Interestingly, even though Tillich's conception of God is the most consonant with the ecological motif of all the theologians Santmire considers, he excludes Tillich from his book. In a footnote toward the end of the book, Santmire explains his reason for this exclusion by claiming that "Tillich writes self-consciously 'on the boundary' of classical Christian thought. This is indicated most dramatically, perhaps, by his 'hyper-personalism,' his refusal to think of God in personal terms. He asserts that the personal is rooted in God, not that God is personal" (p. 252). As Santmire notes, this places Tillich's thought outside of the ecological dilemma that traditional Christian thought finds itself in, namely, the confession that a personal, highest being called God is master of all of impersonal nature. Santmire, nonetheless, makes the following observation: "Some critics of the Christian tradition would perhaps maintain that the only way for Christians to have both God and nature is to follow Tillich's path. That may be. But that is moving outside of the classical theological tradition, as we know it in the West" (Ibid.). Thus, Santmire neglects Tillich in this work, even while acknowledging his significance. For a sustained discussion of the relevance of Tillich's thought for environmental ethics, see Jeremy Yunt, "Reverencing Life in its Multidimensionality: Implications in the Thought of Paul Tillich for a Deep Environmental Ethic," unpublished Master's thesis, Pacific School of Religion (Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, CA), 1999.