must be first presented to the mind before they can be represented by it; while, by referring the phenomena of matter and of mind to one substance, it requires us either to sacrifice both to an indeterminate existence which cannot be apprehended nor even imagined, or at least to sacrifice the one to the other. But we cannot make sacrifices of this kind without being necessitated to make others which are perhaps still greater. If we hold fast to the indeterminate, and persist in evolving from it both the material and mental worlds, we must have another organ of apprehension than ordinary men, and employ a different sort of logic than that of the common understanding. Our minds must have intuitions and processes which are entirely superhuman-a knowledge which transcends consciousness, and a dialectic which is independent of the laws of thought. If, on the other hand, we suppress either matter or mind, it can only be by an application of scepticism which we are logically bound to repeat and to generalise until no object or faculty continues to be acknowledged as trustworthy. Pantheism inevitably involves either mysticism or scepticism; and both mysticism and scepticism mean the sacrifice, the suicide of reason.

Then it requires us also to regard as delusive the consciousness which each man possesses of being a self or person. Whoever knows himself as

a self, a person, knows that he is not a mere part of God or of any other being; he knows himself as different from God and from every other being. The self-consciousness which is in each man cannot at once be his own proper self-consciousness and the self-consciousness which has been acquired by God. Self-consciousness is single, not dual. But there are millions on millions of self-conscious beings or persons in the world. And pantheism, in order to adhere to its dogma of absolute unity, must contradict the testimony borne by the consciousness of all these beings. It is logically

bound to affirm that each of them is under a delusion when he supposes himself to be truly a self or person. But what does this imply? Why, that from true persons, really distinct from all other beings-free, responsible, moral-it must reduce and degrade them to mere semblances; for with personality, their freedom of will, responsibility, duty, must be likewise sacrificed. I should have to dwell long on this if I were to attempt to exhibit the various particulars which are involved, and therefore I must be content with the mere general declaration that pantheistic unity can only be attained at the cost of the abandonment of all the fundamental moral convictions and spiritual aspirations of humanity.

It is only an intellectual idol like the pantheistic unity which can demand sacrifices so numerous

and enormous. It demands them just because it is an intellectual idol-a false unity-a unity of a kind which can never be legitimately attained. We cannot but recognise both the finite and the infinite, the relative and the absolute, the contingent and the necessary; but we cannot by the utmost effort of reason reduce them to one absolute essence from which the whole universe of thought and being may be shown to have necessarily proceeded.

The highest unity to which the finite mind can rise is, it seems to me, the unity of a single creative intelligent Will-the one infinite personal God of theism. To this unity all multiplicity may be traced back. It is no abstract and dead unity, but one which is real, which is all-comprehensive, which fully explains both the unity and variety of the universe, and which fully satisfies at once the demands of the intellect and the heart; for it is a unity which contains the infinite fulness. of power, wisdom, and love. It is an absolute unity in the only sense in which that phrase conveys an intelligible and credible meaning—that is to say, it is one Being which is self-existent and self-sufficient, which is entirely independent of every other being, and possessed in itself of every excellence in an infinite measure; while it is the sole and free source of all finite excellence. Whatever the pantheist describes as an absolute unity must be one and absolute in some way much

inferior to this. The unity of matter, the unity of force, the unity of all that is unconscious and impersonal, is unessential and derivative, yea, even illusory if separated from the underlying and original unity of a self-active mind. Only that which says "I" cannot be divided or supposed to be divided; and that which says "I," while absolutely indivisible, may possess an infinite wealth of powers and properties. The absoluteness of an infinite which necessarily originates the finite is a relative and dependent absoluteness; it is the absoluteness of a being which is not self-sufficient -which is as dependent on what it produces as that which it produces is dependent on it-which is necessarily related to the finite-which, although an infinite that is necessarily and completely active, has only a finite result. This is a curious absoluteness; or rather, it is a manifest absurdity which involves the negation of the principle of causality and of every other principle of rational thought. The theist keeps free from it. God is absolute in the view of the theist, because He alone is selfdependent and self-complete-because He stands in necessary relation to nothing finite, and yet can constitute and enter into all relations with the finite, which He chooses, and which are consistent with His intrinsic perfections. According to theism, whatever is, and is not God, is a creature of God, and no creature of God has, like God,

necessary existence. According to theism, God is the one necessary Being, and He, being selfsufficient, needs no other beings in order to realise perfect self-consciousness or to secure perfect blessedness. This seems to me a much more consistent and satisfactory view of absoluteness than that of the pantheist.

It must be admitted, of course, that from the unity to which theism refers us, an absolute science such as pantheism promises cannot possibly be deduced. Alike the infinity and the freedom of the single supreme will make it impossible that a finite mind should so comprehend it as to be able logically to determine its decisions and acts. In the very knowing, indeed, that there is a God, we know that He is infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in His power, wisdom, and holiness; but this knowledge of His general attributes can never justify our pretending to specify what must be His particular doings, or to maintain more than that none of His doings will be found to be unworthy of His character. The finite mind may legitimately convince itself that there is an infinite mind, but it can never so comprehend such a mind as to be capable of speculatively deducing what it can or must or will do. Absolute science is the

science of an infinite reason, and not the science which can be attained by a creature like man; it is knowledge in which there is no distinction be