the divine presence within the ethical regions of life which reveal the interplay of free spirits and the possibilities of inter-communion through the exercise of will in the intimacies of personal fellowship. For this the term omnipresence is unsuited; it seems too quantitative, too spatial. The indwelling in the consciousness of moral beings must be personal and manifestly active through qualities of character. To speak of the omnipresence of God in the soul of man sounds incongruous; it is a term connected with different planes of reality. Omnipresence is commonly associated with the natural attributes of God as distinguished from the moral activities that constitute His character. It is a wise distinction to consider the universal presence as a natural relation of God to the world, regarded as determined in its activities from behind. A separate term seems desirable when we wish to indicate God's indwelling presence within the moral realm of ends which constitute the motives of a free choice.1 Omnipresence suggests an occupancy of space not fully in harmony with the meeting of spirit with spirit in ethical converse. Here omnipresence obviously is inferior as a term to immanence, for wisdom and love, for instance, are indwelling moral energies to which we do not feel at liberty to apply omnipresence as an acceptable description. Immanence, then, is a useful word for indicating the closer definition of the indwelling presence at work in the moral order of the universe where free spirits exercise their powers. This distinction, however, need not be interpreted as suggesting that the 1 Cf. W. N. Clarke, Christian Doctrine of God, pp. 324 f., for opposing view. presence of God at work in the physical universe is less than personal, that it is there merely a vague, far-spread atmosphere thinly diffused and void of spiritual quality. The will of the omnipresent God is everywhere operative; and will is a definite characteristic of personality. The consideration of this position, however, belongs to a later stage of the discussion.1 In one other sense also it may be said that immanence has a connotation distinguishable from that of omnipresence in modern theology. This is admirably stated by Dr. W. N. Clarke: To the doctrine of omnipresence the doctrine of immanence adds the endeavour to expound the relation between the omnipresent God and the universe with which He is present. It not only affirms that God is present, but attempts to suggest something as to what He effects by virtue of His presence, and how the universe is affected by it. The doctrine of immanence is nothing more than an endeavour to interpret the fact of God's universal presence, and tell what that presence signifies or accomplishes. What does the real presence of the sole transcendent Being, bearing all the power and character of God, mean to the universe material and spiritual? In what manner of contact with it does He stand? Wherein is the universe different because He is in it from what it would be if He were governing it from without? What is it receiving or becoming in consequence of its immediate contact with all the fullness of God? "The doctrine of omnipresence affirms that God is everywhere; the doctrine of immanence affirms what it means that God is 1 Cf. pp. 103 ff., 234 ff. everywhere." The two doctrines differ in their scope, but the reality with which they deal is one and the same. In both we contemplate only the one relation of the living God to His universe.' 1 Christian Doctrine of God, p. 329. 6. DEFINITION BEFORE proceeding to discuss the high themes involved in the doctrine of immanence a reply should be attempted to the question, What precisely does this term mean which appears likely to supplement or to supplant omnipresence for modern theological thought? Its use is rare in English literature. The Oxford Dictionary, it has been pointed out,' gives no example of its use earlier than S. T. Coleridge, whose genius included a gift for interpreting spiritual realities in new currencies of speech. The use of the adjective 'immanent' has been more frequent. The bare dictionary definition of the term, 'The notion that the intelligent and creative principle of the universe pervades the universe itself, a fundamental conception of Pantheism,'' presents the view of the popular mind. This view has unfortunately in some cases been taken over by popular theological writers without the closer definition the word-which is strictly a philosophical term-requires before its service for the expression of religious ideas can be fully justified. To many minds also it denotes an emotion rather than a doctrine. It is the name 1 Davison, London Theological Studies, p. 252. chosen to describe a 'cosmic emotion,' which the poetic contemplation of the beauty and harmony of the world awakens in the imagination of artist and seer, in the man of science also, as well as in the man of God. This sentiment is diffused, indefinite, indefinable indeed, but strong and deep and in close affinity psychologically with the secret sources of religious faith. It reveals a susceptibility in human nature of greatest value in religious development. It is, nevertheless, an element of the problem of religion very difficult to translate into correlative terms in theological thought without taking it to imply either the exclusive indwelling of God in nature and in man in a pantheistic or naturalistic sense, or else involving a doctrine of panegoism, which reduces all reality to elements resident in human consciousness. We are unwilling to accept either of these alternatives as inevitable. It is un necessary to do so. The ideas 'immanence' stands for have come to stay in theological thought. They are of great value there. We need them and welcome them. But we cannot accept them as unrelated ideas, as the loose reactions against the prevalence of ideas of transcendence unduly exalted and exclusively stated in the older theological thought. We must ask more exactly what is their relation to theistic positions and to the fundamental characteristics of Christian thought. We may start on this inquiry by accepting as working hypotheses two definitions of immanence available for Christian thinking, which are supplied by competent writers on the subject: By immanence we mean that God is the omnipresent ground of all finite existence and activity. The world alike of things |