The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1916-01-22
CONTINUED from page ID
IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL

article has all the hall-marks of the
higher learning. 1t runs for sixty
three pages under a most formidable
looking title, ''Thanatophobia and
Immortality" It's author is no less
an authority then the renowned
psychologist, G. Stanley Hail. This
distinguished philosopher never saw
theology book in his life judging
from the few incursions which he
makes into this, for him, unknown
and unknowable land. He defines
Faith as "a vague combination Of
wishes and fears" III he cannot trans
late Latin textbooks there is TO ex.
cuse now for this display Of Grass
ignorance since we got the X. G.
edition OF the Catholic Encyclopedias
selling for tWenty-nine dollars, car
rage paid. AS to immortality in the
orthodox sense of the word, il men
really believed that there was another
life vastly better and more desirable
in every way then this, the world
would soon be depopulated, for all
would emigrate from it unless fear
OF the mere act of dying deferred
them, At least all the strong and
enterprising souls would go. But in
fact even those surest of Heaven stay
here to the latest possible moment,
and use every means at their disposal
not to graduate into the Jenseits, even
though their lives in this world be
miserable. Does not this show that
belief in post norton life is con-
vention, a dream-wish? Otherwise
clergymen themselves would head
their fiocks into the great beyond"
Now look at the dilemma we are
| driven to by the memorable logic,
coupled with the profound metaphysi-
cal and theological lore of the re-
rloWned psychologist and brilliant
editor of the American Journal of
Psychology, G.. Stanley Hall, ably
supported by a most distinguished
group of learned colleagues who hold
chairs of Philosophy in such historic
seats of learning as the Universities
of Paris, Nancy, London, Munich and
4
trine of Immortality must go, or else
to be consistent, we poor benighted
| believers must commit suicide! Let
us throw DR.. Halrs~s specimen, of loose
thinking into a formal syllogism and
see his rigid conclusion vanish into
thin air.. If men believe in another
and better life than this they should
quit this miserable life Immediately
| by an artificially sudden death; but
the surest believers do not adopt this
hasty manner of making their exit
from this vale of tears; therefore be-
lief in post-mortem life is a conven-
ton, a dream-wish! We do not grant
the protests at all because it is alb.
surd and no part of the good old
fashioned doctrine of orthodox believ-
ers in immortality. This life is a
preparation for the next, and one OF
the conditions of future happy i'm.
mortality is to observe the ten com.
mandments one of which reads
Thou shalt not kill" Like good
sensible people we adapt means to
ends and are ever mindful of the
Saviour's Injunction, IF thou wilt
enter into life keep the command
ments even the fifth. Even guided
by the light of natural reason we
could prove to demonstration that
/ suicide is an eminently irrational act;
but a person would be wasting time
in using any kind. of an argument
towards man of DR.. Halls calibre
who sins so glaringly against all the
dictates of any kind of reason, even
goods common horse-sense. We are
perfectly consistent in spite of the
| discoveries of the eminent psychOlo.
gist and challenge criticism of our
position, judged by the canons of the
most rigorous logic. We do not ac-
cept the fallacious sophism of the
editor of the American Journal of
Psychology as expressing our belief
in Immortality in anything like an
adequate formula. What objection
could he throw up against our posi-
ton rightly stated we should like to
know, which is this: If men believe
in another life and better because
they are fully and reasonably con
vinced Of it's existence by the motives
of it's credibility, they should do all
in their power to reach it by the
means dictated, both by reason and
revelation; but the surest believers do
4 adopt this perfectly rational and sane
course Of action: Therefore this goes
TO show that their belief in post-mor.
tenn life is more than convention or
a dream-wish.
Here is another gem from the
learned doctors article: Mans
nature is active; Heaven is passive
But if this is so it does not fit his
nature, which is the need Of doing,
and besides, it does not attract even
the most idle and lazy or those who
| seek only pleasure What on earth
does he mean by active and passive
anyway? When did he learn that
Heaven was passive and why the con
clusion that it does not fit mans
nature? Must man in order to be
active be a member of university
football team always on the gridiron
or a sewer-digger? What kind of an
apology would the author make for
the existence of philosophers of his
own type? Does he think, as he says
that the pleasure of Heaven is identi-
cal with that sought by the most idle
and lazy whose notion Of eternal hap
4 nireSs corresnondS with the definition