This collection of essays explores convergences and divergences between process thought and Roman Catholicism with the goal of identifying reasons for why process philosophy and theology has not had the same impact in Roman Catholic circles as in Protestantism, and of constructively navigating avenues of promising engagement between Process thought and Roman Catholicism. In creatively considering the Roman Catholic tradition from the vantage point of Process thought, different theoretical perspectives are brought to bear on Catholic characteristics of historical theology, fundamental theology, systematic theology, moral theology, social justice, and theology of religions. While the contributors draw upon a broad range of resources from the disciplines of the physical and social sciences, philosophy, and ethics from a process perspective, the primary methodology employed is theological reflection.

In Nature, Truth, and Value nineteen scholars writing from across the humanities and sciences challenge the reigning theoretical and philosophical enterprises of deconstruction and postmodernism. With great erudition, ambition, and daring, all contributions have one thread in common-their abiding interest in the work of Frederick Ferre, a thinker whose passion for intellectual inquiry remains unsurpassed. More specifically Nature, Truth, and Value is an exploration of Ferre's idea that traditional dichotomies are dead, that we all are a part of nature, that truth is one, and that value is ultimate. Ferre's colleagues and friends, writing here in this volume, have all been inspired to develop his ideas which have become, now more than ever, critical issues in a broken and fragmented world. This book represents a deep exploration of Ferre's ideas and is indispensable to the fields of philosophy, theology, ethics, and environmental studies.

In Nature, Truth, and Value nineteen scholars writing from across the humanities and sciences challenge the reigning theoretical and philosophical enterprises of deconstruction and postmodernism. With great erudition, ambition, and daring, all contributions have one thread in common-their abiding interest in the work of Frederick FerrZ, a thinker whose passion for intellectual inquiry remains unsurpassed. More specifically Nature, Truth, and Value is an exploration of FerrZ's idea that traditional dichotomies are dead, that we all are a part of nature, that truth is one, and that value is ultimate. FerrZ's colleagues and friends, writing here in this volume, have all been inspired to develop his ideas which have become, now more than ever, critical issues in a broken and fragmented world. This book represents a deep exploration of FerrZ's ideas and is indispensable to the fields of philosophy, theology, ethics, and environmental studies.

During a time of global conflict, the theological question of whether Muslims, Jews, and Christians worship the same God carries political baggage. Is the God of ISIS the same as the God of Israel? Do Sunni Muslims and Protestant Christians pray to the same Creator and Sustainer of the universe? In this Counterpoints volume, edited by Ronnie P. Campbell, Jr., and Christopher Gnanakan, five leading scholars present the main religious perspectives on this question, demonstrating how to think carefully about an issue where opinions differ and confusion abounds. They examine related subtopics such as the difference between God being referentially the same and essentially the same, what "the same" means when referring to God, the significance of the Trinity in this discussion, whether religious inclusivism is inferred by certain understandings of God's sameness, and the appropriateness of interfaith worship. The four main views, along with the scholars presenting them, are: All Worship the Same God: Religious Pluralist View (Wm. Andrew Schwartz and John B. Cobb, Jr.) All Worship the Same God: Referring to the Same God View (Francis J. Beckwith) Jews and Christians Worship the Same God: Shared Revelation View (Gerald R. McDermott) None Worship the Same God: Different Conceptions View (Jerry L. Walls) Additionally, essays by Joseph Cumming and David W. Shenk explore the implications of this question specifically for Christians wanting to minister among and build relationships with Muslims. Cumming stresses that finding common ground is key, while Shenk advocates for a respectful focus on differences. Insightful, gracious, and relevant, Do Christians, Muslims, and Jews Worship the Same God? sheds light on one of the most important theological issues of our day.

This work is about physical, ecological and political designs for sharing the global resources and services of the planet to meet the needs of all living beings and their community patterns. It uses ecological design to create a simple method to implement and manage the sharing. First, we assess what the planet needs to develop in a stable flow, then we set aside a satisfactory area of the planet to ensure the continuing operation of evolution in wild systems. Next, we measure the ranges of productivities of wild ecosystems as well as agricultural and urban systems, and use those results to determine optimum human populations for local places, regions and the planet. Finally, within human systems, every culture would claim a share of local resources and global services not set aside for wild regeneration. The equal apportionment of resources to all cooperating participants in the global commons is supported by the practice of recognizing and honoring the 'legacy' of the entire planet that hosts its legatees as tenants, and is supported by the 'rule' of all beings, although in the human legal system, humans represent the interests of all other beings, much as we are starting to do now. This reapportionment is enhanced by the wisdom of harmony and by the drawing and making of ecological zones, which emphasize ranges of separation of wild and artificial areas. This reapportionment of 'resources' that human communities have already claimed, as well as of resources that have been badly distributed as a result of theft or violence, may cause some degree of discomfort or suffering for wealthier people, but that is minimal compared to the suffering and death under the current industrial system, which encourages overconsumption and large, immoral differences in the distribution of wealth. Ecological design would work on local and regional scales, as well as on the global scale. Like metaphysics, ecological design has a vision that exceeds its bounds and a reach that exceeds its grasp. And, we have to use it to explore possibilities of local and global harmony, without having complete knowledge or experience. Ecological design requires participation and cooperation to accomplish its ambitious goals. It has to be flexible and adapt to changing environments. This means understanding challenges and problems, as well as natural and artificial ecosystems, histories and cycles, before using a variety of physical and conceptual tools to create ecological designs on local scales, but considering the regional and global implications. This means trying to design places, ecosystems and landscapes, as well as cycles and processes. It means redesigning flows of minerals and gases, wetlands and streams, domestic and wild forests, and animal paths and reserves. It means redesigning human patterns, from transportation corridors to traditional and modern cultures. It means redesigning agriculture, cities-traditional cities and proposed arcologies-buildings, neighborhoods, vehicles, industries, and medicine. It means trying to redesign social traps, cultural adaptations, corporate goals and responsibilities, formal commons, styles of conflict, economic frameworks, political forms and sizes, religious applications, and even advertising. And, the purpose of all this is to restore harmony to systems that support and encourage health and development, under emergency conditions.

This work is about sharing regional resources and services of the planet to meet the needs of all living beings and their community patterns. It uses ecological design to create a simple method to implement and manage the sharing: First, we assess what the planet needs to keep developing in a stable flow, then we set aside a satisfactory area of the planet to ensure the continuing operation of evolution in wild systems. Next, we measure the ranges of productivities of wild ecosystems as well as agricultural and urban systems, then use those results to determine optimum human populations for regions. Within human systems, every culture would claim a share of local resources and global services. For example, the Colorado river would be allocated a percentage of water to keep the river and its downstream ecosystems healthy-this may require 50% or more of all the water flow. The remaining water would be divided between resident cultures sharing the river environments up and downstream. This approach promises a fair way to deal with carbon emissions, toxic wastes, and energy use, also. The equal apportionment of 'resources' to all cooperating participants in a regional commons is supported by the practice of recognizing and honoring the legacy of the entire planet that hosts its legatees as tenants and is supported by the 'rule' of all beings together, although in the human legal system, humans represent the interests of all other beings, much as they are starting to do now. This reapportionment is enhanced by the wisdom of harmony and the drawing and making of ecological zones, which emphasizes the relative separation of wild and artificial areas. This reapportionment of 'resources' that human communities have already claimed, as well as of resources that have been badly distributed as a result of theft or violence, may cause some degree of discomfort or suffering, but that is minimal compared to the suffering and death under the current industrial system, which encourages the consumption of everything and large differences in the distribution of wealth. Like metaphysics, ecological design has a vision that exceeds its bounds and a reach that exceeds its grasp. And, we have to use it to explore possibilities of local and regional harmony, without having enough knowledge or experience. Ecological design requires participation and cooperation to accomplish its ambitious goals. It has to be flexible and adapt to changing environments. It has to be adaptive and accept feedback. This means understanding challenges and problems, as well as natural and artificial ecosystems, histories and cycles, before using a variety of physical and conceptual tools to create ecological designs on regional scales, but considering the local and global implications. This means trying to design places, ecosystems and landscapes, as well as cycles and processes. It means redesigning flows of minerals and gases, wetlands and streams, domestic and wild forests, and animal paths and reserves. It means redesigning human patterns, from transportation corridors to traditional and modern cultures. It means redesigning agriculture, cities-traditional cities and proposed arcologies-buildings, neighborhoods, vehicles, industries, and medicine. It means trying to redesign civilization out of physical and social traps; it means redefining cultural adaptations, corporate goals and responsibilities, formal commons, styles of conflict, economic frameworks, political forms and sizes, religious applications, and even advertising. The purpose of all this is to restore harmony to systems that support health and development.

This work is about sharing the local (as well as global) resources and services of the planet to meet the needs of all living beings and their community patterns. It uses ecological design to create a simple method to implement and manage the sharing. First, we assess what the local place needs to develop in a stable flow, then we set aside a satisfactory area of the place to ensure the continuing operation of evolution in wild systems. Next, we measure the ranges of productivities of wild ecosystems as well as agricultural and urban systems, then use those results to determine optimum human populations for local places, regions and the planet. Within human systems, every culture would claim a share of local resources and global services not set aside for wild regeneration. Ecological design would work on global and regional scales, as well as the local scale. For example, the Colorado river would be allocated a percentage of water to keep the river and its downstream ecosystems (including shallow ocean canyons) healthy-this may require 50% or more of all the water flow. The remaining water would be divided between resident cultures sharing the river environments upstream. This approach promises a fair way to deal with carbon emissions, toxic wastes, and energy use, also. The equal apportionment of 'resources' to all cooperating participants in the global commons (identified with the new word 'Koinomics'-See glossary for neologisms and terms) is supported by the theory and practice of recognizing and honoring the legacy of the entire planet that hosts its legatees as tenants (identified here as 'Legatism') and is supported by the 'rule' of all beings (identified as 'Panocracy'), although in the human legal system, humans represent the interests of all other beings, much as they are starting to do now. This reapportionment is enhanced by the wisdom of harmony (identified as 'Harmosophy') and the drawing and making of ecological zones (identified as 'Zonagraphy'), which emphasizes the relative separation of wild and artificial areas. This reapportionment of 'resources' that human communities have already claimed, as well as of resources that have been badly distributed as a result of theft or violence, may cause some degree of discomfort for wealthier groups, but that is minimal compared to the suffering and death under the current system, which encourages overconsumption and large differences in the distribution of wealth. Like metaphysics, ecological design has a vision that exceeds its bounds and a reach that exceeds its grasp. And, we have to use it to explore possibilities of local and global harmony, without having complete knowledge or experience. Ecological design requires participation and cooperation to accomplish its ambitious goals. It has to be flexible and adapt to changing environments. This means understanding challenges and problems, as well as natural and artificial ecosystems, histories and cycles, before using a variety of physical and conceptual tools to create ecological designs on local scales, but considering the regional and global implications. This means trying to design places, ecosystems and landscapes, as well as cycles and processes. It means redesigning flows of minerals and gases, wetlands and streams, domestic and wild forests, and animal paths and reserves. It means redesigning human patterns, from transportation corridors to traditional and modern cultures. It means redesigning agriculture, cities, buildings, neighborhoods, vehicles, industries, and medicine. It means trying to redesign social traps, cultural adaptations, corporate goals and responsibilities, formal commons, styles of conflict, economic frameworks, political forms and sizes, religious applications, and even advertising. And, the purpose of all this is to restore harmony to systems that encourage health and development.