Replies

Of course, the other side of the coin is Majorie Suchocki’s “Faithfully, God lures the people into being a people who will reflect the divine character as inclusive well being.” Inclusive well being is a more natural read when one views nothing as separate and the spirit of the divine flowing in all created matter. Christianity is struggling with this and is only beginning to approximate the idea as it faces its legacy of destruction of the earth. And despite a profession of belief in Jesus, the cause of justice is violated over and over. Not to be simplistic, but we wanted our needs to be satisfied by God and we saw those needs as outside of ourselves; we never trusted in the abundance of God or in our satisfaction with less individually and more collectively; or with the fact that creation was never intended to be possessed. No wonder I dwelled on “commodity” when considering the section on the traditional beliefs of the indigenous.

George,
Thanks for asking! I used “commodity” to convey the idea that initially people sought to appease a god who had absolute control over the success or failure of the fruits of the earth, and then, later, to barter with that same god by expecting the reward of plenty or the punishment of scarcity for certain behaviors or demonstrations of faithfulness. The progression was from being at the mercy of a capricious god to being able to influence that god with behavior that was perceived as desirable to the god (This is where I partly see the Psalms). Then, over time, people figured that the outcome of foodstuffs was largely under their control and they didn’t have to negotiate with God anymore.
But, what if, like the indigenous, the fruits of the earth were not a commodity that had to be procured and secured, but an integral part of life itself. A given. Yes, we might learn to increase yields and store against cycles of scarcity but it would not be separate from us nor something that would be hoarded or withheld from others. I believe that the desirability of “things” throughout human history truly did advance civilization and raise our standard of living but it is their very separateness that has caused much suffering as well. “As we pray, we believe.” And as we believe, we live. I’m having different conversations with God these days.

I am a life long Roman Catholic but left the institutional church because it was non inclusive in word and practice, did not value women, and it embraced patriarchy. I found my way to an independent Catholic community headed by a woman priest and accessible both in person and via Zoom. The Community has a small church in Ohio blocks from Lake Erie. My experience with this community has allowed me to remain Catholic and still eliminate many of my frustrations with the institutional church. We simply can implement anything that needs to be changed to facilitate our spiritual growth without lobbying for that change (and ultimately being told “No”). None of us would ever return even if invited to do so.
I read more church history than theology because my love is history and I am very connected to time and place. For example, I am attracted to and practice the Liturgy of the Hours because it is meditative and because of all those who have done so before me. I believe in an incarnated God who is one with all of creation and participates in continual quest to bringing life to a fullness of being. My interest in other religions is mostly about comparison and contrast. Where do our core beliefs converge and what insights and perspectives can we offer to one another that may be hidden or under developed in our own faith traditions?