty of God that that will should be fettered in any way. Thepower of the clergy was chiefly manifested in the influence the werealleged to possess in changing his arbitrary determinations. It was thusthat they could abate the baleful action of comets, secure fine weatheror rain, prevent eclipses, and, arresting the course of Nature, work allmanner of miracles; it was thus that the shadow had been made to go backon the dial, and the sun and the moon stopped in mid-career. 

In the century preceding the epoch of Newton, a great religious andpolitical revolution had taken place--the Reformation. Though itseffect had not been the securing of complete liberty for thought, it badweakened many of the old ecclesiastical bonds. In the reformed countriesthere was no power to express a condemnation of Newton's works, andamong the clergy there was no disposition to give themselves any concernabout the matter. At first the attention of the Protestant was engrossedby the movements of his great enemy the Catholic, and when that sourceof disquietude ceased, and the inevitable partitions of the Reformationarose, that attention was fastened upon the rival and antagonisticChurches. The Lutheran, the Calvinist, the Episcopalian, thePresbyterian, had something more urgent on hand than Newton'smathematical demonstrations. 

So, uncondemned, and indeed unobserved, in this clamor of fightingsects, Newton's grand theory solidly established itself. Itsphilosophical significance was infinitely more momentous than the dogmasthat these persons were quarreling about. It not only accepted theheliocentric theory and the laws discovered by Kepler, but it provedthat, no matter what might be the weight of opposing ecclesiasticalauthority, the sun MUST be the centre of our system, and that Kepler'slaws are the result of a mathematical necessity. It is impossible thatthey should be other than they are. 

But what is the meaning of all this? Plainly that the solar systemis not interrupted by providential interventions, but is under thegovernment of irreversible law--law that is itself the issue ofmathematical necessity. 

The telescopic observations of Herschel I. Satisfied him that there arevery many double stars--double not merely because they are accidentallyin the same line of view, but because they are connected physically, revolving round each other. These observations were continued andgreatly extended by Herschel II. The elements of the elliptic orbit ofthe double star zeta of the Great Bear were determined by Savary, itsperiod being fifty-eight and one-quarter years; those of another, sigmaCoronae, were determined by Hind, its period being more than sevenhundred and thirty-six years. The orbital movement of these double sunsin ellipses compels us to admit that the law of gravitation holds goodfar beyond the boundaries of the solar system; indeed, as far as thetelescope can reach, it demonstrates the reign of law. D'Alembert, inthe Introduction to the Encyclopaedia, says: "The universe is but asingle fact; it is only one great truth. "

Shall we, then, conclude that the solar and the starry systems have beencalled into existence by God, and that he has then imposed upon them byhis arbitrary will laws under the control of which it was his pleasurethat their movements should be made?

Or are there reasons for believing that these several systems came intoexistence not by such an arbitrary fiat, but through the operation oflaw?

The following are some peculiarities displayed by the solar system asenumerated by Laplace. All the planets and their satellites move inellipses of such small eccentricity that they are nearly circles. Allthe planets move in the same direction and nearly in the same plane. Themovements of the satellites are in the same direction as those of theplanets. The movements of rotation of the sun, of the planets, and thesatellites, are in the same direction as their orbital motions, and inplanes little different. 

It is impossible that so many coincidences could be the result ofchance! Is it not plain that there must have been a common tie amongall these bodies, that they are only parts of what must once have been asingle mass?

But if we admit that the substance of which the solar system consistsonce existed in a nebulous condition, and was in rotation, all the abovepeculiarities follow as necessary mechanical consequences. Nay, more, the formation of planets, the formation of satellites and of asteroids, is accounted for. We see why the outer planets and satellites are largerthan the interior ones; why the larger planets rotate rapidly, and thesmall ones slowly; why of the satellites the outer planets have more, the inner fewer. We are furnished with indications of the time ofrevolution of the planets in their orbits, and of the satellites intheirs; we perceive the mode of formation of Saturn's rings. We find anexplanation of the physical condition of the sun, and the transitions ofcondition through which the earth and moon have passed, as indicated bytheir geology. 

But two exceptions to the above peculiarities have been noted; they arein the cases of Uranus and Neptune. 

The existence of such a nebulous mass once admitted, all the restfollows as a matter of necessity. Is there not, however, a most seriousobjection in the way? Is not this to exclude Almighty God from theworlds he has made?

First, we must be satisfied whether there is any solid evidence foradmitting the existence of such a nebulous mass. 

The nebular hypothesis rests primarily on the telescopic discovery madeby Herschel I. , that there are scattered here and there in the heavenspale, gleaming patches of light, a few of which are large enough to bevisible to the naked eye. Of these, many may be resolved by a sufficienttelescopic power into a congeries of stars, but some, such as the greatnebula in Orion, have resisted the best instruments hitherto made. 

It was asserted by those who were indisposed to accept the nebularhypothesis, that the non-resolution was due to imperfection in thetelescopes used. In these instruments two distinct functions may beobserved: their light-gathering power depends on the diameter of theirobject mirror or lens, their defining power depends on the exquisitecorrectness of their optical surfaces. Grand instruments may possessthe former quality in perfection by reason of their size, but the lattervery imperfectly, either through want of original configuration, ordistortion arising from flexure through their own weight. But, unless aninstrument be perfect in this respect, as well as adequate in the other, it may fail to decompose a nebula into discrete points. 

Fortunately, however, other means for the settlement of this questionare available. In 1846, it was discovered by the author of this bookthat the spectrum of an ignited solid is continuous--that is, hasneither dark nor bright lines. Fraunhofer had previously made known thatthe spectrum of ignited gases is discontinuous. Here, then, is the meansof determining whether the light emitted by a given nebula comes from anincandescent gas, or from a congeries of ignited solids, stars, orsuns. If its spectrum be discontinuous, it is a true nebula or gas; ifcontinuous, a congeries of stars. 

In 1864, Mr. Huggins made this examination in the case of a nebula inthe constellation Draco. It proved to be gaseous. 

Subsequent observations have shown that, of sixty nebulae examined, nineteen give discontinuous or gaseous spectra--the remainder continuousones. 

It may, therefore, be admitted that physical evidence has at lengthbeen obtained, demonstrating the existence of vast masses of matter in agaseous condition, and at a temperature of incandescence. The hypothesisof Laplace has thus a firm basis. In such a nebular mass, cooling byradiation is a necessary incident, and condensation and rotation theinevitable results. There must be a separation of rings all lying inone plane, a generation of planets and satellites all rotating alike, a central sun and engirdling globes. From a chaotic mass, through theoperation of natural laws, an organized system has been produced. Anintegration of matter into worlds has taken place through a decline ofheat. 

If such be the cosmogony of the solar system, such the genesis of theplanetary worlds, we are constrained to extend our views of the dominionof law, and to recognize its agency in the creation as well as in theconservation of the innumerable orbs that throng the universe. 

But, again, it may be asked: "Is there not something profoundly impiousin this? Are we not excluding Almighty God from the world he has made?"

We have often witnessed the formation of a cloud in a serene sky. A hazypoint, barely perceptible--a little wreath of mist--increases in volume, and becomes darker and denser, until it obscures a large portion of theheavens. It throws itself into fantastic shapes, it gathers a gloryfrom the sun, is borne onward by the wind, and, perhaps, as it graduallycame, so it gradually disappears, melting away in the untroubled air. 

Now, we say that the little vesicles of which this cloud was composedarose from the condensation of water-vapor preexisting in theatmosphere, through reduction of temperature; we show how they assumedthe form they present. We assign optical reasons for the brightnessor blackness of the cloud; we explain, on mechanical principles, itsdrifting before the wind; for its disappearance we account onthe principles of chemistry. It never occurs to us to invoke theinterposition of the Almighty in the production and fashioning of thisfugitive form. We explain all the facts connected with it by physicallaws, and perhaps should reverentially hesitate to call into operationthe finger of God. 

But the universe is nothing more than such a cloud--a cloud of suns andworlds. Supremely grand though it may seem to us, to the Infinite andEternal Intellect it is no more than a fleeting mist. If there be amultiplicity of worlds in infinite space, there is also a succession ofworlds in infinite time. As one after another cloud replaces cloud inthe skies, so this starry system, the universe, is the successor ofcountless others that have preceded it--the predecessor of countlessothers that will follow. There is an unceasing metamorphosis, a sequenceof events, without beginning or end. 

If, on physical principles, we account for minor meteorologicalincidents, mists and clouds, is it not permissible for us to appeal tothe same principle in the origin of world-systems and universes, whichare only clouds on a space-scale somewhat larger, mists on a time-scalesomewhat less transient? Can any man place the line which boundsthe physical on one side, the supernatural on the other? Do not ourestimates of the extent and the duration of things depend altogetheron our point of view? Were we set in the midst of the great nebulaof Orion, how transcendently magnificent the scene! The vasttransformations, the condensations of a fiery mist into worlds, mightseem worthy of the immediate presence, the supervision of God; here, atour distant station, where millions of miles are inappreciable to oureyes, and suns seem no bigger than motes in the air, that nebula is moreinsignificant than the faintest cloud. Galileo, in his description ofthe constellation of Orion, did not think it worth while so much as tomention it. The most rigorous theologian of those days would have seennothing to blame in imputing its origin to secondary causes, nothingirreligious in failing to invoke the arbitrary interference of God inits metamorphoses. If such be the conclusion to which we come respectingit, what would be the conclusion to which an Intelligence seated in itmight come respecting us? It occupies an extent of space millions oftimes greater than that of our solar system; we are invisible from it, and therefore absolutely insignificant. Would such an Intelligence thinkit necessary to require for our origin and maintenance the immediateintervention of God?

From the solar system let us descend to what is still moreinsignificant--a little portion of it; let us descend to our own earth. In the lapse of time it has experienced great changes. Have these beendue to incessant divine interventions, or to the continuous operation ofunfailing law? The aspect of Nature perpetually varies under our eyes, still more grandly and strikingly has it altered in geologicaltimes. But the laws guiding those changes never exhibit the slightestvariation. In the midst of immense vicissitudes they are immutable. The present order of things is only a link in a vast connected chainreaching back to an incalculable past, and forward to an infinitefuture. 

There is evidence, geological and astronomical, that the temperature ofthe earth and her satellite was in the remote past very much higher thanit is now. A decline so slow as to be imperceptible at short intervals, but manifest enough in the course of many ages, has occurred. The heathas been lost by radiation into space. 

The cooling of a mass of any kind, no matter whether large or small, isnot discontinuous; it does not go on by fits and starts; it takesplace under the operation of a mathematical law, though for such mightychanges as are here contemplated neither the formula of Newton, nor thatof Dulong and Petit, may apply. It signifies nothing that periods ofpartial decline, glacial periods, or others of temporary elevation, havebeen intercalated; it signifies nothing whether these variations mayhave arisen from topographical variations, as those of level, or fromperiodicities in the radiation of the sun. A periodical sun would act asa mere perturbation in the gradual decline of heat. The perturbations ofthe planetary motions are a confirmation, not a disproof, of gravity. 

Now, such a decline of temperature must have been attended byinnumerable changes of a physical character in our globe. Her dimensionsmust have diminished through contraction, the length of her day musthave lessened, her surface must have collapsed, and fractures takenplace along the lines of least resistance; the density of the sea musthave increased, its volume must have become less; the constitution ofthe atmosphere must have varied, especially in the amount of water-vaporand carbonic acid that it contained; the barometric pressure must havedeclined. 

These changes, and very many more that might be mentioned, must havetaken place not in a discontinuous but in an orderly manner, since themaster-fact, the decline of heat, that was causing them, was itselffollowing a mathematical law. 

But not alone did lifeless Nature submit to these inevitable mutations;living Nature was also simultaneously affected. 

An organic form of any kind, vegetable or animal, will remain unchangedonly so long as the environment in which it is placed remains unchanged. Should an alteration in the environment occur, the organism will eitherbe modified or destroyed. 

Destruction is more likely to happen as the change in the environmentis more sudden; modification or transformation is more possible as thatchange is more gradual. 

Since it is demonstrably certain that lifeless Nature has in the lapseof ages undergone vast modifications; since the crust of the earth, andthe sea, and the atmosphere, are no longer such as they once were; sincethe distribution of the land and the ocean and all manner of physicalconditions have varied; since there have been such grand changes inthe environment of living things on the surface of our planet--itnecessarily follows that organic Nature must have passed throughdestructions and transformations in correspondence thereto. 

That such extinctions, such modifications, have taken place, howcopious, how convincing, is the evidence!

Here, again, we must observe that, since the disturbing agencywas itself following a mathematical law, these its results must beconsidered as following that law too. 

Such considerations, then, plainly force upon us the conclusion thatthe organic progress of the world has been guided by the operation ofimmutable law--not determined by discontinuous, disconnected, arbitraryinterventions of God. They incline us to view favorably the idea oftransmutations of one form into another, rather than that of suddencreations. 

Creation implies an abrupt appearance, transformation a gradual change. 

In this manner is presented to our contemplation the great theory ofEvolution. Every organic being has a place in a chain of events. It isnot an isolated, a capricious fact, but an unavoidable phenomenon. Ithas its place in that vast, orderly concourse which has successivelyrisen in the past, has introduced the present, and is preparing the wayfor a predestined future. From point to point in this vast progressionthere has been a gradual, a definite, a continuous unfolding, aresistless order of evolution. But in the midst of these mighty changesstand forth immutable the laws that are dominating over all. 

If we examine the introduction of any type of life in the animal series, we find that it is in accordance with transformation, not with creation. Its beginning is under an imperfect form in the midst of other forms, of which the time is nearly complete, and which are passing intoextinction. By degrees, one species after another in succession more andmore perfect arises, until, after many ages, a culmination is reached. From that there is, in like manner, a long, a gradual decline. 

Thus, though the mammal type of life is the characteristic of theTertiary and post-Tertiary periods, it does not suddenly make itsappearance without premonition in those periods. Far back, in theSecondary, we find it under imperfect forms, struggling, as it were, tomake good a foothold. At length it gains a predominance under higher andbetter models. 

So, too, of reptiles, the characteristic type of life of the Secondaryperiod. As we see in a dissolving view, out of the fading outlines ofa scene that is passing away, the dim form of a new one emerging, whichgradually gains strength, reaches its culmination, and then meltsaway in some other that is displacing it, so reptile-life doubtfully, appears, reaches its culmination, and gradually declines. In all thisthere is nothing abrupt; the changes shade into each other by insensibledegrees. 

How could it be otherwise? The hot-blooded animals could not exist inan atmosphere so laden with carbonic acid as was that of the primitivetimes. But the removal of that noxious ingredient from the air by theleaves of plants under the influence of sunlight, the enveloping of itscarbon in the earth under the form of coal, the disengagement of itsoxygen, permitted their life. As the atmosphere was thus modified, the sea was involved in the change; it surrendered a large part of itscarbonic acid, and the limestone hitherto held in solution by it wasdeposited in the solid form. For every equivalent of carbon buried inthe earth, there was an equivalent of carbonate of lime separated fromthe sea--not necessarily in an amorphous condition, most frequentlyunder an organic form. The sunshine kept up its work day by day, butthere were demanded myriads of days for the work to be completed. It wasa slow passage from a noxious to a purified atmosphere, and an equallyslow passage from a cold-blooded to a hot-blooded type of life. But thephysical changes were taking place under the control of law, and theorganic transformations were not sudden or arbitrary providential acts. They were the immediate, the inevitable consequences of the physicalchanges, and therefore, like them, the necessary issue of law. 

For a more detailed consideration of this subject, I may refer thereader to Chapters I, II. , VII, of the second book of my "Treatise onHuman Physiology, " published in 1856. 

Is the world, then, governed by law or by providential interventions, abruptly breaking the proper sequence of events?

To complete our view of this question, we turn finally to what, in onesense, is the most insignificant, in another the most important, casethat can be considered. Do human societies, in their historic career, exhibit the marks of a predetermined progress in an unavoidable track?Is there any evidence that the life of nations is under the control ofimmutable law?

May we conclude that, in society, as in the individual man, parts neverspring from nothing, but are evolved or developed from parts that arealready in existence?

If any one should object to or deride the doctrine of the evolutionor successive development of the animated forms which constitute thatunbroken organic chain reaching from the beginning of life on the globeto the present times, let him reflect that he has himself passed throughmodifications the counterpart of those he disputes. For nine monthshis type of life was aquatic, and during that time he assumed, insuccession, many distinct but correlated forms. At birth his type oflife became aerial; he began respiring the atmospheric air; new elementsof food were supplied to him; the mode of his nutrition changed; butas yet he could see nothing, hear nothing, notice nothing. By degreesconscious existence was assumed; he became aware that there is anexternal world. In due time organs adapted to another change of food, the teeth, appeared, and a change of food ensued. He then passed throughthe stages of childhood and youth, his bodily form developing, and withit his intellectual powers. At about fifteen years, in consequence ofthe evolution which special parts of his system had attained, his moralcharacter changed. New ideas, new passions, influenced him. And thatthat was the cause, and this the effect, is demonstrated when, by theskill of the surgeon, those parts have been interfered with. Nor doesthe development, the metamorphosis, end here; it requires many yearsfor the body to reach its full perfection, many years for the mind. Aculmination is at length reached, and then there is a decline. I neednot picture its mournful incidents--the corporeal, the intellectualenfeeblement. Perhaps there is little exaggeration in saying that inless than a century every human being on the face of the globe, if notcut off in an untimely manner, has passed through all these changes. 

Is there for each of us a providential intervention as we thus passfrom stage to stage of life? or shall we not rather believe that thecountless myriads of human beings who have peopled the earth have beenunder the guidance of an unchanging, a universal law?

But individuals are the elementary constituents of communities--nations. They maintain therein a relation like that which the particles of thebody maintain to the body itself. These, introduced into it, commenceand complete their function; they die, and are dismissed. 

Like the individual, the nation comes into existence without its ownknowledge, and dies without its own consent, often against its own will. National life differs in no particular from individual, except in this, that it is spread over a longer span, but no nation can escape itsinevitable term. Each, if its history be well considered, shows itstime of infancy, its time of youth, its time of maturity, its time ofdecline, if its phases of life be completed. 

In the phases of existence of all, so far as those phases arecompleted, there are common characteristics, and, as like accordances inindividuals point out that all are living under a reign of law, weare justified in inferring that the course of nations, and indeed theprogress of humanity, does not take place in a chance or random way, that supernatural interventions never break the chain of historic acts, that every historic event has its warrant in some preceding event, andgives warrant to others that are to follow. . 

But this conclusion is the essential principle of Stoicism--that Grecianphilosophical system which, as I have already said, offered a support intheir hour of trial and an unwavering guide in the vicissitudes oflife, not only to many illustrious Greeks, but also to some of the greatphilosophers, statesmen, generals, and emperors of Rome; a system whichexcluded chance from every thing, and asserted the direction of allevents by irresistible necessity, to the promotion of perfect good; asystem of earnestness, sternness, austerity, virtue--a protest in favorof the common-sense of mankind. And perhaps we shall not dissent fromthe remark of Montesquieu, who affirms that the destruction of theStoics was a great calamity to the human race; for they alone made greatcitizens, great men. 

To the principle of government by law, Latin Christianity, in its papalform, is in absolute contradiction. The history of this branch ofthe Christian Church is almost a diary of miracles and supernaturalinterventions. These show that the supplications of holy men have oftenarrested the course of Nature--if, indeed, there be any such course;that images and pictures have worked wonders; that bones, hairs, andother sacred relics, have wrought miracles. The criterion or proof ofthe authenticity of many of these objects is, not an unchallengeablerecord of their origin and history, but an exhibition of theirmiracle-working powers. 

Is not that a strange logic which finds proof of an asserted fact in aninexplicable illustration of something else?

Even in the darkest ages intelligent Christian men must have hadmisgivings as to these alleged providential or miraculous interventions. There is a solemn grandeur in the orderly progress of Nature whichprofoundly impresses us; and such is the character of continuity in theevents of our individual life that we instinctively doubt the occurrenceof the supernatural in that of our neighbor. The intelligent man knowswell that, for his personal behoof, the course of Nature has never beenchecked; for him no miracle has ever been worked; he attributes justlyevery event of his life to some antecedent event; this he looks uponas the cause, that as the consequence. When it is affirmed that, in hisneighbor's behalf, such grand interventions have been vouchsafed, hecannot do otherwise than believe that his neighbor is either deceived, or practising deception. 

As might, then, have been anticipated, the Catholic doctrine ofmiraculous intervention received a rude shock at the time of theReformation, when predestination and election were upheld by some of thegreatest theologians, and accepted by some of the greatest ProtestantChurches. With stoical austerity Calvin declares: "We were elected frometernity, before the foundation of the world, from no merit of our own, but according to the purpose of the divine pleasure. " In affirming this, Calvin was resting on the belief that God has from all eternity decreedwhatever comes to pass. Thus, after the lapse of many ages, were againemerging into prominence the ideas of the Basilidians wad Valentinians, Christian sects of the second century, whose Gnostical views led to theengraftment of the great doctrine of the Trinity upon Christianity. Theyasserted that all the actions of men are necessary, that even faith isa natural gift, to which men are forcibly determined, and must thereforebe saved, though their lives be ever so irregular. From the Supreme Godall things proceeded. Thus, also, came into prominence the views whichwere developed by Augustine in his work, "De dono perseverantiae. " Thesewere: that God, by his arbitrary will, has selected certain personswithout respect to foreseen faith or good works, and has infalliblyordained to bestow upon them eternal happiness; other persons, in likemanner, he has condemned to eternal reprobation. The Sublapsariansbelieved that "God permitted the fall of Adam;" the Supralapsarians that"he predestinated it, with all its pernicious consequences, from alleternity, and that our first parents had no liberty from the beginning. "In this, these sectarians disregarded the remark of St. Augustine:"Nefas est dicere Deum aliquid nisi bonum predestinare. "

Is it true, then, that "predestination to eternal happiness is theeverlasting purpose of God, whereby, before the foundations of the worldwere laid, he hath constantly decreed by his council, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen out ofmankind?" Is it true that of the human family there are some who, inview of no fault of their own, Almighty God has condemned to unendingtorture, eternal misery?

In 1595 the Lambeth Articles asserted that "God from eternity hathpredestinated certain men unto life; certain he hath reprobated. " In1618 the Synod of Dort decided in favor of this view. It condemned theremonstrants against it, and treated them with such severity, that manyof them had to flee to foreign countries. Even in the Church of England, as is manifested by its seventeenth Article of Faith, these doctrineshave found favor. 

Probably there was no point which brought down from the Catholics on theProtestants severer condemnation than this, their partial acceptanceof the government of the world by law. In all Reformed Europe miraclesceased. But, with the cessation of shrine-cure, relic-cure, greatpecuniary profits ended. Indeed, as is well known, it was the saleof indulgences that provoked the Reformation--indulgences which areessentially a permit from God for the practice of sin, conditioned onthe payment of a certain sum of money to the priest. 

Philosophically, the Reformation implied a protest against the Catholicdoctrine of incessant divine intervention in human affairs, invoked bysacerdotal agency; but this protest was far from being fully made byall the Reforming Churches. The evidence in behalf of government by law, which has of late years been offered by science, is received by many ofthem with suspicion, perhaps with dislike; sentiments which, however, must eventually give way before the hourly-increasing weight ofevidence. 

Shall we not, then, conclude with Cicero, who, quoted by Lactantius, says: "One eternal and immutable law embraces all things and all times?"

CHAPTER X. 

 LATIN CHRISTIANITY IN RELATION TO MODERN CIVILIZATION. 

 For more than a thousand years Latin Christianity controlled the intelligence of Europe, and is responsible for the result. 

 That result is manifested by the condition of the city of Rome at the Reformation, and by the condition of the Continent of Europe in domestic and social life. --European nations suffered under the coexistence of a dual government, a spiritual and a temporal. --They were immersed in ignorance, superstition, discomfort. --Explanation of the failure of Catholicism--Political history of the papacy: it was transmuted from a spiritual confederacy into an absolute monarchy. --Action of the College of Cardinals and the Curia-- Demoralization that ensued from the necessity of raising large revenues. 

 The advantages accruing to Europe during the Catholic rule arose not from direct intention, but were incidental. 

 The general result is, that the political influence of Catholicism was prejudicial to modern civilization. 

LATIN Christianity is responsible for the condition and progress ofEurope from the fourth to the sixteenth century. We have now to examinehow it discharged its trust. 

It will be convenient to limit to the case of Europe what has here tobe presented, though, from the claim of the papacy to superhuman origin, and its demand for universal obedience, it should strictly be held toaccount for the condition of all mankind. Its inefficacy against thegreat and venerable religions of Southern and Eastern Asia would furnishan important and instructive theme for consideration, and lead us tothe conclusion that it has impressed itself only where Roman imperialinfluences have prevailed; a political conclusion which, however, itcontemptuously rejects. 

Doubtless at the inception of the Reformation there were many personswho compared the existing social condition with what it had been inancient times. Morals had not changed, intelligence had not advanced, society had little improved. From the Eternal City itself its splendorshad vanished. The marble streets, of which Augustus had once boasted, had disappeared. Temples, broken columns, and the long, arcaded vistasof gigantic aqueducts bestriding the desolate Campagna, presented amournful scene. From the uses to which they had been respectively put, the Capitol had been known as Goats' Hill, and the site of the RomanForum, whence laws had been issued to the world, as Cows' Field. Thepalace of the Caesars was hidden by mounds of earth, crested withflowering shrubs. The baths of Caracalla, with their porticoes, gardens, reservoirs, had long ago become useless through the destruction of theirsupplying aqueducts. On the ruins of that grand edifice, "flowery gladesand thickets of odoriferous trees extended in ever-winding labyrinthsupon immense platforms, and dizzy arches suspended in the air. " Ofthe Coliseum, the most colossal of Roman ruins, only about one-thirdremained. Once capable of accommodating nearly ninety thousandspectators, it had, in succession, been turned into a fortress in themiddle ages, and then into a stone-quarry to furnish material for thepalaces of degenerate Roman princes. Some of the popes had occupied itas a woollen-mill, some as a saltpetre factory; some had planned theconversion of its magnificent arcades into shops for tradesmen. The ironclamps which bound its stones together had been stolen. The walls werefissured and falling. Even in our own times botanical works have beencomposed on the plants which have made this noble wreck their home. "TheFlora of the Coliseum" contains four hundred and twenty species. Among the ruins of classical buildings might be seen broken columns, cypresses, and mouldy frescoes, dropping from the walls. Even thevegetable world participated in the melancholy change: the myrtle, whichonce flourished on the Aventine, had nearly become extinct; the laurel, which once gave its leaves to encircle the brows of emperors, had beenreplaced by ivy--the companion of death. 

But perhaps it may be said the popes were not responsible for all this. Let it be remembered that in less than one hundred and forty years thecity had been successively taken by Alaric, Genseric, Rieimer, Vitiges, Totila; that many of its great edifices had been converted intodefensive works. The aqueducts were destroyed by Vitiges, who ruined theCampagna; the palace of the Caesars was ravaged by Totila; then therehad been the Lombard sieges; then Robert Guiscard and his Normans hadburnt the city from the Antonine Column to the Flaminian Gate, fromthe Lateran to the Capitol; then it was sacked and mutilated by theConstable Bourbon; again and again it was flooded by inundations of theTiber and shattered by earthquakes. We must, however, bear in mind theaccusation of Machiavelli, who says, in his "History of Florence, " thatnearly all the barbarian invasions of Italy were by the invitations ofthe pontiffs, who called in those hordes! It was not the Goth, northe Vandal, nor the Norman, nor the Saracen, but the popes and theirnephews, who produced the dilapidation of Rome! Lime-kilns had been fedfrom the ruins, classical buildings had become stone-quarries for thepalaces of Italian princes, and churches were decorated from the oldtemples. 

Churches decorated from the temples! It is for this and such as thisthat the popes must be held responsible. Superb Corinthian columns badbeen chiseled into images of the saints. Magnificent Egyptian obeliskshad been dishonored by papal inscriptions. The Septizonium of Severushad been demolished to furnish materials for the building of St. Peter's; the bronze roof of the Pantheon had been melted into columns toornament the apostle's tomb. 

The great bell of Viterbo, in the tower of the Capitol, had announcedthe death of many a pope, and still desecration of the buildingsand demoralization of the people went on. Papal Rome manifested noconsideration, but rather hatred, for classical Rome, The pontiffs hadbeen subordinates of the Byzantine sovereigns, then lieutenants of theFrankish kings, then arbiters of Europe; their government had changed asmuch as those of any of the surrounding nations; there had been completemetamorphoses in its maxims, objects, claims. In one point only it hadnever changed--intolerance. Claiming to be the centre of the religiouslife of Europe, it steadfastly refused to recognize any religiousexistence outside of itself, yet both in a political and theologicalsense it was rotten to the core. Erasmus and Luther heard with amazementthe blasphemies and witnessed with a shudder the atheism of the city. 

The historian Ranke, to whom I am indebted for many of these facts, has depicted in a very graphic manner the demoralization of the greatmetropolis. The popes were, for the most part, at their election, agedmen. Power was, therefore, incessantly passing into new hands. Everyelection was a revolution in prospects and expectations. In a communitywhere all might rise, where all might aspire to all, it necessarilyfollowed that every man was occupied in thrusting some other into thebackground. Though the population of the city at the inception of theReformation had sunk to eighty thousand, there were vast crowds ofplacemen, and still greater ones of aspirants for place. Thesuccessful occupant of the pontificate had thousands of offices to giveaway--offices from many of which the incumbents had been remorselesslyejected; many had been created for the purpose of sale. The integrityand capacity of an applicant were never inquired into; the pointsconsidered were, what services has he rendered or can he render to theparty? how much can he pay for the preferment? An American reader canthoroughly realize this state of things. At every presidential electionhe witnesses similar acts. The election of a pope by the Conclave is notunlike the nomination of an American president by a convention. In bothcases there are many offices to give away. 

William of Malmesbury says that in his day the Romans made a sale ofwhatever was righteous and sacred for gold. After his time there wasno improvement; the Church degenerated into an instrument for theexploitation of money. Vast sums were collected in Italy; vast sumswere drawn under all manner of pretenses from surrounding and reluctantcountries. Of these the most nefarious was the sale of indulgencesfor the perpetration of sin. Italian religion had become the art ofplundering the people. 

For more than a thousand years the sovereign pontiffs had been rulersof the city. True, it had witnessed many scenes of devastation for whichthey were not responsible; but they were responsible for this, that theyhad never made any vigorous, any persistent effort for its material, itsmoral improvement. Instead of being in these respects an exemplar forthe imitation of the world, it became an exemplar of a condition thatought to be shunned. Things steadily went on from bad to worse, untilat the epoch of the Reformation no pious stranger could visit it withoutbeing shocked. 

The papacy, repudiating science as absolutely incompatible with itspretensions, had in later years addressed itself to the encouragement ofart. But music and painting, though they may be exquisite adornmentsof life, contain no living force that can develop a weak nation into astrong one; nothing that can permanently assure the material well-beingor happiness of communities; and hence at the time of the Reformation, to one who thoughtfully considered her condition, Rome had lost allliving energy. She was no longer the arbiter of the physical or thereligious progress of the world. For the progressive maxims of therepublic and the empire, she had substituted the stationary maxims ofthe papacy. She had the appearance of piety and the possession of art. In this she resembled one of those friar-corpses which we still see intheir brown cowls in the vaults of the Cappuccini, with a breviary orsome withered flowers in its hands. 

From this view of the Eternal City, this survey of what LatinChristianity had done for Rome itself, let us turn to the whole EuropeanContinent. Let us try to determine the true value of the system that wasguiding society; let us judge it by its fruits. 

The condition of nations as to their well-being is most preciselyrepresented by the variations of their population. Forms of governmenthave very little influence on population, but policy may control itcompletely. 

It has been very satisfactorily shown by authors who have givenattention to the subject, that the variations of population dependupon the interbalancing of the generative force of society and theresistances to life. 

By the generative force of society is meant that instinct whichmanifests itself in the multiplication of the race. To some extent itdepends on climate; but, since the climate of Europe did not sensiblychange between the fourth and the sixteenth centuries, we may regardthis force as having been, on that continent, during the period underconsideration, invariable. 

By the resistances to life is meant whatever tends to make individualexistence more difficult of support. Among such may be enumeratedinsufficient food, inadequate clothing, imperfect shelter. 

It is also known that, if the resistances become inappreciable, thegenerative force will double a population in twenty-five years. 

The resistances operate in two modes: 1. Physically; since they diminishthe number of births, and shorten the term of the life of all. 2. Intellectually; since, in a moral, and particularly in a religiouscommunity, they postpone marriage, by causing individuals to declineits responsibilities until they feel that they are competent to meetthe charges and cares of a family. Hence the explanation of along-recognized fact, that the number of marriages during a given periodhas a connection with the price of food. 

The increase of population keeps pace with the increase of food; and, indeed, such being the power of the generative force, it overpasses themeans of subsistence, establishing a constant pressure upon them. Underthese circumstances, it necessarily happens that a certain amount ofdestitution must occur. Individuals have come into existence who must bestarved. 

As illustrations of the variations that have occurred in the populationof different countries, may be mentioned the immense diminution of thatof Italy in consequence of the wars of Justinian; the depopulation ofNorth Africa in consequence of theological quarrels; its restorationthrough the establishment of Mohammedanism; the increase of that of allEurope through the feudal system, when estates became more valuable inproportion to the number of retainers they could supply. The crusadescaused a sensible diminution, not only through the enormous army losses, but also by reason of the withdrawal of so many able-bodied menfrom marriage-life. Similar variations have occurred on the AmericanContinent. The population of Mexico was very quickly diminished by twomillion through the rapacity and atrocious cruelty of the Spaniards, whodrove the civilized Indians to despair. The same happened in Peru. 

The population of England at the Norman conquest was about two million. In five hundred years it had scarcely doubled. It may be supposed thatthis stationary condition was to some extent induced by the papal policyof the enforcement of celibacy in the clergy. The "legal generativeforce" was doubtless affected by that policy, the "actual generativeforce" was not. For those who have made this subject their study havelong ago been satisfied that public celibacy is private wickedness. Thismainly determined the laity, as well as the government in England, tosuppress the monasteries. It was openly asserted that there were onehundred thousand women in England made dissolute by the clergy. 

In my history of the "American Civil War, " I have presented somereflections on this point, which I will take the liberty of quotinghere: "What, then, does this stationary condition of the populationmean? It means, food obtained with hardship, insufficient clothing, personal uncleanness, cabins that could not keep out the weather, the destructive effects of cold and heat, miasm, want of sanitaryprovisions, absence of physicians, uselessness of shrine-cure, thedeceptiveness of miracles, in which society was putting its trust; or, to sum up a long catalogue of sorrows, wants, and sufferings, in oneterm--it means a high death-rate. 

"But more; it means deficient births. And what does that point out?Marriage postponed, licentious life, private wickedness, demoralizedsociety. 

"To an American, who lives in a country that was yesterday aninterminable and impenetrable desert, but which to-day is filling witha population doubling itself every twenty-five years at the prescribedrate, this awful waste of actual and contingent life cannot but be amost surprising fact. His curiosity will lead him to inquire what kindof system that could have been which was pretending to guide anddevelop society, but which must be held responsible for this prodigiousdestruction, excelling, in its insidious result, war, pestilence, andfamine combined; insidious, for men were actually believing that itsecured their highest temporal interests. How different now! In England, the same geographical surface is sustaining ten times the populationof that day, and sending forth its emigrating swarms. Let him, who looksback, with veneration on the past, settle in his own mind what such asystem could have been worth. "

These variations in the population of Europe have been attended withchanges in distribution. The centre of population has passed northwardsince the establishment of Christianity in the Roman Empire. Ithas since passed westward, in consequence of the development ofmanufacturing industry. 

We may now examine somewhat more minutely the character of theresistances which thus, for a thousand years, kept the population ofEurope stationary. The surface of the Continent was for the mostpart covered with pathless forests; here and there it was dotted withmonasteries and towns. In the lowlands and along the river-courses werefens, sometimes hundreds of miles in extent, exhaling their pestiferousmiasms, and spreading agues far and wide. In Paris and London, thehouses were of wood daubed with clay, and thatched with straw or reeds. They had no windows, and, until the invention of the saw-mill, veryfew had wooden floors. The luxury of a carpet was unknown; some straw, scattered in the room, supplied its place. There were no chimneys; thesmoke of the ill-fed, cheerless fire escaped through a hole in the roof. In such habitations there was scarcely any protection from the weather. No attempt was made at drainage, but the putrefying garbage and rubbishwere simply thrown out of the door. Men, women, and children, sleptin the same apartment; not unfrequently, domestic animals were theircompanions; in such a confusion of the family, it was impossible thatmodesty or morality could be maintained. The bed was usually a bag ofstraw, a wooden log served as a pillow. Personal cleanliness was utterlyunknown; great officers of state, even dignitaries so high as theArchbishop of Canterbury, swarmed with vermin; such, it is related, wasthe condition of Thomas a Becket, the antagonist of an English king. Toconceal personal impurity, perfumes were necessarily and profuselyused. The citizen clothed himself in leather, a garment which, with itsever-accumulating impurity, might last for many years. He was consideredto be in circumstances of ease, if he could procure fresh meat oncea week for his dinner. The streets had no sewers; they were withoutpavement or lamps. After nightfall, the chamber-shatters were thrownopen, and slops unceremoniously emptied down, to the discomfiture of thewayfarer tracking his path through the narrow streets, with his dismallantern in his hand. 

Aeneas Sylvius, who afterward became Pope Pius II. , and was therefore avery competent and impartial writer, has left us a graphic account ofa journey he made to the British Islands, about 1430. He describes thehouses of the peasantry as constructed of stones put together withoutmortar; the roofs were of turf, a stiffened bull's-hide served for adoor. The food consisted of coarse vegetable products, such as peas, and even the bark of trees. In some places they were unacquainted withbread. 

Cabins of reeds plastered with mud, houses of wattled stakes, chimneyless peat-fires from which there was scarcely an escape for thesmoke, dens of physical and moral pollution swarming with vermin, wispsof straw twisted round the limbs to keep off the cold, the ague-strickenpeasant, with no help except shrine-cure! How was it possible that thepopulation could increase? Shall we, then, wonder that, in the famine of1030, human flesh was cooked and sold; or that, in that of 1258, fifteenthousand persons died of hunger in London? Shall we wonder that, in someof the invasions of the plague, the deaths were so frightfully numerousthat the living could hardly bury the dead? By that of 1348, which camefrom the East along the lines of commercial travel, and spread all overEurope, one-third of the population of France was destroyed. 

Such was the condition of the peasantry, and of the common inhabitantsof cities. Not much better was that of the nobles. William ofMalmesbury, speaking of the degraded manners of the Anglo-Saxons, says:"Their nobles, devoted to gluttony and voluptuousness, never visited thechurch, but the matins and the mass were read over to them by a hurryingpriest in their bedchambers, before they rose, themselves not listening. The common people were a prey to the more powerful; their property wasseized, their bodies dragged away to distant countries; their maidenswere either thrown into a brothel, or sold for slaves. Drinking dayand night was the general pursuit; vices, the companions of inebriety, followed, effeminating the manly mind. " The baronial castles were densof robbers. The Saxon chronicler records how men and women were caughtand dragged into those strongholds, hung up by their thumbs or feet, fire applied to them, knotted strings twisted round their heads, andmany other torments inflicted to extort ransom. 

All over Europe, the great and profitable political offices were filledby ecclesiastics. In every country there was a dual government: 1. That of a local kind, represented by a temporal sovereign; 2. That ofa foreign kind, acknowledging the authority of the pope, This Romaninfluence was, in the nature of things, superior to the local; itexpressed the sovereign will of one man over all the nations ofthe continent conjointly, and gathered overwhelming power from itscompactness and unity. The local influence was necessarily of a feeblenature, since it was commonly weakened by the rivalries of conterminousstates, and the dissensions dexterously provoked by its competitor. Onnot a single occasion could the various European states form a coalitionagainst their common antagonist. Whenever a question arose, they wereskillfully taken in detail, and commonly mastered. The ostensibleobject of papal intrusion was to secure for the different peoples moralwell-being; the real object was to obtain large revenues, and givesupport to vast bodies of ecclesiastics. The revenues thus abstractedwere not infrequently many times greater than those passing into thetreasury of the local power. Thus, on the occasion of Innocent IV. Demanding provision to be made for three hundred additional Italianclergy by the Church of England, and that one of his nephews--a mereboy--should have a stall in Lincoln Cathedral, it was found that the sumalready annually abstracted by foreign ecclesiastics from England wasthrice that which went into the coffers of the king. 

While thus the higher clergy secured every political appointmentworth having, and abbots vied with counts in the herds of slavesthey possessed--some, it is said, owned not fewer than twentythousand--begging friars pervaded society in all directions, pickingup a share of what still remained to the poor. There was a vast body ofnon-producers, living in idleness and owning a foreign allegiance, whowere subsisting on the fruits of the toil of the laborers. It could notbe otherwise than that small farms should be unceasingly merged intothe larger estates; that the poor should steadily become poorer; thatsociety, far from improving, should exhibit a continually increasingdemoralization. Outside the monastic institutions no attempt atintellectual advancement was made; indeed, so far as the laity wereconcerned, the influence of the Church was directed to an oppositeresult, for the maxim universally received was, that "ignorance is themother of devotion. "

The settled practice of republican and imperial Rome was to have swiftcommunication with all her outlying provinces, by means of substantialbridges and roads. One of the prime duties of the legions was toconstruct them and keep them in repair. By this, her military authoritywas assured. But the dominion of papal Rome, depending upon a differentprinciple, had no exigencies of that kind, and this duty accordinglywas left for the local powers to neglect. And so, in all directions, the roads were almost impassable for a large part of the year. A commonmeans of transportation was in clumsy carts drawn by oxen, going at themost but three or four miles an hour. Where boat-conveyance alongrivers could not be had, pack-horses and mules were resorted to forthe transportation of merchandise, an adequate means for the slendercommerce of the times. When large bodies of men had to be moved, thedifficulties became almost insuperable. Of this, perhaps, one of thebest illustrations may be found in the story of the march of the firstCrusaders. These restraints upon intercommunication tended powerfully topromote the general benighted condition. Journeys by individuals couldnot be undertaken without much risk, for there was scarcely a moor or aforest that had not its highwaymen. 

An illiterate condition everywhere prevailing, gave opportunity for thedevelopment of superstition. Europe was full of disgraceful miracles. Onall the roads pilgrims were wending their way to the shrines of saints, renowned for the cures they had wrought. It had always been the policyof the Church to discourage the physician and his art; he interfered toomuch with the gifts and profits of the shrines. Time has brought thisonce lucrative imposture to its proper value. How many shrines are therenow in successful operation in Europe?

For patients too sick to move or be moved, there were no remedies exceptthose of a ghostly kind--the Pater-noster or the Ave. For the preventionof diseases, prayers were put up in the churches, but no sanitarymeasures were resorted to. From cities reeking with putrefying filthit was thought that the plague might be stayed by the prayers of thepriests, by them rain and dry weather might be secured, and deliveranceobtained from the baleful influences of eclipses and comets. But whenHalley's comet came, in 1456, so tremendous was its apparition thatit was necessary for the pope himself to interfere. He exorcised andexpelled it from the skies. It slunk away into the abysses of space, terror-stricken by the maledictions of Calixtus III. , and did notventure back for seventy-five years!

The physical value of shrine-cures and ghostly remedies is measuredby the death-rate. In those days it was, probably, about one intwenty-three, under the present more material practice it is about onein forty. 

The moral condition of Europe was signally illustrated when syphilis wasintroduced from the West Indies by the companions of Columbus. It spreadwith wonderful rapidity; all ranks of persons, from the Holy Father LeoX. To the beggar by the wayside, contracting the shameful disease. Manyexcused their misfortune by declaring that it was an epidemic proceedingfrom a certain malignity in the constitution of the air, but in truthits spread was due to a certain infirmity in the constitution of man--aninfirmity which had not been removed by the spiritual guidance underwhich he had been living. 

To the medical efficacy of shrines must be added that of special relics. These were sometimes of the most extraordinary kind. There were severalabbeys that possessed our Savior's crown of thorns. Eleven had thelance that had pierced his side. If any person was adventurous enoughto suggest that these could not all be authentic, he would have beendenounced as an atheist. During the holy wars the Templar-Knights haddriven a profitable commerce by bringing from Jerusalem to the Crusadingarmies bottles of the milk of the Blessed Virgin, which they sold forenormous sums; these bottles were preserved with pious care in many ofthe great religious establishments. But perhaps none of these imposturessurpassed in audacity that offered by a monastery in Jerusalem, whichpresented to the beholder one of the fingers of the Holy Ghost! Modernsociety has silently rendered its verdict on these scandalous objects. Though they once nourished the piety of thousands of earnest people, they are now considered too vile to have a place in any public museum. 

How shall we account for the great failure we thus detect in theguardianship of the Church over Europe? This is not the result thatmust have occurred had there been in Rome an unremitting care for thespiritual and material prosperity of the continent, had the universalpastor, the successor of Peter, occupied himself with singleness ofpurpose for the holiness and happiness of his flock. 

The explanation is not difficult to find. It is contained in a storyof sin and shame. I prefer, therefore, in the following paragraphs, tooffer explanatory facts derived from Catholic authors, and, indeed, topresent them as nearly as I can in the words of those writers. 

The story I am about to relate is a narrative of the transformation of aconfederacy into an absolute monarchy. 

In the early times every church, without prejudice to its agreement withthe Church universal in all essential points, managed its own affairswith perfect freedom and independence, maintaining its own traditionalusages and discipline, all questions not concerning the whole Church, orof primary importance, being settled on the spot. 

Until the beginning of the ninth century, there was no change in theconstitution of the Roman Church. But about 845 the Isidorian Decretalswere fabricated in the west of Gaul--a forgery containing about onehundred pretended decrees of the early popes, together with certainspurious writings of other church dignitaries and acts of synods. Thisforgery produced an immense extension of the papal power, it displacedthe old system of church government, divesting it of the republicanattributes it had possessed, and transforming it into an absolutemonarchy. It brought the bishops into subjection to Rome, and made thepontiff the supreme judge of the clergy of the whole Christian world. Itprepared the way for the great attempt, subsequently made by Hildebrand, to convert the states of Europe into a theocratic priest-kingdom, withthe pope at its head. 

Gregory VII. , the author of this great attempt, saw that his planswould be best carried out through the agency of synods. He, therefore, restricted the right of holding them to the popes and their legates. Toaid in the matter, a new system of church law was devised by Anselmof Lucca, partly from the old Isidorian forgeries, and partly from newinventions. To establish the supremacy of Rome, not only had a newcivil and a new canon law to be produced, a new history had also tobe invented. This furnished needful instances of the depositionand excommunication of kings, and proved that they had always beensubordinate to the popes. The decretal letters of the popes were put ona par with Scripture. At length it came to be received, throughoutthe West, that the popes had been, from the beginning of Christianity, legislators for the whole Church. As absolute sovereigns in later timescannot endure representative assemblies, so the papacy, when it wishedto become absolute, found that the synods of particular nationalchurches must be put an end to, and those only under the immediatecontrol of the pontiff permitted. This, in itself, constituted a greatrevolution. 

Another fiction concocted in Rome in the eighth century led to importantconsequences. It feigned that the Emperor Constantine, in gratitude forhis cure from leprosy, and baptism by Pope Sylvester, had bestowedItaly and the Western provinces on the pope, and that, in token of hissubordination, he had served the pope as his groom, and led his horsesome distance. This forgery was intended to work on the Frankish kings, to impress them with a correct idea of their inferiority, and to showthat, in the territorial concessions they made to the Church, they werenot giving but only restoring what rightfully belonged to it. 

The most potent instrument of the new papal system was Gratian'sDecretum, which was issued about the middle of the twelfth century. Itwas a mass of fabrications. It made the whole Christian world, throughthe papacy, the domain of the Italian clergy. It inculcated that it islawful to constrain men to goodness, to torture and execute heretics, and to confiscate their property; that to kill an excommunicated personis not murder; that the pope, in his unlimited superiority to all law, stands on an equality with the Son of God!

As the new system of centralization developed, maxims, that in the oldentimes would have been held to be shocking, were boldly avowed--the wholeChurch is the property of the pope to do with as he will; what is simonyin others is not simony in him; he is above all law, and can be calledto account by none; whoever disobeys him must be put to death; everybaptized man is his subject, and must for life remain so, whether hewill or not. Up to the end of the twelfth century, the popes were thevicars of Peter; after Innocent III. They were the vicars of Christ. 

But an absolute sovereign has need of revenues, and to this the popeswere no exception. The institution of legates was brought in fromHildebrand's time. Sometimes their duty was to visit churches, sometimesthey were sent on special business, but always invested with unlimitedpowers to bring back money over the Alps. And since the pope could notonly make laws, but could suspend their operation, a legislation wasintroduced in view to the purchase of dispensations. Monasteries wereexempted from episcopal jurisdiction on payment of a tribute to Rome. The pope had now become "the universal bishop;" he had a concurrentjurisdiction in all the dioceses, and could bring any cases beforehis own courts. His relation to the bishops was that of an absolutesovereign to his officials. A bishop could resign only by hispermission, and sees vacated by resignation lapsed to him. Appeals tohim were encouraged in every way for the sake of the dispensations;thousands of processes came before the Curia, bringing a rich harvest toRome. Often when there were disputing claimants to benefices, thepope would oust them all, and appoint a creature of his own. Often thecandidates had to waste years in Rome, and either died there, or carriedback a vivid impression of the dominant corruption. Germany sufferedmore than other countries from these appeals and processes, and henceof all countries was best prepared for the Reformation. During thethirteenth and fourteenth centuries the popes made gigantic strides inthe acquisition of power. Instead of recommending their favorites forbenefices, now they issued mandates. Their Italian partisans mustbe rewarded; nothing could be done to satisfy their clamors, but toprovide for them in foreign countries. Shoals of contesting claimantsdied in Rome; and, when death took place in that city, the Pope claimedthe right of giving away the benefices. At length it was affirmed thathe had the right of disposing of all church-offices without distinction, and that the oath of obedience of a bishop to him implied political aswell as ecclesiastical subjection. In countries having a dual governmentthis increased the power of the spiritual element prodigiously. 

Rights of every kind were remorselessly overthrown to complete thiscentralization. In this the mendicant orders were most efficient aids. It was the pope and those orders on one side, the bishops and theparochial clergy on the other. The Roman court had seized the rightsof synods, metropolitans, bishops, national churches. Incessantlyinterfered with by the legates, the bishops lost all desire todiscipline their dioceses; incessantly interfered with by the beggingmonks, the parish priest had become powerless in his own village; hispastoral influence was utterly destroyed by the papal indulgences andabsolutions they sold. The money was carried off to Rome. 

Pecuniary necessities urged many of the popes to resort to such pettyexpedients as to require from a prince, a bishop, or a grand-master, whobad a cause pending in the court, a present of a golden cup filledwith ducats. Such necessities also gave origin to jubilees. Sixtus IV. Established whole colleges, and sold the places at three or four hundredducats. Innocent VIII. Pawned the papal tiara. Of Leo X. It was saidthat he squandered the revenues of three popes, he wasted the savingsof his predecessor, he spent his own income, he anticipated that of hissuccessor, he created twenty-one hundred and fifty new offices and soldthem; they were considered to be a good investment, as they producedtwelve per cent. The interest was extorted from Catholic countries. Nowhere in Europe could capital be so well invested as at Rome. Largesums were raised by the foreclosing of mortgages, and not only by thesale but the resale of offices. Men were promoted, for the purpose ofselling their offices again. 

Though against the papal theory, which denounced usurious practices, an immense papal banking system had sprung up, in connection with theCuria, and sums at usurious interest were advanced to prelates, place. Hunters, and litigants. The papal bankers were privileged; all otherswere under the ban. The Curia had discovered that it was for theirinterest to have ecelesiastics all over Europe in their debt. They couldmake them pliant, and excommunicate them for non-payment of interest. In 1327 it was reckoned that half the Christian world was underexcommunication: bishops were excommunicated because they could notmeet the extortions of legates; and persons were excommunicated, under various pretenses, to compel them to purchase absolution at anexorbitant price. The ecclesiastical revenues of all Europe were flowinginto Rome, a sink of corruption, simony, usury, bribery, extortion. Thepopes, since 1066, when the great centralizing movement began, had notime to pay attention to the internal affairs of their own specialflock in the city of Rome. There were thousands of foreign cases, eachbringing in money. "Whenever, " says the Bishop Alvaro Pelayo, "I enteredthe apartments of the Roman court clergy, I found them occupied incounting up the gold-coin, which lay about the rooms in heaps. " Everyopportunity of extending the jurisdiction of the Curia was welcome. Exemptions were so managed that fresh grants were constantly necessary. Bishops were privileged against cathedral chapters, chapters againsttheir bishops; bishops, convents, and individuals, against theextortions of legates. 

The two pillars on which the papal system now rested were the College ofCardinals and the Curia. The cardinals, in 1059, had become electors ofthe popes. Up to that time elections were made by the whole body of theRoman clergy, and the concurrence of the magistrates and citizenswas necessary. But Nicolas II. Restricted elections to the College ofCardinals by a two-thirds vote, and gave to the German emperor theright of confirmation. For almost two centuries there was a strugglefor mastery between the cardinal oligarchy and papal absolutism. Thecardinals were willing enough that the pope should be absolute in hisforeign rule, but the never failed to attempt, before giving himtheir votes, to bind him to accord to them a recognized share in thegovernment. After his election, and before his consecration, he sworeto observe certain capitulations, such as a participation of revenuesbetween himself and the cardinals; an obligation that lie would notremove them, but would permit them to assemble twice a year to discusswhether he had kept his oath. Repeatedly the popes broke their oath. Onone side, the cardinals wanted a larger share in the church governmentand emoluments; on the other, the popes refused to surrender revenues orpower. The cardinals wanted to be conspicuous in pomp and extravagance, and for this vast sums were requisite. In one instance, not fewer thanfive hundred benefices were held by one of them; their friends andretainers must be supplied, their families enriched. It was affirmedthat the whole revenues of France were insufficient to meet theirexpenditures. In their rivalries it sometimes happened that no popewas elected for several years. It seemed as if they wanted to show howeasily the Church could get on without the Vicar of Christ. 

Toward the close of the eleventh century the Roman Church became theRoman court. In place of the Christian sheep gently following theirshepherd in the holy precincts of the city, there had arisen achancery of writers, notaries, tax-gatherers, where transactions aboutprivileges, dispensations, exemptions, were carried on; and suitorswent with petitions from door to door. Rome was a rallying-point forplace-hunters of every nation. In presence of the enormous mass ofbusiness-processes, graces, indulgences, absolutions, commands, anddecisions, addressed to all parts of Europe and Asia, the functionsof the local church sank into insignificance. Several hundred persons, whose home was the Curia, were required. Their aim was to rise in it byenlarging the profits of the papal treasury. The whole Christianworld had become tributary to it. Here every vestige of religion haddisappeared; its members were busy with politics, litigations, andprocesses; not a word could be heard about spiritual concerns. Everystroke of the pen had its price. Benefices, dispensations, licenses, absolutions, indulgences, privileges, were bought and sold likemerchandise. The suitor had to bribe every one, from the doorkeeperto the pope, or his case was lost. Poor men could neither attainpreferment, nor hope for it; and the result was, that every cleric felthe had a right to follow the example he had seen at Rome, and thathe might make profits out of his spiritual ministries and sacraments, having bought the right to do so at Rome, and having no other way topay off his debt. The transference of power from Italians to Frenchmen, through the removal of the Curia to Avignon, produced no change--onlythe Italians felt that the enrichment of Italian families had slippedout of their grasp. They had learned to consider the papacy as theirappanage, and that they, under the Christian dispensation, were God'schosen people, as the Jews had been under the Mosaic. 

At the end of the thirteenth century a new kingdom was discovered, capable of yielding immense revenues. This was Purgatory. It was shownthat the pope could empty it by his indulgences. In this there was noneed of hypocrisy. Things were done openly. The original germ of theapostolic primacy had now expanded into a colossal monarchy. 

NEED OF A GENERAL COUNCIL. The Inquisition had made the papal systemirresistible. All opposition must be punished with death by fire. A merethought, without having betrayed itself by outward sign, was consideredas guilt. As time went on, this practice of the Inquisition becamemore and more atrocious. Torture was resorted to on mere suspicion. The accused was not allowed to know the name of his accuser. He wasnot permitted to have any legal adviser. There was no appeal. TheInquisition was ordered not to lean to pity. No recantation was ofavail. The innocent family of the accused was deprived of itsproperty by confiscation; half went to the papal treasury, half to theinquisitors. Life only, said Innocent III. , was to be left to the sonsof misbelievers, and that merely as an act of mercy. The consequencewas, that popes, such as Nicolas III. , enriched their families throughplunder acquired by this tribunal. Inquisitors did the same habitually. 

The struggle between the French and Italians for the possession of thepapacy inevitably led to the schism of the fourteenth century. For morethan forty years two rival popes were now anathematizing each other, two rival Curias were squeezing the nations for money. Eventually, therewere three obediences, and triple revenues to be extorted. Nobody, now, could guarantee the validity of the sacraments, for nobody could besure which was the true pope. Men were thus compelled to think forthemselves. They could not find who was the legitimate thinker for them. They began to see that the Church must rid herself of the curialisticchains, and resort to a General Council. That attempt was again andagain made, the intention being to raise the Council into a Parliamentof Christendom, and make the pope its chief executive officer. But thevast interests that had grown out of the corruption of ages could notso easily be overcome; the Curia again recovered its ascendency, andecclesiastical trading was resumed. The Germans, who had never beenpermitted to share in the Curia, took the leading part in these attemptsat reform. As things went on from bad to worse, even they at last foundout that all hope of reforming the Church by means of councils wasdelusive. Erasmus exclaimed, "If Christ does not deliver his peoplefrom this multiform ecclesiastical tyranny, the tyranny of the Turk willbecome less intolerable. " Cardinals' hats were now sold, and under LeoX. Ecclesiastical and religious offices were actually put up to auction. The maxim of life had become, interest first, honor afterward. Amongthe officials, there was not one who could be honest in the dark, andvirtuous without a witness. The violet-colored velvet cloaks and whiteermine capes of the cardinals were truly a cover for wickedness. 

The unity of the Church, and therefore its power, required the use ofLatin as a sacred language. Through this, Rome had stood in an attitudestrictly European, and was enabled to maintain a general internationalrelation. It gave her far more power than her asserted celestialauthority, and, much as she claims to have done, she is open tocondemnation that, with such a signal advantage in her hands, neveragain to be enjoyed by any successor, she did not accomplish muchmore. Had not the sovereign pontiffs been so completely occupied withmaintaining their emoluments and temporalities in Italy, they might havemade the whole continent advance like one man. Their officials couldpass without difficulty into every nation, and communicate withoutembarrassment with each other, from Ireland to Bohemia, from Italy toScotland. The possession of a common tongue gave them the administrationof international affairs with intelligent allies everywhere, speakingthe same language. 

Not without cause was the hatred manifested by Rome to the restorationof Greek and introduction of Hebrew, and the alarm with which sheperceived the modern languages forming out of the vulgar dialects. Not without reason did the Faculty of Theology in Paris re-echo thesentiment that, was prevalent in the time of Ximenes, "What willbecome of religion if the study of Greek and Hebrew be permitted?" Theprevalence of Latin was the condition of her power; its deterioration, the measure of her decay; its disuse, the signal of her limitation toa little principality in Italy. In fact, the development of Europeanlanguages was the instrument of her overthrow. They formed an effectualcommunication between the mendicant friars and the illiterate populace, and there was not one of them that did not display in its earliestproductions a sovereign contempt for her. 

The rise of the many-tongued European literature was thereforecoincident with the decline of papal Christianity; European literaturewas impossible under Catholic rule. A grand, a solemn, an imposingreligious unity enforced the literary unity which is implied in the useof a single tongue. 

While thus the possession of a universal language so signally securedher power, the real secret of much of the influence of the Church layin the control she had so skillfully obtained over domestic life. Herinfluence diminished as that declined. Coincident with this was herdisplacement in the guidance of international relations by diplomacy. 

CATHOLICITY AND CIVILIZATION. In the old times of Roman domination theencampments of the legions in the provinces had always proved to be fociof civilization. The industry and order exhibited in them presented anexample not lost on the surrounding barbarians of Britain, Gaul, andGermany. And, though it was no part of their duty to occupy themselvesactively in the betterment of the conquered tribes, but rather to keepthem in a depressed condition that aided in maintaining subjection, a steady improvement both in the individual and social condition tookplace. 

Under the ecclesiastical domination of Rome similar effects occurred. Inthe open country the monastery replaced the legionary encampment; in thevillage or town, the church was a centre of light. A powerful effectwas produced by the elegant luxury of the former, and by the sacred andsolemn monitions of the latter. 

In extolling the papal system for what it did in the organization of thefamily, the definition of civil policy, the construction of the statesof Europe, our praise must be limited by the recollection that the chiefobject of ecclesiastical policy was the aggrandizement of the Church, not the promotion of civilization. The benefit obtained by the laity wasnot through any special intention, but incidental or collateral. 

There was no far-reaching, no persistent plan to ameliorate the physicalcondition of the nations. Nothing was done to favor their intellectualdevelopment; indeed, on the contrary, it was the settled policy to keepthem not merely illiterate, but ignorant. Century after century passedaway, and left the peasantry but little better than the cattle in thefields. Intercommunication and locomotion, which tend so powerfully toexpand the ideas, received no encouragement; the majority of men diedwithout ever having ventured out of the neighborhood in which they wereborn. For them there was no hope of personal improvement, none of thebettering of their lot; there were no comprehensive schemes for theavoidance of individual want, none for the resistance of famines. Pestilences were permitted to stalk forth unchecked, or at best opposedonly by mummeries. Bad food, wretched clothing, inadequate shelter, weresuffered to produce their result, and at the end of a thousand years thepopulation of Europe had not doubled. 

If policy may be held accountable as much for the births it prevents asfor the deaths it occasions, what a great responsibility there is here!

In this investigation of the influence of Catholicism, we must carefullykeep separate what it did for the people and what it did for itself. When we think of the stately monastery, an embodiment of luxury, withits closely-mown lawns, its gardens and bowers, its fountains and manymurmuring streams, we must connect it not with the ague-stricken peasantdying without help in the fens, but with the abbot, his ambling palfrey, his hawk and hounds, his well-stocked cellar and larder. He is part ofa system that has its centre of authority in Italy. . To that hisallegiance is due. For its behoof are all his acts. When we survey, asstill we may, the magnificent churches and cathedrals of thosetimes, miracles of architectural skill--the only real miracles ofCatholicism--when in imagination we restore the transcendentlyimposing, the noble services of which they were once the scene, thedim, religious-light streaming in through the many-colored windows, thesounds of voices not inferior in their melody to those of heaven, the priests in their sacred vestments, and above all the prostrateworshipers listening to litanies and prayers in a foreign and unknowntongue, shall we not ask ourselves, Was all this for the sake of thoseworshipers, or for the glory of the great, the overshadowing authorityat Rome?

But perhaps some one may say, Are there not limits to humanexertion--things which no political system, no human power, no matterhow excellent its intention, can accomplish? Men cannot be raised frombarbarism, a continent cannot be civilized, in a day!

The Catholic power is not, however, to be tried by any such standard. It scornfully rejected and still rejects a human origin. It claims tobe accredited supernaturally. The sovereign pontiff is the Vicar of Godupon earth. Infallible in judgment, it is given to him to accomplishall things by miracle if need be. He had exercised an autocratic tyrannyover the intellect of Europe for more than a thousand years; and, thoughon some occasions he had encountered the resistances of disobedientprinces, these, in the aggregate, were of so little moment, that thephysical, the political power of the continent may be affirmed to havebeen at his disposal. 

Such facts as have been presented in this chapter were, doubtless, well weighed by the Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century, andbrought them to the conclusion that Catholicism had altogether failed inits mission; that it had become a vast system of delusion and imposture, and that a restoration of true Christianity could only be accomplishedby returning to the faith and practices of the primitive times. This wasno decision suddenly arrived at; it had long been the opinion of manyreligious and learned men. The pious Fratricelli in the middle ages hadloudly expressed their belief that the fatal gift of a Roman emperor hadbeen the doom of true religion. It wanted nothing more than the voice ofLuther to bring men throughout the north of Europe to the determinationthat the worship of the Virgin Mary, the invocation of saints, theworking of miracles, supernatural cures of the sick, the purchase ofindulgences for the perpetration of sin, and all other evil practices, lucrative to their abettors, which had been fastened on Christianity, but which were no part of it, should come to an end. Catholicism, asa system for promoting the well-being of man, had plainly failed injustifying its alleged origin; its performance had not corresponded toits great pretensions; and, after an opportunity of more than athousand years' duration, it had left the masses of men submitted toits influences, both as regards physical well-being and intellectualculture, in a condition far lower than what it ought to have been. 

CHAPTER XI. 

 SCIENCE IN RELATION TO MODERN CIVILIZATION. 

 Illustration of the general influences of Science from the history of America. 

 THE INTRODUCTION OF SCIENCE INTO EUROPE. --It passed from Moorish Spain to Upper Italy, and was favored by the absence of the popes at Avignon. --The effects of printing, of maritime adventure, and of the Reformation--Establishment of the Italian scientific societies. 

 THE INTELLECTUAL INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE. --It changed the mode and the direction of thought in Europe. --The transactions of the Royal Society of London, and other scientific societies, furnish an illustration of this. 

 THE ECONOMICAL INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE is illustrated by the numerous mechanical and physical inventions, made since the fourteenth century. --Their influence on health and domestic life, on the arts of peace and of war. 

 Answer to the question, What has Science done for humanity?

EUROPE, at the epoch of the Reformation, furnishes us with the result ofthe influences of Roman Christianity in the promotion of civilization. America, examined in like manner at the present time, furnishes us withan illustration of the influences of science. 

SCIENCE AND CIVILIZATION. In the course of the seventeenth century asparse European population bad settled along the western Atlantic coast. Attracted by the cod-fishery of Newfoundland, the French had a littlecolony north of the St. Lawrence; the English, Dutch, and Swedes, occupied the shore of New England and the Middle States; some Huguenotswere living in the Carolinas. Rumors of a spring that could conferperpetual youth--a fountain of life--had brought a few Spaniards intoFlorida. Behind the fringe of villages which these adventurers hadbuilt, lay a vast and unknown country, inhabited by wandering Indians, whose numbers from the Gulf of Mexico to the St. Lawrence did not exceedone hundred and eighty thousand. From them the European strangers hadlearned that in those solitary regions there were fresh-water seas, and a great river which they called the Mississippi. Some said that itflowed through Virginia into the Atlantic, some that it passed throughFlorida, some that it emptied into the Pacific, and some that it reachedthe Gulf of Mexico. Parted from their native countries by the stormyAtlantic, to cross which implied a voyage of many months, these refugeesseemed lost to the world. 

But before the close of the nineteenth century the descendants of thisfeeble people had become one of the great powers of the earth. Theyhad established a republic whose sway extended from the Atlantic tothe Pacific. With an army of more than a million men, not on paper, butactually in the field, they had overthrown a domestic assailant. They had maintained at sea a war-fleet of nearly seven hundred ships, carrying five thousand guns, some of them the heaviest in the world. Thetonnage of this navy amounted to half a million. In the defense of theirnational life they had expended in less than five years more than fourthousand million dollars. Their census, periodically taken, showed thatthe population was doubling itself every twenty-five years; it justifiedthe expectation that at the close of that century it would number nearlyone hundred million souls. 

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. A silent continent had been changed into a scene ofindustry; it was full of the din of machinery and the restless movingof men. Where there had been an unbroken forest, there were hundreds ofcities and towns. To commerce were furnished in profusion some of themost important staples, as cotton, tobacco, breadstuffs. The minesyielded incredible quantities of gold, iron, coal. Countless churches, colleges, and public schools, testified that a moral influence vivifiedthis material activity. Locomotion was effectually provided for. Therailways exceeded in aggregate length those of all Europe combined. In 1873 the aggregate length of the European railways was sixty-threethousand three hundred and sixty miles, that of the American was seventythousand six hundred and fifty miles. One of them, built across thecontinent, connected the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. 

But not alone are these material results worthy of notice. Others of amoral and social kind force themselves on our attention. Four millionnegro slaves had been set free. Legislation, if it inclined to theadvantage of any class, inclined to that of the poor. Its intention wasto raise them from poverty, and better their lot. A career was opento talent, and that without any restraint. Every thing was possible tointelligence and industry. Many of the most important public officeswere filled by men who had risen from the humblest walks of life. If there was not social equality, as there never can be in rich andprosperous communities, there was civil equality, rigorously maintained. 

It may perhaps be said that much of this material prosperity arose fromspecial conditions, such as had never occurred in the case of any peoplebefore, There was a vast, an open theatre of action, a whole continentready for any who chose to take possession of it. Nothing more thancourage and industry was needed to overcome Nature, and to seize theabounding advantages she offered. 

ILLUSTRATIONS FROM AMERICAN HISTORY. But must not men be animated by agreat principle who successfully transform the primeval solitudes intoan abode of civilization, who are not dismayed by gloomy forests, orrivers, mountains, or frightful deserts, who push their conqueringway in the course of a century across a continent, and hold it insubjection? Let us contrast with this the results of the invasion ofMexico and Peru by the Spaniards, who in those countries overthrewa wonderful civilization, in many respects superior to their own--acivilization that had been accomplished without iron and gunpowder--acivilization resting on an agriculture that had neither horse, norox, nor plough. The Spaniards had a clear base to start from, andno obstruction whatever in their advance. They ruined all that theaboriginal children of America had accomplished. Millions of thoseunfortunates were destroyed by their cruelty. Nations that formany centuries had been living in contentment and prosperity, underinstitutions shown by their history to be suitable to them, were plungedinto anarchy; the people fell into a baneful superstition, and agreater part of their landed and other property found its way into thepossession of the Roman Church. 

I have selected the foregoing illustration, drawn from American history, in preference to many others that might have been taken from European, because it furnishes an instance of the operation of the actingprinciple least interfered with by extraneous conditions. Europeanpolitical progress is less simple than American. 

QUARREL BETWEEN FRANCE AND THE PAPACY. Before considering its mannerof action, and its results, I will briefly relate how the scientificprinciple found an introduction into Europe. 

INTRODUCTION OF SCIENCE INTO EUROPE. Not only had the Crusades, for manyyears, brought vast sums to Rome, extorted from the fears or the pietyof every Christian nation; they had also increased the papal power to amost dangerous extent. In the dual governments everywhere prevailing inEurope, the spiritual had obtained the mastery; the temporal was littlebetter than its servant. 

From all quarters, and under all kinds of pretenses, streams of moneywere steadily flowing into Italy. The temporal princes found that therewere left for them inadequate and impoverished revenues. Philip theFair, King of France (A. D. 1300), not only determined to check thisdrain from his dominions, by prohibiting the export of gold andsilver without his license; he also resolved that the clergy and theecclesiastical estates should pay their share of taxes to him. This brought on a mortal contest with the papacy. The king wasexcommunicated, and, in retaliation, he accused the pope, BonifaceVIII. , of atheism; demanding that he should be tried by a generalcouncil. He sent some trusty persons into Italy, who seized Boniface inhis palace at Anagni, and treated him with so much severity, that in afew days he died. The succeeding pontiff, Benedict XI. , was poisoned. 

The French king was determined that the papacy should be purified andreformed; that it should no longer be the appanage of a few Italianfamilies, who were dexterously transmuting the credulity of Europe intocoin--that French influence should prevail in it. He Therefore came toan understanding with the cardinals; a French archbishop was elevatedto the pontificate; he took the name of Clement V. The papal court wasremoved to Avignon, in France, and Rome was abandoned as the metropolisof Christianity. 

MOORISH SCIENCE INTRODUCED THROUGH FRANCE. Seventy years elapsed beforethe papacy was restored to the Eternal City (A. D. 1376). The diminutionof its influence in the peninsula, that had thus occurred, gaveopportunity for the memorable intellectual movement which soonmanifested itself in the great commercial cities of Upper Italy. Contemporaneously, also, there were other propitious events. The resultof the Crusades had shaken the faith of all Christendom. In an age whenthe test of the ordeal of battle was universally accepted, those warshad ended in leaving the Holy Land in the hands of the Saracens; themany thousand Christian warriors who had returned from them did nothesitate to declare that they had found their antagonists not such ashad been pictured by the Church, but valiant, courteous, just. Throughthe gay cities of the South of France a love of romantic literaturehad been spreading; the wandering troubadours had been singing theirsongs--songs far from being restricted to ladye-love and feats of war;often their burden was the awful atrocities that had been perpetratedby papal authority--the religious massacres of Languedoc; often theirburden was the illicit amours of the clergy. From Moorish Spain thegentle and gallant idea of chivalry had been brought, and with it thenoble sentiment of "personal honor, " destined in the course of time togive a code of its own to Europe. 

EFFECT OF THE GREAT SCHISM. The return of the papacy to Rome was farfrom restoring the influence of the popes over the Italian Peninsula. More than two generations had passed away since their departure, and, had they come back even in their original strength, they could nothave resisted the intellectual progress that had been made during theirabsence. The papacy, however, came back not to rule, but to be dividedagainst itself, to encounter the Great Schism. Out of its dissensionsemerged two rival popes; eventually there were three, each pressinghis claims upon the religious, each cursing his rival. A sentimentof indignation soon spread all over Europe, a determination that theshameful scenes which were then enacting should be ended. How could thedogma of a Vicar of God upon earth, the dogma of an infallible pope, be sustained in presence of such scandals? Herein lay the cause of thatresolution of the ablest ecclesiastics of those times (which, alas forEurope! could not be carried into effect), that a general council shouldbe made the permanent religious parliament of the whole continent, with the pope as its chief executive officer. Had that intention beenaccomplished, there would have been at this day no conflict betweenscience and religion; the convulsion of the Reformation would have beenavoided; there would have been no jarring Protestant sects. But theCouncils of Constance and Basle failed to shake off the Italian yoke, failed to attain that noble result. 

Catholicism was thus weakening; as its leaden pressure lifted, theintellect of man expanded. The Saracens had invented the method ofmaking paper from linen rags and from cotton. The Venetians had broughtfrom China to Europe the art of printing. The former of these inventionswas essential to the latter. Hence forth, without the possibility of acheck, there was intellectual intercommunication among all men. 

INVENTION OF PRINTING. The invention of printing was a severe blow toCatholicism, which had, previously, enjoyed the inappreciable advantageof a monopoly of intercommunication. From its central seat, orders couldbe disseminated through all the ecclesiastical ranks, and fulminatedthrough the pulpits. This monopoly and the amazing power it conferredwere destroyed by the press. In modern times, the influence of thepulpit has become insignificant. The pulpit has been thoroughlysupplanted by the newspaper. 

Yet, Catholicism did not yield its ancient advantage without a struggle. As soon as the inevitable tendency of the new art was detected, arestraint upon it, under the form of a censorship, was attempted. It wasmade necessary to have a permit, in order to print a book. For this, itwas needful that the work should have been read, examined, and approvedby the clergy. There must be a certificate that it was a godly andorthodox book. A bull of excommunication was issued in 1501, byAlexander VI. , against printers who should publish pernicious doctrines. In 1515 the Lateran Council ordered that no books should be printed butsuch as had been inspected by the ecclesiastical censors, under pain ofexcommunication and fine; the censors being directed "to take the utmostcare that nothing should be printed contrary to the orthodox faith. "There was thus a dread of religious discussion; a terror lest truthshould emerge. 

But these frantic struggles of the powers of ignorance were unavailing. Intellectual intercommunication among men was secured. It culminated inthe modern newspaper, which daily gives its contemporaneous intelligencefrom all parts of the world. Reading became a common occupation. Inancient society that art was possessed by comparatively few persons. Modern society owes some of its most striking characteristics to thischange. 

EFFECTS OF MARITIME ENTERPRISE. Such was the result of bringing intoEurope the manufacture of paper and the printing-press. In like mannerthe introduction of the mariner's compass was followed by imposingmaterial and moral effects. These were--the discovery of America inconsequence of the rivalry of the Venetians and Genoese about the Indiatrade; the doubling of Africa by De Gama; and the circumnavigation ofthe earth by Magellan. With respect to the last, the grandest ofall human undertakings, it is to be remembered that Catholicism hadirrevocably committed itself to the dogma of a flat earth, with thesky as the floor of heaven, and hell in the under-world. Some of theFathers, whose authority was held to be paramount, had, as we havepreviously said, furnished philosophical and religious arguments againstthe globular form. The controversy had now suddenly come to an end--theChurch was found to be in error. 

The correction of that geographical error was by no means the onlyimportant result that followed the three great voyages. The spirit ofColumbus, De Gama, Magellan, diffused itself among all the enterprisingmen of Western Europe. Society had been hitherto living under the dogmaof "loyalty to the king, obedience to the Church. " It had therefore beenliving for others, not for itself. The political effect of that dogmahad culminated in the Crusades. Countless thousands had perished inwars that could bring them no reward, and of which the result had beenconspicuous failure. Experience had revealed the fact that the onlygainers were the pontiffs, cardinals, and other ecclesiastics in Rome, and the shipmasters of Venice. But, when it became known that thewealth of Mexico, Peru, and India, might be shared by any one who hadenterprise and courage, the motives that had animated the restlesspopulations of Europe suddenly changed. The story of Cortez and Pizarrofound enthusiastic listeners everywhere. Maritime adventure supplantedreligious enthusiasm. 

If we attempt to isolate the principle that lay at the basis of thewonderful social changes that now took place, we may recognize itwithout difficulty. Heretofore each man had dedicated his services tohis superior--feudal or ecclesiastical; now he had resolved to gatherthe fruits of his exertions himself. Individualism was becomingpredominant, loyalty was declining into a sentiment. We shall now seehow it was with the Church. 

INDIVIDUALISM. Individualism rests on the principle that a man shallbe his own master, that he shall have liberty to form his own opinions, freedom to carry into effect his resolves. He is, therefore, everbrought into competition with his fellow-men. His life is a display ofenergy. 

To remove the stagnation of centuries front European life, to vivifysuddenly what had hitherto been an inert mass, to impart to itindividualism, was to bring it into conflict with the influencesthat had been oppressing it. All through the fourteenth and fifteenthcenturies uneasy strugglings gave a premonition of what was coming. In the early part of the sixteenth (1517), the battle was joined. Individualism found its embodiment in a sturdy German monk, andtherefore, perhaps necessarily, asserted its rights under theologicalforms. There were some preliminary skirmishes about indulgences andother minor matters, but very soon the real cause of dispute cameplainly into view. Martin Luther refused to think as he was ordered todo by his ecclesiastical superiors at Rome; he asserted that he had aninalienable right to interpret the Bible for himself. 

At her first glance, Rome saw nothing in Martin Luther but a vulgar, insubordinate, quarrelsome monk. Could the Inquisition have laid hold ofhim, it would have speedily disposed of his affair; but, as the conflictwent on, it was discovered that Martin was not standing alone. Manythousands of men, as resolute as himself, were coming up to his support;and, while he carried on the combat with writings and words, they madegood his propositions with the sword. 

THE REFORMATION. The vilification which was poured on Luther and hisdoings was so bitter as to be ludicrous. It was declared that his fatherwas not his mother's husband, but an impish incubus, who had deludedher; that, after ten years' struggling with his conscience, he hadbecome an atheist; that he denied the immortality of the soul; thathe had composed hymns in honor of drunkenness, a vice to which hewas unceasingly addicted; that he blasphemed the Holy Scriptures, andparticularly Moses; that he did not believe a word of what he preached;that he had called the Epistle of St. James a thing of straw; and, aboveall, that the Reformation was no work of his, but, in reality, was dueto a certain astrological position of the stars. It was, however, avulgar saying among the Roman ecclesiastics that Erasmus laid the egg ofthe Reformation, and Luther hatched it. 

Rome at first made the mistake of supposing that this was nothing morethan a casual outbreak; she failed to discern that it was, in fact, theculmination of an internal movement which for two centuries had beengoing on in Europe, and which had been hourly gathering force; that, had there been nothing else, the existence of three popes--threeobediences--would have compelled men to think, to deliberate, toconclude for themselves. The Councils of Constance and Basle taught themthat there was a higher power than the popes. The long and bloody warsthat ensued were closed by the Peace of Westphalia; and then it wasfound that Central and Northern Europe had cast off the intellectualtyranny of Rome, that individualism had carried its point, and hadestablished the right of every man to think for himself. 

DECOMPOSITION OF PROTESTANTISM. But it was impossible that theestablishment of this right of private judgment should end with therejection of Catholicism. Early in the movement some of the mostdistinguished men, such as Erasmus, who had been among its firstpromoters, abandoned it. They perceived that many of the Reformersentertained a bitter dislike of learning, and they were afraid ofbeing brought under bigoted caprice. The Protestant party, having thusestablished its existence by dissent and separation, must, in its turn, submit to the operation of the same principles. A decomposition intomany subordinate sects was inevitable. And these, now that they had nolonger any thing to fear from their great Italian adversary, commencedpartisan warfares on each other. As, in different countries, first oneand then another sect rose to power, it stained itself with crueltiesperpetrated upon its competitors. The mortal retaliations that hadensued, when, in the chances of the times, the oppressed got the betterof their oppressors, convinced the contending sectarians that they mustconcede to their competitors what they claimed for themselves; and thus, from their broils and their crimes, the great principle of tolerationextricated itself. But toleration is only an intermediate stage; and, as the intellectual decomposition of Protestantism keeps going on, thattransitional condition will lead to a higher and nobler state--the hopeof philosophy in all past ages of the world--a social state in whichthere shall be unfettered freedom for thought. Toleration, exceptwhen extorted by fear, can only come from those who are capable ofentertaining and respecting other opinions than their own. It cantherefore only come from philosophy. History teaches us only too plainlythat fanaticism is stimulated by religion, and neutralized or eradicatedby philosophy. 

TOLERATION. The avowed object of the Reformation was, to remove fromChristianity the pagan ideas and pagan rites engrafted upon it byConstantine and his successors, in their attempt to reconcile the RomanEmpire to it. The Protestants designed to bring it back to its primitivepurity; and hence, while restoring the ancient doctrines, they cast outof it all such practices as the adoration of the Virgin Mary andthe invocation of saints. The Virgin Mary, we are assured by theEvangelists, had accepted the duties of married life, and borne to herhusband several children. In the prevailing idolatry, she had ceased tobe regarded as the carpenter's wife; she had become the queen of heaven, and the mother of God. 

DA VINCI. The science of the Arabians followed the invading track oftheir literature, which had come into Christendom by two routes--thesouth of France, and Sicily. Favored by the exile of the popes toAvignon, and by the Great Schism, it made good its foothold in UpperItaly. The Aristotelian or Inductive philosophy, clad in the Saraceniccostume that Averroes had given it, made many secret and not a few openfriends. It found many minds eager to receive and able to appreciateit. Among these were Leonardo da Vinci, who proclaimed the fundamentalprinciple that experiment and observation are the only reliablefoundations of reasoning in science, that experiment is the onlytrustworthy interpreter of Nature, and is essential to the ascertainmentof laws. He showed that the action of two perpendicular forces upon apoint is the same as that denoted by the diagonal of a rectangle, ofwhich they represent the sides. From this the passage to the propositionof oblique forces was very easy. This proposition was rediscovered byStevinus, a century later, and applied by him to the explanation of themechanical powers. Da Vinci gave a clear exposition of the theory offorces applied obliquely on a lever, discovered the laws of frictionsubsequently demonstrated by Amontons, and understood the principle ofvirtual velocities. He treated of the conditions of descent of bodiesalong inclined planes and circular arcs, invented the camera-obscura, discussed correctly several physiological problems, and foreshadowedsome of the great conclusions of modern geology, such as the natureof fossil remains, and the elevation of continents. He explained theearth-light reflected by the moon. With surprising versatility of geniushe excelled as a sculptor, architect, engineer; was thoroughly versed inthe astronomy, anatomy, and chemistry of his times. In painting, hewas the rival of Michel Angelo; in a competition between them, he wasconsidered to have established his superiority. His "Last Supper, " onthe wall of the refectory of the Dominican convent of Sta. Maria delleGrazie, is well known, from the numerous engravings and copies that havebeen made of it. 

ITALIAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES. Once firmly established in the north ofItaly, Science soon extended her sway over the entire peninsula. Theincreasing number of her devotees is indicated by the rise and rapidmultiplication of learned societies. These were reproductions of theMoorish ones that had formerly existed in Granada and Cordova. As ifto mark by a monument the track through which civilizing influences hadcome, the Academy of Toulouse, founded in 1345, has survived to ourown times. It represented, however, the gay literature of the south ofFrance, and was known under the fanciful title of "the Academy of FloralGames. " The first society for the promotion of physical science, theAcademia Secretorum Naturae, was founded at Naples, by BaptistaPorta. It was, as Tiraboschi relates, dissolved by the ecclesiasticalauthorities. The Lyncean was founded by Prince Frederic Cesi at Rome;its device plainly indicated its intention: a lynx, with its eyes turnedupward toward heaven, tearing a triple-headed Cerberus with its claws. The Accademia del Cimento, established at Florence, 1657, held itsmeetings in the ducal palace. It lasted ten years, and was thensuppressed at the instance of the papal government; as an equivalent, the brother of the grand-duke was made a cardinal. It numbered manygreat men, such as Torricelli and Castelli, among its members. Thecondition of admission into it was an abjuration of all faith, and aresolution to inquire into the truth. These societies extricated thecultivators of science from the isolation in which they had hithertolived, and, by promoting their intercommunication and union, impartedactivity and strength to them all. 

Returning now from this digression, this historical sketch of thecircumstances under which science was introduced into Europe, I pass tothe consideration of its manner of action and its results. 

INTELLECTUAL INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE. The influence of science on moderncivilization has been twofold: 1. Intellectual; 2. Economical. Underthese titles we may conveniently consider it. 

Intellectually it overthrew the authority of tradition. It refused toaccept, unless accompanied by proof, the dicta of any master, no matterhow eminent or honored his name. The conditions of admission intothe Italian Accademia del Cimento, and the motto adopted by the RoyalSociety of London, illustrate the position it took in this respect. 

It rejected the supernatural and miraculous as evidence in physicaldiscussions. It abandoned sign-proof such as the Jews in old daysrequired, and denied that a demonstration can be given through anillustration of something else, thus casting aside the logic that hadbeen in vogue for many centuries. 

In physical inquiries, its mode of procedure was, to test the value ofany proposed hypothesis, by executing computations in any special caseon the basis or principle of that hypothesis, and then, by performing anexperiment or making an observation, to ascertain whether the resultof these agreed with the result of the computation. If it did not, thehypothesis was to be rejected. 

We may here introduce an illustration or two of this mode of procedure:

THEORIES OF GRAVITATION AND PHLOGISTON. Newton, suspecting that theinfluence of the earth's attraction, gravity, may extend as far as themoon, and be the force that causes her to revolve in her orbit round theearth, calculated that, by her motion in her orbit, she was deflectedfrom the tangent thirteen feet every minute; but, by ascertaining thespace through which bodies would fall in one minute at the earth'ssurface, and supposing it to be diminished in the ratio of the inversesquare, it appeared that the attraction at the moon's orbit would drawa body through more than fifteen feet. He, therefore, for the time, considered his hypothesis as unsustained. But it so happened that Picardshortly afterward executed more correctly a new measurement of a degree;this changed the estimated magnitude of the earth, and the distance ofthe moon, which was measured in earth-semidiameters. Newton now renewedhis computation, and, as I have related on a previous page, as it drewto a close, foreseeing that a coincidence was about to be established, was so much agitated that he was obliged to ask a friend to complete it. The hypothesis was sustained. 

A second instance will sufficiently illustrate the method underconsideration. It is presented by the chemical theory of phlogiston. Stahl, the author of this theory, asserted that there is a principle ofinflammability, to which he gave the name phlogiston, having the qualityof uniting with substances. Thus, when what we now term a metallic oxidewas united to it, a metal was produced; and, if the phlogiston werewithdrawn, the metal passed back into its earthy or oxidized state. Onthis principle, then, the metals were compound bodies, earths combinedwith phlogiston. 

SCIENCE AND ECCLESIASTICISM. But during the eighteenth century thebalance was introduced as an instrument of chemical research. Now, ifthe phlogistic hypothesis be true, it would follow that a metal shouldbe the heavier, its oxide the lighter body, for the former containssomething--phlogiston--that has been added to the latter. But, onweighing a portion of any metal, and also the oxide producible from it, the latter proves to be the heavier, and here the phlogistic hypothesisfails. Still further, on continuing the investigation, it may be shownthat the oxide or calx, as it used to be called, has become heavier bycombining with one of the ingredients of the air. 

To Lavoisier is usually attributed this test experiment; but the factthat the weight of a metal increases by calcination was establishedby earlier European experimenters, and, indeed, was well known to theArabian chemists. Lavoisier, however, was the first to recognize itsgreat importance. In his hands it produced a revolution in chemistry. 

The abandonment of the phlogistic theory is an illustration of thereadiness with which scientific hypotheses are surrendered, when foundto be wanting in accordance with facts. Authority and tradition pass fornothing. Every thing is settled by an appeal to Nature. It is assumedthat the answers she gives to a practical interrogation will ever betrue. 

Comparing now the philosophical principles on which science wasproceeding, with the principles on which ecclesiasticism rested, we seethat, while the former repudiated tradition, to the latter it was themain support while the former insisted on the agreement of calculationand observation, or the correspondence of reasoning and fact, the latterleaned upon mysteries; while the former summarily rejected its owntheories, if it saw that they could not be coordinated with Nature, thelatter found merit in a faith that blindly accepted the inexplicable, asatisfied contemplation of "things above reason. " The alienation betweenthe two continually increased. On one side there was a sentiment ofdisdain, on the other a sentiment of hatred. Impartial witnesses on allhands perceived that science was rapidly undermining ecclesiasticism. 

MATHEMATICS. Mathematics had thus become the great instrument ofscientific research, it had become the instrument of scientificreasoning. In one respect it may be said that it reduced the operationsof the mind to a mechanical process, for its symbols often saved thelabor of thinking. The habit of mental exactness it encouraged extendedto other branches of thought, and produced an intellectual revolution. No longer was it possible to be satisfied with miracle-proof, or thelogic that had been relied upon throughout the middle ages. Not only didit thus influence the manner of thinking, it also changed the directionof thought. Of this we may be satisfied by comparing the subjectsconsidered in the transactions of the various learned societies with thediscussions that had occupied the attention of the middle ages. 

But the use of mathematics was not limited to the verification oftheories; as above indicated, it also furnished a means of predictingwhat had hitherto been unobserved. In this it offered a counterpartto the prophecies of ecclesiasticism. The discovery of Neptune isan instance of the kind furnished by astronomy, and that of conicalrefraction by the optical theory of undulations. 

But, while this great instrument led to such a wonderful development innatural science, it was itself undergoing development--improvement. Letus in a few lines recall its progress. 

The germ of algebra may be discerned in the works of Diophantus ofAlexandria, who is supposed to have lived in the second century of ourera. In that Egyptian school Euclid had formerly collected the greattruths of geometry, and arranged them in logical sequence. Archimedes, in Syracuse, had attempted the solution of the higher problems by themethod of exhaustions. Such was the tendency of things that, had thepatronage of science been continued, algebra would inevitably have beeninvented. 

To the Arabians we owe our knowledge of the rudiments of algebra; weowe to them the very name under which this branch of mathematics passes. They had carefully added, to the remains of the Alexandrian School, improvements obtained in India, and had communicated to the subjecta certain consistency and form. The knowledge of algebra, as theypossessed it, was first brought into Italy about the beginning of thethirteenth century. It attracted so little attention, that nearly threehundred years elapsed before any European work on the subject appeared. In 1496 Paccioli published his book entitled "Arte Maggiore, " or"Alghebra. " In 1501, Cardan, of Milan, gave a method for the solution ofcubic equations; other improvements were contributed by Scipio Ferreo, 1508, by Tartalea, by Vieta. The Germans now took up the subject. Atthis time the notation was in an imperfect state. 

The publication of the Geometry of Descartes, which contains theapplication of algebra to the definition and investigation of curvelines (1637), constitutes an epoch in the history of the mathematicalsciences. Two years previously, Cavalieri's work on Indivisibles hadappeared. This method was improved by Torricelli and others. The way wasnow open, for the development of the Infinitesimal Calculus, the methodof Fluxions of Newton, and the Differential and Integral Calculusof Leibnitz. Though in his possession many years previously, Newtonpublished nothing on Fluxions until 1704; the imperfect notation heemployed retarded very much the application of his method. Meantime, onthe Continent, very largely through the brilliant solutions of some ofthe higher problems, accomplished by the Bernouillis, the Calculus ofLeibnitz was universally accepted, and improved by many mathematicians. An extraordinary development of the science now took place, andcontinued throughout the century. To the Binomial theorem, previouslydiscovered by Newton, Taylor now added, in his "Method of Increments, "the celebrated theorem that bears his name. This was in 1715. TheCalculus of Partial Differences was introduced by Euler in 1734. It wasextended by D'Alembert, and was followed by that of Variations, by Eulerand Lagrange, and by the method of Derivative Functions, by Lagrange, in1772. 

But it was not only in Italy, in Germany, in England, in France, thatthis great movement in mathematics was witnessed; Scotland had added anew gem to the intellectual diadem with which her brow is encircled, by the grand invention of Logarithms, by Napier of Merchiston. It isimpossible to give any adequate conception of the scientific importanceof this incomparable invention. The modern physicist and astronomerwill most cordially agree with Briggs, the Professor of Mathematics inGresham College, in his exclamation: "I never saw a book that pleasedme better, and that made I me more wonder!" Not without reason did theimmortal Kepler regard Napier "to be the greatest man of his age, in thedepartment to which he had applied his abilities. " Napier died in 1617. It is no exaggeration to say that this invention, by shortening thelabors, doubled the life of the astronomer. 

But here I must check myself. I must remember that my present purpose isnot to give the history of mathematics, but to consider what science hasdone for the advancement of human civilization. And now, at once, recursthe question, How is it that the Church produced no geometer in herautocratic reign of twelve hundred years?

With respect to pure mathematics this remark may be made: Itscultivation does not demand appliances that are beyond the reach ofmost individuals. Astronomy must have its observatory, chemistry itslaboratory; but mathematics asks only personal disposition and afew books. No great expenditures are called for, nor the servicesof assistants. One would think that nothing could be more congenial, nothing more delightful, even in the retirement of monastic life. 

Shall we answer with Eusebius, "It is through contempt of such uselesslabor that we think so little of these matters; we turn our souls tothe exercise of better things?" Better things! What can be better thanabsolute truth? Are mysteries, miracles, lying impostures, better? Itwas these that stood in the way!

The ecclesiastical authorities had recognized, from the outset of thisscientific invasion, that the principles it was disseminating wereabsolutely irreconcilable with the current theology. Directly andindirectly, they struggled against it. So great was their detestationof experimental science, that they thought they had gained a greatadvantage when the Accademia del Cimento was suppressed. Nor was thesentiment restricted to Catholicism. When the Royal Society of Londonwas founded, theological odium was directed against it with so muchrancor that, doubtless, it would have been extinguished, had not KingCharles II. Given it his open and avowed support. It was accused ofan intention of "destroying the established religion, of injuring theuniversities, and of upsetting ancient and solid learning. "

THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. We have only to turn over the pages of itsTransactions to discern how much this society has done for the progressof humanity. It was incorporated in 1662, and has interested itself inall the great scientific movements and discoveries that have since beenmade. It published Newton's "Principia;" it promoted Halley's voyage, the first scientific expedition undertaken by any government; it madeexperiments on the transfusion of blood, and accepted Harvey's discoveryof the circulation. The encouragement it gave to inoculation led QueenCaroline to beg six condemned criminals for experiment, and then tosubmit her own children to that operation. Through its encouragementBradley accomplished his great discovery, the aberration of the fixedstars, and that of the nutation of the earth's axis; to these twodiscoveries, Delambre says, we owe the exactness of modern astronomy. Itpromoted the improvement of the thermometer, the measure of temperature, and in Harrison's watch, the chronometer, the measure of time. Throughit the Gregorian Calendar was introduced into England, in 1752, againsta violent religious opposition. Some of its Fellows were pursued throughthe streets by an ignorant and infuriated mob, who believed it hadrobbed them of eleven days of their lives; it was found necessary toconceal the name of Father Walmesley, a learned Jesuit, who had takendeep interest in the matter; and, Bradley happening to die during thecommotion, it was declared that he had suffered a judgment from Heavenfor his crime!

THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. If I were to attempt to do justice to themerits of this great society, I should have to devote many pages, tosuch subjects as the achromatic telescope of Dollond; the dividingengine of Ramsden, which first gave precision to astronomicalobservations, the measurement of a degree on the earth's surface byMason and Dixon; the expeditions of Cook in connection with the transitof Venus; his circumnavigation of the earth; his proof that scurvy, the curse of long sea-voyages, may be avoided by the use of vegetablesubstances; the polar expeditions; the determination of the density ofthe earth by Maskelyne's experiments at Scheliallion, and by thoseof Cavendish; the discovery of the planet Uranus by Herschel; thecomposition of water by Cavendish and Watt; the determination of thedifference of longitude between London and Paris; the invention ofthe voltaic pile; the surveys of the heavens by the Herschels;the development of the principle of interference by Young, and hisestablishment of the undulatory theory of light; the ventilationof jails and other buildings; the introduction of gas for cityillumination; the ascertainment of the length of the seconds-pendulum;the measurement of the variations of gravity in different latitudes; theoperations to ascertain the curvature of the earth; the polar expeditionof Ross; the invention of the safety-lamp by Davy, and his decompositionof the alkalies and earths; the electro-magnetic discoveries of Oerstedand Faraday; the calculating-engines of Babbage; the measures takenat the instance of Humboldt for the establishment of many magneticobservatories; the verification of contemporaneous magnetic disturbancesover the earth's surface. But it is impossible, in the limited space atmy disposal, to give even so little as a catalogue of its Transactions. Its spirit was identical with that which animated the Accademia delCimento, and its motto accordingly was "Nullius in Verba. " It proscribedsuperstition, and permitted only calculation, observation, andexperiment. 

INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE. Not for a moment must it be supposed that in thesegreat attempts, these great Successes, the Royal Society stood alone. In all the capitals of Europe there were Academies, Institutes, orSocieties, equal in distinction, and equally successful in promotinghuman knowledge and modern civilization. 

THE ECONOMICAL INFLUENCES OF SCIENCE. 

The scientific study of Nature tends not only to correct and ennoblethe intellectual conceptions of man; it serves also to ameliorate hisphysical condition. It perpetually suggests to him the inquiry, how hemay make, by their economical application, ascertained facts subservientto his use. 

The investigation of principles is quickly followed by practicalinventions. This, indeed, is the characteristic feature of our times. Ithas produced a great revolution in national policy. 

In former ages wars were made for the procuring of slaves. A conquerortransported entire populations, and extorted from them forced labor, forit was only by human labor that human labor could be relieved. But whenit was discovered that physical agents and mechanical combinations couldbe employed to incomparably greater advantage, public policy underwent achange; when it was recognized that the application of a new principle, or the invention of a new machine, was better than the acquisition of anadditional slave, peace became preferable to war. And not only so, butnations possessing great slave or serf populations, as was the care inAmerica and Russia, found that considerations of humanity were supportedby considerations of interest, and set their bondmen free. 

SCIENTIFIC INVENTIONS. Thus we live in a period of which acharacteristic is the supplanting of human and animal labor by machines. Its mechanical inventions have wrought a social revolution. We appealto the natural, not to the supernatural, for the accomplishment of ourends. It is with the "modern civilization" thus arising that Catholicismrefuses to be reconciled. The papacy loudly proclaims its inflexiblerepudiation of this state of affairs, and insists on a restoration ofthe medieval condition of things. 

That a piece of amber, when rubbed, will attract and then repel lightbodies, was a fact known six hundred years before Christ. It remained anisolated, uncultivated fact, a mere trifle, until sixteen hundred yearsafter Christ. Then dealt with by the scientific methods of mathematicaldiscussion and experiment, and practical application made of the result, it has permitted men to communicate instantaneously with each otheracross continents and under oceans. It has centralized the world. Byenabling the sovereign authority to transmit its mandates withoutregard to distance or to time, it has revolutionized statesmanship andcondensed political power. 

In the Museum of Alexandria there was a machine invented by Hero, themathematician, a little more than one hundred years before Christ. Itrevolved by the agency of steam, and was of the form that we shouldnow call a reaction-engine. This, the germ of one of the most importantinventions ever made, was remembered as a mere curiosity for seventeenhundred years. 

Chance had nothing to do with the invention of the modern steam-engine. It was the product of meditation and experiment. In the middle of theseventeenth century several mechanical engineers attempted to utilizethe properties of steam; their labors were brought to perfection by Wattin the middle of the eighteenth. 

The steam-engine quickly became the drudge of civilization. It performedthe work of many millions of men. It gave, to those who would have beencondemned to a life of brutal toil, the opportunity of better pursuits. He who formerly labored might now think. 

Its earliest application was in such operations as pumping, wherein mereforce is required. Soon, however, it vindicated its delicacy of touchin the industrial arts of spinning and weaving. It created vastmanufacturing establishments, and supplied clothing for the world. Itchanged the industry of nations. 

In its application, first to the navigation of rivers, and then to thenavigation of the ocean, it more than quadrupled the speed that hadheretofore been attained. Instead of forty days being requisite forthe passage, the Atlantic might now be crossed in eight. But, in landtransportation, its power was most strikingly displayed. The admirableinvention of the locomotive enabled men to travel farther in less thanan hour than they formerly could have done in more than a day. 

The locomotive has not only enlarged the field of human activity, but, by diminishing space, it has increased the capabilities of human life. In the swift transportation of manufactured goods and agriculturalproducts, it has become a most efficient incentive to human industry

The perfection of ocean steam-navigation was greatly promoted by theinvention of the chronometer, which rendered it possible to findwith accuracy the place of a ship at sea. The great drawback on theadvancement of science in the Alexandrian School was the want of aninstrument for the measurement of time, and one for the measurement oftemperature--the chronometer and the thermometer; indeed, the inventionof the latter is essential to that of the former. Clepsydras, orwater-clocks, had been tried, but they were deficient in accuracy. Ofone of them, ornamented with the signs of the zodiac, and destroyed bycertain primitive Christians, St. Polycarp significantly remarked, "Inall these monstrous demons is seen an art hostile to God. " Not untilabout 1680 did the chronometer begin to approach accuracy. Hooke, thecontemporary of Newton, gave it the balance-wheel, with the spiralspring, and various escapements in succession were devised, such as theanchor, the dead-beat, the duplex, the remontoir. Provisions for thevariation of temperature were introduced. It was brought to perfectioneventually by Harrison and Arnold, in their hands becoming an accuratemeasure of the flight of time. To the invention of the chronometermust be added that of the reflecting sextant by Godfrey. This permittedastronomical observations to be made, notwithstanding the motion of aship. 

Improvements in ocean navigation are exercising a powerful influence onthe distribution of mankind. They are increasing the amount and alteringthe character of colonization. 

DOMESTIC IMPROVEMENT. But not alone have these great discoveries andinventions, the offspring of scientific investigation, changed thelot of the human race; very many minor ones, perhaps individuallyinsignificant, have in their aggregate accomplished surprising effects. The commencing cultivation of science in the fourteenth century gavea wonderful stimulus to inventive talent, directed mainly to usefulpractical results; and this, subsequently, was greatly encouraged by thesystem of patents, which secure to the originator a reasonable portionof the benefits of his skill. It is sufficient to refer in the mostcursory manner to a few of these improvements; we appreciate at once howmuch they have done. The introduction of the saw-mill gave wooden floorsto houses, banishing those of gypsum, tile, or stone; improvementscheapening the manufacture of glass gave windows, making possible thewarming of apartments. However, it was not until the sixteenth centurythat glazing could be well done. The cutting of glass by the diamondwas then introduced. The addition of chimneys purified the atmosphereof dwellings, smoky and sooty as the huts of savages; it gave thatindescribable blessing of northern homes--a cheerful fireside. Hithertoa hole in the roof for the escape of the smoke, a pit in the midst ofthe floor to contain the fuel, and to be covered with a lid when thecurfew-bell sounded or night came, such had been the cheerless andinadequate means of warming. 

MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS. Though not without a bitter resistance onthe part of the clergy, men began to think that pestilences are notpunishments inflicted by God on society for its religious shortcomings, but the physical consequences of filth and wretchedness; that the propermode of avoiding them is not by praying to the saints, but by insuringpersonal and municipal cleanliness. In the twelfth century it wasfound necessary to pave the streets of Paris, the stench in them was sodreadful At once dysenteries and spotted fever diminished; a sanitarycondition approaching that of the Moorish cities of Spain, which hadbeen paved for centuries, was attained. In that now beautiful metropolisit was forbidden to keep swine, an ordinance resented by the monksof the abbey of St. Anthony, who demanded that the pigs of that saintshould go where they chose; the government was obliged to compromise thematter by requiring that bells should be fastened to the animals' necks. King Philip, the son of Louis the Fat, had been killed by his horsestumbling over a sow. Prohibitions were published against throwing slopsout of the windows. In 1870 an eye-witness, the author of this book, at the close of the pontifical rule in Rome, found that, in walking theordure-defiled streets of that city, it was more necessary to inspectthe earth than to contemplate the heavens, in order to preserve personalpurity. Until the beginning of the seventeenth century, the streets ofBerlin were never swept. There was a law that every countryman, who cameto market with a cart, should carry back a load of dirt!

Paving was followed by attempts, often of an imperfect kind, atthe construction of drains and sewers. It had become obvious to allreflecting men that these were necessary to the preservation of health, not only in towns, but in isolated houses. Then followed the lightingof the public thoroughfares. At first houses facing the streets werecompelled to have candles or lamps in their windows; next the systemthat had been followed with so much advantage in Cordova and Granada--ofhaving public lamps--was tried, but this was not brought to perfectionuntil the present century, when lighting by gas was invented. Contemporaneously with public lamps were improved organizations fornight-watchmen and police. 

By the sixteenth century, mechanical inventions and manufacturingimprovements were exercising a conspicuous influence on domestic andsocial life. There were looking-glasses and clocks on the walls, mantelsover the fireplaces. Though in many districts the kitchen-fire was stillsupplied with turf, the use of coal began to prevail. The table in thedining-room offered new delicacies; commerce was bringing to it foreignproducts; the coarse drinks of the North were supplanted by the delicatewines of the South. Ice-houses were constructed. The bolting of flour, introduced at the windmills, had given whiter and finer bread. Bydegrees things that had been rarities became common--Indian-corn, thepotato, the turkey, and, conspicuous in the long list, tobacco. Forks, an Italian invention, displaced the filthy use of the fingers. It may besaid that the diet of civilized men now underwent a radical change. Teacame from China, coffee from Arabia, the use of sugar from India, andthese to no insignificant degree supplanted fermented liquors. Carpetsreplaced on the floors the layer of straw; in the chambersthere appeared better beds, in the wardrobes cleaner and morefrequently-changed clothing. In many towns the aqueduct was substitutedfor the public fountain and the street-pump. Ceilings which in the olddays would have been dingy with soot and dirt, were now decorated withornamental frescoes. Baths were more commonly resorted to; there wasless need to use perfumery for the concealment of personal odors. An increasing taste for the innocent pleasures of horticulturewas manifested, by the introduction of many foreign flowers in thegardens--the tuberose, the auricula, the crown imperial, the Persianlily, the ranunculus, and African marigolds. In the streets thereappeared sedans, then close carriages, and at length hackney-coaches. 

Among the dull rustics mechanical improvements forced their way, andgradually attained, in the implements for ploughing, sowing, mowing, reaping, thrashing, the perfection of our own times. 

MERCANTILE INVENTIONS. It began to be recognized, in spite of thepreaching of the mendicant orders, that poverty is the source of crime, the obstruction to knowledge; that the pursuit of riches by commerce isfar better than the acquisition of power by war. For, though it maybe true, as Montesquieu says, that, while commerce unites nations, itantagonizes individuals, and makes a traffic of morality, it alone cangive unity to the world; its dream, its hope, is universal peace. 

MEDICAL IMPROVEMENTS. Though, instead of a few pages, it would requirevolumes to record adequately the ameliorations that took place indomestic and social life after science began to exert its beneficentinfluences, and inventive talent came to the aid of industry, thereare some things which cannot be passed in silence. From the port ofBarcelona the Spanish khalifs had carried on an enormous commerce, andthey with their coadjutors--Jewish merchants--had adopted or originatedmany commercial inventions, which, with matters of pure science, they had transmitted to the trading communities of Europe. The art ofbook-keeping by double entry was thus brought into Upper Italy. Thedifferent kinds of insurance were adopted, though strenuously resistedby the clergy. They opposed fire and marine insurance, on the groundthat it is a tempting of Providence. Life insurance was regarded asan act of interference with the consequences of God's will. Housesfor lending money on interest and on pledges, that is, banking andpawnbroking establishments, were bitterly denounced, and especially wasindignation excited against the taking of high rates of interest, which was stigmatized as usury--a feeling existing in some backwardcommunities up to the present day. Bills of exchange in the present formand terms were adopted, the office of the public notary established, andprotests for dishonored obligations resorted to. Indeed, it may be said, with but little exaggeration, that the commercial machinery now usedwas thus introduced. I have already remarked that, in consequence of thediscovery of America, the front of Europe had been changed. Many richItalian merchants and many enterprising Jews, had settled in HollandEngland, France, and brought into those countries various mercantiledevices. The Jews, who cared nothing about papal maledictions, wereenriched by the pontifical action in relation to the lending of money athigh interest; but Pius II. , perceiving the mistake that had beenmade, withdrew his opposition. Pawnbroking establishments were finallyauthorized by Leo X. , who threatened excommunication of those who wroteagainst them. In their turn the Protestants now exhibited a dislikeagainst establishments thus authorized by Rome. As the theologicaldogma, that the plague, like the earthquake, is an unavoidablevisitation from God for the sins of men, began to be doubted, attemptswere made to resist its progress by the establishment of quarantines. When the Mohammedan discovery of inoculation was brought fromConstantinople in 1721, by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, it was sostrenuously resisted by the clergy, that nothing short of its adoptionby the royal family of England brought it into use. A similar resistancewas exhibited when Jenner introduced his great improvement, vaccination;yet a century ago it was the exception to see a face unpitted bysmallpox--now it is the exception to see one so disfigured. In likemanner, when the great American discovery of anaesthetics was appliedin obstetrical cases, it was discouraged, not so much for physiologicalreasons, as under the pretense that it was an impious attempt to escapefrom the curse denounced against all women in Genesis iii. 16. 

MAGIC AND MIRACLES. Inventive ingenuity did not restrict itself to theproduction of useful contrivances, it added amusing ones. Soon after theintroduction of science into Italy, the houses of the virtuosi began toabound in all kinds of curious mechanical surprises, and, as theywere termed, magical effects. In the latter the invention of themagic-lantern greatly assisted. Not without reason did the ecclesiasticsdetest experimental philosophy, for a result of no little importanceensued--the juggler became a successful rival to the miracle-worker. Thepious frauds enacted in the churches lost their wonder when broughtinto competition with the tricks of the conjurer in the market-place: hebreathed flame, walked on burning coals, held red-hot iron in histeeth, drew basketfuls of eggs out of his mouth, worked miracles bymarionettes. Yet the old idea of the supernatural was with difficultydestroyed. A horse, whose master had taught him many tricks, was triedat Lisbon in 1601, found guilty of being, possessed by the devil, andwas burnt. Still later than that many witches were brought to the stake. 

DISCOVERIES IN ASTRONOMY AND CHEMISTRY. Once fairly introduced, discovery and invention have unceasingly advanced at an acceleratedpace. Each continually reacted on the other, continually they sappedsupernaturalism. De Dominis commenced, and Newton completed, theexplanation of the rainbow; they showed that it was not the weapon ofwarfare of God, but the accident of rays of light in drops of water. DeDominis was decoyed to Rome through the promise of an archbishopric, and the hope of a cardinal's hat. He was lodged in a fine residence, butcarefully watched. Accused of having suggested a concord between Romeand England, he was imprisoned in the castle of St Angelo, and theredied. He was brought in his coffin before an ecclesiastical tribunal, adjudged guilty of heresy, and his body, with a heap of heretical books, was cast into the flames. Franklin, by demonstrating the identity oflightning and electricity, deprived Jupiter of his thunder-bolt. Themarvels of superstition were displaced by the wonders of truth. The twotelescopes, the reflector and the achromatic, inventions of the lastcentury, permitted man to penetrate into the infinite grandeurs ofthe universe, to recognize, as far as such a thing is possible, itsillimitable spaces, its measureless times; and a little later theachromatic microscope placed before his eyes the world of the infinitelysmall. The air-balloon carried him above the clouds, the diving-bellto the bottom of the sea. The thermometer gave him true measures ofthe variations of heat; the barometer, of the pressure of the air. Theintroduction of the balance imparted exactness to chemistry, it provedthe indestructibility of matter. The discovery of oxygen, hydrogen, andmany other gases, the isolation of aluminum, calcium, and other metals, showed that earth and air and water are not elements. With an enterprisethat can never be too much commended, advantage was taken of thetransits of Venus, and, by sending expeditions to different regions, the distance of the earth from the sun was determined. The step thatEuropean intellect had made between 1456 and 1759 was illustrated byHalley's comet. When it appeared in the former year, it was consideredas the harbinger of the vengeance of God, the dispenser of the mostdreadful of his retributions, war, pestilence, famine. By order of thepope, all the church-bells in Europe were rung to scare it away, thefaithful were commanded to add each day another prayer; and, as theirprayers had often in so marked a manner been answered in eclipses anddroughts and rains, so on this occasion it was declared that a victoryover the comet had been vouchsafed to the pope. But, in the mean time, Halley, guided by the revelations of Kepler and Newton, had discoveredthat its motions, so far from being controlled by the supplications ofChristendom, were guided in an elliptic orbit by destiny. Knowing thatNature bad denied to him an opportunity of witnessing the fulfillmentof his daring prophecy, he besought the astronomers of the succeedinggeneration to watch for its return in 1759, and in that year it came. 

INVENTIONS AND DISCOVERIES. Whoever will in a spirit of impartialityexamine what had been done by Catholicism for the intellectual andmaterial advancement of Europe, during her long reign, and what has beendone by science in its brief period of action, can, I am persuaded, cometo no other conclusion than this, that, in instituting a comparison, hehas established a contrast. And yet, how imperfect, how inadequate isthe catalogue of facts I have furnished in the foregoing pages! I havesaid nothing of the spread of instruction by the diffusion of the artsof reading and writing, through public schools, and the consequentcreation of a reading community; the modes of manufacturing publicopinion by newspapers and reviews, the power of journalism, thediffusion of information public and private by the post-office and cheapmails, the individual and social advantages of newspaper advertisements. I have said nothing of the establishment of hospitals, the firstexemplar of which was the Invalides of Paris; nothing of the improvedprisons, reformatories, penitentiaries, asylums, the treatment oflunatics, paupers, criminals; nothing of the construction of canals, ofsanitary engineering, or of census reports; nothing of the invention ofstereotyping, bleaching by chlorine, the cotton-gin, or of the marvelouscontrivances with which cotton-mills are filled--contrivances which havegiven us cheap clothing, and therefore added to cleanliness, comfort, health; nothing of the grand advancement of medicine and surgery, orof the discoveries in physiology, the cultivation of the fine arts, the improvement of agriculture and rural economy, the introductionof chemical manures and farm-machinery. I have not referred to themanufacture of iron and its vast affiliated industries; to those oftextile fabrics; to the collection of museums of natural history, antiquities, curiosities. I have passed unnoticed the great subject ofthe manufacture of machinery by itself--the invention of the slide-rest, the planing-machine, and many other contrivances by which engines canbe constructed with almost mathematical correctness. I have said nothingadequate about the railway system, or the electric telegraph, nor aboutthe calculus, or lithography, the airpump, or the voltaic battery; thediscovery of Uranus or Neptune, and more than a hundred asteroids; therelation of meteoric streams to comets; nothing of the expeditions byland and sea that have been sent forth by various governments for thedetermination of important astronomical or geographical questions;nothing of the costly and accurate experiments they have caused to bemade for the ascertainment of fundamental physical data. I have been sounjust to our own century that I have made no allusion to some of itsgreatest scientific triumphs: its grand conceptions in natural history;its discoveries in magnetism and electricity; its invention of thebeautiful art of photography; its applications of spectrum analysis; itsattempts to bring chemistry under the three laws of Avogadro, of Boyleand Mariotte, and of Charles; its artificial production of organicsubstances from inorganic material, of which the philosophicalconsequences are of the utmost importance; its reconstruction ofphysiology by laying the foundation of that science on chemistry; itsimprovements and advances in topographical surveying and in the correctrepresentation of the surface of the globe. I have said nothing aboutrifled-guns and armored ships, nor of the revolution that has been madein the art of war; nothing of that gift to women, the sewing-machine;nothing of the noble contentions and triumphs of the arts of peace--theindustrial exhibitions and world's fairs. 

What a catalogue have we here, and yet how imperfect! It gives merely arandom glimpse at an ever-increasing intellectual commotion--a mentionof things as they casually present themselves to view. How strikingthe contrast between this literary, this scientific activity, and thestagnation of the middle ages!

The intellectual enlightenment that surrounds this activity has impartedunnumbered blessings to the human race. In Russia it has emancipated avast serf-population; in America it has given freedom to four millionnegro slaves. In place of the sparse dole of the monastery-gate, it hasorganized charity and directed legislation to the poor. It has shownmedicine its true function, to prevent rather than to cure disease. Instatesmanship it has introduced scientific methods, displacing randomand empirical legislation by a laborious ascertainment of social factsprevious to the application of legal remedies. So conspicuous, soimpressive is the manner in which it is elevating men, that the hoarynations of Asia seek to participate in the boon. Let us not forget thatour action on them must be attended by their reaction on us. If thedestruction of paganism was completed when all the gods were broughtto Rome and confronted there, now, when by our wonderful facilities oflocomotion strange nations and conflicting religions are brought intocommon presence--the Mohammedan, the Buddhist, the Brahman-modificationsof them all must ensue. In that conflict science alone will standsecure; for it has given us grander views of the universe, more awfulviews of God. 

AMERICAN AND FRENCH REVOLUTIONS. The spirit that has imparted life tothis movement, that has animated these discoveries and inventions, isIndividualism; in some minds the hope of gain, in other and nobler onesthe expectation of honor. It is, then, not to be wondered at thatthis principle found a political embodiment, and that, during the lastcentury, on two occasions, it gave rise to social convulsions--theAmerican and the French Revolutions. The former has ended in thededication of a continent to Individualism--there, under republicanforms, before the close of the present century, one hundred millionpeople, with no more restraint than their common security requires, willbe pursuing an unfettered career. The latter, though it has modifiedthe political aspect of all Europe, and though illustrated by surprisingmilitary successes, has, thus far, not consummated its intentions; againand again it has brought upon France fearful disasters. Her dual form ofgovernment--her allegiance to her two sovereigns, the political and thespiritual--has made her at once the leader and the antagonist of modernprogress. With one hand she has enthroned Reason, with the other shehas re-established and sustained the pope. Nor will this anomaly in herconduct cease until she bestows a true education on all her children, even on those of the humblest rustic. 

SCIENCE AND CIVILIZATION. The intellectual attack made on existingopinions by the French Revolution was not of a scientific, but of aliterary character; it was critical and aggressive. But Science hasnever been an aggressor. She has always acted on the defensive, and leftto her antagonist the making of wanton attacks. Nevertheless, literarydissent is not of such ominous import as scientific; for literature is, in its nature, local--science is cosmopolitan. 

If, now, we demand, What has science done for the promotion of moderncivilization; what has it done for the happiness, the well-being ofsociety? we shall find our answer in the same manner that we reacheda just estimate of what Latin Christianity had done. The reader of theforegoing paragraphs would undoubtedly infer that there must havebeen an amelioration in the lot of our race; but, when we apply thetouchstone of statistics, that inference gathers precision. Systems ofphilosophy and forms of religion find a measure of their influence onhumanity in census-returns. Latin Christianity, in a thousand years, could not double the population of Europe; it did not add perceptiblyto the term of individual life. But, as Dr. Jarvis, in his report tothe Massachusetts Board of Health, has stated, at the epoch of theReformation "the average longevity in Geneva was 21. 21 years, between1814 and 1833 it was 40. 68; as large a number of persons now live toseventy years as lived to forty, three hundred years ago. In 1693 theBritish Government borrowed money by selling annuities on lives frominfancy upward, on the basis of the average longevity. The contractwas profitable. Ninety-seven years later another tontine, or scaleof annuities, on the basis of the same expectation of life as in theprevious century, was issued. These latter annuitants, however, lived somuch longer than their predecessors, that it proved to be a very costlyloan for the government. It was found that, while ten thousand of eachsex in the first tontine died under the age of twenty-eight, only fivethousand seven hundred and seventy-two males and six thousand fourhundred and sixteen females in the second tontine died at the same age, one hundred years later. "

We have been comparing the spiritual with the practical, the imaginarywith the real. The maxims that have been followed in the earlier and thelater period produced their inevitable result. In the former that maximwas, "Ignorance is the mother of Devotion in the latter, Knowledge isPower. "

CHAPTER XII. 

 THE IMPENDING CRISIS. INDICATIONS OF THE APPROACH OF A RELIGIOUS CRISIS. --THE PREDOMINATING CHRISTIAN CHURCH, THE ROMAN, PERCEIVES THIS, AND MAKES PREPARATION FOR IT. --PIUS IX CONVOKES AN OECUMENICAL COUNCIL--RELATIONS OF THE DIFFERENT EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS TO THE PAPACY. --RELATIONS OF THE CHURCH TO SCIENCE, AS INDICATED BY THE ENCYCLICAL LETTER AND THE SYLLABUS. 

 Acts of the Vatican Council in relation to the infallibility of the pope, and to Science. --Abstract of decisions arrived at. 

 Controversy between the Prussian Government and the papacy. -- It is a contest between the State and the Church for supremacy--Effect of dual government in Europe--Declaration by the Vatican Council of its position as to Science--The dogmatic constitution of the Catholic faith. --Its definitions respecting God, Revelation, Faith, Reason. --The anathemas it pronounces. --Its denunciation of modern civilization. 

 The Protestant Evangelical Alliance and its acts. 

 General review of the foregoing definitions, and acts. -- Present condition of the controversy, and its future prospects. 

PREDOMINANCE OF CATHOLICITY. No one who is acquainted with the presenttone of thought in Christendom can hide from himself the fact that anintellectual, a religious crisis is impending. 

In all directions we see the lowering skies, we hear the mutteringsof the coming storm. In Germany, the national party is arraying itselfagainst the ultramontane; in France, the men of progress are strugglingagainst the unprogressive, and in their contest the political supremacyof that great country is wellnigh neutralized or lost. In Italy, Romehas passed into the hands of an excommunicated king. The sovereignpontiff, feigning that he is a prisoner, is fulminating from the Vaticanhis anathemas, and, in the midst of the most convincing proofs of hismanifold errors, asserting his own infallibility. A Catholic archbishopwith truth declares that the whole civil society of Europe seems to bewithdrawing itself in its public life from Christianity. In England andAmerica, religious persons perceive with dismay that the intellectualbasis of faith has been undermined by the spirit of the age. Theyprepare for the approaching disaster in the best manner they can. 

The most serious trial through which society can pass is encountered inthe exuviation of its religious restraints. The history of Greece andthe history of Rome exhibit to us in an impressive manner how great arethe perils. But it is not given to religions to endure forever. Theynecessarily undergo transformation with the intellectual development ofman. How many countries are there professing the same religion now thatthey did at the birth of Christ?

It is estimated that the entire population of Europe is about threehundred and one million. Of these, one hundred and eighty-five millionare Roman Catholics, thirty-three million are Greek Catholics. OfProtestants there are seventy-one million, separated into many sects. OfJews, five million; of Mohammedans, seven million. 

Of the religious subdivisions of America an accurate numerical statementcannot be given. The whole of Christian South America is Roman Catholic, the same may be said of Central America and of Mexico, as also of theSpanish and French West India possessions. In the United States andCanada the Protestant population predominates. To Australia the sameremark applies. In India the sparse Christian population sinks intoinsignificance in presence of two hundred million Mohammedans and otherOriental denominations. The Roman Catholic Church is the most widelydiffused and the most powerfully organized of all modern societies. Itis far more a political than a religious combination. Its principle isthat all power is in the clergy, and that for laymen there is only theprivilege of obedience. The republican forms under which the Churchesexisted in primitive Christianity have gradually merged into an absolutecentralization, with a man as vice-God at its head. This Churchasserts that the divine commission under which it acts comprises civilgovernment; that it has a right to use the state for its own purposes, but that the state has no right to intermeddle with it; that even inProtestant countries it is not merely a coordinate government, but thesovereign power. It insists that the state has no rights over any thingwhich it declares to be in its domain, and that Protestantism, beinga mere rebellion, has no rights at all; that even in Protestantcommunities the Catholic bishop is the only lawful spiritual pastor. 

It is plain, therefore, that of professing Christians the vast majorityare Catholic; and such is the authoritative demand of the papacy forsupremacy, that, in any survey of the present religious condition ofChristendom, regard must be mainly had to its acts. Its movements areguided by the highest intelligence and skill. Catholicism obeys theorders of one man, and has therefore a unity, a compactness, a power, which Protestant denominations do not possess. Moreover, it derivesinestimable strength from the souvenirs of the great name of Rome. 

Unembarrassed by any hesitating sentiment, the papacy has contemplatedthe coming intellectual crisis. It has pronounced its decision, andoccupied what seems to it to be the most advantageous ground. 

This definition of position we find in the acts of the late VaticanCouncil. 

THE OECUMENICAL COUNCIL. Pius IX. , by a bull dated June 29, 1868, convoked an Oecumenical Council, to meet in Rome, on December 8, 1869. Its sessions ended in July, 1870. Among other matters submitted to itsconsideration, two stand forth in conspicuous prominence--they are theassertion of the infallibility of the Roman pontiff, and the definitionof the relations of religion to science. 

But the convocation of the Council was far from meeting with generalapproval. 

The views of the Oriental Churches were, for the most part, unfavorable. They affirmed that they saw a desire in the Roman pontiff to set himselfup as the head of Christianity, whereas they recognized the Lord JesusChrist alone as the head of the Church. They believed that the Councilwould only lead to new quarrels and scandals. The sentiment of thesevenerable Churches is well shown by the incident that, when, in1867, the Nestorian Patriarch Simeon had been invited by the ChaldeanPatriarch to return to Roman Catholic unity, he, in his reply, showedthat there was no prospect for harmonious action between the East andthe West: "You invite me to kiss humbly the slipper of the Bishop ofRome; but is he not, in every respect, a man like yourself--is hisdignity superior to yours? We will never permit to be introduced intoour holy temples of worship images and statues, which are nothing butabominable and impure idols. What! shall we attribute to Almighty God amother, as you dare to do? Away from us, such blasphemy!"

EXPECTATIONS OF THE PAPACY. Eventually, the patriarchs, archbishops, andbishops, from all regions of the world, who took part in this Council, were seven hundred and four. 

Rome had seen very plainly that Science was not only rapidly underminingthe dogmas of the papacy, but was gathering great political power. Sherecognized that all over Europe there was a fast-spreading secessionamong persons of education, and that its true focus was North Germany. 

She looked, therefore, with deep interest on the Prusso-Austrian War, giving to Austria whatever encouragement she could. The battle of Sadowawas a bitter disappointment to her. 

With satisfaction again she looked upon the breaking out of theFranco-Prussian War, not doubting that its issue would be favorable toFrance, and therefore favorable to her. Here, again, she was doomed todisappointment at Sedan. 

Having now no further hope, for many years to come, from external war, she resolved to see what could be done by internal insurrection, and thepresent movement in the German Empire is the result of her machinations. 

Had Austria or had France succeeded, Protestantism would have beenoverthrown along with Prussia. 

But, while these military movements were being carried on, a movement ofa different, an intellectual kind, was engaged in. Its principle was, torestore the worn-out mediaeval doctrines and practices, carrying them toan extreme, no matter what the consequences might be. 

ENCYCLICAL LETTER AND SYLLABUS. Not only was it asserted that the papacyhas a divine right to participate in the government of all countries, coordinately with their temporal authorities, but that the supremacy ofRome in this matter must be recognized; and that in any question betweenthem the temporal authority must conform itself to her order. 

And, since the endangering of her position had been mainly brought aboutby the progress of science, she presumed to define its boundaries, andprescribe limits to its authority. Still more, she undertook to denouncemodern civilization. 

These measures were contemplated soon after the return of his Holinessfrom Gaeta in 1848, and were undertaken by the advice of the Jesuits, who, lingering in the hope that God would work the impossible, supposedthat the papacy, in its old age, might be reinvigorated. The organ ofthe Curia proclaimed the absolute independence of the Church as regardsthe state; the dependence of the bishops on the pope; of the diocesanclergy on the bishops; the obligation of the Protestants to abandontheir atheism, and return to the fold; the absolute condemnation of allkinds of toleration. In December, 1854, in an assembly of bishops, thepope had proclaimed the dogma of the immaculate conception. Ten yearssubsequently he put forth the celebrated Encyclical Letter and theSyllabus. 

The Encyclical Letter is dated December 8, 1864. It was drawn up bylearned ecclesiastics, and subsequently debated at the Congregation ofthe Holy Office, then forwarded to prelates, and finally gone over bythe pope and cardinals. 

ENCYCLICAL LETTER AND SYLLABUS. Many of the clergy objected to itscondemnation of modern civilization. Some of the cardinals werereluctant to concur in it. The Catholic press accepted it, not, however, without misgivings and regrets. The Protestant governments put noobstacle in its way; the Catholic were embarrassed by it. France allowedthe publication only of that portion proclaiming the jubilee; Austriaand Italy permitted its introduction, but withheld their approval. The political press and legislatures of Catholic countries gave it anunfavorable reception. Many deplored it as likely to widen the breachbetween the Church and modern society. The Italian press regarded it asdetermining a war, without truce or armistice, between the papacy andmodern civilization. Even in Spain there were journals that regretted"the obstinacy and blindness of the court of Rome, in branding andcondemning modern civilization. "

It denounces that "most pernicious and insane opinion, that liberty ofconscience and of worship is the right of every man, and that this rightought, in every well-governed state, to be proclaimed and asserted bylaw; and that the will of the people, manifested by public opinion (asit is called), or by other means, constitutes a supreme law, independentof all divine and human rights. " It denies the right of parents toeducate their children outside the Catholic Church. It denounces "theimpudence" of those who presume to subordinate the authority of theChurch and of the Apostolic See, "conferred upon it by Christ our Lord, to the judgment of the civil authority. " His Holiness commends, tothe venerable brothers to whom the Encyclical is addressed, incessantprayer, and, "in order that God may accede the more easily to our andyour prayers, let us employ in all confidence, as our mediatrix withhim, the Virgin Mary, mother of God, who sits as a queen upon theright hand of her only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, in a goldenvestment, clothed around with various adornments. There is nothing shecannot obtain from him. "

CONVOCATION OF THE COUNCIL. Plainly, the principle now avowed by thepapacy must bring it into collision even with governments which hadheretofore maintained amicable relations with it. Great dissatisfactionwas manifested by Russia, and the incidents that ensued drew forth fromhis Holiness an allocution (November, 1866) condemnatory of the courseof that government. To this, Russia replied, by declaring the Concordatof 1867 abrogated. 

Undeterred by the result of the battle of Sadowa (July, 1866), thoughit was plain that the political condition of Europe was now profoundlyaffected, and especially the relations of the papacy, the pope deliveredan allocution (June 27, 1867), confirming the Encyclical and Syllabus. He announced his intention of convoking an Oecumenical Council. 

Accordingly, as we have already mentioned, in the following year (June29, 1868), a bull was issued convoking that Council. Misunderstandings, however, had now sprung up with Austria. The Austrian Reichsrathhad adopted laws introducing equality of civil rights for all theinhabitants of the empire, and restricting the influence of the Church. This produced on the part of the papal government an expostulation. Acting as Russia had done, the Austrian Government found it necessary toabrogate the Concordat of 1855. 

In France, as above stated, the publication of the entire Syllabus wasnot permitted; but Prussia, desirous of keeping on good terms with thepapacy, did not disallow it. The exacting disposition of the papacyincreased. It was openly declared that the faithful must now sacrificeto the Church, property, life, and even their intellectual convictions. The Protestants and the Greeks were invited to tender their submission. 

THE VATICAN COUNCIL. On the appointed day, the Council opened. Itsobjects were, to translate the Syllabus into practice, to establish thedogma of papal infallibility, and define the relations of religion toscience. Every preparation had been made that the points determined onshould be carried. The bishops were informed that they were coming toRome not to deliberate, but to sanction decrees previously made byan infallible pope. No idea was entertained of any such thing asfree discussion. The minutes of the meetings were not permitted to beinspected; the prelates of the opposition were hardly allowed to speak. On January 22, 1870, a petition, requesting that the infallibility ofthe pope should be defined, was presented; an opposition petition of theminority was offered. Hereupon, the deliberations of the minority wereforbidden, and their publications prohibited. And, though the Curia hadprovided a compact majority, it was found expedient to issue an orderthat to carry any proposition it was not necessary that the vote shouldbe near unanimity, a simple majority sufficed. The remonstrances of theminority were altogether unheeded. 

As the Council pressed forward to its object, foreign authoritiesbecame alarmed at its reckless determination. A petition drawn up by theArchbishop of Vienna, and signed by several cardinals and archbishops, entreated his Holiness not to submit the dogma of infallibility forconsideration, "because the Church has to sustain at present a struggleunknown in former times, against men who oppose religion itself asan institution baneful to human nature, and that it is inopportuneto impose upon Catholic nations, led into temptation by so manymachinations, more dogmas than the Council of Trent proclaimed. " Itadded that "the definition demanded would furnish fresh arms tothe enemies of religion, to excite against the Catholic Church theresentment of men avowedly the best. " The Austrian prime-ministeraddressed a protest to the papal government, warning it against anysteps that might lead to encroachments on the rights of Austria. TheFrench Government also addressed a note, suggesting that a French bishopshould explain to the Council the condition and the rights of France. Tothis the papal government replied that a bishop could not reconcile thedouble duties of an ambassador and a Father of the Council. Hereupon, the French Government, in a very respectful note, remarked that, to prevent ultra opinions from becoming dogmas, it reckoned on themoderation of the bishops, and the prudence of the Holy Father; and, to defend its civil and political laws against the encroachments of thetheocracy, it had counted on public reason and the patriotism of FrenchCatholics. In these remonstrances the North-German Confederation joined, seriously pressing them on the consideration of the papal government. 

On April 23d, Von Arnim, the Prussian embassador, united with Daru, theFrench minister, in suggesting to the Curia the inexpediency of revivingmediaeval ideas. The minority bishops, thus encouraged, demanded nowthat the relations of the spiritual to the secular power should bedetermined before the pope's infallibility was discussed, and that itshould be settled whether Christ had conferred on St. Peter and hissuccessors a power over kings and emperors. 

INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. No regard was paid to this, not even delaywas consented to. The Jesuits, who were at the bottom of the movement, carried their measures through the packed assembly with a high hand. TheCouncil omitted no device to screen itself from popular criticism. Itsproceedings were conducted with the utmost secrecy; all who took part inthem were bound by a solemn oath to observe silence. 

On July 13th, the votes were taken. Of 601 votes, 451 were affirmative. Under the majority rule, the measure was pronounced carried, and, fivedays subsequently, the pope proclaimed the dogma of his infallibility. It has often been remarked that this was the day on which the Frenchdeclared war against Prussia. Eight days afterward the French troopswere withdrawn from Rome. Perhaps both the statesman and the philosopherwill admit that an infallible pope would be a great harmonizing element, if only common-sense could acknowledge him. 

Hereupon, the King of Italy addressed an autograph letter to the pope, setting forth in very respectful terms the necessity that his troopsshould advance and occupy positions "indispensable to the security ofhis Holiness, and the maintenance of order;" that, while satisfyingthe national aspirations, the chief of Catholicity, surrounded by thedevotion of the Italian populations, "might preserve on the banks of theTiber a glorious seat, independent of all human sovereignty. "

To this his Holiness replied in a brief and caustic letter: "I givethanks to God, who has permitted your majesty to fill the last days ofmy life with bitterness. For the rest, I cannot grant certain requests, nor conform with certain principles contained in your letter. Again, Icall upon God, and into his hands commit my cause, which is his cause. I pray God to grant your majesty many graces, to free you from dangers, and to dispense to you his mercy which you so much need. "

THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT. The Italian troops met with but littleresistance. They occupied Rome on September 20, 1870. A manifesto wasissued, setting forth the details of a plebiscitum, the vote to be byballot, the question, "the unification of Italy. " Its result showed howcompletely the popular mind in Italy is emancipated from theology. Inthe Roman provinces the number of votes on the lists was 167, 548; thenumber who voted, 135, 291; the number who voted for annexation, 133, 681;the number who voted against it, 1, 507; votes annulled, 103. TheParliament of Italy ratified the vote of the Roman people for annexationby a vote of 239 to 20. A royal decree now announced the annexation ofthe Papal States to the kingdom of Italy, and a manifesto was issuedindicating the details of the arrangement. It declared that "by theseconcessions the Italian Government seeks to prove to Europe that Italyrespects the sovereignty of the pope in conformity with the principle ofa free Church in a free state. "

AFFAIRS IN PRUSSIA. In the Prusso-Austrian War it had been the hope ofthe papacy, to restore the German Empire under Austria, and makeGermany a Catholic nation. In the Franco-German War the French expectedultramontane sympathies in Germany. No means were spared to exciteCatholic sentiment against the Protestants. No vilification was spared. They were spoken of as atheists; they were declared incapable of beinghonest men; their sects were pointed out as indicating that theirsecession was in a state of dissolution. "The followers of Luther arethe most abandoned men in all Europe. " Even the pope himself, presumingthat the whole world had forgotten all history, did not hesitate to say, "Let the German people understand that no other Church but that of Romeis the Church of freedom and progress. "

Meantime, among the clergy of Germany a party was organized toremonstrate against, and even resist, the papal usurpation. It protestedagainst "a man being placed on the throne of God, " against a vice-Godof any kind, nor would it yield its scientific convictions toecclesiastical authority. Some did not hesitate to accuse thepope himself of being a heretic. Against these insubordinatesexcommunications began to be fulminated, and at length it was demandedthat certain professors and teachers should be removed from theiroffices, and infallibilists substituted. With this demand the PrussianGovernment declined to comply. 

The Prussian Government had earnestly desired to remain on amicableterms with the papacy; it had no wish to enter on a theological quarrel;but gradually the conviction was forced upon it that the question wasnot a religious but a political one--whether the power of the stateshould be used against the state. A teacher in a gymnasium had beenexcommunicated; the government, on being required to dismiss him, refused. The Church authorities denounced this as an attack upon faith. The emperor sustained his minister. The organ of the infallible partythreatened the emperor with the opposition of all good Catholics, andtold him that, in a contention with the pope, systems of government canand must change. It was now plain to every one that the question hadbecome, "Who is to be master in the state, the government or the RomanChurch? It is plainly impossible for men to live under two governments, one of which declares to be wrong what the other commands. If thegovernment will not submit to the Roman Church, the two are enemies. " Aconflict was thus forced upon Prussia by Rome--a conflict in which thelatter, impelled by her antagonism to modern civilization, is clearlythe aggressor. 

ACTION OF THE PRUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. The government, now recognizing itsantagonist, defended itself by abolishing the Catholic department inthe ministry of Public Worship. This was about midsummer, 1871. Inthe following November the Imperial Parliament passed a law thatecclesiastics abusing their office, to the disturbance of the publicpeace, should be criminally punished. And, guided by the principle thatthe future belongs to him to whom the school belongs, a movement arosefor the purpose of separating the schools from the Church. 

THE CHURCH A POLITICAL POWER. The Jesuit party was extending andstrengthening an organization all over Germany, based on the principlethat state legislation in ecclesiastical matters is not binding. Herewas an act of open insurrection. Could the government allow itself to beintimidated? The Bishop of Ermeland declared that he would not obey thelaws of the state if they touched the Church. The government stopped thepayment of his salary; and, perceiving that there could be no peaceso long as the Jesuits were permitted to remain in the country, theirexpulsion was resolved on, and carried into effect. At the close of1872 his Holiness delivered an allocution, in which he touched on the"persecution of the Church in the German Empire, " and asserted that theChurch alone has a right to fix the limits between its domain and thatof the state--a dangerous and inadmissible principle, since under theterm morals the Church comprises all the relations of men to each other, and asserts that whatever does not assist her oppresses her. Hereupon, afew days subsequently (January 9, 1873), four laws were brought forwardby the government: 1. Regulating the means by which a person mightsever his connection with the Church; 2. Restricting the Church in theexercise of ecclesiastical punishments; 3. Regulating the ecclesiasticalpower of discipline, forbidding bodily chastisement, regulating finesand banishments granting the privilege of an appeal to the Royal Courtof Justice for Ecclesiastical Affairs, the decision of which is final;4. Ordaining the preliminary education and appointment of priests. Theymust have had a satisfactory education, passed a public examinationconducted by the state, and have a knowledge of philosophy, history, and German literature. Institutions refusing to be superintended by thestate are to be closed. 

These laws demonstrate that Germany is resolved that she will no longerbe dictated to nor embarrassed by a few Italian noble families; that shewill be master of her own house. She sees in the conflict, not an affairof religion or of conscience, but a struggle between the sovereigntyof state legislation and the sovereignty of the Church. She treats thepapacy not in the aspect of a religious, but of a political power, andis resolved that the declaration of the Prussian Constitution shall bemaintained, that "the exercise of religious freedom must not interferewith the duties of a citizen toward the community and the state. "

DUAL GOVERNMENT IN EUROPE. With truth it is affirmed that the papacy isadministered not oecumenically, not as a universal Church, for allthe nations, but for the benefit of some Italian families. Look at itscomposition! It consists of pope, cardinal bishops, cardinal deacons, who at the present moment are all Italians; cardinal priests, nearly allItalians; ministers and secretaries of the Sacred Congregation in Rome, all Italians. France has not given a pope since the middle ages. Itis the same with Austria, Portugal, Spain. In spite of all attempts tochange this system of exclusion, to open the dignities of the Church toall Catholicism, no foreigner can reach the holy chair. It is recognizedthat the Church is a domain given by God to the princely Italianfamilies. Of fifty-five members of the present College of Cardinals, forty are Italians--that is, thirty-two beyond their proper share. 

The stumbling-block to the progress of Europe has been its dual systemof government. So long as every nation had two sovereigns, a temporalone at home and a spiritual one in a foreign land--there being differenttemporal masters in different nations, but only one foreign masterfor all, the pontiff at Rome--how was it possible that history shouldpresent us with any thing more than a narrative of the strifes of theserival powers? Whoever will reflect on this state of things will seehow it is that those nations which have shaken off the dual form ofgovernment are those which have made the greatest advance. He willdiscern what is the cause of the paralysis which has befallen France. Onone hand she wishes to be the leader of Europe, on the other she clingsto a dead past. For the sake of propitiating her ignorant classes, sheenters upon lines of policy which her intelligence must condemn. Soevenly balanced are the two sovereignties under which she lives, thatsometimes one, sometimes the other, prevails; and not unfrequently theone uses the other as an engine for the accomplishment of its ends. 

INTENTIONS OF THE POPE. But this dual system approaches its close. Tothe northern nations, less imaginative and less superstitious, it hadlong ago become intolerable; they rejected it summarily at the epoch ofthe Reformation, notwithstanding the protestations and pretensionsof Rome, Russia, happier than the rest, has never acknowledged theinfluence of any foreign spiritual power. She gloried in her attachmentto the ancient Greek rite, and saw in the papacy nothing more than atroublesome dissenter from the primitive faith. In America the temporaland the spiritual have been absolutely divorced--the latter is notpermitted to have any thing to do with affairs of state, though in allother respects liberty is conceded to it. The condition of the NewWorld also satisfies us that both forms of Christianity, Catholic andProtestant, have lost their expansive power; neither can pass beyond itslong-established boundary-line--the Catholic republics remain Catholic, the Protestant Protestant. And among the latter the disposition tosectarian isolation is disappearing; persons of different denominationsconsort without hesitation together. They gather their current opinionsfrom newspapers, not from the Church. 

Pius IX. , in the movements we have been considering, has had two objectsin view: 1. The more thorough centralization of the papacy, with aspiritual autocrat assuming the prerogatives of God at its head; 2. Control over the intellectual development of the nations professingChristianity. 

The logical consequence of the former of these is politicalintervention. He insists that in all cases the temporal must subordinateitself to the spiritual power; all laws inconsistent with the interestsof the Church must be repealed. They are not binding on the faithful. In the preceding pages I have briefly related some of the complicationsthat have already occurred in the attempt to maintain this policy. 

THE SYLLABUS. I now come to the consideration of the manner in which thepapacy proposes to establish its intellectual control; how it definesits relation to its antagonist, Science, and, seeking a restorationof the mediaeval condition, opposes modern civilization, and denouncesmodern society. 

The Encyclical and Syllabus present the principles which it was theobject of the Vatican Council to carry into practical effect. TheSyllabus stigmatizes pantheism, naturalism, and absolute rationalism, denouncing such opinions as that God is the world; that there is no Godother than Nature; that theological matters must be treated in the samemanner as philosophical ones, that the methods and principles by whichthe old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitableto the demands of the age and the progress of science; that every manis free to embrace and profess the religion he may believe to be true, guided by the light of his reason; that it appertains to the civilpower to define what are the rights and limits in which the Churchmay exercise authority; that the Church has not the right of availingherself of force or any direct or indirect temporal power; that theChurch ought to be separated from the state and the state from theChurch; that it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion shallbe held as the only religion of the state, to the exclusion of all othermodes of worship; that persons coming to reside in Catholic countrieshave a right to the public exercise of their own worship; that theRoman pontiff can and ought to reconcile himself to, and agree with, theprogress of modern civilization. The Syllabus claims the right of theChurch to control public schools, and denies the right of the state inthat respect; it claims the control over marriage and divorce. 

Such of these principles as the Council found expedient at present toformularize, were set forth by it in "The Dogmatic Constitution ofthe Catholic Faith. " The essential points of this constitution, moreespecially as regards the relations of religion to science, we have nowto examine. It will be understood that the following does not presentthe entire document, but only an abstract of what appear to be its moreimportant parts. 

CONSTITUTION OF CATHOLIC FAITH. This definition opens with a severereview of the principles and consequences of the Protestant Reformation:

"The rejection of the divine authority of the Church to teach, and thesubjection of all things belonging to religion to the judgment of eachindividual, have led to the production of many sects, and, as thesediffered and disputed with each other, all belief in Christ wasoverthrown in the minds of not a few, and the Holy Scriptures began tobe counted as myths and fables. Christianity has been rejected, andthe reign of mere Reason as they call it, or Nature, substituted; manyfalling into the abyss of pantheism, materialism, and atheism, and, repudiating the reasoning nature of man, and every rule of right andwrong, they are laboring to overthrow the very foundations of humansociety. As this impious heresy is spreading everywhere, not a fewCatholics have been inveigled by it. They have confounded human scienceand divine faith. 

"But the Church, the Mother and Mistress of nations, is ever ready tostrengthen the weak, to take to her bosom those that return, and carrythem on to better things. And, now the bishops of the whole worldbeing gathered together in this Oecumenical Council, and the Holy Ghostsitting therein, and judging with us, we have determined to declare fromthis chair of St. Peter the saving doctrine of Christ, and proscribe andcondemn the opposing errors. 

"OF GOD, THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS. --The Holy Catholic Apostolic RomanChurch believes that there is one true and living God, Creator andLord of Heaven and Earth, Almighty, Eternal, Immense, Incomprehensible, Infinite in understanding and will, and in all perfection. He isdistinct from the world. Of his own most free counsel he made alike outof nothing two created creatures, a spiritual and a temporal, angelicand earthly. Afterward he made the human nature, composed of both. Moreover, God by his providence protects and governs all things, reaching from end to end mightily, and ordering all things harmoniously. Every thing is open to his eyes, even things that come to pass by thefree action of his creatures. "

"OF REVELATION. --The Holy Mother Church holds that God can be known withcertainty by the natural light of human reason, but that it has alsopleased him to reveal himself and the eternal decrees of his will in asupernatural way. This supernatural revelation, as declared by theHoly Council of Trent, is contained in the books of the Old and NewTestament, as enumerated in the decrees of that Council, and as are tobe had in the old Vulgate Latin edition. These are sacred because theywere written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. They have God fortheir author, and as such have been delivered to the Church. 

"And, in order to restrain restless spirits, who may give erroneousexplanations, it is decreed--renewing the decision of the Council ofTrent--that no one may interpret the sacred Scriptures contrary to thesense in which they are interpreted by Holy Mother Church, to whom suchinterpretation belongs. "

"OF FAITH. --Inasmuch as man depends on God as his Lord, and createdreason is wholly subject to uncreated truth, he is bound when God makesa revelation to obey it by faith. This faith is a supernatural virtue, and the beginning of man's salvation who believes revealed things tobe true, not for their intrinsic truth as seen by the natural lightof reason, but for the authority of God in revealing them. But, nevertheless that faith might be agreeable to reason, God willed tojoin miracles and prophecies, which, showing forth his omnipotence andknowledge, are proofs suited to the understanding of all. Such we havein Moses and the prophets, and above all in Christ. Now, all thosethings are to be believed which are written in the word of God, orhanded down by tradition, which the Church by her teaching has proposedfor belief. 

"No one can be justified without this faith, nor shall any one, unlesshe persevere therein to the end, attain everlasting life. Hence God, through his only-begotten Son, has established the Church as theguardian and teacher of his revealed word. For only to the CatholicChurch do all those signs belong which make evident the credibility ofthe Christian faith. Nay, more, the very Church herself, in view ofher wonderful propagation, her eminent holiness, her exhaustlessfruitfulness in all that is good, her Catholic unity, her unshakenstability, offers a great and evident claim to belief, and an undeniableproof of her divine mission. Thus the Church shows to her children thatthe faith they hold rests on a most solid foundation. Wherefore, totallyunlike is the condition of those who, by the heavenly gift of faith, have embraced the Catholic truth, and of those who, led by humanopinions, are following, a false religion. "

"OF FAITH AND REASON. --Moreover, the Catholic Church has ever held andnow holds that there exists a twofold order of knowledge, each of whichis distinct from the other, both as to its principle and its object. Asto its principle, because in the one we know by natural reason, in theother by divine faith; as to the object, because, besides those thingswhich our natural reason can attain, there are proposed to our beliefmysteries hidden in God, which, unless by him revealed, cannot come toour knowledge. 

"Reason, indeed, enlightened by faith, and seeking, with diligence andgodly sobriety, may, by God's gift, come to some understanding, limitedin degree, but most wholesome in its effects, of mysteries, both fromthe analogy of things which are naturally known and from the connectionof the mysteries themselves with one another and with man's last end. But never can reason be rendered capable of thoroughly understandingmysteries as it does those truths which form its proper object. ForGod's mysteries, in their very nature, so far surpass the reach ofcreated intellect, that, even when taught by revelation and received byfaith, they remain covered by faith itself, as by a veil, and shrouded, as it were, in darkness as long as in this mortal life. 

"But, although faith be above reason, there never can be a realdisagreement between them, since the same God who reveals mysteries andinfuses faith has given man's soul the light of reason, and God cannotdeny himself, nor can one truth ever contradict another. Wherefore theempty shadow of such contradiction arises chiefly from this, that eitherthe doctrines of faith are not understood and set forth as the Churchreally holds them, or that the vain devices and opinions of men aremistaken for the dictates of reason. We therefore pronounce false everyassertion which is contrary to the enlightened truth of faith. Moreover, the Church, which, together with her apostolic office of teaching, is charged also with the guardianship of the deposits of faith, holdslikewise from God the right and the duty to condemn 'knowledge, falselyso called, ' 'lest any man be cheated by philosophy and vain deceit. 'Hence all the Christian faithful are not only forbidden to defend, aslegitimate conclusions of science, those opinions which are known tobe contrary to the doctrine of faith, especially when condemned by theChurch, but are rather absolutely bound to hold them for errors wearingthe deceitful appearance of truth. "

THE VATICAN ANATHEMAS. "Not only is it impossible for faith and reasonever to contradict each other, but they rather afford each other mutualassistance. For right reason establishes the foundation of faith, and, by the aid of its light, cultivates the science of divine things; andfaith, on the other hand, frees and preserves reason from errors, andenriches it with knowledge of many kinds. So far, then, is the Churchfrom opposing the culture of human arts and sciences, that she ratheraids and promotes it in many ways. For she is not ignorant of nor doesshe despise the advantages which flow from them to the life of man; onthe contrary, she acknowledges that, as they sprang from God, the Lordof knowledge, so, if they be rightly pursued, they will, through the aidof his grace, lead to God. Nor does she forbid any of those sciencesthe use of its own principles and its own method within its own propersphere; but, recognizing this reasonable freedom, she takes care thatthey may not, by contradicting God's teaching, fall into errors, or, overstepping the due limits, invade or throw into confusion the domainof faith. 

"For the doctrine of faith revealed by God has not been proposed, likesome philosophical discovery, to be made perfect by human ingenuity, butit has been delivered to the spouse of Christ as a divine deposit, to befaithfully guarded and unerringly set forth. Hence, all tenets of holyfaith are to be explained always according to the sense and meaning ofthe Church; nor is it ever lawful to depart therefrom under pretense orcolor of a more enlightened explanation. Therefore, as generations andcenturies roll on, let the understanding, knowledge, and wisdom of eachand every one, of individuals and of the whole Church, grow apace andincrease exceedingly, yet only in its kind; that is to say retainingpure and inviolate the sense and meaning and belief of the samedoctrine. "

Among other canons the following were promulgated. 

"Let him be anathema--

"Who denies the one true God, Creator and Lord of all things, visibleand invisible. 

"Who unblushingly affirms that, besides matter, nothing else exists. 

"Who says that the substance or essence of God, and of all things, isone and the same. 

"Who says that finite things, both corporeal and spiritual, or at leastspiritual things, are emanations of the divine substance; or that thedivine essence, by manifestation or development of itself, becomes allthings. 

"Who does not acknowledge that the world and all things which itcontains were produced by God out of nothing. 

"Who shall say that man can and ought to, of his own efforts, by meansof, constant progress, arrive, at last, at the possession of all truthand goodness. 

"Who shall refuse to receive, for sacred and canonical, the books ofHoly Scripture in their integrity, with all their parts, according asthey were enumerated by the holy Council of Trent, or shall deny thatthey are Inspired by God. 

"Who shall say that human reason is in such wise independent, that faithcannot be demanded of it by God. 

"Who shall say that divine revelation cannot be rendered credible byexternal evidences. 

"Who shall say that no miracles can be wrought, or that they can neverbe known with certainty, and that the divine origin of Christianitycannot be proved by them. 

"Who shall say that divine revelation includes no mysteries, but thatall the dogmas of faith may be understood and demonstrated by reasonduly cultivated. 

"Who shall say that human sciences ought to be pursued in such a spiritof freedom that one may be allowed to hold as true their assertions, even when opposed to revealed doctrine. 

"Who shall say that it may at any time come to pass, in the progressof science, that the doctrines set forth by the Church must be taken inanother sense than that in which the Church has ever received and yetreceives them. "

THE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE. The extraordinary and, indeed, it may be said, arrogant assumptions contained in these decisions were far from beingreceived with satisfaction by educated Catholics. On the part of theGerman universities there was resistance; and, when, at the close of theyear, the decrees of the Vatican Council were generally acquiesced in, it was not through conviction of their truth, but through a disciplinarysense of obedience. 

By many of the most pious Catholics the entire movement and the resultsto which it had led were looked upon with the sincerest sorrow. PereHyacinthe, in a letter to the superior of his order, says: "I protestagainst the divorce, as impious as it is insensate, sought to beeffected between the Church, which is our eternal mother, and thesociety of the nineteenth century, of which we are the temporalchildren, and toward which we have also duties and regards. It is mymost profound conviction that, if France in particular, and the Latinrace in general, are given up to social, moral, and religious anarchy, the principal cause undoubtedly is not Catholicism itself, but themanner in which Catholicism has for a long time been understood andpractised. "

Notwithstanding his infallibility, which implies omniscience, hisHoliness did not foresee the issue of the Franco-Prussian War. Had theprophetical talent been vouchsafed to him, he would have detected theinopportuneness of the acts of his Council. His request to the King ofPrussia for military aid to support his temporal power was denied. Theexcommunicated King of Italy, as we have seen, took possession of Rome. A bitter papal encyclical, strangely contrasting with the courteouspoliteness of modern state-papers, was issued, November 1, 1870, denouncing the acts of the Piedmontese court, "which had followed thecounsel of the sects of perdition. " In this his Holiness declares thathe is in captivity, and that he will have no agreement with Belial. Hepronounces the greater excommunication, with censures and penalties, against his antagonists, and prays for "the intercession of theimmaculate Virgin Mary, mother of God, and that of the blessed apostlesPeter and Paul. "

Of the various Protestant denominations, several had associatedthemselves, for the purposes of consultation, under the designation ofthe Evangelical Alliance. Their last meeting was held in New York, inthe autumn of 1873. Though, in this meeting, were gathered together manypious representatives of the Reformed Churches, European and American, it had not the prestige nor the authority of the Great Council that hadjust previously closed its sessions in St. Peters, at Rome. It couldnot appeal to an unbroken ancestry of far more than a thousand years;it could not speak with the authority of an equal and, indeed, ofa superior to emperors and kings. While profound intelligence and astatesmanlike, worldly wisdom gleamed in every thing that the VaticanCouncil had done, the Evangelical Alliance met without a clear andprecise view of its objects, without any definitely-marked intentions. Its wish was to draw into closer union the various Protestant Churches, but it had no well-grounded hope of accomplishing that desirable result. It illustrated the necessary working, of the principle on whichthose Churches originated. They were founded on dissent and exist byseparation. 

Yet in the action of the Evangelical Alliance may be discernedcertain very impressive facts. It averted its eyes from its ancientantagonist--that antagonist which had so recently loaded the Reformationwith contumely and denunciation--it fastened them, as the VaticanCouncil had done, on Science. Under that dreaded name there stood beforeit what seemed to be a spectre of uncertain form, of hourly-dilatingproportions, of threatening aspect. Sometimes the Alliance addressedthis stupendous apparition in words of courtesy, sometimes in tones ofdenunciation. 

THE VATICAN CONSTITUTION CRITICISED. The Alliance failed to perceivethat modern Science is the legitimate sister--indeed, it is thetwin-sister--of the Reformation. They were begotten together andwere born together. It failed to perceive that, though there is animpossibility of bringing into coalition the many conflicting sects, they may all find in science a point of connection; and that, not adistrustful attitude toward it, but a cordial union with it, is theirtrue policy. 

It remains now to offer some reflections on this "Constitution of theCatholic Faith, " as defined by the Vatican Council. 

For objects to present themselves under identical relations to differentpersons, they must be seen from the same point of view. In the instancewe are now considering, the religious man has his own especial station;the scientific man another, a very different one. It is not for eitherto demand that his co-observer shall admit that the panorama of factsspread before them is actually such as it appears to him to be. 

The Dogmatic Constitution insists on the admission of this postulate, that the Roman Church acts under a divine commission, specially andexclusively delivered to it. In virtue of that great authority, itrequires of all men the surrender of their intellectual convictions, andof all nations the subordination of their civil power. 

But a claim so imposing must be substantiated by the most decisive andunimpeachable credentials; proofs, not only of an implied and indirectkind, but clear, emphatic, and to the point; proofs that it would beimpossible to call in question. 

The Church, however, declares, that she will not submit her claim tothe arbitrament of human reason; she demands that it shall be at onceconceded as an article of faith. 

If this be admitted, all bar requirements must necessarily be assentedto, no matter how exorbitant they may be. 

With strange inconsistency the Dogmatic Constitution deprecates reason, affirming that it cannot determine the points under consideration, andyet submits to it arguments for adjudication. In truth, it might be saidthat the whole composition is a passionate plea to Reason to stultifyitself in favor of Roman Christianity. 

With points of view so widely asunder, it is impossible that Religionand Science should accord in their representation of things. Nor canany conclusion in common be reached, except by an appeal to Reason as asupreme and final judge. 

There are many religions in the world, some of them of more venerableantiquity, some having far more numerous adherents, than the Roman. Howcan a selection be made among them, except by such an appeal to Reason?Religion and Science must both submit their claims and their dissensionsto its arbitrament. 

Against this the Vatican Council protests. It exalts faith to asuperiority over reason; it says that they constitute two separateorders of knowledge, having respectively for their objects mysteriesand facts. Faith deals with mysteries, reason with facts. Asserting thedominating superiority of faith, it tries to satisfy the reluctant mindwith miracles and prophecies. 

On the other hand, Science turns away from the incomprehensible, andrests herself on the maxim of Wiclif: "God forceth not a man to believethat which he cannot understand. " In the absence of an exhibition ofsatisfactory credentials on the part of her opponent, she considerswhether there be in the history of the papacy, and in the biography ofthe popes, any thing that can adequately sustain a divine commission, any thing that can justify pontifical infallibility, or extort thatunhesitating obedience which is due to the vice-God. 

One of the most striking and vet contradictory features of the DogmaticConstitution is, the reluctant homage it pays to the intelligence ofman. It presents a definition of the philosophical basis of Catholicism, but it veils from view the repulsive features of the vulgar faith. Itsets forth the attributes of God, the Creator of all things, in wordsfitly designating its sublime conception, but it abstains from affirmingthat this most awful and eternal Being was born of an earthly mother, the wife of a Jewish carpenter, who has since become the queen ofheaven. The God it depicts is not the God of the middle ages, seatedon his golden throne, surrounded by choirs of angels, but the God ofPhilosophy. The Constitution has nothing to say about the Trinity, nothing of the worship due to the Virgin--on the contrary, that is byimplication sternly condemned; nothing about transubstantiation, orthe making of the flesh and blood of God by the priest; nothing of theinvocation of the saints. It bears on its face subordination to thethought of the age, the impress of the intellectual progress of man. 

THE PASSAGE OF EUROPE TO LLAMAISM. Such being the exposition rendered tous respecting the attributes of God, it next instructs us as to hismode of government of the world. The Church asserts that she possesses asupernatural control over all material and moral events. The priesthood, in its various grades, can determine issues of the future, either by theexercise of its inherent attributes, or by its influential invocation ofthe celestial powers. To the sovereign pontiff it has been given to bindor loose at his pleasure. It is unlawful to appeal from his judgmentsto an Oecumenical Council, as if to an earthly arbiter superior to him. Powers such as these are consistent with arbitrary rule, but they areinconsistent with the government of the world by immutable law. Hencethe Dogmatic Constitution plants itself firmly in behalf of incessantprovidential interventions; it will not for a moment admit that innatural things there is an irresistible sequence of events, or in theaffairs of men an unavoidable course of acts. 

But has not the order of civilization in all parts of the world been thesame? Does not the growth of society resemble individual growth? Do notboth exhibit to us phases of youth, of maturity, of decrepitude? Toa person who has carefully considered the progressive civilization ofgroups of men in regions of the earth far apart, who has observed theidentical forms under which that advancing civilization has manifesteditself, is it not clear that the procedure is determined by law? Thereligious ideas of the Incas of Peru and the emperors of Mexico, and theceremonials of their court-life, were the same as those in Europe--thesame as those in Asia. The current of thought had been the same. A swarmof bees carried to some distant land will build its combs and regulateits social institutions as other unknown swarms would do, and so withseparated and disconnected swarms of men. So invariable is this sequenceof thought and act, that there are philosophers who, transferring thepast example offered by Asiatic history to the case of Europe, wouldnot hesitate to sustain the proposition--given a bishop of Rome and somecenturies, and you will have an infallible pope: given an infalliblepope and a little more time, and you will have Llamaism--Llamaism towhich Asia has long, ago attained. 

As to the origin of corporeal and spiritual things, the DogmaticConstitution adds a solemn emphasis to its declarations, byanathematizing all those who bold the doctrine of emanation, or whobelieve that visible Nature is only a manifestation of the DivineEssence. In this its authors had a task of no ordinary difficulty beforethem. They must encounter those formidable ideas, whether old or new, which in our times are so strongly forcing themselves on thoughtful men. The doctrine of the conservation and correlation of Force yields as itslogical issue the time-worn Oriental emanation theory; the doctrines ofEvolution and Development strike at that of successive creative acts. The former rests on the fundamental principle that the quantity offorce in the universe is invariable. Though that quantity can neither beincreased nor diminished, the forms under which Force expresses itselfmay be transmuted into each other. As yet this doctrine has not receivedcomplete scientific demonstration, but so numerous and so cogent are thearguments adduced in its behalf, that it stands in an imposing, almostin an authoritative attitude. Now, the Asiatic theory of emanation andabsorption is seen to be in harmony with this grand idea. It does nothold that, at the conception of a human being, a soul is created byGod out of nothing and given to it, but that a portion of the alreadyexisting, the divine, the universal intelligence, is imparted, and, whenlife is over, this returns to and is absorbed in the general source fromwhich it originally came. The authors of the Constitution forbid theseideas to be held, under pain of eternal punishment. 

In like manner they dispose of the doctrines of Evolution andDevelopment, bluntly insisting that the Church believes in distinctcreative acts. The doctrine that every living form is derived from somepreceding form is scientifically in a much more advanced position thanthat concerning Force, and probably may be considered as established, whatever may become of the additions with which it has recently beenoverlaid. 

In her condemnation of the Reformation, the Church carries into effecther ideas of the subordination of reason to faith. In her eyes theReformation is an impious heresy, leading to the abyss of pantheism, materialism, and atheism, and tending to overthrow the very foundationsof human society. She therefore would restrain those "restless spirits"who, following Luther, have upheld the "right of every man to interpretthe Scriptures for himself. " She asserts that it is a wicked error toadmit Protestants to equal political privileges with Catholics, and thatto coerce them and suppress them is a sacred duty; that it is abominableto permit them to establish educational institutions. Gregory XVI. Denounced freedom of conscience as an insane folly, and the freedom ofthe press a pestilent error, which cannot be sufficiently detested. 

But how is it possible to recognize an inspired and infallible oracle onthe Tiber, when it is remembered that again and again successive popeshave contradicted each other; that popes have denounced councils, andcouncils have denounced popes; that the Bible of Sixtus V. Had so manyadmitted errors--nearly two thousand--that its own authors had to recallit? How is it possible for the children of the Church to regard as"delusive errors" the globular form of the earth, her position as aplanet in the solar system, her rotation on her axis, her movement roundthe sun? How can they deny that there are antipodes, and other worldsthan ours? How can they believe that the world was made out of nothing, completed in a week, finished just as we see it now; that it hasundergone no change, but that its parts have worked so indifferently asto require incessant interventions?

THE ERRORS OF ECCLESIASTICISM. When Science is thus commanded tosurrender her intellectual convictions, may she not ask the ecclesiasticto remember the past? The contest respecting the figure of the earth, and the location of heaven and hell, ended adversely to him. He affirmedthat the earth is an extended plane, and that the sky is a firmament, the floor of heaven, through which again and again persons have beenseen to ascend. The globular form demonstrated beyond any possibilityof contradiction by astronomical facts, and by the voyage of Magellan'sship, he then maintained that it is the central body of the universe, all others being in subordination to it, and it the grand object ofGod's regard. Forced from this position, he next affirmed that it ismotionless, the sun and the stars actually revolving, as they apparentlydo, around it. The invention of the telescope proved that here againhe was in error. Then he maintained that all the motions of the solarsystem are regulated by providential intervention; the "Principia"of Newton demonstrated that they are due to irresistible law. He thenaffirmed that the earth and all the celestial bodies were created aboutsix thousand years ago, and that in six days the order of Nature wassettled, and plants and animals in their various tribes introduced. Constrained by the accumulating mass of adverse evidence, he enlargedhis days into periods of indefinite length--only, however, to find thateven this device was inadequate. The six ages, with their six specialcreations, could no longer be maintained, when it was discovered thatspecies, slowly emerged in one age, reached a culmination in a second, and gradually died out in a third: this overlapping from age to agewould not only have demanded creations, but re-creations also. Heaffirmed that there had been a deluge, which covered the whole earthabove the tops of the highest mountains, and that the waters of thisflood were removed by a wind. Correct ideas respecting the dimensionsof the atmosphere, and of the sea, and of the operation of evaporation, proved how untenable these statements are. Of the progenitors of thehuman race, he declared that they had come from their Maker's handperfect, both in body and mind, and had subsequently experienced a fall. He is now considering how best to dispose of the evidence continuallyaccumulating respecting the savage condition of prehistoric man. 

Is it at all surprising that the number of those who hold the opinionsof the Church in light esteem should so rapidly increase? How can thatbe received as a trustworthy guide in the invisible, which falls into somany errors in the visible? How can that give confidence in the moral, the spiritual, which has so signally failed in the physical? It is notpossible to dispose of these conflicting facts as "empty shadows, " "vaindevices, " "fictions coming from knowledge falsely so called, " "errorswearing the deceitful appearance of truth, " as the Church stigmatizesthem. On the contrary, they are stern witnesses, bearing emphaticand unimpeachable testimony against the ecclesiastical claim toinfallibility, and fastening a conviction of ignorance and blindnessupon her. 

Convicted of so many errors, the papacy makes no attempt at explanation. It ignores the whole matter Nay, more, relying on the efficacyof audacity, though confronted by these facts, it lays claim toinfallibility. 

SEPARATION OF CATHOLICISM AND CIVILIZATION. But, to the pontiff, noother rights can be conceded than those he can establish at the bar ofReason. He cannot claim infallibility in religious affairs, anddecline it in scientific. Infallibility embraces all things. It impliesomniscience. If it holds good for theology, it necessarily holds goodfor science. How is it possible to coordinate the infallibility of thepapacy with the well-known errors into which it has fallen?

Does it not, then, become needful to reject the claim of the papacyto the employment of coercion in the maintenance of its opinions; torepudiate utterly the declaration that "the Inquisition is an urgentnecessity in view of the unbelief of the present age, " and in the nameof human nature to protest loudly against the ferocity and terrorism ofthat institution? Has not conscience inalienable rights?

An impassable and hourly-widening gulf intervenes between Catholicismand the spirit of the age. Catholicism insists that blind faith issuperior to reason; that mysteries are of more importance than facts. She claims to be the sole interpreter of Nature and revelation, thesupreme arbiter of knowledge; she summarily rejects all modern criticismof the Scriptures, and orders the Bible to be accepted in accordancewith the views of the theologians of Trent; she openly avows her hatredof free institutions and constitutional systems, and declares that thoseare in damnable error who regard the reconciliation of the pope withmodern civilization as either possible or desirable. 

SCIENCE AND PROTESTANTISM. But the spirit of the age demands--is thehuman intellect to be subordinated to the Tridentine Fathers, or to thefancy of illiterate and uncritical persons who wrote in the earlier agesof the Church? It sees no merit in blind faith, but rather distrusts it. It looks forward to an improvement in the popular canon of credibilityfor a decision between fact and fiction. It does not consider itselfbound to believe fables and falsehoods that have been invented forecclesiastical ends. It finds no argument in behalf of their truth, thattraditions and legends have been long-lived; in this respect, those ofthe Church are greatly inferior to the fables of paganism. The longevityof the Church itself is not due to divine protection or intervention, but to the skill with which it has adapted its policy to existingcircumstances. If antiquity be the criterion of authenticity, the claimsof Buddhism must be respected; it has the superior warrant of manycenturies. There can be no defense of those deliberate falsifications ofhistory, that concealment of historical facts, of which the Church hasso often taken advantage. In these things the end does not justify themeans. 

Then has it in truth come to this, that Roman Christianity and Scienceare recognized by their respective adherents as being absolutelyincompatible; they cannot exist together; one must yield to the other;mankind must make its choice--it cannot have both. 

SCIENCE AND FAITH. While such is, perhaps, the issue as regardsCatholicism, a reconciliation of the Reformation with Science is notonly possible, but would easily take place, if the Protestant Churcheswould only live up to the maxim taught by Luther, and established by somany years of war. That maxim is, the right of private interpretation ofthe Scriptures. It was the foundation of intellectual liberty. But, ifa personal interpretation of the book of Revelation is permissible, how can it be denied in the case of the book of Nature? In themisunderstandings that have taken place, we must ever bear in mindthe infirmities of men. The generations that immediately followedthe Reformation may perhaps be excused for not comprehending the fullsignificance of their cardinal principle, and for not on all occasionscarrying it into effect. When Calvin caused Servetus, to be burnt, hewas animated, not by the principles of the Reformation, but by thoseof Catholicism, from which he had not been able to emancipate himselfcompletely. And when the clergy of influential Protestant confessionshave stigmatized the investigators of Nature as infidels and atheists, the same may be said. For Catholicism to reconcile itself to Science, there are formidable, perhaps insuperable obstacles in the way. ForProtestantism to achieve that great result there are not. In the onecase there is a bitter, a mortal animosity to be overcome; in the other, a friendship, that misunderstandings have alienated, to be restored. 

CIVILIZATION AND RELIGION. But, whatever may be the preparatoryincidents of that great impending intellectual crisis which Christendommust soon inevitably witness, of this we may rest assured, that thesilent secession from the public faith, which in so ominous a mannercharacterizes the present generation, will find at length politicalexpression. It is not without significance that France reenforces theultramontane tendencies of her lower population, by the promotion ofpilgrimages, the perpetration of miracles, the exhibition of celestialapparitions. Constrained to do this by her destiny, she does it witha blush. It is not without significance that Germany resolves to ridherself of the incubus of a dual government, by the exclusion of theItalian element, and to carry to its completion that Reformation whichthree centuries ago she left unfinished. The time approaches whenmen must take their choice between quiescent, immobile faith andever-advancing Science--faith, with its mediaeval consolations, Science, which is incessantly scattering its material blessings in the pathwayof life, elevating the lot of man in this world, and unifying thehuman race. Its triumphs are solid and enduring. But the glory whichCatholicism might gain from a conflict with material ideas is at thebest only like that of other celestial meteors when they touch theatmosphere of the earth--transitory and useless. 

Though Guizot's affirmation that the Church has always sided withdespotism is only too true, it must be remembered that in the policyshe follows there is much of political necessity. She is urged on bythe pressure of nineteen centuries. But, if the irresistible indicatesitself in her action, the inevitable manifests itself in her life. Forit is with the papacy as with a man. It has passed through the strugglesof infancy, it has displayed the energies of maturity, and, its workcompleted, it must sink into the feebleness and querulousness of oldage. Its youth can never be renewed. The influence of its souvenirsalone will remain. As pagan Rome threw her departing shadow over theempire and tinctured all its thoughts, so Christian Rome casts herparting shadow over Europe. 

INADMISSIBLE CLAIMS OF CATHOLICISM. Will modern civilization consent toabandon the career of advancement which has given it so much power andhappiness? Will it consent to retrace its steps to the semi-barbarianignorance and superstition of the middle ages? Will it submit to thedictation of a power, which, claiming divine authority, can presentno adequate credentials of its office; a power which kept Europe in astagnant condition for many centuries, ferociously suppressing by thestake and the sword every attempt at progress; a power that is foundedin a cloud of mysteries; that sets itself above reason and common-sense;that loudly proclaims the hatred it entertains against liberty ofthought and freedom in civil institutions; that professes its intentionof repressing the one and destroying the other whenever it can find theopportunity; that denounces as most pernicious and insane the opinionthat liberty of conscience and of worship is the right of every man;that protests against that right being proclaimed and asserted by law inevery well-governed state; that contemptuously repudiates the principlethat the will of the people, manifested by public opinion (as it iscalled) or by other means, shall constitute law; that refuses to everyman any title to opinion in matters of religion, but holds that it issimply his duty to believe what he is told by the Church, and to obeyher commands; that will not permit any temporal government to definethe rights and prescribe limits to the authority of the Church;that declares it not only may but will resort to force to disciplinedisobedient individuals; that invades the sanctify of private life, bymaking, at the confessional, the wife and daughters and servants of onesuspected, spies and informers against him; that tries him without anaccuser, and by torture makes him bear witness against himself; thatdenies the right of parents to educate their children outside of its ownChurch, and insists that to it alone belongs the supervision of domesticlife and the control of marriages and divorces; that denounces "theimpudence" of those who presume to subordinate the authority of theChurch to the civil authority, or who advocate the separation of theChurch from the state; that absolutely repudiates all toleration, andaffirms that the Catholic religion is entitled to be held as the onlyreligion in every country, to the exclusion of all other modes ofworship; that requires all laws standing in the way of its intereststo be repealed, and, if that be refused, orders all its followers todisobey them?

ISSUE OF THE CONFLICT. This power, conscious that it can work no miracleto serve itself, does not hesitate to disturb society by its intriguesagainst governments, and seeks to accomplish its ends by alliances withdespotism. 

Claims such as these mean a revolt against modern civilization, anintention of destroying it, no matter at what social cost. To submit tothem without resistance, men must be slaves indeed!

As to the issue of the coming conflict, can any one doubt? Whateveris resting on fiction and fraud will be overthrown. Institutions thatorganize impostures and spread delusions must show what right they haveto exist. Faith must render an account of herself to Reason. Mysteriesmust give place to facts. Religion must relinquish that imperious, thatdomineering position which she has so long maintained against Science. There must be absolute freedom for thought. The ecclesiastic must learnto keep himself within the domain he has chosen, and cease to tyrannizeover the philosopher, who, conscious of his own strength and the purityof his motives, will bear such interference no longer. What waswritten by Esdras near the willow-fringed rivers of Babylon, more thantwenty-three centuries ago, still holds good: "As for Truth it endurethand is always strong; it liveth and conquereth for evermore. "