The consequence would follow, of course, that the modern Christian must repudiate that total
immanence which has so fully dawned in our world, and stand aside from every contemporary negation of transcendence.
Evidence is found in the analysis of transcendence and
immanence which Professor Charles Hartshorne has made.
Not exact matches
What is needed, therefore, is not a collapsing of reality into a monolith of
immanence but rather the recovery of a language by
which man can be called out of identity into responsibility.
This conclusion means that there is mutual
immanence between God and the world,
which, according to Whitehead, is very much in accord with «the Galilean origins of Christianity.
Whitehead actually defines nexus and society in terms of mutual
immanence, in
which two or more occasions are interwoven (AI 201 - 202).
In either case, Hartshorne's system has a contradiction,
which, although attempting to create a balance of transcendence and
immanence, remains unresolved.
Whitehead also stated (in the paragraph from
which Nobo quoted) that the «mutual
immanence of contemporary actual entities is «of the indirect type» (Adventures 259).
There are some Whiteheadian philosophers, no doubt, who would tend to think that
immanence is adequately explained by the temporal aspect of process: present prehending actual entity following in temporal succession past actual entities
which have completed their concrescence and become fully determinate.
The everlasting nature of God,
which in a sense is nontemporal and in another sense is temporal, may establish with the soul a peculiarly intense relationship of mutual
immanence.
To him, this Kingdom was not located in another place called heaven or in a future millennium, but could best be described in modern terms as a level of consciousness in
which one recognized the
immanence of God in human life and the interconnected, interacting, interdependent nature of the entire human species.
The question around
which the crisis in most modern theology revolves can be summed up as that of
immanence and transcendence, the historical and the timeless, the relative and the absolute.
The aspect of process philosophy to
which I have most particularly drawn your attention is its concept of
immanence, whereby it affirms an actual sense in
which one entity is immanent in another; a sense in
which the experiences of one individual «live on» in those of another, the subjectivity of these experiences passing from the former to the latter.
Thomas Altizer puts a different slant on his nontheology, claiming that the death of God occurred in Christ, a kind of mystical orgasm in
which transcendence empties into
immanence:
The essential feature of a nexus
which qualifies it as an existent thing is then precisely the composite unity brought about through the relational «mutual
immanence» of its many constituents.6
We acknowledge that the criticism of romantic tendencies in the theologies
which have stressed the
immanence of God is often justified.
Only in modern idealism is there a full and pure conceptual realization of the total
immanence of God, a conceptual realization
which in Hegelian logic culminates in an enactment of an absolute mediation that here and now is all in all.
The application of process philosophy accomplishes three things
which the author considers necessary to make theology relevant today: (1) it reconciles theology with the scientific world, (2) it reconciles
immanence and transcendence, and (3) it makes theological talk relevant.
The way in
which the transcendence of God is reduced to
immanence here is quite different.
The everlasting nature of God,
which in a sense is non-temporal and in another sense is temporal, may establish with the soul a peculiarly intense relationship of mutual
immanence.
Ultimately, the Arian / feminist dislocation of meaning from words results in either a remotenessof God
which can never be accessed and whose gap no creature (not even the Logos creature of Arianism) can ever hope to bridge (i.e. Arianism); or it means an
immanence of God who is one with creation and its articulation in such a way that every articulation of meaning can be surpassed by a further better one, as evolution / God evolves to a higher state of being.
The incarnate Word and the divine providence,
which guides creation toward this telos, hold precedence in Maximus» manner of speaking of divine
immanence in creation.
Since His love - in - operation is His essential nature — He is love,
which is His «root - attribute», not aseity, as the older theology claimed — the other things said about Him (transcendence,
immanence, omnipotence, omniscience, omni - presence, righteousness, etc.) are to be understood, as I have already argued earlier, as adverbially descriptive of His mode of being love rather than set up as separate or even as distinct attributions.
Classical theism sees only a single problem here, the question of God's transcendence and
immanence, for
which a twofold solution is quite adequate.
Like conic sections,
which had to wait nearly two thousand years for their first important application in Kepler's description of the elliptical orbits of the planets, perhaps the trinitarian conceptuality, at least with regard to the problem of transcendence and
immanence, first comes into its own in our situation.
Another principle is required, and this is consequent nature
which has the capacity to receive into itself the objective
immanence of the world.
The divine attributes of actuality,
immanence and transcendence are not problematic in any way: all of them characterize the God in two natures for
which Whitehead is so well known.
As primarily relational beings, women are images of
immanence and ultimately of the Church,
which is prepared, at all times, to receive Christ's love.
For Otto, this «wholly other» is transcendent rather than immanent,
which marks it off from Whitehead's insistence that
immanence is the key, although both seem to be considering the same experiential evidence.
Thus, in an important essay, he argues that «freedom requires indeterminism and universal causality «56 He freely admits that there is an element of regularity and order in nature
which may be partially described in the statistical laws of science; but he also confesses his inability to give a rational explanation (other than the
immanence of God) of why, in a world of freedom, we have an orderly cosmos instead of sheer chaos.57
This description of events could equally well belong to Whitehead or to Merleau - Ponty; it describes the
immanence whereby the Anglo - American would see one event lying within its predecessor, or it describes the sedimentation by
which time layers itself out, event by event, experience by experience.
Thus the idea of tsimtsum, or the self - limitation of God, is given a metaphorical rather than a literal interpretation
which enables it to coexist with the strongest possible emphasis on the
immanence of God, or God's Glory, in all things.
The guiding element in Teilhard's world view was his introduction of the evolutionary principle into God's relationship with man, by means of
which he wove a vision that both broke from the traditional transcendence -
immanence dualism and challenged many timeworn dogmas of divine providence.
Tons of free Divine Breast, Divine
Immanence refers to those philosophical and metaphysical theories of divine presence in
which the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world.
Some also include short Buddhist, Hindu, and Taoist texts
which have profoundly affected the artist, making clear his concern with
immanence, permanence, and the infinite.
As he writes, «Martin's schizophrenia, though never entirely a secret, seems at odds with her art,
which is marked by its clarity and rigour, and an exactitude that never excludes human qualities, and has within it a sense of
immanence.»
Martin's schizophrenia, though never entirely a secret, seems at odds with her art,
which is marked by its clarity and rigour, and an exactitude that never excludes human qualities, and has within it a sense of
immanence.