(as has been suggested) to object to treat
Immorality as no less a revelation of God than Morality, I must plead
guilty to such an obsession. And yet without such an 'obsession' I
confess I do not see what is left of Christianity. There is only one way
out of the difficulty. If we are all parts of God, we can only call God
good or perfect by maintaining that the deliverances of our moral
consciousness have no validity for God, and therefore can tell us nothing
about him. That has been done deliberately and explicitly by some
Philosophers:[7] the distinguished Theologians who echo the language of
this Philosophy have fortunately for their own religious life and
experience, but unfortunately for their philosophical consistency,
declined to follow in their steps. A God who is 'beyond good and evil,'
can be no fitting object of {105} worship to men who wish to become good,
just, merciful. If the cosmic process be indifferent to these ethical
considerations, we had better (with honest Agnostics like Professor
Huxley) make up our minds to defy it, whether it call itself God or not.

But it is not so much on account of its consequences as on account of its
essential unmeaningness and intellectual unintelligibility that I would
invite you to reject this formula 'God is all.' Certainly, the Universe
is an ordered system: there is nothing in it that is not done by the Will
of God. And some parts of this Universe--the spiritual parts of it and
particularly the higher spirits--are not mere creations of God's will.
They have a resemblance of nature to Him. I do not object to your saying
that at bottom there is but one Substance in the Universe, if you will
only keep clear of the materialistic and spacial association of the word
Substance: but it is a Substance which reveals itself in many different
consciousnesses. The theory of an all-inclusive Consciousness is not
necessary to make possible the idea of close and intimate communion
between God and men, or of the revelation in and to Humanity of the
thought of God. On the contrary, it is the idea of Identity which
destroys the possibility of communion. Communion implies two minds: a
mind cannot have communion with itself or with part of itself. The two
may also in a {106} sense be one; of course all beings are ultimately
part of one Universe or Reality: but that Reality is not one
Consciousness. The Universe is a unity, but the unity is not of the kind
which constitutes