The Philosophy of the ConditionedMansel, Henry Longueville
Religion
The Philosophy of the Conditioned
Mansel, Henry Longueville
Hamilton, William, Sir, 1788-1856; Mill, John Stuart, 1806-1873. Examination of Sir William Hamilton's philosophy
But this distinction involves a further consequence. If the mysteries of
the Divine Nature are not apprehended by reason as existing in a
particular manner (in which case they would be mysteries no longer), but
are accepted by faith as existing in some manner unknown to us, it
follows that we do not know God as He is in His absolute nature, but only
as He is imperfectly represented by those qualities in His creatures
which are analogous to, but not identical with, His own. If, for example,
we had a knowledge of the Divine Personality as it is in itself, we
should know it as existing in a certain manner compatible with
unconditioned action; and this knowledge of the manner would at once
transform our conviction from an act of faith to a conception of reason.
If, on the other hand, the only personality of which we have a positive
knowledge is our own, and if our own personality can only be conceived as
conditioned in time, it follows that the Divine Personality, in so far as
it is exempt from conditions, does not resemble the only personality
which we directly know, and is not adequately represented by it. This
necessitates a confession, which, like the distinction which gives rise
to it, has been vehemently condemned by modern critics, but which has
been concurred in with singular unanimity by earlier divines of various
ages and countries,--the confession that the knowledge which man in this
life can have of God is not a knowledge of the Divine Nature as it is in
itself, but only of that nature as imperfectly represented through
analogous qualities in the creature. Were it not that this doctrine has
been frequently denounced of late as an heretical novelty, we should
hardly have thought it necessary to cite authorities in proof of its
antiquity and catholicity. As it is, we will venture to produce a few
only out of many, selecting not always the most important, but those
which can be best exhibited _verbatim_ in a short extract.
CHRYSOSTOM.--_De Incompr. Dei Natura_, Hom. i. 3: "_That_ God is
everywhere, I know; and _that_ He is wholly everywhere, I know; but
the _how_, I know not: _that_ He is without beginning, ungenerated
and eternal, I know; but the _how_, I know not."
BASIL.--Ep. ccxxxiv.: "That God is, I know; but what is His essence
I hold to be above reason. How then am I saved? By faith; and faith
is competent to know that God is, not what He is."
GREGORY NAZIANZEN.--Orat. xxxiv.: "A theologian among the Greeks
[Plato] has said in his philosophy, that to conceive God is
difficult, to express Him is impossible. ... But I say that it is
impossible to express Him, and more impossible to conceive Him."
[Compare Patrick, _Works_, vol. iii., p. 39.]
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM.--Catech. vi. 2: "We declare not what God is,
but candidly confess that we know not accurately concerning Him.
For in those things which concern God, it is great knowledge to
confess our ignorance."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account