It being Sunday, I heard a Christian service on BBC Radio 4, broadcast from a Church of England cathedral, so that its congregation could endorse the standard prayer: “Good morning, God. It’s us again, you remember, the righteous ones. Others may fail you but not us!” The theme for the service was World Peace, the special gimmick to invite a representative from Islam. A Muslim lady spoke about her life, her religion, her respect for Christianity, and the similarity of texts in the Bible and the Q’uran. In the music, there was an attempt at fusion, in the form of an English choir getting to grips with the traditional muezzin chant of “Allah Akbar”: God is great. We worship the same God, right?
I guess this was the Anglicans seizing the chance to score one over the Catholics after the Pope was criticized for quoting a remark which a Byzantine Emperor had made six centuries before the invention of political correctness.
I sympathize with poor Pope Benedict. His remark was taken out of the context of the speech as a whole, so I read the full text as reported here. It’s a theological justification for the continued existence of the Roman Catholic Church in the modern world. He defends its synthesis with Hellenism which I referred to the other day re St Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle. It’s not just religious violence that’s wrong. He sneers a little at subjective conscience, for it’s clear he is on the side of complex theology which needs a Pope to interpret, on behalf of the simple people.
To summarise, the Pope’s attack on religious violence is a corollary of his main theme: a plea for religion to be supported in the Hellenic way, by reason. Therefore theology should not be dropped from University curricula. Science and technology are examples of good coming out of the proper exercise of reason. But it’s an error, he says, to pursue religion by following faith and conscience alone. Few of us have time to take full-time courses in theology, but that’s all right because if we are obedient Catholics, we’ll benefit from the wisdom of those who have taken those courses.
What I have argued in this blog is the opposite. I’ve been against organised religion, belief, gurus, being a follower; in favour of conscience, integrity, subjective experience. As I implied in my previous post “Knowing”, the most important thing to know is not theology but what to do.
Listening to the church service this morning, which so righteously and earnestly advocated peace, and suggested it will come about if the religions join forces or at least flatter one another, I wonder what better advice I could give, if asked.
I’d say, “We are capable of developing ourselves, our conscience, our wisdom, our compassion, our strength, so that we need to be told what to think neither by politicians nor priests.” As Hayden pointed out some time ago in her post, The 20% rule, 80% of people have their hearts in the right place. I’d expect that 80% of them are easily manipulated so that their righteousness can be sharpened to a vicious cutting-edge and become a weapon in the hands of their leaders. If we can disengage ourselves from this manipulation, we are taking a big step towards peace.
a wayfarer’s notes 
I think Vincent, what you are bringing this to, in this post, is this:Reason/logic- this to me is 'now', in the sense of it is the continuity of reason in a scientific world understanding. That continuity depends on schooling and learning by each generation, and each gen. uses exactly the same technique, ie, logic/reason.Faith/conscience-this is the singular experience of an individual, his/her 'religious' experience in only one,(this one), life time, the one lived now. It has no 'generational continuity' that is 'seeable' or 'knowable'.Neither of these is fit for proper judgement regarding 'position' in one's single lifetime. Not if one assumes there is more than 'this life is all there is'. Now, the first example, reason/logic, more or less verifies 'one lifetime only' per person. The second example 'teaches' during that 'one lifetime only' that there is something to come after, but not here, you will ie, not be concerned or 'about' this world anymore.What does that say to you?My view is this, there is a third and it is the true reality that his 'lifetime' and 'world' are within. And this world/lifetime is a phase thru which the larger/longer lifetime passes, there is involvement by 'me' before I got here, while I am here, and I will be affected by this place after I leave it. In this case, I have far greater purpose for what I do here now than either of the other two examples can give me. That 'purpose' is what I personally experienced, that 'purpose' extended 'thru' here, and I continued on, of that there was/is NO doubt. Now one cannot really 'teach' this, can one? And I hold that it is true for most of us, should we feel it in us? This is where I bog down, Because I do know (again, from my 'larger subjective experience') that in the 'spiritual' world (which this physical world is inside of/apart of), NOTHING is lost, it can be changed, but not lost. Therefore I have to say, it behooves God/Spirit to be 'all inclusive', meaning continue everyone, somehow.In some way, this is what is called 'ascension', which is rising to the 'realization' in this physical world, of this other 'continuity'. It simply means that ones' thinking becomes 'like' that idea, somehow, becomes 'aware' of it.In all spiritual teachings, eastern or western, they have this basic concept, in some manner.For me, it 'dawned' upon me unexpectedly, while I was looking for something else. So I am unable to say how it happened that I became aware of it. But I did, and I cannot 'leave' it. Yet I am not tied to an organized religion, but am more inclined to Judaism because of their acceptance of all three ways and they have integrated they well. That is not to say that the people of that religion are perfect, like all of us they are human. But I don't think that Gurus are perfect either. Nor saints, nor priests, etc.Sorry Vincent to run on like this, but this is what I perceived your post to be looking for. If I was wrong, forgive me. Perhaps you can glean something from it regardless, that you can use. Thanks.
LikeLike
Thanks Jim, I find what you say extremely relevant – not so much to what I was intending in the post, but to an underlying anomaly in my thinking these days. I very much like what you say about reason/logic & faith/conscience.
Your third point, the extended life of which this one between birth and death is only the visible section of an invisible continuity, is worthy of much consideration. I have been setting that to one side, as a “belief”, or as something that is taught from generation to generation.
But you are right and I do believe that it is more than that. The sense of continuity and purpose is something that we know with a special kind of knowing; a knowing that I am extremely cautious of, because it can get corrupted by concepts which do not originate within us, but from the culture, etc.
I respect greatly your profound comment.
LikeLike
The movers and shakers of this world, of whom the pope is quite obviously one, all base the legitimacy of their rule on the frames set by the ‘civilizations’ of the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans. The major things they have given mankind are death and destruction, injustice, ignorance, fear, greed, hate and indifference. Of course they were also responsible for conjuring splendid inventions, structures and solutions, but that is because they made sure mankind would know. The information they withheld from us, the information they distorted and the filthy lies they sold us claiming it to be the truth, are what matters. For those interventions were the treacherous perversions of the immaculate essence of man (not the vehicle, but the soul). Any system can be entirely logical within its own frame and structure, mechanism and aim. But what counts is the foundation of those systems – their very cores from which all else emerges, that are consistently far removed from what was indicated in your blog and the comment below it to be intuitively knowing the distinction between good and evil, Light and dark. For thousands of centuries mankind has been abused, exploited and betrayed by the spawn of criminal gods who were a murderous, treacherous and promiscuous lot, that claims to be the conjurer of life, but is more famous for their merciless efforts to end it. ALL movers and shakers of this world, ALL who are allowed on the podium to be involved with them, regardless of their function or conviction are the ominous offspring of the deceitful breed. Their knowledge, perception and imagination may dwarf that of the average (wo)man, their power may seem without limit, but they rule only this tiny, insignificant planet in a small solar system, that is part of an anonymous galaxy somewhere near the outer borders of this universe. Their ignorant and cruel conduct will be corrected by the High Powers of this universe. Most of us contributing to this blog may live to witness that event. I pity them as much as I pity their victims.
LikeLike
It's been said before, but someone's got to say it here: the Pope (whom I do not have any special respect for) says that many Muslims often behave violently. Several Muslims are so mad to hear him say this that they … well, become violently. And he's supposed to apologize? The Muslim world needs to grow up.
LikeLike
Dunno, jlhart7. You reveal a certain prejudice against Muslims. If several of them are provoked to violence by what the Pope says, why does the whole Muslim world need to grow up? If I were a Muslim – and I have a strong sympathy with my neighbours, for I live in the Pakistani part of town – I'd be provoked to frustration by your remarks.
There is a strong temptation to behave like a teenager in a zoo. Some animals, known to be dangerous, are kept in a cage, but he pokes a stick through the wire to see how angry he can make them, then runs off. If anyone needs to grow up, it is that teenager. But the media and politicians, and in this case the Pope, have their own agendas, which they place above peace and universal brotherhood.
LikeLike
Amen! Best, rama
LikeLike
I guess what I should have said was that those Muslims who use violence need to grow up. I meant that the violent face of Islam seems to be the one most active in the political realm today, unfortunately. Islam is a strange case in that its own founder used violence.
LikeLike
[…] PS, on the topic of Popes, see also this post: The Pope and the Koran […]
LikeLike