360 
himself and each fellow-man as an animal “Unit,” and as a conscious 
“ Person,” and as bearing a common “ Nature ” ; and this latter in several 
senses. 
It is certain that any other use of the word “ Nature ” than that which 
is elicited from its ordinary use, would mislead us, and be frequently 
unintelligible. All writers, both sacred and secular, in all ages, use the 
word thus. If they enlarge its meaning from the specific to the generic, 
and then speak of “ Universal Nature,” they do but further idealize the 
same truth, viz., that the Universe not only contains orders of beings, but 
is as a whole a great order of being. 
An order of Being, whether specific, or general, or universal, has its 
reason and purpose included in it. “ It is — because it is,” and for its own 
end. An infraction of its order is a disarrangement as to its purpose. The 
“ Goodness” of any “ Nature ” is, in the judgment of all men, its fitness 
for its end ; its disorder is Evil, for it thwarts the end. 
It is thus Cicero says, “Jus in Natura positum est” ( De Leg.) : thus 
“seeds of Virtue” are called “lumina Naturae.” Thus, Law is the highest 
Reason implanted “ in Nature.” Hence also the whole “ Lex Naturae,” as 
examined by the Jurists, and thus Aristotle, ■>) fvcnin) a peri ) irpoc ri)v icvpiav. 
(Eth., vi. 13.) 
If again we cross examine the use of Christian writers of all ages, it is 
the same. St. Paul speaks of somethings as “ contrary to Nature ,” (mean- 
ing man’s), and indentifies “Nature ” in its better estate with Divine Law 
(Rom. i. 26 ; ii. 14.) St. Chrysostom contrasts the <pvoiv ayykXov and 
<pv<riv avSpwirov (ad Heb. ii.). St. James had contrasted the “Nature” 
of men, with that of wild beasts and birds (S. James iii. 7). 
Later on, among the Scholastics, we have “Nature” analyzed, as either 
“ natura Naturans,” (which describes the process of becoming),^ and 
“ Natura naturata,” (as that which is perfected); reminding us of Cicero’s 
saying, that we may rise, “ a primis inchoatisque Naturis, ad ultimas per- 
fectasque.” ( De Nat. Deo.) 
“ To act according to Nature,” sequi Naturam, if Nature be the “ order of 
things ” with its Reason in it, is the highest wisdom within our natural 
reach, whenever Nature itself has not been injured, or depraved. That in 
which all things rightly consist must be the law of the individual being 
everywhere. The conscious finite Being aims at this, freely. 
“Goodness” being thus recognized in every “ Nature” as its “ fitness” to 
its End, it follows that there will be diversities in forms of goodness, accord- 
ing to various Natures, conscious or unconscious, involuntary or not, and 
their various ends. If indeed, we rise above the phenomenal, we have then 
to consider the Nature, and Goodness, of the Absolute, and Unconditioned, 
and Infinite ; rising as our poet says, to the 
“ First True, first Perfect, and first Fair.” 
This would lead us to contemplation of the ii priori , which cannot here be 
