knowledge of its own essence and perfections, in all their extent; and this, because it cannot take a compass round itself, from the first moment of its existence, through all future eternity, and return back to the first moment of its existence; and because it has no standard within itself to compare itself by, for it subsists in one mode only; neither can it make another created mind a standard to compare its own perfections by, having no immediate, continued, and immutable communication therewith. Hence we say, in the present state, there is no way for a created mind to know itself in all respects, and to become perfectly acquainted with the whole extent of its own being.

And what it does know of itself, can only be by careful observation from without, and attentive reflection from within; neither can it know its own immateriality and immortality but by the most attentive investigation, the most correct comparison, made with the most careful and laborious efforts. This is well known to metaphysicians.

Now, by parity of reasoning, and as far as lawful to follow the perfections of the created mind, up to those of the uncreated, it is absolutely impossible for us to conceive, upon any rational principle, how the Divine Mind can know itself, as eternal, immense, and immutable, by the exercise of its own intellectual or perceptive powers,

if it subsist in one mode only, for want of objects suited to these powers, and for want of objects suited to its intuitive decisions, in the pursuit of the knowledge of itself. Perceptive powers require objects distinct from the percipient agent: intuitive decision, by innate ideas, requires dis tinct objects to decide upon. Now where can these be found in one mode of subsistence only? It will appear, upon a fair examination of the intellectual powers of the human mind, that they all require objects external to the mind, in order to the exercise of intelligence, perception, memory, conception, abstraction, association, judgment, reasoning, all require objects external to the mind, in order to the increase of knowledge. And does not the intellectual powers of the Divine Mind require objects, distinct in itself, in order to the perfection of the divine know. ledge?

12. It will be found, upon a fair examination of the innate ideas of the created mind, that they are mostly, if not always, exercised by intuitive judgment, and that they ever have necessary truths, or first principles, as the objects of this intuitive decision; and it will farther be found, whether we examine the axioms of mathematics, or the axiomatic principles of any other art, or science, or necessary truths, or first principles, that the intuitive decision of the human mind upon these, is pronounced by comparison, either

drawn from innate ideas, or from the decisions of the different senses.

And if we dare follow our reasoning from the created to the uncreated Mind, we have no way of accounting for the knowledge of the uncreated Mind, but by supposing something similar, though far more perfect, than the exercise of the innate ideas, or the organs of sense, of the created mind. This must either be granted, or the opposers are required to give some reasonable account of the exercise of the innate ideas, and the perceptive powers of the uncreated Mind. For it is impossible even for the Divine Being, supposing only one mode of distinct subsistence in the Divine Essence, to take a compass round itself, from all past eternity, through all future eternity, and return to where it set out, in order to ascertain the necessary and everlasting duration, and the immensity of space comprehending its own essence and perfections. Or, in other words, it is impossible for eternity to compass eternity, and for immensity to encompass immensity, in one simple mode of subsistence, or in one person only. No being, whether created, or necessarily existent, can travel round itself, upon the margins of its own existence; and unless the Divine Being could encompass itself thus, which reason says it never can; or unless it could find a distinction in the modes of the subsistence of its own essence and perfections. forming a stan

dard of comparison within itself, there is no way that we can reasonably conceive or imagine how it can know its own eternity and immensity.-And it is equally impossible for finite intelligence to conceive how the Divine Being can exercise its own innate ideas, or its own perceptive powers, in order to know itself in all respects perfectly, but upon the supposition that the Divine Essence and perfections subsist in three distinct, not separate, modes, in order to the full and perfect exercise of the divine intelligence, to the very uttermost of its nature, as well as the divine efficiency. For, if not, the divine intelligence must be imperfect, and if the divine intelligence be imperfect, the Divine Being is imperfect, which is absurd and impossible.*

* See Note E. on the preceding Proposition.

PROPOSITION VI.

PROVING THE DOCTRINE FROM THE WAY IN WHICH THE DIVINE BEING KNOWS THE ETERNITY OF ITS OWN WISDOM, AND THEREBY OF ALL ITS OTHER PERFECTIONS.

[The Divine Being knows the eternity of its own wisdom, and of all its other perfections, by the exercise of its intellectual or perceptive powers-It is fair and legitimate reasoning to rise from the perfections of the rational moral creature, and ascend to the perfections of the uncreated moral Essence-But the Creator, in viewing one of its own perfections, cannot descend to a corresponding one in the moral creature—The law of the activity of the divine intelligence-The manner in which the modes arise, or the way by which the second and third are constituted—A view of the relation of the divine intelligence in each of the modes-The Divine Being could not be what is, without distinct modes of subsistence in the Divine Essence-The impossibility of there being either more or less than three divine modes, objects, or persons, in the Divine Essence-Inference and conclusion.]

1. We now pursue the subject, by endeavouring to shew how the Divine Being exercises its own intellectual or perceptive powers, and also its innate ideas, in the knowledge of the eternity of its own wisdom. We suppose the divine wisdom to be the object of the divine innate ideas, or the divine perceptive powers, in order to know