"Protestantism has the method of Jesus with His secret too much left out of mind: Catholicism has His secret with His method too much left out of mind; neither has His unerring balance, His intuition, His sweet reasonableness. But both have hold of a great truth, and get from it a great power.
-- Matthew Arnold (1822-1888), poet, educator, cultural critic
No religion? Not necessarily a bad thing, but let's make sure we all agree on just what religion is. Religion is defined as a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes beliefs, and practices; a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with scrupulous conformity, ardor, and faith. Is there any formal, organized religion in which an individual could exercise a spiritual belief that is not part of the institutionalized system? I think not. If we look back to religious roots, we see the institutional aspect coming into being as a way to ensure conformity, adherence, and control. If belief, one's faith, is dictated by rules which demand conformity and adherence in favor of freedom of thought, the freedom to have a personal faith, what are the chances that institutionalized spirituality will be stronger than a personal one that is freely given, with love and understanding, and without fear or trepidation?
I think we tend to look at religious belief and spiritual faith as one and the same. I see a difference. Whether there is a personal or institutionalized system of belief, it is still a "system" which was set in place to ensure faith which, if heartfelt, should require no rules and regulations with which to ensure. Spirituality is ensured, and adhered to, by one's own "human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things." We have to ask ourselves which seems more sincere, the definition of religion which is based on some system to ensure adherence or the definition of spirituality with a "relationship based on a profound level of mental or emotional communion." I have to ask: If you have to ensure something through a particular system, how really profound is your personal level of mental or emotional communion, your commitment? If your faith is not your own, is it really your faith? If you haven't found a personal relationship with your faith, are you expecting some clergy to do the work for you and, if so, why would you, then, deserve the credit?
When I was inducted into the military I was asked what religious preference I wanted on my dog tags. I wasn't sure at that point in my life where my faith was ultimately headed so I had them put down 'NO RELIG PREF" (no religious preference). It really didn't matter, as I thought that God must know my mind. Over the next 22 years my "religious preference" would change, several times, on those dog tags. Buddhist, Taoist, Agnostic, No Religion, would all find a temporary home around my neck. The more I studied "religious" philosophy, the more I grew to dislike organized religion.
Spiritually, if I have to define my beliefs in a way as to simplify explaining "panentheism" and to stay away from quantum physics, I define myself as more of a Christian-Taoist. I've always found it easy to see how many might think Jesus spent his lost years, from age 13 to 29, in India and Tibet studying with the monks. There, he would come to be known by the Tibetan monks as Saint Issa. Buddhist and Taoist philosophies can be found throughout the sayings and teachings of Jesus Christ, especially if one reads the lost gospels of Mary and Thomas. It would be upon his return home from this absence that he would begin his ministry.
The monastery blog posted an article recently, America's Fastest Growing Religion: "None". One needs to read past the title and understand that "none" does not mean a lack of spirituality or of belief in a higher power in the universe. It does not, necessarily, claim affiliation as an atheist but, rather, can mean claiming no affiliation with any "organized" religious belief. Atheism denies God, they deny religion and, yet, they have a symbol to denote their belief, their faith in a denial of faith. I think any group claiming a symbol in order to claim equal status with religious orders haven't quite thought it through. There comes a point when your protestation becomes, itself, a "religious" belief.
I suppose, reading the monastery post, I probably qualify as a "none" by definition, though I hate the label as it misrepresents me, to most people, as an atheist, a philosophy which I abhor. An agnostic questions the existence of God, the definition of God, but at least keeps an open mind about God. I view atheists, as a whole, as having a belief in nothing religion has to offer. They disavow anything spiritual or religious and see it as so much superstitious bunk. There is nothing greater than themselves and they believe in nothing they cannot see or prove.
I have heard atheists state they don't need a list of "Ten Commandments" or any Holy Scripture to dictate a morality for which they are well aware. This would, of course, be the morality dictated by common law which is, to an atheists chagrin, steeped in religious scripture and commandments handed down through the ages. I tell them you wouldn't know if you didn't know, so thank God a list was left to give you some clue, an easy list for you to follow, ignorance of the origins of our laws and morality notwithstanding.
No religion? I don't know, religion has given us much and taught us much, good and bad, and credit should be given on both scores. Whether it is necessary for organized religion to continue is a personal choice each of us will have to make. Our choices are ones which organized religion will , no doubt, have to suffer for if they don't grasp the obvious issues which face them. You can view religion as a necessity for "easy" salvation, a crutch, the opiate of the masses, a vehicle of control over those with weak minds, or simply as a serious vehicle for fellowship. Historically, though, we know organized religions have had their problems when leadership forgets their moral basis. Some religions are currently discovering these failings still infect the body whole.
Matthew Arnold stated, in this post's opening quote, "Protestantism has the method of Jesus with His secret too much left out of mind: Catholicism has His secret with His method too much left out of mind; neither has His unerring balance, His intuition, His sweet reasonableness. But both have hold of a great truth, and get from it a great power." I have stated in my writing that what Arnold offers is true of most all organized religion. I don't think many of them hold to their tenets of unerring balance, intuition, or sweet reasonableness, any more than they fully grasp the concept of truth, tolerance, and peace. These concepts fly in the face of control, and control is really what they're all about. Their base philosophies may not have started out with this goal, but it seems, in the absence of these concepts, control was the only way to hold it all together. It is an unfortunate consequence that, in the absence of great responsibility great power will corrupt into evil.
Lenny Bruce once wrote, "People are leaving the church and going back to God."
It would seem a good many of us still are.
Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint.
When I was inducted into the military I was asked what religious preference I wanted on my dog tags. I wasn't sure at that point in my life where my faith was ultimately headed so I had them put down 'NO RELIG PREF" (no religious preference). It really didn't matter, as I thought that God must know my mind. Over the next 22 years my "religious preference" would change, several times, on those dog tags. Buddhist, Taoist, Agnostic, No Religion, would all find a temporary home around my neck. The more I studied "religious" philosophy, the more I grew to dislike organized religion.
Spiritually, if I have to define my beliefs in a way as to simplify explaining "panentheism" and to stay away from quantum physics, I define myself as more of a Christian-Taoist. I've always found it easy to see how many might think Jesus spent his lost years, from age 13 to 29, in India and Tibet studying with the monks. There, he would come to be known by the Tibetan monks as Saint Issa. Buddhist and Taoist philosophies can be found throughout the sayings and teachings of Jesus Christ, especially if one reads the lost gospels of Mary and Thomas. It would be upon his return home from this absence that he would begin his ministry.
The monastery blog posted an article recently, America's Fastest Growing Religion: "None". One needs to read past the title and understand that "none" does not mean a lack of spirituality or of belief in a higher power in the universe. It does not, necessarily, claim affiliation as an atheist but, rather, can mean claiming no affiliation with any "organized" religious belief. Atheism denies God, they deny religion and, yet, they have a symbol to denote their belief, their faith in a denial of faith. I think any group claiming a symbol in order to claim equal status with religious orders haven't quite thought it through. There comes a point when your protestation becomes, itself, a "religious" belief.
I suppose, reading the monastery post, I probably qualify as a "none" by definition, though I hate the label as it misrepresents me, to most people, as an atheist, a philosophy which I abhor. An agnostic questions the existence of God, the definition of God, but at least keeps an open mind about God. I view atheists, as a whole, as having a belief in nothing religion has to offer. They disavow anything spiritual or religious and see it as so much superstitious bunk. There is nothing greater than themselves and they believe in nothing they cannot see or prove.
I have heard atheists state they don't need a list of "Ten Commandments" or any Holy Scripture to dictate a morality for which they are well aware. This would, of course, be the morality dictated by common law which is, to an atheists chagrin, steeped in religious scripture and commandments handed down through the ages. I tell them you wouldn't know if you didn't know, so thank God a list was left to give you some clue, an easy list for you to follow, ignorance of the origins of our laws and morality notwithstanding.
No religion? I don't know, religion has given us much and taught us much, good and bad, and credit should be given on both scores. Whether it is necessary for organized religion to continue is a personal choice each of us will have to make. Our choices are ones which organized religion will , no doubt, have to suffer for if they don't grasp the obvious issues which face them. You can view religion as a necessity for "easy" salvation, a crutch, the opiate of the masses, a vehicle of control over those with weak minds, or simply as a serious vehicle for fellowship. Historically, though, we know organized religions have had their problems when leadership forgets their moral basis. Some religions are currently discovering these failings still infect the body whole.
Matthew Arnold stated, in this post's opening quote, "Protestantism has the method of Jesus with His secret too much left out of mind: Catholicism has His secret with His method too much left out of mind; neither has His unerring balance, His intuition, His sweet reasonableness. But both have hold of a great truth, and get from it a great power." I have stated in my writing that what Arnold offers is true of most all organized religion. I don't think many of them hold to their tenets of unerring balance, intuition, or sweet reasonableness, any more than they fully grasp the concept of truth, tolerance, and peace. These concepts fly in the face of control, and control is really what they're all about. Their base philosophies may not have started out with this goal, but it seems, in the absence of these concepts, control was the only way to hold it all together. It is an unfortunate consequence that, in the absence of great responsibility great power will corrupt into evil.
Lenny Bruce once wrote, "People are leaving the church and going back to God."
It would seem a good many of us still are.
Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint.
It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.
We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.
Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You may find it easier to choose "anonymous" when leaving a comment, then adding your contact info or name to the end of the comment.
Thank you for visiting "The Path" and I hope you will consider following the Congregation for Religious Tolerance while on your own path.