We know him only by the excellent effects of his wisdom and power, by final causes. We revere him because of his perfections, and adore him because of his infinite power: for we adore him as being his creatures; and a God without sovereignty, providence, or final causes, would be no more than destiny and nature.

136. OF SPACE.

Newton says, "There exists a Being incorporeal, living, intelligent, and omni"present, who, in infinite space, as in his "sensorium, sees, discerns, and compre"hends all things, in a manner the most "intimate and perfect." He does not, by that, mean to say, that Space is the organ by which God perceives things, nor does he say that God has need of any medium through which to perceive them; on the contrary, he says that God, being every where present, perceives things by his immediate presence in all Space where they are, without the intervention of any organ or any medium. To render this the more intelligible, he illustrates it by a compari

son he says, the soul, being immediately present to images which are formed on the brain by the organs of sense, sees those images, as if they were the things themselves which they represent: so God sees all by his immediate presence, being actually present to the things themselves, as the soul is present to the images which are formed in the brain. Newton considers the brain and the organs of sense, as the means by which those images are formed, and not as the means by which the soul sees or perceives those images, when they are thus formed; and, in the universe, he does not consider things as if they were images formed by certain means or by organs, but as real things, which God himself has formed, and which he sees in every place where they are, without the intervention of any medium. This is all that he means to assert, when he supposes that infinite Space is as the sensorium (tanquam sensorio suo) of the Being who is omnipresent.

Dr. Clarke, being charged with the task of replying to the objections which the celebrated Leibnitz had made to this definition

of Space, has thrown much light on Newton's opinion. "God," he says, "exists "not in Space, or time, but his existence "is the cause of Space and time; and "when we say that God exists in all Space "and in all time, we merely mean to say, "that he is omnipresent and eternal; that "is to say, that infinite Space and infinite "duration are necessary consequences of "his existence; not that Space and dura"tion are things distinct from him, and in "which he exists. It is certain, that Space ❝is not a simple idea, for it is not possible "to form an idea of Space which goes "beyond what is infinite, and yet reason "informs us, that it is a contradiction to

66

say that Space itself is not actually infi"nite. It is not less certain, that Space is "not any sort of substance, because infi"nite Space is immensity, and not the "immense; in like manner as duration is "not a substance, because infinite duration "is eternity, and not an eternal Being; "but an infinite substance is an eternal "Being, and not eternity. Whence it fol"lows, that Space is a property, in like

86 manner as duration is. Immensity is a property of the immense Being, as eter"nity is a property of the eternal Being."

137. INEXPLICABLE MYSTERY OF THE TRI

NITY.

If there is any one mystery, to endeavour to comprehend whose nature would be fruitless, it is certainly that of the Trinity; but this is not a reason for doubting of the mystery. We believe in so many things that we cannot comprehend, because they are above our capacity, that being once persuaded of the truth of the Christian religion by incontestible evidence, the mysteries it presents for the exercise of faith ought not to shake that faith. When a philosopher is convinced of the existence of an attractive power in bodies, and has calculated its laws, he believes in it, without comprehending its nature. Do we know how the soul is united to the body? Have we, however, any doubt of this union? We see a musician, at a harpsichord, playing a piece of music; to express the first note, he must have the will to place a cer

tain finger upon a certain key, another finger upon another key to express the second, and so successively, to execute a sonata of ten thousand notes. Here are ten thousand acts of the will, which follow each other so rapidly, that individually they are imperceptible. There is no doubt, however, that every touch of a key is by an express and distinct act of the will, directing the fingers, one after the other, to particular notes. Is it known how the will thus influences each movement of the finger? Has any one conceived the least idea of the nature of this mechanism? Yet we do not deny the influence of the will on every movement of the body.

I do not call to mind where I have read the following reasoning, respecting the mystery of the Trinity, but it appears to me so satisfactory, that I cannot refrain from stating it. I am fully persuaded of the necessity of revelation; that of the Evangelists, founded upon the prophecies, the miracles, and the purity of its doctrine, offers irresistible proofs of its divine origin, and which no other can furnish. I find in