Fromthis“a-se-ity“onGod’spart,theologydeducesbymerelogicmostofhisotherperfections。Forinstance,hemustbebothNECESSARYandABSOLUTE,cannotnotbe,andcannotinanywaybedeterminedbyanythingelse。ThismakesHimabsolutelyunlimitedfromwithout,andunlimitedalsofromwithin;forlimitationisnon-being;andGodisbeingitself。ThisunlimitednessmakesGodinfinitelyperfect。Moreover,GodisONE,andONLY,fortheinfinitelyperfectcanadmitnopeer。HeisSPIRITUAL,forwereHecomposedofphysicalparts,someotherpowerwouldhavetocombinethemintothetotal,andhisaseitywouldthusbecontradicted。Heisthereforebothsimpleandnon-physicalinnature。HeisSIMPLEMETAPHYSICALLYalso,thatistosay,hisnatureandhisexistencecannotbedistinct,astheyareinfinitesubstanceswhichsharetheirformalnatureswithoneanother,andareindividualonlyintheirmaterialaspect。SinceGodisoneandonly,hisessentiaandhisessemustbegivenatonestroke。Thisexcludesfromhisbeingallthosedistinctions,sofamiliarintheworldoffinitethings,betweenpotentialityandactuality,substanceandaccidents,beingandactivity,existenceandattributes。Wecantalk,itistrue,ofGod’spowers,acts,andattributes,butthesediscriminationsareonly“virtual。”andmadefromthehumanpointofview。InGodallthesepointsofviewfallintoanabsoluteidentityofbeing。
  ThisabsenceofallpotentialityinGodobligesHimtobeIMMUTABLE。Heisactuality,throughandthrough。WerethereanythingpotentialaboutHim,Hewouldeitherloseorgainbyitsactualization,andeitherlossorgainwouldcontradicthisperfection。Hecannot,therefore,change。Furthermore,HeisIMMENSE,BOUNDLESS;forcouldHebeoutlinedinspace,Hewouldbecomposite,andthiswouldcontradicthisindivisibility。HeisthereforeOMNIPRESENT,indivisiblythere,ateverypointofspace。Heissimilarlywhollypresentateverypointoftime——inotherwordsETERNAL。ForifHebeganintime,Hewouldneedapriorcause,andthatwouldcontradicthisaseity。IfHeendeditwouldcontradicthisnecessity。IfHewentthroughanysuccession,itwouldcontradicthisimmutability。
  HehasINTELLIGENCEandWILLandeveryothercreature-
  perfection,forwehavethem,andeffectusnequitsuperarecausam。InHim,however,theyareabsolutelyandeternallyinact,andtheirOBJECT,sinceGodcanbeboundedbynaughtthatisexternal,canprimarilybenothingelsethanGodhimself。Heknowshimself,then,inoneeternalindivisibleact,andwillshimselfwithaninfiniteself-pleasure。[295]SinceHemustoflogicalnecessitythusloveandwillhimself,Hecannotbecalled“free“adintra,withthefreedomofcontrarietiesthatcharacterizesfinitecreatures。Adextra,however,orwithrespecttohiscreation,Godisfree。HecannotNEEDtocreate,beingperfectinbeingandinhappinessalready。HeWILLStocreate,then,byanabsolutefreedom。
  [295]Forthescholasticsthefacultasappetendiembracesfeeling,desire,andwill。
  Beingthusasubstanceendowedwithintellectandwillandfreedom,GodisaPERSON;andaLIVINGpersonalso,forHeisbothobjectandsubjectofhisownactivity,andtobethisdistinguishesthelivingfromthelifeless。HeisthusabsolutelySELF-SUFFICIENT:hisSELF-KNOWLEDGEandSELF-LOVEarebothoftheminfiniteandadequate,andneednoextraneousconditionstoperfectthem。
  HeisOMNISCIENT,forinknowinghimselfasCauseHeknowsallcreaturethingsandeventsbyimplication。Hisknowledgeisprevisive,forHeispresenttoalltime。EvenourfreeactsareknownbeforehandtoHim,forotherwisehiswisdomwouldadmitofsuccessivemomentsofenrichment,andthiswouldcontradicthisimmutability。HeisOMNIPOTENTforeverythingthatdoesnotinvolvelogicalcontradiction。HecanmakeBEING——inotherwordshispowerincludesCREATION。IfwhatHecreatesweremadeofhisownsubstance,itwouldhavetobeinfiniteinessence,asthatsubstanceis;butitisfinite;soitmustbenon-divineinsubstance。Ifitweremadeofasubstance,aneternallyexistingmatter,forexample,whichGodfoundtheretohishand,andtowhichHesimplygaveitsform,thatwouldcontradictGod’sdefinitionasFirstCause,andmakeHimameremoverofsomethingcausedalready。Thethingshecreates,then,Hecreatesexnihilo,andgivesthemabsolutebeingassomanyfinitesubstancesadditionaltohimself。Theformswhichheimprintsuponthemhavetheirprototypesinhisideas。ButasinGodthereisnosuchthingasmultiplicity,andastheseideasforusaremanifold,wemustdistinguishtheideasastheyareinGodandthewayinwhichourmindsexternallyimitatethem。WemustattributethemtoHimonlyinaTERMINATIVEsense,asdifferingaspects,fromthefinitepointofview,ofhisuniqueessence。
  Godofcourseisholy,good,andjust。Hecandonoevil,forHeispositivebeing’sfullness,andevilisnegation。ItistruethatHehascreatedphysicalevilinplaces,butonlyasameansofwidergood,forbonumtotiuspraeeminetbonumpartis。MoralevilHecannotwill,eitherasendormeans,forthatwouldcontradicthisholiness。BycreatingfreebeingsHePERMITSitonly,neitherhisjusticenorhisgoodnessobligingHimtopreventtherecipientsoffreedomfrommisusingthegift。
  AsregardsGod’spurposeincreating,primarilyitcanonlyhavebeentoexercisehisabsolutefreedombythemanifestationtoothersofhisglory。Fromthisitfollowsthattheothersmustberationalbeings,capableinthefirstplaceofknowledge,love,andhonor,andinthesecondplaceofhappiness,fortheknowledgeandloveofGodisthemainspringoffelicity。InsofarforthonemaysaythatGod’ssecondarypurposeincreatingisLOVE。
  Iwillnotwearyyoubypursuingthesemetaphysicaldeterminationsfarther,intothemysteriesofGod’sTrinity,forexample。WhatIhavegivenwillserveasaspecimenoftheorthodoxphilosophicaltheologyofbothCatholicsandProtestants。Newman,filledwithenthusiasmatGod’slistofperfections,continuesthepassagewhichIbegantoquotetoyoubyacoupleofpagesofarhetoricsomagnificentthatIcanhardlyrefrainfromaddingthem,inspiteoftheinroadtheywouldmakeuponourtime。[296]HefirstenumeratesGod’sattributessonorously,thencelebrateshisownershipofeverythinginearthandHeaven,andthedependenceofallthathappensuponhispermissivewill。Hegivesusscholasticphilosophy“touchedwithemotion。”andeveryphilosophyshouldbetouchedwithemotiontoberightlyunderstood。Emotionally,then,dogmatictheologyisworthsomethingtomindsofthetypeofNewman’s。Itwillaidustoestimatewhatitisworthintellectually,ifatthispointImakeashortdigression。
  [296]Op。cit。,DiscourseIII。Section7。
  WhatGodhathjoinedtogether,letnomanputasunder。TheContinentalschoolsofphilosophyhavetoooftenoverlookedthefactthatman’sthinkingisorganicallyconnectedwithhisconduct。ItseemstometobethechiefgloryofEnglishandScottishthinkerstohavekepttheorganicconnectioninview。
  TheguidingprincipleofBritishphilosophyhasinfactbeenthateverydifferencemustMAKEadifference,everytheoreticaldifferencesomewhereissueinapracticaldifference,andthatthebestmethodofdiscussingpointsoftheoryistobeginbyascertainingwhatpracticaldifferencewouldresultfromonealternativeortheotherbeingtrue。WhatistheparticulartruthinquestionKNOWNAS?Inwhatfactsdoesitresult?Whatisitscash-valueintermsofparticularexperience?ThisisthecharacteristicEnglishwayoftakingupaquestion。Inthisway,youremember,Locketakesupthequestionofpersonalidentity。
  Whatyoumeanbyitisjustyourchainofparticularmemories,sayshe。Thatistheonlyconcretelyverifiablepartofitssignificance。Allfurtherideasaboutit,suchastheonenessormanynessofthespiritualsubstanceonwhichitisbased,arethereforevoidofintelligiblemeaning;andpropositionstouchingsuchideasmaybeindifferentlyaffirmedordenied。SoBerkeleywithhis“matter。”
  Thecash-valueofmatterisourphysicalsensations。Thatiswhatitisknownas,allthatweconcretelyverifyofitsconception。That,therefore,isthewholemeaningoftheterm“matter“——anyotherpretendedmeaningismerewindofwords。
  Humedoesthesamethingwithcausation。Itisknownashabitualantecedence,andastendencyonourparttolookforsomethingdefinitetocome。Apartfromthispracticalmeaningithasnosignificancewhatever,andbooksaboutitmaybecommittedtotheflames,saysHume。DugaldStewartandThomasBrown,JamesMill,JohnMill,andProfessorBain,havefollowedmoreorlessconsistentlythesamemethod;andShadworthHodgsonhasusedtheprinciplewithfullexplicitness。Whenallissaidanddone,itwasEnglishandScotchwriters,andnotKant,whointroduced“thecriticalmethod“intophilosophy,theonemethodfittedtomakephilosophyastudyworthyofseriousmen。Forwhatseriousnesscanpossiblyremainindebatingphilosophicpropositionsthatwillnevermakeanappreciabledifferencetousinaction?Andwhatcoulditmatter,ifallpropositionswerepracticallyindifferent,whichofthemweshouldagreetocalltrueorwhichfalse?
  AnAmericanphilosopherofeminentoriginality,Mr。CharlesSandersPeirce,hasrenderedthoughtaservicebydisentanglingfromtheparticularsofitsapplicationtheprinciplebywhichthesemenwereinstinctivelyguided,andbysinglingitoutasfundamentalandgivingtoitaGreekname。HecallsittheprincipleofPRAGMATISM,andhedefendsitsomewhatasfollows:[297]——
  [297]Inanarticle,HowtomakeourIdeasClear,inthePopularScienceMonthlyforJanuary,1878,vol。xii。p。286。
  Thoughtinmovementhasforitsonlyconceivablemotivetheattainmentofbelief,orthoughtatrest。Onlywhenourthoughtaboutasubjecthasfounditsrestinbeliefcanouractiononthesubjectfirmlyandsafelybegin。Beliefs,inshort,arerulesforaction;andthewholefunctionofthinkingisbutonestepintheproductionofactivehabits。Iftherewereanypartofathoughtthatmadenodifferenceinthethought’spracticalconsequences,thenthatpartwouldbenoproperelementofthethought’ssignificance。Todevelopathought’smeaningweneedthereforeonlydeterminewhatconductitisfittedtoproduce;
  thatconductisforusitssolesignificance;andthetangiblefactattherootofallourthought-distinctionsisthatthereisnooneofthemsofineastoconsistinanythingbutapossibledifferenceofpractice。Toattainperfectclearnessinourthoughtsofanobject,weneedthenonlyconsiderwhatsensations,immediateorremote,weareconceivablytoexpectfromit,andwhatconductwemustprepareincasetheobjectshouldbetrue。Ourconceptionofthesepracticalconsequencesisforusthewholeofourconceptionoftheobject,sofarasthatconceptionhaspositivesignificanceatall。
  ThisistheprincipleofPeirce,theprincipleofpragmatism。
  Suchaprinciplewillhelpusonthisoccasiontodecide,amongthevariousattributessetdowninthescholasticinventoryofGod’sperfections,whethersomebenotfarlesssignificantthanothers。
  If,namely,weapplytheprincipleofpragmatismtoGod’smetaphysicalattributes,strictlysocalled,asdistinguishedfromhismoralattributes,Ithinkthat,evenwereweforcedbyacoercivelogictobelievethem,westillshouldhavetoconfessthemtobedestituteofallintelligiblesignificance。TakeGod’saseity,forexample;orhisnecessariness;hisimmateriality;his“simplicity“orsuperioritytothekindofinnervarietyandsuccessionwhichwefindinfinitebeings,hisindivisibility,andlackoftheinnerdistinctionsofbeingandactivity,substanceandaccident,potentialityandactuality,andtherest;
  hisrepudiationofinclusioninagenus;hisactualizedinfinity;
  his“personality。”apartfromthemoralqualitieswhichitmaycomport;hisrelationstoevilbeingpermissiveandnotpositive;
  hisself-sufficiency,self-love,andabsolutefelicityinhimself:——candidlyspeaking,howdosuchqualitiesasthesemakeanydefiniteconnectionwithourlife?Andiftheyseverallycallfornodistinctiveadaptationsofourconduct,whatvitaldifferencecanitpossiblymaketoaman’sreligionwhethertheybetrueorfalse?
  Formyownpart,althoughIdisliketosayaughtthatmaygrateupontenderassociations,Imustfranklyconfessthateventhoughtheseattributeswerefaultlesslydeduced,Icannotconceiveofitsbeingofthesmallestconsequencetousreligiouslythatanyoneofthemshouldbetrue。Pray,whatspecificactcanI
  performinordertoadaptmyselfthebettertoGod’ssimplicity?
  Orhowdoesitassistmetoplanmybehavior,toknowthathishappinessisanyhowabsolutelycomplete?Inthemiddleofthecenturyjustpast,MayneReidwasthegreatwriterofbooksofout-of-dooradventure。Hewasforeverextollingthehuntersandfield-observersoflivinganimals’habits,andkeepingupafireofinvectiveagainstthe“closet-naturalists。”ashecalledthem,thecollectorsandclassifiers,andhandlersofskeletonsandskins。WhenIwasaboy,Iusedtothinkthatacloset-