My aims in this essay are two. The first is to expose
dangers presented by the model of economic globalization shaping
our world today. Secondly, in light of those dangers, I will offer
rays of hope for the moral-spiritual power to forge new forms of
economic life. As a source of that moral-spiritual power, I will
probe an ancient Earth-honoring faith claim and specifically
Luther's little known expressions of it.
 Before moving into that two fold agenda, I pause to clarify
my use of the term "globalization." It has multiple and conflicting
meanings. In this essay it refers specifically and only to the
prevailing model of economic globalization today. That model
involves seven intimately related trends. The first is a rapid
increase in the movement of goods and services as well as capital -
trade and investment - across international borders. A second
defining trend is the subordination of democratic political power
to unaccountable economic power in order to ease that movement.
More specifically, international trade and investment agreements
increasingly are giving global corporations the legal power to
override local and national government policies that protect their
people and resources. Third, a growing portion of the world's
largest economies are planned and directed in ways unaccountable to
the public as a whole. That is, 51 of the world's 100 largest
economies are corporations.1
 A fourth defining trend in economic globalization -
privatization - gives ownership and control of basic goods and
services such as water, electricity, health care, and seed strains
to corporations or individuals usually not accountable to the
communities they impact. To illustrate, the privatization of water
allows a foreign corporation to purchase the water supply in an
impoverished South American area, and export the water for sale at
whatever price the market will bear in Seattle, Paris, or wherever.
Original users of the water are left without. For many people on
this Earth, no clean water means death.
 A fifth trend is an accelerating commodification of life
experiences and of life forms, such as genetic material or seed
strains that may have been developed over generations by a
particular people. "Commodification" refers to placing a monetary
value on something and marketing it. 2A sixth and intimately related
trend is the strategic marketing of western consumer-oriented ways
of life around the world.3 An aim, for instance, of some
transnational businesses, is to enable every Chinese family to own
an automobile and a refrigerator. (Imagine the impact on global
 A final defining trend is the commodification of money. That
is, huge amounts of money are bought and sold across national
borders instantly at the behest of investors unaccountable for
social and environmental impacts of their investments, and
unregulated by political bodies. The impact, as seen in the recent
Southeast Asian and Mexican financial crises, may be
 For the purpose of this essay, the word "globalization"
designates the prevailing paradigm of economic globalization
characterized by these seven trends. Globalization, thus defined,
brings economic growth and, with it, enormous economic benefits to
many. Those benefits are overshadowed by a chorus of diverse voices
documenting threats that globalization poses to human and other
life on Earth.
A Disturbing Story: Dangers Presented by Economic
 Shortly, I will invite the reader to imagine and to remember
who we are called to be as friends and followers of the God who
loves each one of us and this good earth with unquenchable and
boundless love. But first I invite you to open your eyes and to see
very clearly who we are in the economic and ecological story
unfolding on this generous planet. More specifically, consider who
we are as a species in relationship to the rest of nature, and who
we are as economically privileged people in relationship to others
far and near who are impoverished. Thus, I ask you for a few
moments, to bear with a disturbing and frightening story, and
particularly to see some of its main characters: human beings of
relative economic standing. The intent is not to wallow in the
horror of that story, but rather to hold it in light of another: a
subversive story of life-giving, justice-making love incarnate in
flesh and Earth. The point of all I will say is that we might live
differently. The vision toward which I write is of ordinary
Christians resisting economic brutality to human beings and Earth,
and crafting economic ways that enable the household of Earth to
 You and I live according to economic arrangements that spell
death for many people and are destroying Earth's capacity to
sustain life as we know and love it. We could go into myriad
statistics and arguments supporting that claim, but space here does
not allow. Instead I draw upon a few stories and voices of people I
have encountered. The first set of voices speaks to the
consequences of globalization on many human beings, and the second
illumines the impact on other-than-human parts of nature.
 As a missionary in Honduras, I watched young children
flounder in malnourishment, children who could have flourished had
their parents had access to a pedacito de tierra (small plot of
land) on which to grow beans, corn and vegetables. Much arable
land, however, was owned and used by transnational corporations
growing fruit and beef for North American tables. To organize for
land reform could spell death by paramilitary forces in league with
wealthy land owners. Later, leading delegations of U.S. citizens to
Mexico and Central America, I met a strawberry picker who burns in
my memory: "Our children," she declared, "die of hunger because
this land which ought grow their food, produces strawberries for
 A Lutheran church worker in India with whom I have worked
on a Lutheran World Federation project, has dedicated his life to
resisting global companies whose bauxite mines displace thousands
of tribal folk from their lands. Those lands had enabled the people
to feed their children, and sustain their health systems, values,
family structures, and identity for generations. Despite fierce and
courageous resistance from people whose villages are destroyed by
the mines, they continue to occupy more Indian
mining companies - based in Norway, the United States, and
elsewhere - provide aluminum for our use.
 Hear now the voice of a South Korean theologian: "Suddenly
in November 1997 . . . foreign investors, panicked by the Asian
currency crisis, demanded their dollars back, and lenders called in
their short-term loans. . . . Koreans say that this is the most
tragic event ever since the Korean War. . . . Korea is now plunged
into a stormy night of company bankruptcies, mass layoffs, [and
more]. . . . A layoff in a household means a death sentence to
one's family in Korea. Those who have found no way out of the swamp
have committed suicide - sometimes a familial suicide. . . . The
only winners in Korea are the foreign banks, who will get their
money back and then some."5
 Finally, consider the US worker who spent her life at a
good job in a GE aircraft engines plant that is to be closed and
moved to Mexico as a result of the so-called "free trade" inscribed
by NAFTA. Countless jobs have been lost in similar plant closings.
Lives are devastated, yet according to GE's CEO Jack Welch in an
now infamous quote: "Ideally you would have every plant you own on
a barge" to move to where labor is cheapest.
 According to a United Nations agency, globalization "is
concentrating power and marginalizing the poor, both countries and
people. . . ."6
The reality, according to that agency, is staggering. Read it
slowly: New estimates show that the 225 richest people have
combined wealth equal to the annual income of the poorest 47 % of
the world's people. The richest three people have assets that
exceed the combined GDP of the 48 least developed
 Consider now the second set of voices. According to a
State of the World Report: "Biodiversity is the basis for
our existence. . . . However, like the dinosaurs 65 million years
ago, humanity now finds itself in the midst of a mass extinction: a
global evolutionary convulsion with few parallels in the entire
history of life. . . . Most estimates are that at least 1,000
species are lost per year. . . . But unlike the dinosaurs, we are
not simply the contemporaries of a mass extinction - we are
thereason for it." 8Reversing this trend calls for
"restructuring the global economy. . . . It calls for replacing our
consumer culture with a less materialistic and far more
environmentally literate way of life. . . . The fate of our
children depends upon it, in ways we can barely begin to
 According to The Development Dictionary: "[W]e now
consume in one year what it took the earth a million years to store
up. Much of our glorious productivity is fed by the gigantic
through-put of fossil energy; on the one side, the earth is being
excavated and permanently scarred, while on the other a continuous
rain of harmful substances drizzles down. . . . If all the
countries followed 'successfully' the industrialized example, five
or six planets would be needed to serve as mines and waste
 In short, the present world is unsustainable. Economic
growth, the aim and promise of globalization, has collided with the
Earth's natural limits.11 Economic growth, together
with population growth, threatens Earth's capacity to regenerate.
The words' blandness dims the stark reality: While human life
depends upon Earth's life-systems, "every natural system on the
planet is disintegrating,"12 and the human species is the
cause of it. Life according to the triune god of growth, profit,
and consumption is endangering life itself.13 Daniel Mcguire cuts to the
quick: "If current trends continue, we will not. . . . We are an
 Enough. Many of us, Christians of North America, are people
of deep compassion and enormous heart. We long to love God by
loving God's children, especially the most vulnerable. None of us
wishes to buy shirts made in sweatshops, strawberries grown on land
that should feed its hungry children, or metal products from mines
that have displaced thousands of people. Surely, we do not want to
commit "ecocide," to destroy, by our consumption levels, the life
systems upon which life depends.
 The pathos of the situation is enormous. Christians are
called, before all else except love for God, to love neighbor as
self. We were created to receive God's love, love God in return,
reflect God's love in relationship with each other and all of
creation. This is our lifework. We long to fulfill it. In today's
world, the call to love is a call to change as we never have
imagined. It is a call to ways of living that make for sustainable
Earth-human relations, and to the abolition of extreme poverty.
Yet, in tragic contrast, against our better judgment, and defying
our call to walk the ways of Jesus, we North Americans who are
relatively comfortable find ourselves in this ungodly situation: We
seem locked into complicity with global economic arrangements that
degrade and even destroy Earth's life systems, and vast numbers of
human beings, in order that a few - including many of us - might
consume far more than we need, and a tiny elite might concentrate
enormous wealth in their hands. In the contest between
powerlessness and hope, it seems the former prevails. Blindly, we
bow at the altar of growth, consumption, and profit. Asleep, it
appears, is our moral-spiritual power to rise up subversively and
cry, "No! In the name of God, this we refuse: to eat, clothe and
transport ourselves, recreate, and equip our dwellings in ways that
ravage the good Earth and the lives of many."
 The moral crisis - a crisis of our faith lives - raised
here is two fold: First, the reigning model of economic
globalization threatens a beloved world. Secondly, as a society, we
acquiesce to that economic model. We comply with its demands and
accede to its truths, as if indeed, "There Is No
We fail to consider seriously the long-term social and ecological
implications of economic globalization, resist it, and forge
alternatives. This great dearth of moral-spiritual energy - and its
reawakening - are the concerns of this essay.
Rays of Hope: A Subversive Earth-honoring Faith
 I fear the despair and retreat into private morality that may
emerge when we dare to see and hear the cries of those who suffer
at the hands of global economic arrangements. I fear that
hopelessness because I have known it intimately. Sallie McFague
says it well: "At the end of the day, one can easily lose heart. .
. . planetary responsibility is too much for us. . . . How [does
one] get up in the morning and keep going?" 16Wherein, then, lies hope? How
can we hope for the moral-spiritual energy to swim upstream against
powerful currents, toward economic ways which serve neighbor-love
and sustainable Earth- human relations?
 The rays of hope are many. They are offered by (little
known) groups of people the world over, organizing and living
toward alternative visions of a global economic order in which the
wealth of a few is not bought by the impoverishment of the many and
of the Earth. And streams of hope are offered by Earth's great
religious traditions, all of which must be drawn upon now if
Earth's people are to forge the path into lifeways which nurture
the great community of life, rather than lead further to its
 Two faith convictions undergird my hope as a follower of
Jesus. First, where God calls us to go, God empowers us to go. The
God revealed in Scripture calls God's people to the seemingly
impossible, and empowers them to go there. The other conviction is
this: Following Jesus in ways of love and justice is all about
seeing. We had best hear Jesus' challenge to his disciples: "Do you
have eyes and fail to see?" What we see and refuse to see, and how
we see are morally loaded, bearing upon whether we foster or thwart
life-saving social and ecological change. That is, when good and
compassionate people do not see and do not understand the
consequences of our economic ways, we simply carry on with them.
Needed today are critical and morally responsible sight, and tools
for political-economic literacy about the power arrangements that
determine who has food and water and who does not, the terms of the
human species' relationship to the planet, and the survival chances
of endangered cultures and eco-systems. Simply said: In order to
live differently, we must see clearly. In the words of Teilhard de
Chardin: "All of life is in that verb, to see."
 Yes, seeing our economic reality critically and clearly is
crucial. But it is not enough. Living as friends of God today
entails also coming to see and know ever more fully the mystery
that is God, and holding the two - our lived economic realities and
God - in one breath. More specifically here I refer to seeing the
mystery of God living and loving in the creatures and elements of
this good Earth. For guidance toward seeing God's indwelling
presence and the moral-spiritual power that it offers, journey now
into the holy terrain of our faith forbearers' lives.
 I nudge us toward faith ancestors because in some of them
we encounter a contradiction that whispers hope. While our tendency
may be toward moral acquiescence, we are descendants of a cloud of
witnesses whose relationship with God disallowed acquiescence to
systems of domination seemingly as all-powerful as the global
economy of our day. We are well advised to seek the wisdom of these
ancestors. How did they come to embody the living Christ, drink the
"dew of God's Spirit . . . diffused throughout all the earth"
17to such an
extent that - despite many mistakes - they defied systems of
injustice, and lived toward alternative realities that reflected
God's gracious and saving love for all? We have before us in a
constellation of faith stories - many silenced and yet waiting to
be heard - guides who witness to the moral power offered by the
God's presence breathing in and through Earth's elements and
 One of those faith forebears is Martin Luther. We use him
now to explore the ancient faith claim that power to conform our
lives more closely to love may be drawn from God's fierce and
tender love coursing through creation, and working there toward its
flourishing. With this claim, we venture to enter a land long
ignored, a terrain pregnant with hope.
 According to Luther, as expressed in varied works from
sermons and treatises to letters, the claim reads thus: As gracious
gift, God dwells in the faithful, and in all things. Dwelling in
the faithful, God transforms them - gradually, in communion with
others, and never completely - into lovers as God loves. First
recipients of God's love, the faithful become givers of it. As a
communion, we are enabled by the indwelling God to love beyond
self. That love obligates and empowers us, in all that we do, to
serve and benefit others, especially those in need. Hear Luther
regarding God indwelling the faithful: "Christians are indeed
called and made habitation of God, and in them God speaks, and
rules, and works."18 And "[T]his is . . .
one of the exceedingly great promises granted to us . . . that we
should . . . be so highly honored as not only to be loved by God
through Jesus Christ . . . but should even have the Lord Himself
dwelling completely in us. . ."19 God's power and
presence as the Holy Spirit, may be written as "a fiery flame on
the heart, mak[ing] it . . . burn with love and delight in whatever
pleases God . . . creat[ing] new courage so that [one] . . . serves
the people." 20
 Don't get me wrong. Luther did absolutely refute the two
medieval theological axioms that union with Christ requires human
merit, and that union with Christ is a way to earn salvation. For
Luther, Christ dwells in sinners as sinners without merit. And
Christ dwelling in sinners is not a way to salvation, but rather is
an effect of salvation.
 Now hear this: Luther insists that God actually is present
not only in the faithful, but in all created things. "Nothing can
be more truly present and within all creatures than God . . . with
[God's] power."21 "God . . . exists at the
same time in every little seed, whole and entire, and yet also in
all and above all and outside all created things."22 ". . . everything is full of
Christ through and through. . . . ." 23"Christ . . . fills all
things . . . is present in all creatures, and I might find him in
stone, in fire, in water . . . for he certainly is there. . .
."24 While for
Luther, the scope of redemption and of the theo-ethical universe is
the human - and these are faultlines with grave
- the scope of God's blessed creaturehood in whom God dwells is
 What do these claims have to do with economic life? What
might it mean in our economic lives - as individuals and as faith
communities - to live as if God actually does abide in us and in
all of nature? How might our being the communal and communing body
of God empower us to resist economic and ecological brutality? I
invite you to imagine the implications for our economic lives, of
our actually being dwelling place of Christ. Here I suggest a few
of those implications.
 The first concerns moral-spiritual power to resist
dangerous economic practices and to forge alternatives. For Luther,
all activity in relationship to neighbor is normed and empowered by
one theological principle. It is this. A true Christian becomes
Christ for neighbors, and thus serves the neighbors' well-being in
all that she/he does. Economic activity is fundamentally activity
in relationship to neighbors, and therefore is to serve their
well-being. Economic practices that undermine the good of others ,
and especially of vulnerable people, are to be rejected and
replaced with alternatives. The moral-spiritual power to shape
economic life according to neighbor-love is Christself making
habitation in the faithful and changing them into people who love
with Christ's very love. This process of transformation happens
over time, for the faithful remain simultaneously sinners and
righteous. They are - in Luther's words - "rusty
polished by God for as long as they live.
 To glimpse what this meant in Luther's world, a brief look
at context is necessary. Luther's was a time of "economic
revolution which was gradually transforming Germany from a nation
of peasant agriculturalists into a society with at least the
beginnings of a capitalist economy."27 Consequences included high
prices, growing disparity of wealth, and increasing poverty,
especially of those with small or fixed income. The poor "were a
cheap labor pool for an expanding profit economy."28 In this
context, for Luther, economic life as neighbor-love meant
vehemently denouncing market activity that enabled a few to make a
profit at the expense of the common good or the well-being of the
poor. And it meant promoting economic practices that serve a
widespread good, especially the good of the poor.
 We cannot here look extensively at the specific economic
norms Luther established to meet these aims. Suffice it to here to
1. Because selling anything is an act toward neighbor, the
transaction's goal should be not profit but rather "an adequate
living" and serving the needs of the neighbor.28
2. Market activity ought be subject to "rules and regulations"
established by civil authorities to prevent the very wealthy from
taking advantage of the poor.29
 In line with these norms, Luther insisted on a number of
rules for economic life that speak directly to the global economy
today, mirroring the claims of its critics. My home is Seattle.
Reading Luther in 1999 during the WTO-related struggles there, I
was provoked by a startling coherence between WTO protesters and
Luther in their insistence that unregulated global "free market"
activity endangers the poor and those with limited income. Many of
Luther's words and those of globalization's opponents are virtually
the same! Allow me to illustrate. Which voice is this? Regarding
large international trading companies, the speaker says: They "are
a bottomless pit of avarice and wrong-doing. . . . They control all
commodities...raise or lower prices at their pleasure. They oppress
and ruin all the small businessmen. . . . Because of it all the
world must be sucked dry and all the money sink and swim in their
- Luther or the WTO protestors - declares that public officials
"should be alert and resolute enough to establish and maintain
order in all areas of trade and commerce in order that the poor may
not be burdened and oppressed. . . ."?31 Who denounces the practices
of buying out the entire supply of a commodity and then raising the
price, and of buying at a low price from one who needs money so
badly that he/she sells low? Who condemns the "the free public
market" and "trade and commerce," where they "burden and oppress
the poor?" The voice in each case was Luther.
 In the words of Carter Lindberg, Luther "saw the entire
community endangered by the financial power of a few great economic
centers. . . . He saw an economic situation immune to moral
jurisdiction that would destroy the ethos of the community. . . .
Luther believed that the church was called to reject publicly and
unequivocally these economic developments and to develop a
constructive social ethic that would include public accountability
of large business through government regulation. . .
Contemporary critics of globalization see much the same. So close
is the coherence between Luther's norms and the situation of
economic globalization today that were his norms adopted as guiding
principles of economic life today, they would subvert the
prevailing paradigm of economic globalization.
 My point, of course, is not to advocate a direct and
uncritical application of Luther's economic analyses or norms to
the contemporary situation. Given Luther's inflammatory
denunciations of Jews, peasants, and Anabaptists, never are his
social ethics to be adopted uncritically as normative. So doing
would lack intellectual and moral integrity. Nor is my point to
imply that Luther was a "progressive" early anti-capitalist. The
implication would be false, failing to acknowledge that his
condemnation of emerging capitalism and his crafting of alternative
economic norms and practices were not rooted in a bent toward
progressive social change. His critique was rooted, social
theoretically, in his "conservative" defense of feudal social
arrangements and prohibitions on interest, and, theologically, in
his conviction that economic life - as all life - must serve the
proclamation and hearing of the gospel, and neighbor-love.
 Rather, the relevant points are these: Luther's economic
ethics had subversive implications in his context, which bore
uncanny resemblances to ours. The subversive nature of Luther's
economic norms, and the moral power for heeding them, stem from
their foundation, neighbor-love, issuing in part from God's
indwelling presence. Economic activity is normed by this one
principle: Christians, having received God's love through God's
grace alone, are "filled with God" and over time come to love
others with God's indwelling love. Thus they grow in serving the
well-being of the community and the neighbor, especially the "needy
ones." Widely accepted economic practices that undermine the
"common good" or the well-being of the poor are to be defied and
replaced with alternatives by the power of Christ's love actually
living within us.
 This is one startling and hope-giving implication of the
claim that God makes home in matter, in the bodies of us "mud
creatures." Recall the question at hand: What might our being body
of God contribute to our moral power to live toward economic and
ecological justice? Thus far my response has been anthropocentric:
God living in human creatures empowers us for lives of
justice-making love. Yet, the anthropocentric boundaries of
mainstream Western ethical frameworks cripple our capacity to
address the bio-cide and eco-cide inherent in our economic
practices, policies, and systems. Luther's pantheism dissolves
those anthropocentric boundaries.
 Recall that, for Luther, God who indwells and empowers the
faithful is "flowing and pouring into [all creatures], filling all
things."33 ". .
. the power of God . . . must be essentially present in all places
even in the tiniest leaf."34 God is "present in every
single creature in its innermost and outermostbeing. . . ."
and reveals the infinite. God "is in and through all creatures, in
all their parts and places, so that the world is full of God and
Hefills all. . . ."36
 The presence of God taking bodily form in "our" many forms
suggests a web of connectedness pregnant with implications for both
moral obligation and moral-spiritual power. The community, the
"common good," the neighbor extends beyond the human to the larger
community of life, the Earth community. Luther did not make this
extension per se. Yet his pantheist claim, held in light of his
conviction that the Word brings life to places of brokenness and
suffering, compels us, his theological heirs, in a time of
ecological brokenness to do so. Our concern here, however, is not
only the normative but also the transformative implications of
Luther's "creation as habitation of God." That is, if, as Luther
asserts, God dwells not only in human creatures but also in all of
Earth's bounty, then in what sense does God's presence and power
there not only obligate us to live toward the healing and
sustaining of creation, but also nurture our moral-spiritual power
to do so, even when that entails swimming upstream against the ways
of life that we have come to assume as natural?
 To think theologically about the moral-spiritual power that
flows from God inhabiting "every little seed" and "all creatures,"
is to struggle for and with "a concept that does not exist"
Protestant ethics. Luther's pantheism re-opens that door
theologically. Exploring the fertile terrain on the other side may
be a vital step in re-situating humankind in the moral universe in
ways that open our capacity to receive and embody God's presence as
power to live toward just and sustainable ways of life.
 The claim to explore and the hope to unfold is this: "Our
efforts on behalf of our planet are not ours alone . . . the source
and power of life in the universe is working in and through us [and
the rest of nature] for the well-being of all creation, including
our tiny part in it."38 Unfolding that claim is a
crucial task of us all as theologians of everyday life today. Here,
I but raise possibilities and questions. If, as Luther insists,
"Christ...is present in all creatures, and I might find him in
stone, in fire, inwater. . . ."39 then undauntable,
redemptive, liberating love lives in the creatures and elements of
this good Earth.
 One species wields power to destroy life as we know and love
it on this generous Earth and - aided by the laws of economic
globalization - is exercising that power. Our capacity to resist
that destruction and to move toward socially just and ecologically
sustainable economic ways may be fed and watered by God's love
coursing through "all created things."40 Said differently: God makes
home in matter. As we awaken each morning, the great Lover and
Liberator is alive in and among our bodies. The mystery of creation
"is the indwelling of God within it."41 The mystery of our power to
resist economic and ecological violence and to live differently is
the living Christ, "pouring and flowing" through us and among us.
We "mud creatures"42 are home of One who breathes
through creation healing, making whole, undoing injustice, and
restoring right relationships, so that all might have life and have
it abundantly. Having received God's subversive love, we are
bearers of it. Tapping that moral-spiritual power entails entry
into the mystery of communion with all of life and with God whose
love for this world is unquenchable, will restore the community of
life, will liberate humanity from being its destroyers, and fills
every cell of all being. The presence and power of God, living in
and loving in creation, will lead those who dare to know that
presence more intimately and to see the realities of globalization
more clearly, along "life-saving and life-savoring43 paths. In the words of
Martin Luther: "The Word of God, wherever it comes, comes to change
and renew the world."
© September 2001
Journal of Lutheran Ethics (JLE)
Volume 1, Issue 1
1 Sarah Anderson and John Cavanagh, "The Top 200,"
Washington, DC: Institute for Policy Studies, 1996, using data
Development Report 1996 and Forbes Magazine. This trend is
confirmed in the United Nations Research Institute's (UNRISD)
States of Disarray: The Social Effects of Globalization (London:
Banson, 1995), 154.
2 "One tendency in a capitalist society is for more
aspects of life to be reduced to commodities over time." Pamela
Sparr, "United Methodist Study Guide on Global Economics: Seeking a
Christian Ethics" (General Board of Global Ministries, United
Methodist Church, 1993), 15.
3 These trends are historically situated. None is new. New
is the speed of financial transactions enabled by cyber-technology,
the growing number of bi-lateral and multi-lateral agreements
deregulating trade and investment, and the seventh trend noted
4 The information regarding the impact of bauxite mining
in India is drawn from two papers: Orissa Development Action Forum,
"An Ethical Response to Globalization - A Christian Perspective,"
Orissa, India, 2000; and the National Council of Churches in India,
"The Land Does Not Belong to Us - We Belong to the Land,"
Visakhapatnam, India, 2000.
5 Yoon-Jae, Chang, "From Mammon of Impoverishment to God
of Empowerment: Implications of the Free Market Economy to the
Theologies of the Third World," unpublished paper, 1998.
6 The United Nations Development Programme, Human
Development Report 1999 (New York and Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1999), 30-31.
7 The United Nations Development Programme, Human
Development Report 1998 (New York and Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1998), 29-30, using data from Forbes Magazine (1997).
8 Lester R. Brown, et. al. State of the World 1998 (New
York and London: W.W. Norton, 1998), 41-42.
9 Ibid., book jacket.
10 Wolfgang Sachs, "Introduction," The Development
Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power, ed. Wolfgang Sachs
(London and New Jersey: Zed Books and Johannesburg: Witwatersrand
University Press, 1993), 2.
11 According to Lester R. Brown et. al., State of the
World: "As the global economy has expanded from 5 trillion of
output in 1950 to 29 trillion in 1997, its demands have crossed
12 Paul Hawken, The Ecology of Commerce (San Francisco:
Harper Books, 1993), 22.
13 A 1992 "Warning to Humanity" issued by more than 1600
senior scientists, including a majority of all living Nobel
Laureates in the sciences, advises that: "[H]uman beings and the
natural world (sic) are on a collision course...that may so alter
the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the
manner that we know." Cited by David Korten in "Will the God of
Life Survive the Institutions of Mammon," unpublished paper
delivered at conference entitled "Global Economic Justice,"
Seattle, Sept., 30, 1999.
14 Daniel Mcguire, The Moral Core of Judaism and
Christianity: Reclaiming the Revolution (Minneapolis: Fortress,
15 The phrase, known as TINA, is Margaret
16 Sallie McFague, The Body of God: An Ecological Theology
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 207-8.
17 Irenaeus of Lyons Against Heresies 3.17.3.
18 Luther, "Third Sermon for Pentecost Sunday," in Sermons
of Martin Luther, ed. John Nicholas Lenker (Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1983), vol. 3: 321.
19 Luther, ibid., 3: 316.
21 Luther, "That These Words of Christ, 'This Is My
Fanatics," Luther's Works 37:58.
22 Luther, "Confession concerning
Martin Luther's Basic Theological Writings (Minneapolis: Fortress,
23 Ibid., 387.
24 Luther, "The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ
- against the Fanatics," in Lull, 321.
25 See Larry Rasmussen with Cynthia Moe-Lobeda, "Reform
Dynamic," in The Promise of Lutheran Ethics, ed. Karen Bloomquist
and John Stumme (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998).
26 Luther, W.A., 2, 413, 27, cited by George W. Forell,
Faith Active in Love (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House,
27 "Introduction to 'Trade and
28 See for example, Luther in "Trade and Usury,"
29 Ibid., 249-50.
30 Luther, "Trade and Usury,"
denounces the trading companies in his comments on the seventh
commandment in the "Large Catechism."
31 Luther, "The Large Catechism," The Book of Concord,
32 Carter Lindberg, Beyond Charity: Reformation
Initiatives for the Poor (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 113.
33 Luther, "Sermons on the Gospel of John, Chapters 1-4,"
34 Luther, "That These Words of Christ, 'This Is My
Fanatics," Luther's Works 37:57.
35 Ibid., 58.
36 Luther, the Weimar Ausgabe 23.134.34, as cited by
Rasmussen, "Luther and a Gospel of Earth," 22, citing Paul
Santmire, The Travail of Nature: The Ambiguous Ecological Promise
of Christian Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985),
37 Mary Grey, Redeeming the Dream: Feminism, Redemption,
and Christian Tradition (London: SPCK, 1989), 87.
38 McFague, Body of God, 212.
39 Luther, "The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of
Christ - against Fanatics," in Lull, 321.
40 Luther, "Confession concerning
41 Sharon Daloz Parks, "Household Economics," in
Practicing Our Faith, ed. Dorothy C. Bass (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1997), 47.
42 "Mud creature" is a term used by Denis Minns to
the created human being. See Denis Minns, OP, Irenaeus (Washington,
D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1994).
43 The phrase is Larry