The word remains, though the idea is continually attenuated. Respect for Him demands that He should have no limitations. While we can speak of good, say some, can speak of God. God is the possibility of goodness, the good side of things. But whether that is to be considered, even after the most strenuous exercises in personification, as a greater person or a comprehensive person, is another matter.
Personality is the last vestige of anthropomorphism.
On the other hand there is in many fine religious minds a desire amounting almost to a necessity for an object of devotion so individualized as to be capable at least of a receptive consciousness even if no definite response is conceded. One type of mind can accept a reality in itself which another must project and dramatize before it can comprehend it and react to it. The human soul is an intricate thing which will not endure elucidation when that passes beyond a certain degree of harshness and roughness. In matters not immediately material, language has to work by metaphors, and though every metaphor carries its own peculiar risks of confusion, we cannot do without them. Just now I wrote Peccavi because I had written God the Invisible King, but after all I do not think it was so much a sin to use that phrase, God the Invisible King, as an error in expression.