Men and Things by Dudley Marvin Canright

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 2, 1872

Men and Things.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

The Religious Amendment.

Seventh-day Adventists cannot fail to be interested in this movement, it is so manifestly connected with the Sunday law which we have all along expected. The strict protection of Sunday by law comes out prominently in all their arguments for the desired amendment to the Constitution. The movement is evidently spreading, and gaining attention quite fast. Some ministers are devoting all their time and talents to it. From a report of one of these I clip the following out of the Christian Statesman:—

“A leading judge said, in talking on the amendment, ‘It must be, as surely as God reigns and the Bible is his word of eternal truth.’ A lawyer, than whose no name in the city or State is higher, said, ‘You have my cordial sympathy. Count me in your ranks.’ Another eminent judge said, ‘I know this movement. I have watched it. Christian sentiment as to government in this land is chrystallizing, and this is the shape it must take.’ And so on I might go indefinitely.

“As one of the ablest scholars and thinkers of New England writes me in a letter just received: ‘Notwithstanding the indifference of many and the hostility of some, from whom better things might have been expected, the movement towards the religious amendment of our Constitution grows in volume and strength.’ There can be no doubt of it. Let us ‘thank God and take courage.’

“Yours as ever, “D. McAllister.”

Proper Weapons.

Beecher thus delivers himself concerning an opponent:

“If we had it in our power to shut Mr. Abbott’s lips, to break his presses, to violently suppress doctrines which we deem untrue and pernicious, we would not do it. That is not the best way to combat error. Argument against argument, a better theory against a poor one, larger inductions against inferior ones, in short, better facts, better philosophy, better spirit, furnish the only true and proper method of resisting the injury arising from free speech, when employed in the cause of untruth. Freedom is the very atmosphere through which all angels of truth descend to the world.”

This is right: Sound argument, moral suasion, a spirit of love, are the arguments which the advocate of truth must use.

Arguments for Immortality.

Formerly the grand argument for the immortality of the soul, was its immateriality. It was immaterial, hence indestructible and immortal. All other arguments were secondary to this. It was supposed to settle the question. But as science and philosophy have advanced, how has it affected this argument? Wm. Pittinger, in a late number of the Phrenological Journal, thus states how this argument is now considered:—

“Yet it is a singular instance of the change brought by advancing knowledge over the current of human thoughts, that what was formerly the great argument for the immortality of mind is now the weak point of the whole structure. The immateriality and consequent incorruptibility of the spirit was contrasted strongly with the inconstancy and perishibility of matter. The case is now reversed, and while the continuance of matter in all its integrity is as sure as any event in the future, belief in the continued endurance of mind, though somewhat strengthened by analogy, still rests rather upon faith than demonstration.”

Scientific men have now practically abandoned this old argument from immateriality, and now rather seek to base an argument for the immortality of the soul upon exactly the reverse of this, viz., the indestructibility of matter! Yet they confess that this is about as unsatisfying as the other, and that the theory has finally got to rest more upon faith than upon proof! We hope they will make more such honest confessions of the truth, and thus help to open the eyes of the people.

Dr. Horne also makes the following admission: “How many philosophers have theorized in vain on the mode in which the impressions of the senses are conveyed to the sensorium, and on the way in which they produce thoughts and passions! Yet the manner in which the brain operates in these instances is as much a mystery now as it was in the days of Plato and Aristotle. We cannot explain the nature of the human soul, nor in what manner it is united to the body; and yet, that such a union does exist, we are convinced by daily experience.” Introduction, Vol. I, chap. 5, sec. 1, p 159. Philadelphia, 1836.

In short, all the boasted arguments from philosophy for the immortality of the soul, are vain and prove nothing. The only question is, What saith the word of God.

D. M. Canright.