354 PAET I. — THEOLOGY. [Ch. IV. — Can God be known?
includes the affirmation of the mind that a thing is true and trust- worthy. But it is impossible for the mind to affirm anything of that of which it knows nothing. Romanists indeed say that if a man believes that the Church teaches the truth, then he believes all the Church teaches, although ignorant of its doctrines. It might as well be said that because a child has confidence in his father, there- fore he knows all his father knows. Truth must be communicated to the mind, and seen to be possible, before, on any evidence, it can be believed. If, therefore, we cannot know God, we cannot believe in Him.
B. Regulative Knowledge.
The second principle which Hamilton and Mansel adopt to save themselves from scepticism is that of regulative knowledge. We are bound to believe that God is what the Scriptures and our moral nature declare Him to be. This revelation, however, does not teach us what God really is, but merely- what He wills us to believe concerning Him. Our senses, they say, tell us that things around us are, but not what they are. We can, however, safely act on the assumption that they really are what they appear to be. Our senses, therefore, give only regulative knowledge ; i. e., knowledge sufficient to regulate our active life. So we do not, and cannot, know what God really is ; but the representations contained in the Scriptures are sufficient to regulate our moral and religious life. We can safely act on the assumption that He really is what we are thus led to think Him to be, although we know that such is not the fact.
We must be " content," says Mansel,^ " with those regulative ideas of the Deity, which are sufficient to guide our practice, but not to satisfy our intellect, — which tell us not what God is in Himself, but how He wills that we should think of Him." " Though this kind of knowledge," says Hampden,^ " is abundantly instructive to us in point of sentiment and action ; teaches us, that is, both how to feel, and how to act towards God ; — for it is the language that we understand, the language formed by our own ex- perience and practice ; — it is altogether inadequate in point of science." Regulative knowledge, therefore, is that which is de- signed to regulate our character and practice. It need not be true. Nay, it may be, and is demonstrably false ; for Hamilton says it is blasphemy to think that God really is what we take Him to be.
1 Limits of Religious Thought, p. 132.
2 Bampton Lectures, 1832, p. 54.