Ecumenical, interreligious, and other relationships Archives

Don’t Discount the Ways

A beautiful and well-known poem of Elizabeth Barrett Browning begins with, “How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.”
   This could be a good description of the so many varieties of religious experiences, allegiances, and practices that we seem to have now and to have had forever!
   For example, we speak of Judaism and Christianity, but each includes many and differing doctrines and practices, both now-a-days and centuries before!
   Actually, Christianity itself—in all its varieties—is rooted in Judaism. Although it seems hard to recognize now, early Christianity was a variant among other versions of ancient Judaism. Contemporary Judaism itself still has different varieties, both from centuries long ago and also relatively modern times!
   Today we may speak about Orthodox, Liberal, and Reformed Jews (to name a few major varieties) and Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians (to name a few major varieties).
   At the time of Jesus, the major varieties of Judaism were Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes (besides, of course, the Messianic Jews who were the followers of Jesus).
   Pharisees were the remote ancestors of the Rabbinic Judaism that we know today. The New Testament refers to them often, usually as critics of the teachings of Jesus—although many Pharisees became his followers (e.g., St. Paul the Apostle).
   The Pharisees were active from the middle of the second century BC until the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. They were defenders of the laws and traditions of the Jewish people and had their backing.
   On the other hand, the Sadducees, during that same period, were associated more with the maintenance of the Temple, its priesthood, and its rituals. They were an elite group of priests.

   We know less about the Essenes than the Pharisees and the Sadducees. In modern times we’ve learned about them through archeological discoveries (e.g., Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls).
   The Essenes led a strict, communal life, similar to what we know about early Eastern Christian desert monasticism. Some suggest that John the Baptist may have been an Essene at first or have been influenced by them.
   In spite of the so many disagreements about what and how to believe and live that have characterized different religious sects and factions over the centuries, the important thing is to remember that there is only one and the same God.
   That means that in spite of internal divisions in and among, for example, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, we are all believers in the one and the same God, although we have deeply rooted practices and beliefs—even rules and regulations—that differ about how best to serve him.
   It doesn’t mean that we should pretend that we don’t have differences or try to “homogenize” our customs, rules, regulations, rituals, prayers, and practices—actually we should celebrate them and profit by them as best we can.
   The great “No, no!” in all this is the “I’m right, you’re wrong” mentality. There is not a one and only way to live a good and holy life.
   When it comes to religion, to knowing, loving, and serving God, we could all profit by remembering and adopting what Elizabeth Barrett Browning wrote:
   “How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.”

30 July 2023

Friends in High Places

To have friends in high places means that you know people in senior positions that are able and willing to use their influence on your behalf, that you know important people who can help you get what you want.
   Another way of describing it is to have a “patron” (which is related to the Latin word for father, “pater”).
   A dictionary definition of “patron” is 1. a person empowered with the granting of an English church benefice. 2. a patron saint. 3. a person corresponding in some respects to a father; protector; benefactor. 4. a person, usually a wealthy and influential one, who sponsors and supports some person, activity, institution, etc. 5. a regular customer, as of a store. 6. In ancient Rome, a person who had freed his slave but still retained a certain paternal control over him.
In the days when people believed in many gods, most had a sort of “patron god” (somewhat like our notion of the later concept of patron saint).
   You can see this in the earlier books of the Bible with their dozens of references to personal and family gods (e.g., the god of Abraham, the god of Isaac, the god of Jacob) and later to tribal and national gods (e.g., the god of the Hebrews, the god of Israel).
   We still have a vestige of this way of thinking when we speak of different religions today as though each are worshiping their own, and a different, god.
   It’s okay to espouse different customs, religious traditions, forms of governance, and language, but we must not forget that we’re fundamentally referencing the one and the same (and the only) God!
   For example, Muslim or not, any believer can praise God in Arabic, saying “Allahu Akbar” (God is great)—and it’s the same God. And Catholic or not, any believer can thank God in Latin, saying “Deo gratias” (Thanks be to God)—the same God.

   In the words of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s beautiful sonnet, all believers should be able to say to God, “How much do I love thee? Let me count the ways.”
   If you aspire to have a friend in high places, remember it’s not something exclusive, just for you. There will be a great crowd of others like you. Surprised you may be, but don’t begrudge them the reward they are receiving. Nothing of their gain has any impact on or diminishes yours.
   The metaphor Jesus used for all this was that of the shepherd and his sheep:

   . . . I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I will lay down my life for the sheep.
   I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.
   This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own. I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again.
   This command I have received from my Father. (John 10:14-18)

Thanks be to God that, notwithstanding all our fumbling and bumbling, our failings and fallings, the love and mercy of God overrides them all.
In spite of all of our limitations and imperfections and misunderstandings, we’re all still fortunate to have a friend in high places, in the highest of places, in the realm of God.

18 June 2023

One Church, One Faith, One Lord

For the first ten years of my life, I was a city dweller and lived in an apartment house.
   A curious word, when you think about it—a kind of “house” [singular] made up of separate “apartments” [plural].
   But, after all, a house is a dwelling made up of separate rooms. So, an apartment house is a dwelling made up of separate apartments.
   The apartment house dwellers have some sense of solidarity since they live in the same building with the same identifying address—but, they have a sense of separateness too since the apartments vary in size, furnishings, and inhabitants!
   To make it a tad more complicated, sometimes apartment houses themselves are grouped together, to be identified as neighborhoods—different clusters of buildings in the one and the same city or town.
   As a kid, growing up, I certainly, clearly knew what apartment and which house I lived in, what neighborhood and (since it was in New York City) what borough we lived in, and of course what city, state, and country we lived it—and, as I learned more about geography, what continent and part of the world as well.
   Later on, I learned about the world as one of many planets in the same solar system, our solar system as one of many in the same galaxy, and the many galaxies as well…
   If your life started out in a very different situation—for example, on a large estate or ranch in a wide-open sector of the country—you might find the city lifestyle and mentality somewhat strange and hard to understand. And, you might even be more suspicious of strangers than a city dweller who encounters them all the time.
   What stirred up all these odd thoughts for me was the concluding refrain of each stanza of a hymn in the Divine Office: “One church, one faith, one lord”

   When we say, “one church” what do we mean? Is it the church we’re used to and were raised in? Is it the local parish or diocese? Is it the particular branch of Christianity we belong to?
   Is our one church more like an historic dwelling on a huge estate or more like an apartment house with a lot of different dwellers, but sharing the same address.
   Does one church mean everybody prays, believes, and behaves the same (or at least tries too)? Or, can one church include a wide variety of languages, ideas, customs, rules, and regulations.
   For many centuries, long ago, people believed in the existence of many gods. This, of course, invited a difference of opinion about right and wrong, how to worship, and a host of other things.
   But, if people believe in only one god, they must be actually believing in the one and the same god no matter what different names, titles, prayers, customs, and usages they might have and observe.
   And, it follows, that the one and the same God isn’t giving contradictory commandments, rules, and teachings to different groups of believers. It’s got to be the misunderstandings of the different groups of believers among themselves.
   Religiously, we are like dwellers in an apartment house! We live next door to one another, but in the same dwelling. Apartments can and may be different in size, furnishings, and number and kinds of people, but all share the same address.
   We’re fellow dwellers and citizens in the same town and place. We’re all neighbors. We live together in the same world with the one and same God!

11 December 2022

Role Models

Growing up, usually we’ve had some role models for various aspects of our lives. That is to say, we’ve tried to be like someone who, as best we understood it, was exemplary in some or many ways.
   Our role models included people distinguished by, for example, looks, strength, popularity, sex appeal, power, money, insight, academic achievement, heroism, skill, artistry, generosity, leadership, holiness, or beauty.
   We’re all somewhat familiar with Halls of Fame—that is, places that call attention to and commemorate people distinguished by a particular kind of achievement—for example, pro football or baseball.
   Although not necessarily commemorated in a Hall of Fame, many people are selected as exemplars in their chosen field. Just think of the Academy Awards for different successes in motion pictures, or medals awarded for valor in the military.
   In Washington, DC., there are monument erected to distinguished Americans—e.g., George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King.
   All over, there are monuments, pictures, busts, and statutes of special people held up for us as models and achievers for better or for worse, from beauty contests to elections!
   Sometimes people are honored during their life, although that can become disappointing since people tend to improve or decline with the passage of time.
   That’s why so many people are not completely held up as exemplars or role models until they have died—and even so, they are not held up as models in every single aspect of their lives; except for a special dispensation of God, no human person is perfect in every way.
   Many years ago I was at the funeral for Pope John Paul II. Towards the end of the ceremony in St. Peter’s Square, many people began to cry out, “Santo subito!”

   “Saint right away!” was what they wanted, that he be honored as a saint.
   Canonization of a saint is a solemn declaration that the person was so distinguished by their quality of life that they now must be in heaven—and may be called upon as our intercessor before God.
   Of course, it doesn’t mean that the person was 100% perfect in every way, but it does hold up the person as a model to be imitated, as an example of faith and goodness for each of us.
   We’re all called upon and challenged to live lives as nearly perfect and as exemplary we can—but it doesn’t necessarily mean that we will be singled out for any award or Hall of Fame.
   Life is filled with unsung heroes/heroines known only to a few people or maybe only to God. Very few are publicly recognized, acclaimed, remembered, and held up as role models.
   Those held up as exemplars in one time and place may not be esteemed the same way in another; values change, and few people stand the test of time and continue to stand as role models through the ages.
   Each of us may have had role models known only to ourselves—and, conversely, we may have become a role model for another in some ways without realizing it.
   As children we learned by imitating and taking after others. Sometimes we realized that our choice of role models was a mistake—and sometime it was a mistake and we never realized it.
   You’re a role model, each of us is a role model, whether we know it or not. Of course, we’re not and never will be perfect models. But, we try to do the best we can!

23 January 2022

Motto-vation

Motto: 1. A word, phrase, or sentence chosen as expressive of the goals or ideals of a nation, group, etc. and inscribed on a seal, banner, coin, etc. 2. A maxim adopted as a principle of behavior.

The United States of America has a motto. It was inscribed on its Great Seal, which was adopted by the Continental Congress on 20 June 1782. It has appeared on its coinage since 1795, and on $1 bills since 1935:

E pluribus unum [Out of many, one]

It’s about unity, originally about the uniting of the 13 separate British colonies to become one new, independent country.
It has come to mean the unique ethos of that new country—the fundamental character and spirit of American culture—the underlying sentiment that informs the beliefs, customs, and practices of American society—the ideal and inspiration of the people of the United States.
It has been suggested that the origin of the expression can be traced back to Cicero’s paraphrase of a saying of Pythagoras, regarding basic family and social bonds as the origin of societies and states. Cicero wrote, “When each person loves the other as much as himself, it makes one out of many (unus fiat ex pluribus), as Pythagoras wishes things to be in friendship.”
A much older expression of this ideal is found in the Hebrew scriptures (Leviticus, 19:17-18):

You shall not hate any of your kindred in your heart. Reprove your neighbor openly so that you do not incur sin because of that person. Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against your own people. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.

Jesus gave us a still higher standard, “Love one another as I have loved you!”
If you’re Catholic and your neighbor is too, you have something in common, a similarity in religious affiliation—but you’re not the same. If you vote Republican or Democrat and your neighbor does the same, you have a similarity in political affiliation—but you’re still different. If you’re male, and your neighbor is female, you have your humanity in common, but you’re not the same.
Loving your neighbor implies loving him/her in spite of differences and diversities—for no two persons are, have been, or will be 100% identical, no matter how many similarities or commonalities they may have.
In 1623 John Donne wrote:

No man is an island,
entire of itself;
every man is a piece of the continent,
a part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less,
as well as if a promontory were,
as well as if a manor of thy friend’s
or of thine own were.
Any man’s death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind;
and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
it tolls for thee.

The one God made the one world we all share. The one Lord redeemed everyone in the whole world. We form one human family, and should be united in spite of our diversity
E pluribus unum is a motto for everyone!

3 May 2020

A Very Attractive Universe

In 1915 Albert Einstein published his theory of general relativity—a new insight and idea that changed our understanding of the universe in which we live. It was followed by other great breakthroughs in scientific thought, dazzlingly difficult to comprehend.
Science-Faction books and films have popularized many of these ideas, sometimes veering into fantasy or a kind of mysticism.
I’ve always had a fondness for the notion of “the force,” in the 1977 Star Wars film. In it wise old Obi-Wan Kenobi tells young Luke Skywalker that “It surrounds us and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together.”
The study of forces and energy is part of traditional physics, including, for example, gravitational, magnetic, electric, and intra-nuclear. The quest, the “impossible dream,” is to find the one theory that will embrace them all.
It’s hard to find simple words to explain the sophisticated theories of modern physics, but perhaps one of them helps: “attraction”—the idea that everything attracts everything else, one way or another.
Magnetism obviously involves attraction. The notion is so common that we even use the word “magnetic” to describe mutual relationships between persons.
Gravity can also be described as attraction. What “falls” to the ground is attracted by the earth. Less obviously, the earth is attracted to the thing that falls—but this attraction is negligible compared to the other.
Clearly the degree to which one thing is attracted to (responds to or moves towards) another has to do with their relative size, strength, and other qualities. In physics, the word “mass” is usually used.
In modern astronomy or astrophysics, a hard to imagine yet real fact is that even light can be “attracted” by an object with enough mass. So to speak, instead of traveling in a straight line light can be “bent” or deflected from its course.

This was a cause of misunderstanding in traditional astronomy. We presume that when light hits our eyes it has traveled in a straight line, and so we think we know exactly from which direction it has come. But, if its path is curved—think of a golf drive or arrow in flight—it’s much harder to know the direction of its source.
If everything “attracts” everything else, then everything is subject to a great variety of “attractions” or forces pulling it one way or another.
Even more bewildering, if everything “attracts” everything else, then everything is subject to an infinite (i.e. without limit) number of “attractions” or forces at any given moment.
And, to make things even more bewildering, the total amount of “everything” is constantly changing. Things are constantly appearing and disappearing, constantly “being born” and “dying.”
Fortunately,the “attraction” of many things is negligible even though they are real. But even this is relative. For example, the “death” of a star millions of light years away hardly affects us at all—but suppose it was our star, the Sun?
There’s a huge difference between viewing a snapshot and a video. Living things are constantly changing and developing. Modern scientific thinking realizes that everything is “in motion.”
Nothing is fixed. Everything is dynamically situated in a web of forces pulling it this way and that. In fact, everything and everybody can be described in terms of the forces, the “attractions,” affecting it. (And, don’t forget, among the most powerful forces is love.)
It’s a very attractive universe!

29 November 2015

On Being catholic

No, it’s not a typographical error. The last word in the title is meant to be spelled with a lower case, “c.” It’s a rather respectable adjective, though not so very commonly used. My dictionary defines it as:

1. broad or wide-ranging tastes, interests, or the like; having sympathies with all; broadminded; liberal.
2. universal in extent; involving all; of interest to all.
3. pertaining to the whole Christian body or church

Of course, spelled with an upper case, “C,” it usually means, according to my dictionary:

1. of or pertaining to a Catholic church, especially the Roman Catholic Church
2. pertaining to the Western Church
3. a member of a Catholic church, especially of the Roman Catholic Church.

A similar ambiguity exists for me when I tell people I’m a New Yorker. By that, I mean to say I was born in New York City. However, I wasn’t born in New York County, one of the five boroughs of New York City, but in the borough of the Bronx. And, when I speak to other residents of New York State, they rightly claim to be New Yorkers, too, but without any connection to the city of the same name.
“American” is just as confusing. People born in the United States of America tend to call themselves “Americans,” but what about people born in North America, Central America and South America? In fact, when most of them say “americano,” they do mean someone from the Western Hemisphere.
Every distinct sense of the same word is equally legitimate. It’s important to realize that my favorite usage of a word isn’t its exclusive meaning, especially a rich, complex and ambiguous word like “catholic.”

I was raised “Catholic,” meaning I was baptized a Christian according to the rite of the Roman Catholic Church and grew up keeping Roman Catholic practices, receiving Catholic sacraments and following Christian doctrines.
During 26 years working with CNEWA, I came to understand and appreciate that I was a member of one of the Catholic family of churches and had experienced only one of multiple different ways of prayer, sacramental life, piety, customs and discipline.
Over these years, getting to know, respect and love so many “Orthodox” (with an upper case, “O”), the importance of also being “catholic” — that is, part of the whole Christian church — certainly came to the fore.
Of course, we “Catholics” are also “orthodox” (lower case), just as “Orthodox” are also “catholic.” That’s what we all profess when we affirm that we believe in “one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.”
Increasingly, though, my mind and heart are drawn to the consciousness of the greater unity, not only of all followers of Christ — Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Evangelical and others — but also of all the believers of the one God of Abraham, of all men and women of good will and of all the human family.
I wouldn’t be me if I wasn’t Roman Catholic. But I also wouldn’t be all that God calls me to be, if I didn’t grow to be more and more Catholic and ultimately more and more catholic.
In the plan of God, we’re not all meant to be Roman Catholic. Perhaps we’re not all meant to be Catholic either. But, come what may and no matter what, we definitely are all meant to be catholic.

(Published in
one, 37:5, September 2011)

Cover Story

A precious legacy of blessed Pope John XXIII was the encyclical, Pacem in Terris, issued just before his death in 1963. This forthright, clear and openhearted appeal “to all men of good will” showed the way to peace in the modern world.
One challenging section distinguished “between error as such and the person who falls into error — even in the case of men who err regarding the truth or are led astray as a result of their inadequate knowledge, in matters either of religion or of the highest ethical standards.
“A man who has fallen into error does not cease to be a man. He never forfeits his personal dignity . . . Besides, there exists in man’s very nature an undying capacity to break through the barriers of error and seek the road to truth.
“God, in his great providence, is ever present with his aid. Today, maybe, a man lacks faith and turns aside into error; tomorrow, perhaps, illumined by God’s light, he may indeed embrace the truth.”
What followed startled many readers by its implicit reference to Marxist Communism:
“Again it is perfectly legitimate to make a clear distinction between a false philosophy of the nature, origin and purpose of men and the world, and economic, social, cultural and political undertakings, even when such undertakings draw their origin and inspiration from that philosophy.
“True, the philosophic formula does not change once it has been set down in precise terms, but the undertakings clearly cannot avoid being influenced to a certain extent by the changing conditions in which they have to operate.
“Besides, who can deny the possible existence of good and commendable elements in these undertakings, elements which do indeed conform to the dictates of right reason, and are an expression of man’s lawful aspirations?”

Pope John is affirming that “actions speak louder than words.” We should be more concerned about the other’s behavior than the ideology to which he or she appeals — it’s possible to collaborate in good works with anyone.
In matters religious, one can always find texts in Jewish, Christian and Muslim holy books that can outrage and offend the sensibilities of others. But that doesn’t mean that Jews, Christians and Muslims should never trust one another nor work together.
As a Christian, I’m outraged and offended by many things done by Christians over the centuries. I don’t identify with these deeds. For me, those responsible for them are “so- called” Christians, since what they have done is inconsistent with the teaching of Jesus.
With all due respect, the same can be said by Jews and Muslims — and by adherents to Confucianism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, various traditional religions, and no religion at all.
Relentlessly holding on to historical — and recent — memories of past offenses, like a dog with a bone, belies compassion, mercy, forgiveness and love.
In matters political, the situation is similar. Politics is the art of the possible, founded on respect for the dignity and rights of every person. Political leaders who demonize the other because of his or her politics, belief or ideology, who refuse to trust or to work together, don’t even need to be identified as a “so-called” anything — by now calling them “politicians” increasingly suffices.
You might say that Pope John’s thought is, “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” In that case, look for the inside story and try hard to read each other person like a book!

(Published in
one, 37:2, March 2011)

It’s a Small World

One of the favorite themes of many American “Westerns” is the tension between ranchers and farmers, cattlemen and settlers. Ranchers want open grazing land; settlers want to fence in the wide open spaces, build houses and till the land.
The story of the westward expansion of the United States is a tale of open land gradually giving way to farms, towns, and, ultimately, cities. Paradoxically, as cities have grown, family farms and small towns have declined.
Many urban dwellers have become modern nomads; they have little attachment to any one place, often moving from apartment to apartment, city to city. They’re really not settlers at all; they don’t feel bound nor do they bind themselves to where they live.
The whole world is inexorably changing in a similar way. No matter how much blood is shed in the name of homelands, no matter how many disputes rage about boundaries and frontiers, people move about the world wherever they can.
At the beginning of last October’s Special Assembly for the Middle East of the Synod of Bishops, the secretary general, Archbishop Nikola Eterović, opened the working session with some very provocative population statistics.
He reported there are approximately 5,707,000 Catholics in the Middle East — understood as the countries from Turkey to Egypt, extending as far east as Iran, plus the island of Cyprus and the Arabian Peninsula. Approximately 2,429,000 of them (43%) are found in the Arabian Peninsula, but they’re “guest workers,” not native residents
This means, for instance, there are more Syro-Malabar Catholics from India working in the Persian Gulf region than the total number of Christians of all denominations in Palestine and Israel.
On the other hand, you’ll probably find more Christians from Bethlehem in Santiago, Chile, than in Bethlehem itself.

The former Chaldean Catholic bishop of Basra, Iraq, now tends a Chaldean flock in Sydney, Australia. Pastors truly are shepherds; they follow their flocks wherever they graze!
In the New York metropolitan area where CNEWA has its administrative headquarters, there are three Syriac eparchies, three Armenian, two Russian and one Maronite. Of course, when it comes to Middle East Christians, New York yields to metro Detroit with its huge Arab-American population.
At the synod for the Middle East, many Middle East bishops bewailed the exodus of so many of their faithful; the bishops were concerned to build a climate of peaceful coexistence so their people would stay in their historical homelands. However, the Middle Eastern bishops ministering in North and South America, Australia, and Europe had a different perspective; they saw their originally immigrant flock fully integrated into their new homelands and thriving.
Unlike the situation of earlier centuries, emigration doesn’t mean being cut off forever from ancestral countries and cultures; modern emigrants can and often frequently visit “home” even though they don’t live their anymore.
I have to confess to a certain bias: I’m not only a typical American — that is, a blend of different ethnic and cultural strains (my great-grandparents came to the States from Ireland and Germany) — but also a typical urban nomad who’s moved many times in his life, from neighborhood to neighborhood and even from country to country.
I’m not a cowboy, but you might say my motto is “Don’t fence me in” — unless the fence is big enough to enclose the whole, small world.

(Published in
one, 37:1, January 2011)

Allegiance to Whom?

School kids in America usually start the school day with a “Pledge of Allegiance” to “the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all.”
Allegiance is a lesser value in our day than it used to be. In a feudal society, it is a key value. Everyone knows his place. You owe allegiance to the one over you (your lord) and are responsible to him. Those under you owe allegiance to you (their lord) and you have responsibilities for them.
Many other creatures have similar relationships. When it comes to chickens, it’s clear that there is a “pecking order” among them. In every barnyard, you know which bird is boss.
Dogs sort out their relationships very quickly; in a pack, it’s easy to see who is the “alpha male.”
Elephants recognize who is the matriarch of the herd.
It’s all about domination.
Who is the dominus — the lord, the master — for you and me?
For Saint Paul it was clear. He knew to whom primary allegiance was due. As he wrote to the Romans,

None of us lives as his own master and none of us dies as his own master. While we live we are responsible to the Lord, and when we die we die as his servants. Both in life and death we are the Lord’s

Would that we all knew our primary allegiance as well as Paul.
What about who owes allegiance to us? Under God, for whom are we responsible?
Often the rest of our relationships and allegiances are no better than those of birds and bees, dogs and cats, elephants and all other creatures.

What does our Lord tell us about lording over others? The first part of the answer is in Genesis, where it says that God has placed the whole world under us:

Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that move on the earth.

The corollary of this is that we are responsible for the whole world and all the creatures in it — a truth being reaffirmed in our contemporary concern for the environment.
What about our human relationships, one with the other? “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Oh, yes. As Saint John reminds us:

This is the commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother

Jesus dramatically illustrated this when he, teacher and master, washed his disciples feet as a model for them to follow.
If we know our true allegiance and responsibilities, we have a standard to guide all our decisions and our lives.
We shouldn’t act as animals. They are as God made them. And, we must be as God made us.
Individuals or families, tribes or nations, countries or organizations — we’re not meant to establish a pecking order, boss others around, intimidate as an alpha male, or be the matriarch of the herd.
We exercise our “domination” through love.

(Published as “Allegiance” in
one, 34:3, May 2008)