She Who Changes: Re-Imagining the Divine in the World

I think the author does an excellent job of helping the reader understand a new vision of God. It is obvious from the book that our current vision of God is warped and outdated.

Carol Christ has written an engaging, thought provoking book with "She Who Changes: Re-Imagining the Divine in the World." The book is an exploration of the influence process theology has had on Christ's own notion of the divine. Rooted in her own experience, and the "problems with God" she encounters (including the problem of evil) Christ details the potential answers process theology offers. Writing about the perspective of process theologian Charles Hartshorne, Christ recounts the six mistakes of classical theism (including belief in scriptural infallibility and belief in the afterlife) and possible alternatives to them. There is an emphasis on social justice and ecology, and on enjoying life. Although this book is rooted in process theology, there is still considerable overlap with other theologies. How does this stack up, and differ, from other alternatives to classical theism? Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong has written about similar issues in "Why Christianity Must Change or Die." There are less theistically based denominations, such as Unitarian Universalism. Some forms of Christianity and Judaism focus on environmental issues, and use gender inclusive language and symbology. I would put Christ in complement to these, not in contrast. Her focus may be outside Christianity but that doesn't put her in opposition to it.

This is a truly great and potentially life changing book. I highly recommend it for anyone who has had their fill of "domination religion" and would like to look into a more compassionate understanding, hopeful and even realistic look at faith. Contrary to the popular "stern father figure in the sky with a whipping belt" type of belief system, Carol imagines a loving, compassionate and most importantly co-creative deity. This more "feminine" goddess/god that she refers to seems much more in line to me with the teachings of great religious minds like the Buddha or Jesus than with any of todays contemporary religious beliefs. It may not be what belief is today, but it is what it should be. If you have ever thought that religion or faith should be about love, understanding, helping, or compassion, then this book is a must read, regardless of your own faith or religion or gender or upbringing.

The more I think about this book, the better I like it and the more important I think it is. I believe it is groundbreaking for theology and religion in the way that Women's Ways ofKnowing was for women's studies and epistemology. Like all great books, it may raise as many questions as it answers. So it deserves a slow, careful reading and a thoughtful, thorough discussion. If I were still teaching college, I would use it in my women's studies classes. But it would also be great for book clubs.

The more I think about this book, the better I like it and the more important I think it is. I think it may be groundbreaking for theology/religion in the way that Women's Ways of Knowing was for women's studies and epistemology. And like all really good books, in my opinion, it may raise as many questions as it answers. Thus, it deserves to be read slowly and carefully and discussed thoroughly from all angles. The highest compliment that I can pay it, I think, is to say that if I were still teaching, I would find a way to use it in one of my women's studies classes. It would also be great for book clubs.Here are some of the things it made me think about:From a personal point of view, I never had any argument with or anger towards God, perhaps only because personally I never bought it. I cannot remember not knowing that I was part of God and God was part of me, and knowing/experiencing/believing this so certainly that I also knew everyone, that would be most people and society in general, was wrong -- god was not (only) male. S/he/It clearly could not be, because I was part of it and it was part of me, and I was female. So my anger was with society generally and patriarchal religions specifically. From the time I was a child, I argued with everyone (except my parents who allowed me to think about it on my own and draw my own conclusions). I gave up trying to find a place to fit into the religions available to me and having these conversations, debates, however, when I entered college. I decided that it was simply not worth the time and effort any more to discuss it.I couldn't win the debates. Why not?Them: No, we really don't believe that God is male, but we just use "He" because you have to use some pronoun. It's no big deal. It really doesn't matter.Me: Well, if it's no big deal and doesn't really matter, let's just use "She."Them: Oh, heavens, no. We could never do THAT!Me: Well, then, it does matter, doesn't it? So what's with that?Them: Basically, we just don't want to think about it.This book would allow me to have/legitimize those conversations again and make people really think about it. Wow! How cool that would be. And I can only hope that people who are still in religion/theology and/or women's studies take advantage of this book's publication and have those conversations.Other topics/thoughts to consider/discuss in the process might include the concept of praying. What is it? How do people do it? It's generally thought to be about talking to/asking God for something. Maybe new conceptions of God/dess require new conceptions of things like prayer. For myself, I consider everything I do a prayer and so I don't specifically (stop to) pray, like people think about it ordinarily. What I do is listen, all the time, carefully....(and always do what I'm told,even if/when it's hard.) Might this be appropriate for new conceptions of God/dess?Just one other thought at the moment, in terms of the book raising other questions: It seems to me tha