The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-20
scientific Theology.

preacher of the day relies on sentiment
rather than elaborate logic to convert
pnd instruc: his hearers. The the
ology of Jonathan Edwards Cay
was indeed science in is in
tricate and exact workings; the only
trouble was that most of the premises
were inaccurate. In THE Divine Pedigree
CT Man. Thomson Jay Hudson has under
taken TO give a scientific basis for the
advanced religious thought of the day.
In his two previous works, THE Law OF
Psychic Phenomena" and "A Scientific
Demonstration of the Future Life" he
worked along the same line, although
the three books are quite distinct and
separate in their scope, and the hrst
had nothing directly to do with religion
The basis of the present work is the
theory established in the first one; the
duality of mans consciousness. Mr.. Hud-
soE holds that man has a subjective and
objective consciousness the latter work
ing through the brain, the former inde-
pendent of the physical being, and often
most active when the body is quiescent
as in dreams or frances. He explains
many mysterious psychic phenomena on
this hypothesis Fer instance, he cites the
case of the servant girl, who repeated
whole pages of Latin and Greek years
after having heard her master read them
aloud. She could not even read her own
language and as Mr.. Hudson puts it, her
objective mind was not impressed with
what she heard; but the subjective con-
seriousness retained and repeated the pas
capac vprhafiJn during delirium
With this theory as the foundation, the
author goes on to develop what he calls
the divine pedigree of man. Briefly, his
argument is this: That evolution is due to
the workings of the subjective conscious
ness, striving to bring the objective con-
seriousness into harmony with its own
laws, and that through this subjective
mind we become conscious that God exists
and are capable to some extent of under
standing Him. BY inference, when the
subjective mind and the brain are thor
oughly in accord We have poet, seer,
genius; through the intuition of the sub
jective consciousness divine laws may be
revealed to a Buddha, Socrates, or a
Christ. The author states that this sub
jective consciousness is not inherent but
irnmanent, in mans physical being, just
as God is immanent, but not inherent in
the universe; in other words. dwells in
it, but is not dependent upon it, which is
as fine a distinction as any Jonathan Ed
wards ever spun in his dissertations on
free will and fate. and has the advantage
of resting On firmer logical basis.
The great trouble with Mr.. Hudson
book lis the style of it. He has made per-
fectly clear argument somewhat difficult
to follow, by winding it around with cab
crate scientific terms, one or two OF which
are invented by himself 1t is beautiful,
considered as a scientific demonstration,
but il could be simplified without be ng
hurt in the least. For example, instead of
the cumbrous terms subjective ard OBJ
iective consciousness" il seems as If he
might quite as easily have spoken OF
soul and mind putting in, if ne e5-
sary. a definition of the precise meaning
which he wishes each word to have. TGere
is decided distinction between these two
things, as understood by the average per-
son. Soul is generally assumed to be
the mysterious indwelling individually
which is recognized as being the real ego.
and not dying with the body; mind is as
generally taken to be the living brain in
the exercise of its functions. Nobody ever
postulates that the mind lives after death.
OF that the soul dies with the brain. When
we speak of persons mind failing. we do
cot think of the soul also giving way. and
most people know Of persons who. without
being very brilliant mentally, seem 10 have
an intuitive sense Of what is right and
wise. on occasion, simply by the force Of
character which works through very sim
pie organism. In short. it is pretty we'll
established. in all theologieg and most sys-
TENS of philosophy, that man is a dual
personality, and that one-half of this is
physical and the other spiritual, which
is about all that Mr.. Hudson means by his
subjective and objective phraseolcgy. In
writing of these things it is well 10 be as
pain and simple as possible.
The thing which is really valuable in
this book is the general argument which.
when one has brushed away the cobwsb3
with which Mr.. Hudson's objective con-
sciousness-or shall we say simply his
mind?-has bestrewn it, is very clear ard
convincing and will be Of assistance
10 many seekers for truth in this temui-
died age. 1t is quite true that religious
discussion is becoming more and more de-
pendent on sentiment. and material sci
ence on logic: and it is good thing that
here and there writer has the original
ity and hard sense to demonstrate that
religion can be put on a scientific basis.
pure and simple, and that evolution has
ethics as we'll as necessity in ii.
The author begins by definition Of ag
Mysticism which he fearlessly calls ag
gressive ignorance. He cites Herbert
Spencer's definition of God as the Unknow
able, and declares it to be scientifically
incorrect. He considers that a better
word would be Unfathomable because, al
though the human being cannot fathom in
finity. he can know something about il.
For illustration, one cannot dip up the
Atlantic Ocean with teacup, but one can
dip up certain amount of the ocean in
that way, examine 1t, analyze 1t, and dis
cover what are some of its component
parts. AT every turn, whether in the
star spaces or the infnitesimal drop Of
water, We encounter infnity; it cannot be
fathomed. but finite part Of il can be
known, and some Of the laws which gov
ern it understood. Thus. SO far from be-
iieying that the study of science is mimi
cal to religion. Mr.. Hudson positively af-
firms that religious truths cannot be denied
by science without inconsistency. This is
a pretty good argument, even If ii does
contradict Herbert Spencer.
Mr.. Hudson then goes on to define his
theory of the dual minds. which has been
already explained, and subsequently. be-
ginning with the discussion of micro-or-
ganisms. outlines his theory of evolution.
He claims that the subjective mind, the
soul, not the brais, is the originator of
the upward tendency OF nature. that reflex
action is not enough to account for the
development of instinct; that instinct in
the lower animals is identical with intui-
tion In man: and that telepathy, spirit
phenomena, and kindred mysterious things
are functions of the soul and not of the
brain. He then explains the presence Of
the soul, which the scalpel cannot prove,
by stating that the soul is immanent. not
inherent, in the body. He claims that the
objective mind educates the subjective
mind, so that the instinct of animals is.
generally speaking, in proportion to their
iufalliYenca and the reader easily