THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. 391 



does not end the war. Muny earnest and good men oppose the doc- 

 trine for two hundred years longer. Then the French astronomers 

 make their measurements of degrees in equatorial and polar regions 

 and add to other proofs that of the lengthened pendulum. When 

 this was done, when the deductions of science were seen to be estab- 

 lished by the simple test of measurement, beautifully, perfectly, then 

 and then only this war of twelve centuries ended.^ 



And now what was the result of this war ? The efforts of Eusebius 

 and Lactantius to deaden scientific thought ; the efforts of Augustine 

 to combat it ; the efforts of Cosmas to stop it by dogmatism ; the 

 efforts of Boniface, and Zachary, and others to stop it by force, con- 

 scientious as they all Avere, had resulted in what ? Simply in forcing 

 into many noble minds this most unfortunate conviction, that Science 

 and Religion are enemies ; simply in driving away from religion hosts 

 of the best men in all those centuries. The result was wholly bad. 

 No optimism can change that verdict. 



On the other hand, what was gained by the warriors of science 

 for religion ? Simply, a far more ennobling conception of the world, 

 and a far truer conception of Him who made and who sustains it. 



Which is the more consistent with a great, true religion the 

 cosmography of Cosmas, or that of Isaac Newton ? Which presents 

 the nobler food foi' religious thought the diatribes of Lactantius, or 

 the astronomical discourses of Thomas Chalmers ? 



The next great battle was fought on a question relating to the 

 position of the earth among the heavenly bodies. On one side, the 

 great body of conscientious religious men planted themselves firmly 

 on the geocentric doctrine the doctrine that the earth is the centre, 

 and that the sun and planets revolve about it. The doctrine was old, 

 and of the highest respectability.'^ The very name, Ptolemaic theory, 

 carried weight. It had been elaborated until it accounted well for 

 the phenomena. Exact textual interpreters of Scripture cherished it, 

 for it agreed with the letter of the sacred text.^ 



Still the germs of the heliocentric theory * had been planted long 

 before, and well planted ; it had seemed ready even to bloom forth 



p. 369 ; Pesche!, " Geschichte des Zeitalters der Entdeckungen," concluding chapters ; 

 and for an admirable summary, Draper, " Hist. Int. Dev. of Europe," pp. 451-453. 



Tor general statement as to supplementary proof by measurement of degrees, and 

 by pendulum, see Somerville, " Phys. Geog.," chapter i., 6, note. Also Humboldt, 

 "Cosmos," vol. ii., p. 736, aud v., pp. 16, 32. Also, Montucla, iv., 138. 



* " Respectability of Geocentric Theory, Plato's Authority for it," etc., see Grote'a 

 "Plato," vol. iii., p. 25*7. Also, Sir G. C. Lewis, " Astronomy of the Ancients," chap, iii., 

 sec. i., for a very thoughtful statement of Plato's view, and differing from ancient 

 statements. For plausible elaboration of it, see Fromundus, " Anti-Aristarchus," Ant- 

 werp, 1631. Also Melanchthon " Initia Doctrin;ie Physicfe." 



^ For supposed agreement of Scripture with Ptolemaic theory, see Fromundus, passim, 

 Melanchthon, and a host of other writers. 



^ For " Germs of Heliocentric Theory planted long before," etc., see Sir G. C. Lewis ; 

 also, Draper, "Intellectual Development of Europe," p. 512. For germs among thinkers 



