God's Eternity, Immensity, and Omnipresence

§5–6: Eternity, Immensity, and Omnipresence

SECTION .5 god’s eternity i. Preliminary Observations. — Our concept of time {tempus, wrf) is prior to our concept of eternity (aeternitas) , and we acquire the latter by a negation of the former. As space signifies co-existence, so time signifies succession, or, in its widest sense, motion (tnotus). a) Hence Aristotle 1 defines time as ” the number of movement, estimated according to its before and after.” 2 It follows that the notion of time postulates mutability, nay, even mutation (change). Like space, time has three dimensions: past, present, and future. It is to be observed, however, that whatever actually exists, constitutes an ” ever current now ” ; for the past exists no longer, and the future not yet. As this quality of being current, or flowing, as it were, inheres in and endures with an object, so constant duration (perduratio) constitutes an element of time as well as of eternity, — with this difference, that in the former it is successive, in the latter simultaneous. Whence it follows that successiveness is the essential characteristic of time. b) Eternity, being the direct contradictory of time, must not be conceived as “endless time” iPhys. IV, ii : xp^os iarlp 2 Cfr. J. Rickaby, General Mefadpidfibs Kivfoeus icard t6 Tp6rcpop physics, pp. 376 sqq. kclI Gcrepov. 306

or “absence of duration,” 3 but as “limitless duration/’ without beginning or end. Eternity, therefore, has its immediate and proximate principle in absolute immutability,4 and is consequently, like immutability, incommunicable. God alone is eternal. If time be designated as ” an ever current now ” (nunc fluens), we must describe eternity as “a standing now” (nunc stans) ; that is, as pure presence without any admixture of past or future. Hence eternity and time are related to each other, not as species of the same genus, but precisely as contingency is related to self-existence, or the creature to its Creator. They are contradictories. It was to eliminate succession not only from the divine Essence but likewise from the operation of God, that Boethius introduced the concept of “life” into his famous definition:5 ” Aeternitas est interminabilis vitae tota simul et perfecta possessio — Eternity is the possession, perfect and all at once, of life without beginning or end,” 6 or ” Eternity is a simultaneously full and perfect possession of interminable life.”T As God is in eternity, or, more correctly, as He is His own eternity,8 so all created beings exist in time, in so far. as, and because, they are subject to incessant and real changes. These changes constitute what is called “intrinsic time” (tempus intrinsecum) . “Extrinsic time ” (tempus extrinsecum) is the external stand8 Klee, Oswald, et ai. Supr?t | 4. sDe Consol. Phil, V, 6. e Cfr. Wilhelm-Scannell, Manual, p. 1 95. 7 Hunter, Outlines, II, 78. 8 Cfr. W. Humphrey, ” His Divine Majesty/’ pp. 120 sqq. 3o8 ETERNITY ard or conventional unity of measurement (e. g., the uniform motion of the heavens) for gauging successive duration (year, month, day, hour, minute, second). The real mutation to which all creatures are subject is not necessarily constant and uninterrupted. There are creatures which are relatively immutable, either in their essence (e. g., angels, the spiritual soul), or in their operation (the act of beatific vision). Such a state, more or less exempt from the mutations of time, is by theologians called aevum abstractly aeviternitas, in opposition and contradistinction to time as well as to eternity proper. Aeviternitas, therefore, stands midway between fempus ’ and aeternitas. It shares with aeternitas the negation of constant fluctuation, with tempus the possibility . of fluctuation, i. e., real mutability. Hence aevum differs in principle from eternity just as much as it differs from time. Being a creature, the ens aeviternum, too, though it will have no end, must have had a beginning; while on the other hand, it always remains mutable and capable of being immersed as it were in the constantly flowing stream of time.10 c) Finally we have to distinguish in God eternity and sempiternity. Eternity as such abstracts from actual time, just as immensity abstracts from actual space. God would be absolutely eternal and immense even if there were neither time nor space. However, just as, assuming that there is actual space, immensity becomes omnipresence; so, assuming that there is real time, eternity must co» at&v, from del &v> lOCfr. S. Theol., ia, qu. 10, art. 5.

exist with every time or instant of time.11 As a counterpart to omnipresence, this is a new (hypothetical or relative) attribute, for which unfortunately theology has not yet coined a distinct term. We may call it ” sempiternity.” 12 2. The Dogma of God’s Eternity. — It is an article of faith that God alone is absolutely eternal. Already the first Council of Nicaea anathematized “those who say: There was a time when [the Son of God] was not ore ofa fy) f and the Athanasian Creed teaches : “Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus Spiritus Sanctus, et tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus — The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal, and yet they are not three Eternals but one Eternal.* Similarly the Fourth Lateran Council, and also that of the 11 Cfr. St. Thomas, Contra Gent., I, 66, (Rickaby, Of God and His Creatures, p. 48) : * Since the being of the eternal never fails, eternity is present to every time or instant of time. Some sort of example of this may be seen in a circle: for a point taken on the circumference does not coincide with every other point; but the centre, lying away from the circumference, is directly opposite to every point of the circumference. [As between any two points you can draw a straight line, every point in space is • directly opposite ’ every other point. What St. Thomas means is that the line drawn from the centre of the circle to any point in the circumference makes a right angle, with the tangent at that point.] Whatever therefore is in any portion of time, co-exists with the eternal, as present to it, although in respect to another portion of time, it be past or future. But nothing can co-exist in presence with the eternal otherwise than with the whole of it, because it has no successive duration. Whatever therefore is done in the whole course t>f time, the divine mind beholds it as present throughout the whole of its eternity; and yet it cannot be said that what is done in a definite portion of time has always been an existing fact.* 12 Cfr. Alcuin, De Differentia Aeterni et Sempiterni; Oswald, Dogmat. TheoU, Vol. I, pp. 130 sqq. 3io ETERNITY Vatican, enumerate eternity” among the absolute attributes of God. a) The Bible often employs the predicate “eternal” to signify “without end”;13 hence in constructing the Scriptural argument for the dogma under consideration, we shall have to be careful to adduce only such passages in which the term is strictly defined. However, it will not be difficult to show that Scripture expressly ascribes to God all three of the constitutive elements of eternity, viz., no beginning, no end, no succession— together with their root, self-existence. ) That eternity has neither beginning nor end is often emphasized in Holy Writ. Cfr. Ps. LXXXIX, 2: “Priusquatn tnontes Cerent, aut formaretur terra et orbis, a saeculo et usque in saeculum tu es Deus — Before the mountains were made, or the earth and the world was formed ; from eternity to eternity thou art God.” Ps. XCII, 2: “Ex tunc a saeculo tu es — Thou art from everlasting. 14 In this connection we can also adduce the expression The Ancient of Days” (antiquus dierum) in Dan. VII, 9, which is not meant to express old age, but eternity. P) Secondly, the Bible does not conceive the attribute of having neither beginning nor end as lBE. g, eternal fire, eternal hills; XXXII, 40: Vivo ego in aeter dr. Gen. XXi, 33; I«. XL, 28. num.— I live forever. 14 Compare this text with Deut. THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES 311 infinite duration in time, but as a constant duration without any admixture of successiveness, i. e.} as “nunc stans” Without insisting on the predilection which the Sacred Book, in referring to God, shows for the present tense, we merely observe that the texts we have already cited to prove the immutability of God also prove that time does not enter into His essence or operation. St. Augustine acutely observes: “Qui sunt anni, qui non deficiunt, nisi qui stantf Si ergo ibi anni stant, et ipsi anni, qui stant, unus annus est; et ipse unus annus, qui stat, unus dies est … sed stat semper ille dies 15 Holy Scripture, in comparing time with eternity, repeatedly speaks of *one day,” of “the eternal to-day.”16 y) Immutability is the proximate and self-existence the ultimate principle of eternity. In predicating aseity of God, therefore, we implicitly declare that He is without beginning and without end, and that there is in Him no succession of time. Holy Scripture leaves no doubt about this. Apoc. I, 8: I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord God, who is and who was, and who is is In Ps. CXXI, n. 6. leCfr. 2 Petr. Ill, 8: * Unus dies apud Dominant stent mille anni, et mille anni sicut unus dies — One day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. (Cfr. Pa. LXXXIX, 4.) Ps. II, 7: *Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te — Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee.” John VIII, 58: ” Antequam Abraham fieret, ego sum — Before Abraham was made, I am.” 312 ETERNITY to come, the Almighty.” And still more pregnantly ApOC. I, 4 : ” “O

THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES rAntickristus coexistit Deo in aeternitate secundum suum esse reale; ergo ab aeterno habet hanc coexisientiam in ipsa aeternitate/’ It is easy to discover the fallacy. To co-exist with all eternity is by no means the same as to co-exist always with eternity. Daring the time of its physical life a creature truly co-exists with all eternity, because it co-exists With eternity, and eternity cannot be divided into parts. But it is manifestly wrong to conclude from this that, because it co-exists with all eternity, a creature’s physical co-existence is eternal. This would be tantamount to asserting that all existing creatures are formally eternal, thus contradicting the dogmatic teaching of the Church that no creature exists from eternity. Misunderstanding can easily be avoided by keeping in mind the Scholastic formula: * Creaturae coexistunt quidem toti aeternitati, sed non totaliter,* 20 that is to say, All things which at any time exist, co-exist, so far as the actual being of them is concerned, with the whole of the divine eternity, although not from eternity.21 20Cfr. Chr. Pesch, PraelecU Dogm., torn. II, pp. 87 sqq. Friburgi 1899. 21 ” Successive co-existence is not to be understood as if it implied succession in the eternal duration, but only as there is succession in the co-existing time. The several parts of its duration co-exist in actual reality with the eternal dura* tion, for that time only in which they actually exist. As regards actual reality, those things which’ now at this present exist, co-exist with the eternity of God. Those things which have passed away, and are now no more in existence, did co-exist with the same changeless 21 eternity, at that time when they were in existence. Those things which are not yet in actual existence, but which will one day exist, will then co-exist with the same eternity; in that day when they shall begin to exist, and so long as they continue to exist in their actual being. It is not as if the past co-existed with one part, and as if the present co-existed with another part, while the future coexisted with yet another part of the eternal duration. The divine eternity does not consist of parts.” — Humphrey, “His Divine Majesty/’ PP. 122 sq. 3H ETERNITY Readings: — S. Thorn., 5. TheoL, ia, qu. 10 (Bonjoannes-Lescher, Compendium, pp. 26 sqq.). — Suarez, De Deo, II, 4. — Vasquez, t. 1, disp. 31. — Petavius, De Deo, III, 3-6. — Thomassin, De Deo, V, 11-15. — Lessius, De Perfect. Divin., 1. IV. — Gillius, De Essentia Dei, tract. 10, c. 17. — Franzelin, De Deo Uno, thes. 3132. — Tepe, Instit. TheoL, Vol. II, pp. 90 sqq., Paris 1895. — Rickaby, Of God and His Creatures, pp. 14, 48. — WilhelmScannell, Manual, pp. 195 sqq. — Humphrey, “His Divine Majesty*” PP. “9 sqq.

god’s immensity and omnipresence i. Preliminary Observations. — We can conceive eternity only as the negation of time, and immensity only as the negation of space (spatium, But what is space?1 As time is a (successive) before and after, so space is (simultaneous) juxtaposition. Hence juxtaposition (positio partium extra partes) according to length, breadth, and thickness, forms the characteristic note of space, as well as of matter. The modern theory of an nth dimension is merely a metaphysico-mathematical gewgaw.2 a) Space and body differ in many particulars. For while space, as the ” container ” of bodies, is conceived as immovable, unlimited, uncreatable, and indestructible, bodies move about freely in space, are circumscribed by external surface, and susceptible both of being created and annihilated. Space as here described is usually called absolute or imaginary space. It must not be coni ” • Space ’ scarcely engaged St God is everywhere where creatures Thomas’s attention. Nor does he are; but that, apart from creation, discuss immensity as an attribute there is no meaning in speaking of of God. He declares: ‘We say God as being everywhere.” — Rickthat there was no place or space aby, Of God and His Creatures, p. before the world was’ (Sum. 230, n. Theol, ia, qu. 46, art. 1, ad 4). 2 Cfr. Gutberlet, Die neue Raum* This is tantamount to saying that theorie, Mainz 1882. 315

3i6 IMMENSITY founded with real space, which depends on the existence of a real material world. Though this kind of space is also immovable, it does not extend beyond the limits of the physical universe. Outside of this there is no real, but only absolute or imaginary space. Real space began to exist simultaneously with the bodies which it contains ; and it would disappear if these bodies ceased to exist. Real space is consequently ” real extension carried to the utmost limits of the universe, combined with the function of receiving and holding material bodies.” Similarly we may define absolute (t. e., possible) space, as the extension of merely possible bodies with regard to their position. b) Place {locus, situs, *6

and in all of its parts, in such manner that it cannot be circumscribed by any real space, no matter how vast; this kind of presence is predicable of God alone. c) Eternity, as we said before, must not be conceived as infinite duration in time. In like manner immensity must not be conceived as infinite extension, expansion, or diffusion of the Divine Essence in space, because the Divine Essence is absolutely simple. St. Augustine confesses that he entertained this misconception in his youth.4 Newton committed a similar blunder when, in his controversy with Leibniz, he confounded the immensity of God with absolute (imaginary) space. The immensity of God cannot be measured with a yardstick in length, breadth, and depth. Lessius, it is true, refers to this divine attribute as ” uncreated space.” 5 But he merely wishes to assert that the immensity of God constitutes the foundation of space in the same way that eternity constitutes the foundation of time. In matter of fact immensity is the formal contradictory of space, and therefore can be conceived only by the negation of its essential characteristic, i. e., juxtaposition. God is not subject to space; He is beyond space; He has no extension, either formal or virtual; He is in no wise bound by the limits of space. This relation can be best understood by picturing the analogous mode in which truth exists in space. It is everywhere and nowhere; it is present in every portion of space, and yet not subject to space, because it is above space. 4 Confess. VIII, 5. 5” Spotiutn increatutn.” De Perfect. Divin., II, 2,

3i8 IMMENSITY Now, God, being the subsisting, absolute, living Truth, can be immense and omnipresent only in the manner that truth is immense and omnipresent. d) Immensity (immensitas) and omnipresence (otnnipraesentia) are differentiated in the same manner as eternity and sempiternity. Immensity is an absolute attribute, which belongs to God regardless of existing space. Omnipresence, on the other hand, is a relative and hypothetical attribute, contingent on real extension. Is God, by virtue of His immensity, also present in absolute space? The query is futile, inasmuch as absolute space has no actual existence, no reality. But we can and must say that God is present even in possible space negative et fundamentaliter, so that if new space came into existence, God would not begin to exist there, but, conversely, the newly created world would find the Immense Being already present when it came into existence. Since Divine Revelation itself discriminates between immensity and omnipresence, we shall consider them as two separate attributes. 2. The Dogma of God’s Immensity. — In reciting the Athanasian Creed we profess:

Fourth Lateran and the Vatican Councils distinctly enumerate immensity among the divine attributes. a) Holy Scripture teaches the immensity of God in terms similar to those which it employs in asserting His eternity. As eternity, having neither beginning nor end, extends . beyond all time, both before and after; so immensity exceeds all limits of space. Cf r. 3 Kings VIII, 27 : “For if heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee, how much less this house [i. e.y temple] which I have built ?” Job XI, 8 sq.: “Excelsior coelo est et quid fades? … Iongior terra mensura eius et latior mari — He is higher than heaven, and what wilt thou? … The measure of him is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea.” Because He is beyond space, God, according to Holy Scripture, cannot be measured by the dimensions of space. He is without measure, immeasurable, immense. As eternity, which is duration without succession, combines the three measurements of time in one single “To-day,” so with God the dimenmerely took it, with a few slight The Being and Attributes of God, alterations, from the Protestant p. 263 n., New York 1909. On Book of Common Prayer. We The Popular Use of the Athanasian have before us the Oxford edi- Creed in the Catholic Church in tion of 1834, where the ” Quicun- England — a subject about which que vult” appears immediately many more than dubious notions before the ” Litany, or General are current among Protestants — Supplication.” The pages are not cfr. J. W. Legg’s pamphlet with the numbered. Cfr. also F. J. Hall, above title, London 1909. IMMENSITY sions of space are reduced to one single point. Cf r. Jer. XXIII, 23: Putasne, Deus e viciw ego sum … et non [etiam] Deus de longef — -Am I, think ye, a God at hand … and not a God afar off? Is. LXVI, 1: “Heaven is my throne, and the earth my footstool.” Like eternity, immensity is rooted in self-existence. Cfr. Deut. IV, 39: “Scito ergo hodie et cogitato in corde tuo, quod Dominus ipse sit Deus in coelo sursum et in terra deorsum, et non sit alius — Know therefore this day, and think in thy heart that the Lord he is God in heaven above, and in the earth beneath, and there is no other.” b) The Fathers have developed this dogma scientifically, and their writings contain some exquisitely poetical passages in relation to it. The incorporeity of God they explain thus : ” Before the creation of the world God was His own place or site.” Ante omnia erat Deus solus, says Tertullian, ipse sibi et tnundus et locus et omnia — Before all things God alone was; He is to Himself world, space, and everything.,, 7 And Theophitus : 8 * ®£o« ov xapcfau. dAA avros cort roiras oAwv, avros 82 eqyrov totto? — God cannot be contained by space, for He Himself is the place of everything and of Himself” [i. e., He Himself is the place of all things, but with regard to Himself, He is His own place] . Augustine asks : ” Antequam faceret Deus coelum et terram, ubi habitobat? In se habitabat Deus, apud se habitabat, et apud se est Deusf”9 To 7 Adv. Prax. 9 In Ps., 122, n. 4. sAd Autolyc, II, 1. THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES explain that God is beyond space, the Fathers say we must conceive Him not as surrounded by, but qs surrounding space.10 3. The Dogma of God’s Omnipresence. — Omnipresence is included in the dogma of God’s immensity as a part is included in the whole. Assuming the existence of real space, immensity involves omnipresence. God’s ubiquity must not be conceived either circumscriptive or definitive, but strictly repletive. His praesentia repletwa in space is not merely intellectual {per praesentiam scientiae), or dynamic (per potentiatn), but substantial (per essentiam sen substantiate, divinam). The pagan philosophers of antiquity were in error when they limited the presence of God to this or that locality (e. g., Mount Olympus, the Capitol). Equally erroneous was the belief of the Valentinian Gnostics, the Calvinist Vorstius, and the Greek Steuchus Eugubinus, who held that God is substantially present nowhere except in Heaven.11 a) The Scriptural locus classicus is Ps. CXXXVIII, 7 sqq.: “Whither shall I go from thy spirit ? or whither shall I flee from thy face ? If I ascend into Heaven, thou art there: if I descend into hell, thou art present. If I take lOCfr. Pastor Hermae, II, 1: ” Elf Qebs fUros, 6 irdyra x^P^t fi6vos Sk &x

my wings early in the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there also shall thy hand lead me : and thy right hand shall hold me.” Here we have both an accurate and a beautifully poetical description of the divine omnipresence.12 It is to be observed that the Psalmist does not limit omnipresence to the knowledge or power of God (which it, of course, includes) ; but expressly extends it to the divine Essence itself: “Tu illic es, ades.” Jer. XXIII, 24, removes every vestige of a doubt: Numquid non coelum et terram ego impleo? — Do not I fill heaven and earth? It is only on this assumption that St. Paul could 12 Francis Thompson has elaborated it in his famous ode, ” The Hound of Heaven ”: I fled Him, down the nights and down the days; I fled Him, down the arches of the years; I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways Of my own mind; and in the mist of tears I hid from Him, and under running laughter. Up vistaed hopes, I sped; And shot, precipitated Adown Titanic glooms of chasmed fears, From those strong Feet that followed, followed after. But with unhurrying chase, And unperturbed pace, Deliberate speed, majestic instancy, They beat — and a Voice beat More instant than the Feet — ” All things betray thee, who betrayest Me.” To all swift things for swiftness did I sue; Clung to the whistling mane of every wind. But whether they swept, smoothly fleet, The long savannahs of the blue; Or whether, Thunder-driven, They clanged His chariot ‘thwart a heaven, Plashy with flying lightnings round the spurn o’ their feet : — Fear wist not to evade as Love wist to pursue. Still with unhurrying chase, And unperturbea pace, Deliberate speed, majestic instancy, Came on the following Feet, And a Voice above their beat — ” Naught shelters thee, who wilt not shelter Me.” (and so forth) THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES 323 say: 13 In ipso enim vivimus et movemur et sumus — For in him we live, and move, and are. 14 b) Patristic theology not only re-echoed the teaching of Holy Scripture in regard to God’s omnipresence, but it engaged all the resources of science to explain the concept and to safeguard it against misinterpretation. In this domain, as in so many others, the genius of Augustine shines with peculiar splendor. In his Confessions the Saint draws an impressive comparison between God’s omnipresence and the waters which surround and fill the sponges growing at the bottom of the sea (i. e., the world). At the same time, in order to forestall a purely material conception of the ” diffusion ” of the Divine Essence, the great Bishop of Hippo endeavors, with keen analytical acumen, to determine the true notion of God’s omnipresence as accurately as is possible for the mind of man. Sic est Deus per cuncta diffusus, he says, ” ut non sit qualitas mundi, sed substantia creatrix mundi, sine labore regens et sine mere continens mundum. Non tamen per spatia locorum quasi mole diffusa, ita ut in dimidio mundi corpore sit dimidius et in alio dimidio dimidius, atque ita per totum totus; sed in solo coelo totus, et in sola terra totus, et in coelo et in terra totus, et nullo contentus loco, sed in se ipso ubique totus.* 15 18 Acts XVII, a8. i4Cfr. Amos, IX, 2 sq. 16 Ep. 187, c. 1, n. 14. St. Chrysostom expresses the same truth more succinctly in these words: U&rra wkripois, raai irdpet, 06 #car& A^pos, dXXd waffiv JXof — Thou fillest all, Thou art present to all, not in part, but whole [Thou art present] to all.” (In Ps. 138, n. a.) IMMENSITY c) Scholastic theology, following the lead of Peter the Lombard 16 and St. Thomas Aquinas,17 goes a step farther and extends the substantial omnipresence of God to the world of spirits — angels, demons, and the souls of men. The Schoolmen distinguish a threefold presence of God in His creatures. He is present in them either (i) by essence (per essentiam s. substantia™) ; or (2) by power (per potentiam) ; or (3) by presence or inhabitation (per inhabitationetn s. praesentiam specialem). a) God is substantially present when he is in spiritual beings with His substance, totus ubique. Erasmus’s objection, that it is derogatory to the majesty of God to be present in demons, the souls of the damned, and other horrid creatures, had already been refuted long before his time by St. Augustine,18 who compared God’s presence in such beings to that of the sunlight, which penetrates filth without suffering contamination. P) If God is present in all things substantially or ” by essence,” it is evident that He must also be present in them dynamically or “by power”; for a substance can operate wherever it is. Is it equally logical, conversely, to infer that God is substantially present when we know Him to be present dynamically? His dynamic presence is admitted by all, not so the possibility of * actio in distans While the oft-quoted axiom that actio in distans is impossible is not fully eviie Liber Sent,, I, disk 37. 18 De Natura Boni, c. 29. 17 Summa TheoL, xa, qu. 8, art. 3. THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES 325 dent, yet in respect of divine things its validity is undeniable; for as God’s power objectively coincides with His Essence, His Essence must be present wherever His power is operative. It follows that all the remaining attributes of God must likewise be present in every created being; and this is especially true of His omniscience,10 which sees all things.20 We must not omit to point out, however, that an important distinction lies between God’s substantial and His dynamic presence. Substantial presence, being an emanation from the Absolute Essence, rests on metaphysical necessity, while dynamic presence, so far as it manifests itself actively, is subject to the free will of the Almighty. This explains why God manifests His power variously in His various creatures. y) What we have said towards the end of the above paragraph is true in an even higher degree of God’s inhabitative presence, that is to say, His special mode of indwelling in His creatures. He indwells differently in the just, in sinners, in angels, in demons, m the Church and in the State ; 21 on earth and in Heaven ; arid so forth. Therefore we pray in the “Our Father”: * Pater noster, qui es in coelis — Our Father, Who art in Heaven.* St. Paul alludes to this truth when he says: “While we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord; … but we are confident, and have a good will to be absent rather from the body, and to be present with the Lord.”22 St. Bernard appositely observes: “Licet ubique esse Deus non dubitetur, sic tamen in coelo est, ut … nec esse videatur in terris. ProploCfr. Ps. LXV, 7: “Oculi eius super gentes respiciunt. — His eyes behold the nations.” 20 This explains why artists love to represent the divine omnipresence by the symbol of a ” seeing eye.” 21 Cfr. Math. XXVIII, 20. 22 2 Cor. V, 6 sqq. 36 IMMENSITY ter quod et or antes dicimus: Pater noster, qui es in coelis. Sicut enim anima, cum in toto quoque sit corpore, excellentius tamen et singularius est in capite, in quo sunt omnes sensus, … ita si praesentiam Mam cogitamus, qua beati angeli perfruuntur, videmur vix aliquant Dei protectionem et nomen habere”2 In Christ and in the Blessed Eucharist the Godhead, by virtue of the Hypostatic Union, indwells in an altogether singular manner, hence our churches are veritably and literally ” houses of God.” 24 Readings: — S. Thorn., 5”. Theol, ia, qu. 8. — Idem, Contr. Gent, III, 68 (Rickaby, Of God and His Creatures, pp. 238 sq.). — Lessius, De Perfect. Divin., 1. II. — *Gillius, De Essentia Dei, tract. 9. — Franzelin, De Deo Uno, thes. 33-34. — Scheeben, Dogmatik, Vol. I, §§ 77, 88 (Wilhelm-Scannell, Manual, pp. 193 sqq., 211 sqq.). — Lepicier, De Deo Uno, t. I, pp. 286 sqq., Parisiis 1902. — Humphrey, ” His Divine Majesty,” pp. 124 sqq. — Boedder, Natural Theology, pp. 249 sqq. itSerm. in Ps. “Qui habitat/’ the treatise on Grace. It will 1, n. 4. hardly be necessary to add any24 For a refutation of the false . thing to what we have said above, teaching of Luther concerning to explain such Scriptural phrases God’s ubiquity we must refer the as the ” coming n and ” going of reader to Christology. The special God,” the “descent of the Holy indwelling of the Holy Ghost in Ghost,” etc the souls of the just belongs to