BIBLICAL AUTHORITY
“Protestantism has . . . intensified the authority of the Bible as a substitute for the lost authority of the church. But as history has shown, one can interpret certain biblical texts in many ways. . . . . [U]nder the influence of a so-called scientific enlightenment great masses of educated people have either left the church or have become profoundly indifferent to it. . . . But many of them are religious people, only incapable of agreeing with the actually existing forms of the creed. . . . The Catholic who has turned his back on the church usually develops a secret or manifest inclination toward atheism, whereas the Protestant follows, if possible, a sectarian movement. The absolutism of the Catholic church seems to demand an equally absolute negation, while Protestant relativism permits variations.”
Carl Jung. Psychology and Religion. 1938.
A REFLECTION
Of course the sects Jung had in mind were what Americans now characterize as Mainline Protestant, a breed whose numbers continue to decline. Eighty years on in America the authoritarian face is less that of the Pope than that of the non-denominational “Bible Church” minister who leads large, semi-autonomous congregations made up of the theological illiterati. That the manipulative and unbiblical apocalyptic visions expressed in sermons and popular fiction, e.g., the Left Behind series, could be taken seriously might be held to demonstrate the depths of biblical and historical ignorance to which a large majority have sunk. The religious perversion that is the Dominionist movement exploits this ignorance and, furthermore, countenances none of the relativism to which Jung refers. What might he say about today’s atheist/Muslim Europe and secularist/Christianist America?
CS
Monday, February 26, 2007
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Why We Fight
COSMIC CHRIST
“You have to begin somewhere and send down deep roots from that place. We have to go the whole way with Christ, and only then will we meet the cosmic Christ. Then we will no longer need to defend our frontiers so stubbornly, and we can see that truth can be found in the other great world religions too. I know that many people are not ready for this yet, and I have to admit that I myself took a very long time to get to this point. But why else would Jesus say so often: Don’t be afraid, don’t be afraid! A large percentage of Christians are still afraid, as if God needed us to defend Gods’ work. I believe that in reality we don’t all love the Christ who is the Alpha and Omega of history; instead we love the little Jesus whom we can stick in our pockets.”
Fr. Richard Rohr, O.F.M. Simplicity: The Freedom of Letting Go. 1991.
COMMENT
Religion is dangerous in its concrete particulars. A world filled with people defending their boundaries rather than seeking their centers makes inevitable all manner of conflict. Every belief system, theistic or otherwise, has its own counterpart to the pocket-sized Jesus.
CS
“You have to begin somewhere and send down deep roots from that place. We have to go the whole way with Christ, and only then will we meet the cosmic Christ. Then we will no longer need to defend our frontiers so stubbornly, and we can see that truth can be found in the other great world religions too. I know that many people are not ready for this yet, and I have to admit that I myself took a very long time to get to this point. But why else would Jesus say so often: Don’t be afraid, don’t be afraid! A large percentage of Christians are still afraid, as if God needed us to defend Gods’ work. I believe that in reality we don’t all love the Christ who is the Alpha and Omega of history; instead we love the little Jesus whom we can stick in our pockets.”
Fr. Richard Rohr, O.F.M. Simplicity: The Freedom of Letting Go. 1991.
COMMENT
Religion is dangerous in its concrete particulars. A world filled with people defending their boundaries rather than seeking their centers makes inevitable all manner of conflict. Every belief system, theistic or otherwise, has its own counterpart to the pocket-sized Jesus.
CS
Friday, February 9, 2007
I can't tell you but I know it's mine
MYSTERY
“The feeling of [mysterium termendum] may at times come sweeping like a gentle tide, pervading the mind with a tranquil mood of deepest worship. It may pass over into a more set and lasting attitude of the soul, continuing, as it were, thrillingly vibrant and resonant, until at last it dies away and the soul resumes its ‘profane’, non-religious mood of everyday experience. It may burst in sudden eruption up from the depths of the soul with spasms and convulsions, or lead to the strangest excitement, to intoxicated frenzy, to transport, and to ecstasy. It has its wild and demonic forms and can sink to an almost grisly horror and shuddering. It has its crude, barbaric antecedents and early manifestations, and again it may be developed into something beautiful and pure and glorious. It may become the hushed, trembling, and speechless humility of the creature in the presence of—whom or what? In the presence of that which is a mystery inexpressible and above all creatures.”
Rudolf Otto. The Idea of the Holy. 1923.
COMMENT
The conjunction of the rational and non-rational completes a context. The rational side of religion, the theological system, provides the framework upon which to hang the non-rational Holy (or is it the other way around?). Further along in the text, Otto provides a musical analogy for this essential interrelationship. A poem, in this case the lyrics, represents the rational expression of some emotion while the music, more abstract by definition, evokes a mood that defies explication. Together they form something closer to a whole, but the extent to which that whole is apprehended and the relative weights of the two elements—rational and non-rational—differ with each person depend directly upon the individual’s progress along the path toward full maturity—spiritual maturity? philosophical maturity? The path, in any case, cannot be defined by authority whose own growth is arrested at the stage of pre-adolescent literalism.
CS
“The feeling of [mysterium termendum] may at times come sweeping like a gentle tide, pervading the mind with a tranquil mood of deepest worship. It may pass over into a more set and lasting attitude of the soul, continuing, as it were, thrillingly vibrant and resonant, until at last it dies away and the soul resumes its ‘profane’, non-religious mood of everyday experience. It may burst in sudden eruption up from the depths of the soul with spasms and convulsions, or lead to the strangest excitement, to intoxicated frenzy, to transport, and to ecstasy. It has its wild and demonic forms and can sink to an almost grisly horror and shuddering. It has its crude, barbaric antecedents and early manifestations, and again it may be developed into something beautiful and pure and glorious. It may become the hushed, trembling, and speechless humility of the creature in the presence of—whom or what? In the presence of that which is a mystery inexpressible and above all creatures.”
Rudolf Otto. The Idea of the Holy. 1923.
COMMENT
The conjunction of the rational and non-rational completes a context. The rational side of religion, the theological system, provides the framework upon which to hang the non-rational Holy (or is it the other way around?). Further along in the text, Otto provides a musical analogy for this essential interrelationship. A poem, in this case the lyrics, represents the rational expression of some emotion while the music, more abstract by definition, evokes a mood that defies explication. Together they form something closer to a whole, but the extent to which that whole is apprehended and the relative weights of the two elements—rational and non-rational—differ with each person depend directly upon the individual’s progress along the path toward full maturity—spiritual maturity? philosophical maturity? The path, in any case, cannot be defined by authority whose own growth is arrested at the stage of pre-adolescent literalism.
CS
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Morality from Within
A PRAGMATIC IDEA OF SAINTLINESS
“The collective name for the ripe fruits of religion in a character is Saintliness. The saintly character is the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual centre of the personal energy; and there is a certain composite photograph of universal saintliness, the same in all religions, of which the feature can easily be traced.
1. A feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world’s selfish little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power. . . .
2. A sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own life, and a willing self-surrender to this control.
3. An immense elation and freedom, as the outline of the confining selfhood melt down.
4. A shifting of the emotional centre toward loving and harmonious affections, towards ‘yes, yes,’ and away from ‘no,’ where the claims of the non-ego are concerns.”
William James. The Varieties of Religious Experience. 1902.
OBSERVATION
James goes on to note the practical indistinguishability of the lives of saints, whether they go under the banner of stoic, Christian, Buddhist or, presumably, Jewish, Sufi, Hindu, Jain, animist, etc. He lists certain characteristics that set saints apart: asceticism, strength of soul, purity, and charity. Obviously, James is pointing us toward some universal here--not a prescribed life for all to follow, but a universal in the sense that the most tuned-in among us appear to embrace strikingly similar ways of living. Though all but a few fall well short of the holy state James describes, a lesson is clear for the masses as well: it’s how you live your life, not the liturgy or incantations your mouth, and how you live your life is the truest manifestation of your character and spiritual development.
CS
“The collective name for the ripe fruits of religion in a character is Saintliness. The saintly character is the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual centre of the personal energy; and there is a certain composite photograph of universal saintliness, the same in all religions, of which the feature can easily be traced.
1. A feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world’s selfish little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power. . . .
2. A sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own life, and a willing self-surrender to this control.
3. An immense elation and freedom, as the outline of the confining selfhood melt down.
4. A shifting of the emotional centre toward loving and harmonious affections, towards ‘yes, yes,’ and away from ‘no,’ where the claims of the non-ego are concerns.”
William James. The Varieties of Religious Experience. 1902.
OBSERVATION
James goes on to note the practical indistinguishability of the lives of saints, whether they go under the banner of stoic, Christian, Buddhist or, presumably, Jewish, Sufi, Hindu, Jain, animist, etc. He lists certain characteristics that set saints apart: asceticism, strength of soul, purity, and charity. Obviously, James is pointing us toward some universal here--not a prescribed life for all to follow, but a universal in the sense that the most tuned-in among us appear to embrace strikingly similar ways of living. Though all but a few fall well short of the holy state James describes, a lesson is clear for the masses as well: it’s how you live your life, not the liturgy or incantations your mouth, and how you live your life is the truest manifestation of your character and spiritual development.
CS
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
DEMOCRACY IS NOT THE ENEMY OF FAITH
CRYPTO-FASCISTS (CHRISTO-FASCISTS) AMONG US
“Democracy is not, as the Christo-fascists claim, the enemy of faith. Democracy keeps religious faith in the private sphere, ensuring that all believers have an equal measure of protection and practice mutual tolerance. Democracy sets no religious ideal. It simply ensures coexistence. It permits the individual to avoid simply being subsumed by the crowd—the chief goal of totalitarianism, which seeks to tell all citizens what to believe, how to behave and how to speak. The call to obliterate the public and the private wall that keeps faith the prerogative of the individual means the obliteration of democracy.”
Chris Hedges. American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. 2006.
COMMENT
Where is the virtue in blind obedience to authority or adherence to any law that mandates religious or political orthodoxy? Where is the virtue and, finally, what is the point? If the Far Right ever manages to persuade the nation to ratify a constitutional amendment outlawing disrespect for the flag, the sense of virtue we feel when we stand and place our hands over our hearts will be nullified; when the flag passes, we will merely be complying with the law. We will no longer act out of genuine patriotism. Similarly, required adherence to a narrow range of religious and moral behavior would give rise to a culture in which outward conformity masks the truth of private thought. As the ultimate disintegration of the 20th Century’s totalitarian states shows, such a system is inherently unstable.
CS
“Democracy is not, as the Christo-fascists claim, the enemy of faith. Democracy keeps religious faith in the private sphere, ensuring that all believers have an equal measure of protection and practice mutual tolerance. Democracy sets no religious ideal. It simply ensures coexistence. It permits the individual to avoid simply being subsumed by the crowd—the chief goal of totalitarianism, which seeks to tell all citizens what to believe, how to behave and how to speak. The call to obliterate the public and the private wall that keeps faith the prerogative of the individual means the obliteration of democracy.”
Chris Hedges. American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. 2006.
COMMENT
Where is the virtue in blind obedience to authority or adherence to any law that mandates religious or political orthodoxy? Where is the virtue and, finally, what is the point? If the Far Right ever manages to persuade the nation to ratify a constitutional amendment outlawing disrespect for the flag, the sense of virtue we feel when we stand and place our hands over our hearts will be nullified; when the flag passes, we will merely be complying with the law. We will no longer act out of genuine patriotism. Similarly, required adherence to a narrow range of religious and moral behavior would give rise to a culture in which outward conformity masks the truth of private thought. As the ultimate disintegration of the 20th Century’s totalitarian states shows, such a system is inherently unstable.
CS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)