ANTHROPOMORPHISM, a term in theology used to denote that figure whereby words derived from human objects are employed to express some thing which relates to the Deity. As a finite being can have no intuitive knowledge of an in finite, so no language of rational creatures can fully express the nature of God and render it compre hensible. All further knowledge of God must be communicated by words used to express ourselves intelligibly concerning human and other terrestrial objects. Such words and phrases have their foun dation in a resemblance, which, according to our conceptions, exists between the Deity and man kind. This resemblance, when essential, is such as regards the pure perfections of our minds, that is, such as are unaccompanied with any imperfection, as reason, liberty, power, life, wisdom, and good ness. Those expressions afford an analogical knowledge, from whence arise analogical phrases, which are absolutely necessary whenever we speak of God, and would acquire or communicate some knowledge of his perfections. Such analogical ex pressions must, however, be understood properly, although they give no immediate and intuitive, but only a symbolical knowledge of the Deity. In this sense it is that in Gcn. ii. 16; iii. 9; vi. 13; xii. 1; xv. ; xvii. ; xviii.; Exod. iii. 4, 5—speech is immediately ascribed to the Deitywhile addressing Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Moses. The Deity is also in this sense said to speak mediately to man, viz. by his messengers. But although the speech here ascribed to the Deity is to be understood in a different manner from the language of men, it is not to be understood in such instances figuratively, or in the anthropomorphitic sense, but really and properly. 'Either,' says St. Augustine, 'immutable truth speaks to man ineffably of itself to the minds of rational creatures, or speaks by a mutable creature, either by spiritual images to our minds, or by corporeal voices to the bodily senses.' But God speaks not properly but anthropopathically, when his decrees and their execution are described in human methods, or in the form of dialogues and conversations, as in the phrase (Gen. i. 2) Let there be light, and there was light.' `This,' says Maimonides, 'is to be understood of the will, not the speech ;' and in like manner, St. Augustine, This was performed by the intellectual and eternal, not by the audible and temporal word' (City of God, ch. vii.) Anthropomorphitic phrases, generally considered, are such as ascribe to the Deity mixed perfections and human imperfections. These phrases may be divided into three classes, according to which we ascribe to God :—I. Human actions. 2. Human affections, passions, and sufferings (anthropopathy).
3. Human form, human organs, human members (anthropomorphism).
A rational being, who receives impressions through the senses, can form conceptions of the Deity only by a consideration of his own powers and properties. Anthropomorphitic modes of thought are therefore unavoidable in the religion of mankind; and although they can furnish no other than corporeal or sensible representations of the Deity, they are nevertheless true and just when we guard against transferring to God qualities pertain ing to the human senses. It is, for instance, a proper expression to assert that God knows all things ; it is improper, that is, tropical or anthro pomorphitic, to say that He sees all things. Anthropomorphism is thus a species of accommoda tion, inasmuch as by these representations the Deity as it were lowers himself to the comprehension of men. [ACCOMMODATION.] Divine affections,' says Tertullian, are ascribea to the Deity by means of figures borrowed from the human form, not as if he were endued with corporeal qualities: when eyes are ascribed to him, it is denoted that he sees [viz. knows] all things; when ears, that he hears all things : the speech denotes the will ; nostrils, the perception of prayer; hands, creation ; arms, power ; feet, immensity ; for he has no members, and performs no office for which they are required, but executes all things by the sole act of his will. How can he require eyes, who is light itself? or feet, who is omni present ? How can he require hands, who is the silent creator of all things ? or a tongue, to whom to think is to command. Those members are necessary to men, but not to God, inasmuch as the counsel of men would be inefficacious unless his thoughts put his members in motion ;—but not to God, whose operations follow his will without effort.' In the same manner human affections, as grief, repentance, anger, revenge, jealousy, etc., are ascribed to the Deity. These affections are not, properly speaking, in the mind of God, who is infinitely happy and immutable, but are ascribed to him anthropopathically by way of similitude. For instance, when God forgives the penitent what he had denounced against the wicked who continue in sin, he is said to act as men do in similar cases. Thus St, Augustine observes, By repentance is signified a change of events. For as a man when he repents bewails the crime which he had com mitted, so, when God alters anything unexpectedly, that is, beyond man's expectation, he, figuratively, is said to have repented of the punishment when man repents of the sin' (Ps. cx.) Thus also, when ignorance is ascribed to the Deity (Gen. iv.