Life of Harriet Beecher Stowe | Page 8

Mr.
Brace, brightened and looked interested, and at the close I heard him
ask, 'Who wrote that composition?' 'Your daughter, sir,' was the answer.
It was the proudest moment of my life. There was no mistaking father's
face when he was pleased, and to have interested him was past all
juvenile triumphs."
That composition has been carefully preserved, and on the old yellow
sheets the cramped childish hand-writing is still distinctly legible. As

the first literary production of one who afterwards attained such
distinction as a writer, it is deemed of sufficient value and interest to be
embodied in this biography exactly as it was written and read sixty-five
years ago. The subject was certainly a grave one to be handled by a
child of twelve.
CAN THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL BE PROVED BY THE
LIGHT OF NATURE?
It has justly been concluded by the philosophers of every age that "The
proper study of mankind is man," and his nature and composition, both
physical and mental, have been subjects of the most critical
examination. In the course of these researches many have been at a loss
to account for the change which takes place in the body at the time of
death. By some it has been attributed to the flight of its tenant, and by
others to its final annihilation.
The questions, "What becomes of the soul at the time of death?" and, if
it be not annihilated, "What is its destiny after death?" are those which,
from the interest that we all feel in them, will probably engross
universal attention.
In pursuing these inquiries it will be necessary to divest ourselves of all
that knowledge which we have obtained from the light which revelation
has shed over them, and place ourselves in the same position as the
philosophers of past ages when considering the same subject.
The first argument which has been advanced to prove the immortality
of the soul is drawn from the nature of the mind itself. It has (say the
supporters of this theory) no composition of parts, and therefore, as
there are no particles, is not susceptible of divisibility and cannot be
acted upon by decay, and therefore if it will not decay it will exist
forever.
Now because the mind is not susceptible of decay effected in the
ordinary way by a gradual separation of particles, affords no proof that
that same omnipotent power which created it cannot by another simple
exertion of power again reduce it to nothing. The only reason for belief

which this argument affords is that the soul cannot be acted upon by
decay. But it does not prove that it cannot destroy its existence.
Therefore, for the validity of this argument, it must either be proved
that the "Creator" has not the power to destroy it, or that he has not the
will; but as neither of these can be established, our immortality is left
dependent on the pleasure of the Creator. But it is said that it is evident
that the Creator designed the soul for immortality, or he would never
have created it so essentially different from the body, for had they both
been designed for the same end they would both have been created
alike, as there would have been no object in forming them otherwise.
This only proves that the soul and body had not the same destinations.
Now of what these destinations are we know nothing, and after much
useless reasoning we return where we began, our argument depending
upon the good pleasure of the Creator.
And here it is said that a being of such infinite wisdom and
benevolence as that of which the Creator is possessed would not have
formed man with such vast capacities and boundless desires, and would
have given him no opportunity for exercising them.
In order to establish the validity of this argument it is necessary to
prove by the light of Nature that the Creator is benevolent, which,
being impracticable, is of itself sufficient to render the argument
invalid.
But the argument proceeds upon the supposition that to destroy the soul
would be unwise. Now this is arraigning the "All-wise" before the
tribunal of his subjects to answer for the mistakes in his government.
Can we look into the council of the "Unsearchable" and see what
means are made to answer their ends? We do not know but the
destruction of the soul may, in the government of God, be made to
answer such a purpose that its existence would be contrary to the
dictates of wisdom.
The great desire of the soul for immortality, its secret, innate horror of
annihilation, has been brought to prove its immortality. But do we
always find this horror or this desire? Is it not much more evident that
the great