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-