A challenge

This morning someone pointed out that I had said, on the 31st of July I think it was,  that 'God was in all of life; in all the good'. For her that seemed contradictory: if God is in all life, God cannot just be in the good.

I am not sure how to say what I meant.  My understanding about what God is like comes from the way Jesus lived his life. So looking at Jesus, I see someone who is good in the most essential way. But in compassion, he was present to people who were in the midst of evil. He was there for them if they wanted but they were free to reject him. I think of God in the same way.


I have no idea if this would satisfy the person with whom I was speaking but at that point another person raised an issue of perception or belief. This person said that he does not believe in a personal God but rather for him, God is a concept and that fully satisfies him. It is hard for me to relate to that but I see that it is good for him. 

In both these dialogues I thought about how hard it is for us to come together on the really meaningful things in life: religious belief, politics, the raising of children I suppose - anything that is fundamental to us.


I was reminded how, even in the monastery where you would think there would be a profound agreement about God, the church, the vocation and its purpose, there was in fact, as many thoughts about these as there were sisters. There was a whole spectrum of understanding on these issues and sometimes feelings could run high.


All of which brought me around to the very chaotic situation of the American government these last months. I think that between family members for instance, or groups of all sorts, however deep the differences, there is usually a way forward because people need to move forward. There will be a degree of compromise without a loss of principle.


So why is this not possible in the United States?