Scan barcode
mdewit's review against another edition
2.0
McFague describes a panentheistic vision of God - the whole universe as God's body empowered by the divine spirit. McFague develops such an alternative 'organic model' in response to the ecological crisis and what she believes as a 'common story of creation'. In the process she rejects classical notions of the 'church as the body of God' citing its' anthropocentric exclusivity as a reason and several models of who God is, namely deism, dialogic, monarchical and agential. She emphasises the range of God's inclusive love for all of creation and especially for the oppressed. With a 'cosmic Christ', suffering also happens to God and not just to us, McFague argues. Such a new vision would lead to a renewed, better word as it underscores interdependence and independence, how to live within the scheme of things, seeing salvation as meeting the basic, physical needs of earth's creatures, solidarity with the oppressed, and humans' special vocation as stewards. McFague's desire to live responsibly on this planet needs to be welcomed. Humanity has indeed taken its freedom to such extreme levels that many of the God's creatures are suffering. But, McFague's next pragmatic step of constructing a model of God that suits a vision of planetary responsibility is not convincing when compared to God as revealed to us in Scripture.
tdwightdavis's review against another edition
3.0
I struggle with how to evaluate this book. I clearly have a very different view of theological method and norms than McFague does and that makes it difficult for me to see her methodology here as legitimate. To me, this doesn't feel like theology, and certainly not Christian theology. It feels like new age mysticism/panentheism wrapped in Christian lingo. There's very little here that offers any sort of concrete way of doing ecological theology and creation care, McFague rather prefers to stay abstract in her theologizing and is actually happy to NOT provide any actual concrete ethic for creation care (cf. page 202). So much of this book feels surface level, afraid to delve into the complexities and difficulties involved in actually practicing ecological theology.
I'm also extremely concerned about making the earth and creation a member of the oppressed as McFague does. I'm reminded of a conversation with M. Shawn Copeland at AAR one year where she told me that she often sees ecological theology function as a way for whites to assuage their guilt over not participating in the struggle for liberation because they feel like they're doing their part by helping the environment and I can very easily see McFague's work being misappropriated along these lines despite the fact that she would disapprove of such a misappropriation.
I did really appreciate, however, McFague's articulations of the importance of embodiment. This is where her work is at its strongest and makes a positive contribution to theological studies.
I'm also extremely concerned about making the earth and creation a member of the oppressed as McFague does. I'm reminded of a conversation with M. Shawn Copeland at AAR one year where she told me that she often sees ecological theology function as a way for whites to assuage their guilt over not participating in the struggle for liberation because they feel like they're doing their part by helping the environment and I can very easily see McFague's work being misappropriated along these lines despite the fact that she would disapprove of such a misappropriation.
I did really appreciate, however, McFague's articulations of the importance of embodiment. This is where her work is at its strongest and makes a positive contribution to theological studies.
katrinadalythompson's review against another edition
5.0
This changed how I think about God and about environmental justice. I’m not a Christian but I still loved her ideas. Highly recommend.
More...