or life has no independent conscious existence, apart from the organs that produce thought, feeling, and action; and, therefore, life, mind, memory, thought, reason, and consciousness are physical phenomena, and cease at death."* What balder or bolder infidelity than this was ever displayed? What of being can be left to man after the extinction of all these? And yet this man professed, faith in revelation and in a future life!

There is a class of men who conceal their materialism in the mystical formulas of some development theory, which stealthily but studiously excludes a first cause in the creation of man, and also the higher elements of soul from his nature. Like infidels in all ages, they assume to be, par excellence, the men of science, of facts, of reason, and of intelligence. Of this class are Darwin, Morell, Huxley, and their minor followers. But we have already devoted sufficient space to the examination of their respective theories.

We repeat, then, that all the theories relating to the nature of mind or soul range themselves, in the final result, under two general heads. The first is that the soul is an independent spiritual existence, mysteriously connected with the human body. The other is that mind or soul is merely an organic state of matter, such as constitutes the human brain; or, in other words, that the human soul is merely a function of matter. Into one or the other of these two opinions all these various theories, in the final analysis, resolve themselves. Nor does the subject seem to furnish the least grounds upon which, outside of these two, any other opinions could be erected.

The first has the sanction of Divine Revelation; the purest and soundest philosophy of all ages has recognized it; and it has ever formed a distinct element in the Chris*Immateriality of the Soul.

tian creed. We have already presented, to some extent, the facts and arguments by which it is established. We come now to consider the objections to the opposite theory; that theory which regards the human soul as a mere result of physical organization, or, in other words, as a function of matter. This summary method of robbing a man of himself we shall subject to a somewhat rigid analysis; and the more so as it seems to be specially revived in the present day. Brought forth under the guise of a new nomenclature, sustained by the most subtile sophistries, and heralded with the most pompous pretension, it has already obtained a foothold among pretentious theologians, and it seems as though it would, were it possible, "deceive the very elect." To us this theory seems not only fraught with pernicious moral effects, tending to degrade the being, character, and destiny of man, but also, in a philosophical point of view, to be unwarranted by any sound induction of facts. We shall go further, and undertake to show that it is irreconcilable with the phenomena of mental action, and also with well-attested facts in the psychological his tory of man.

II. THE FUNCTION-THEORY FAILS TO SOLVE ANY MYSTERY IN THE HUMAN ORGANIZATION; NOR DOES IT RE LIEVE ANY PHILOSOPHICAL DIFFICULTY."

Our first objection to the theory that soul or spirit is merely a function of matter is, that it fails to accomplish the end proposed. It solves no mystery, and removes no difficulty. At most it only changes the ground of diffi culty. The acknowledged fact for which we seek a solution—that is, the existing spiritual phenomena-is left as mysterious and inexplicable as ever.

If the declaration that "there is a spirit in man is to

be rejected because it is mysterious and above our comprehension, the assumption that these phenomena originate in the physical condition of our bodies involves a mystery equally inexplicable, and on the same ground must also be rejected. If we can not, upon philosophical principles, explain the origin and nature of mind, still more difficult shall we find the task of explaining by what process matter may become endowed with such transcendent, such surprising power.

The opinion that even organic matter could, by any possibility, be made to exhibit such power, can not be received without the most clear and indubitable evidence. What is there to be found in the composition of the brain and nervous system, or in their organization, that would lead us to look for the development of thought, feeling, or conscience in them? The brain has been analyzed, and more than eight-tenths of its substance has been found to be water. Indeed this, mixed up with a little albumen, a still less quantity of fat, osmazome, phosphorus, acids, salts, and sulphur constitute its material elements.* In all cases water largely predominates. Take even the pineal gland— that interior and mysterious organ of the brain, supposed by Descartes, and by many philosophers after him, to be the peculiar seat of the soul-even this has been analyzed.

One hundred parts of the brain, according to Vaugnelin, consist of water, 80; albumen, 7; acids, salts, and sulphur, 5.15; phosphorus, 1.5; osmazome, 1.12; white fatty matter, 4.53; and red fatty matter, 7. According to Gass and Pfaff, who separated the water into its elements: Carbon, 53.48; hydrogen, 16.89; nitrogen, 6.70; oxygen, 18.44; fixed salts, 3.36; and phosphorus, 1.08. Dr. Draper, in his Human Physiology, gives the following table:

Its principal elements are found to be phosphate of lime, together with a smaller proportion of carbonate of lime and phosphates of ammonia and magnesia.

If the brain at large constitutes the soul, then the soul is only a peculiar combination of oxygen and hydrogen with albumen, acids, salts, sulphur, etc. Or, if the pineal gland constitutes the soul, then the principal element of soul is phosphate of lime! If this wonderful theory is true, it may be safely conceded that we gain something by it. We have at last found out what the soul is. And when the wise man again inquires, "Who knoweth the spirit of man?" these sage philosophers may respond, "We! it is phosphate of lime!" But, what! has a peculiar combination of a few elemental substances; has phosphate of lime been the cause, the fons et origo, of all the glorious manifestations of intellect that have been made among men? Is it osmazome that has given origin to the creations of art? Is it oxygen that blazes out in the glowing fires of eloquence? Was it hydrogen that soared in the philosophy of Newton, and sought with all-comprehending grasp to encircle the universe of God? Was it phosphate of lime that wove the garlands of poesy, and thus touched the tender chords of human sympathy, taste, and sentiment?

"To rise in science, as in bliss,
Initiate in the mysteries of the skies;
To read creation, read its mighty plans-
The plan and execution to collate."

III. THE SOUL EXERTS A CONTROLLING INFLUENCE OVER THE BODY, AND THEREFORE MUST BE SOMETHING MORE THAN A MERE RESULT OF BODILY ORGANIZATION.

We have seen that this function-theory assumes that the intellectual power of man results from physical organization,

just as mechanical power is acquired by the skillful adaptation of machinery. It should be borne in mind that in mechanics it is the machinery which originates and modifies the force or power. The force, which is the mere result or effect produced by the machinery, can not exert the least influence over the machinery itself. There is a physical impossibility in the case. And so it must be with man, if this function-theory is true."

If the mental phenomena are the mere result, or force, produced by bodily organization, those phenomena must be entirely subject to the laws which govern the physical nature. Instead of acting upon or exerting any influence over our bodies, the mind, according to the established laws of mechanics, must be acted upon-that is, it is produced, modified, controlled, and in the end will be extinguished by the successive conditions of our physical being. But, we ask, is the mind the mere slave of our bodies? Rather, does it not often force those bodies to action, even against the physical inertia which inheres in matter? nay, often against the strong instincts of our nature? Does not the mind possess a strong and controlling influence over our bodies? How then can it be a mere result or effect of bodily organization, unless we are prepared to admit the absurdity that the effect may control the cause? He who should claim that the movement of the hands in a clock or watch occasioned the movement of the machinery within, would do no greater violence to philosophy, nor be guilty of a more palpable absurdity.

No fact is more certain or more generally acknowledged than that the soul can and does exert a controlling influence over the bodily functions. "A letter or newspaper is brought by a postman to the individual, he reads it, and the result of reading it has been that the man has dropped down dead. Why this? No physical weapon touched him.