Professor Draper's Book [pp. 155-174]

Professor Draper's Books.
physical apis; not the bull, but, as
the North American Indian says,
"the manitou of bulls;" and instead
of worshipping the visible objects of
the universe, as the sun, moon, and
stars, the ocean and rivers, groves
and fountains, storms and tempests,
as did polytheism in the outset, they
wvorship certain metaphysical ab stractions into which they have refin ed them, and which they finally gene ralize into one grand abstraction,
which they call Zeus, Jupiter, Jeho vah,l Theus, Deus, or God, and thus
assert the Hebrew and Christian
monotheism. In the third and last
age there is no longer fetichism,
polytheism, or monotheism; men no
longer divinize nature, or their own
abstractions, no longer believe in
the supernatural or the metaphysical
or anything supposed to be supramundane, but reject whatever is not
sensible, material, positive as the ob ject of positive science.
The professor develops this system
with less science than its inventor or
reviver, M. Auguste Comte and his
European disciples; but as well as
he could be expected to do it, in
respectable English. He takles it as
tile basis of his ristory of the Iztelzleatial Development of Euroje, and
attempts to reconcile with it all the
known and unknown facts of that
development. We make no quotations to prove that we state the professor's doctrine correctly, for no one
who has read him, with any attention,
will question our statement; and, indeed, we might find it difficult to
quote passages which clearly and expressly confirm it, for it is a grave
complaint against him, as against
nearly all writers of his school, that
they do not deal in clear and express
statements of doctrine. Had Professor Draper put forth what is evidently his doctrine in clear, simple,
and distinct propositions, so that his
doctrine could at once be seen and
understood, his works, instead of
going through several editions, and
being commended in reviews and
journals, as scientific, learned, and
profound, would have fallen dead
from the press, or been received with
a universal burst of public indigna tion; for they attack everything dear
to the heart of the Christian, the
philosopher, and the citizen. Nothing worse is to be found in the old
French Encyclopedists, in the S,stcbme de la iVature of D'Holbach, or in
l']omme-Plant, and l'Homme-Mfiac/ziie of Lamettrie. His doctrine is
nothing in the world but pure materialism and atheism, and we do not
believe the American people are as
yet prepared to deny either God, or
creation and Providence. The success of these authors is in their vagueness, in their refusal to reduce their
doctrine to distinct propositions, in
hinting, rather than stating it, and in
pretending to speak always in the
name of science, thug: "Science
shows this," or" Science shows that;"
when, if they knew anything of the
matter, they would know that science
does no such thing. Then, how can
you accuse Professor Draper of atheism or materialism; for does he not
expressly declare his belief, as a man
of science, in the existence of the Supreme Being, and in an immaterial
and immortal soul? What Dr. Draper
believes or disbelieves, is his affair, not
ours; we only assert that the doctrine
he defends in his professedly scientific books, from beginning to end, is
purely physiological, and has no God
or soul in it. As a man, Dr. Draper
may believe much; as an author, he
is a materialist and an atheist, beyond
all dispute: if he knows it, little can
be said for his honesty; if he does
not know it, little can be said for his
science, or his competency to write
on the intellectual development of
I59