13 Comments
Jan 23Liked by Jeanne Torrence Finley

Creation itself is material evidence of Love’s expression.

I LOVE this!

(Also, this conversation will be influencing upcoming sermons. Thanks for the fodder!)

Expand full comment
Jan 22Liked by Jeanne Torrence Finley

Reminds me of the Leonard Cohen song; The Faith in which he asks the question, Love aren't you tired yet? The reference is obvious! Many thanks!

Expand full comment

Thank you both. I so appreciate this dialogue and the wisdom shared

Expand full comment

i have a question a tad late in the game, but please tell me what is the difference between of notes and comments ....lord knows i am never shy about expressing my 2 cents on things ,for better or worse, so i would like to make it easier and put it in the right place.!

Expand full comment

a very special Easter morning rose , and there was a new excitement in your heart . you had slept on a hard surface that night but it didn't matter ! you had received a special invitation to meet someone ,as others did too, and was anxious to go in the building ,called for ,inside a book you had been led to. once you went inside ,you went about making sure all that was needed for their for His arrival . you began to share the gift of song you had been given,preparing all of the souls there to welcome Him in.....

Expand full comment

There's a sign in an obscure room connected to a church in West Los Angeles. It's made out of lead and colored glass. It simple says, "God is Love." I've always thought that was best definition anyone could ever make of God...

Expand full comment

Love is it! And like you mentioned the garden metaphor - Healthy Love takes work and tending based on the balancing act of our souls and our earthly shell/mortal coils needs/wants. If one believes in a soul - then we are spirits living in the material world (Sting) or as Chardin once said "We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” Although I have my own post Catholic upbringing (now a Christian/Buddhist/Taoist) perspective on the Garden of Eden archetype story of a fall from grace. I interpret it as the Jewish awaking to life out of balance with nature or what the Hopi Natives call Koyaanisqatsi (also a great film featuring Phillip Glass soundtrack and no talk). I believe that the ancient Jewish peoples started to see the negative ecosystem effects of not being good stewards of the earth after the first few thousand years of the birth of Civilization with cities and exponential population growth in the Middle East using up all the local Mediterranean resources. This had/has a negative impact on their lives as did the later Native Americans after they wiped out many of the last great sized Mammals - Woolly Mammoths, Saber Tooth tigers etc. upon arriving in the Western Continents from Siberia etc. over 15-25,000 years ago. Yet the Natives eventually learned their lesson and changed their relationship to the earth to a more respectful one trying to live in harmony with it. Whereas the disconnect from nature in early Europe was reinforced by the Catholic Church emphasizing life in the ever after versus life here on earth, thus feeding the disrespect for our miracle planet with fine tuned, Goldie Locks story. Later during the so called Enlightenment period - further disconnect from nature with philosopher Hobbes influential perspective of nature being "red in tooth and claw" and "nasty and brutish" - which having some truth was a negative exaggeration, most likely based upon their generation coming on the heels of 2 centuries of deadly plague(s) in Europe. So I see the fall from grace as a humility wisdom story to correct bad stewardship behaviors on earth because there is no planet B - at least nearby! The one thing that most of the great prophets and sages agreed upon is that Love is the cosmic glue that holds it all together - meaning that the creator created us in Love that expands as we do through evolution of higher consciousness toward God/home -(hopefully!) God bless Us All!

Expand full comment
author

Like the image of Love as "cosmic glue."

Expand full comment

I like the dialogue format. It doesn’t feel like a study guide at all. It feels more like a conversation. And that pulls me in.

Expand full comment
author

Glad to hear that.

Expand full comment

are you all in one piece after being on the road with your grandsons ? i have some questions ~ how did you come up with "nones' ? i dont understand. and a side comment in the lyrics of the birthing of "it all".....whales,after the birthing of their new one, the other woman whales come and lift the baby up to get its first breathe and then return it to the mother care. i always loved that concept of that love. on the having questions in the book ...it reminds me of some ladies bible studies where we had read the texts and when we come together we discuss the questions.forgive me for being a cheap seat editor but i am concerned, it may become a rather a "heady' book for some readers.for others an added bonus to help them get more from the writings.where will you put them? following the context of the book, after each chapter, where would you put an explanation of the questions as to how to use them or not.? i would want it written in a manner that no one feels it is a necessity while reading the book. if there is no time in this persons life thru this first reading you may want to reassure them . i've read books like that it makes you feel like quite the failure ! okay thats my two cents ! For the Love of it all, lynn m.

l

Expand full comment
author

We didn't come up with "nones." It's a word being used in writings about changes in religious affliation and attendance in the last 20 to 30 years. It comes from surveys that ask about religious preference in which persons with no affliation click the box beside the word "none."

If the dialogues make it into the published book (a decision to be made by the editor), one would come after each of the six parts.

Expand full comment

thank you for your speaking to what that means, i had never had it come into my readings !if you use it in the book, ( excuse me for my boldness) perhaps provide an explanation as that is not a commonly used word . scholars may.

Expand full comment