[Recently, I posted here a discussion question under the title "What Kind of Sacred Principles Do We Need?" (at www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_andrew_b_060921_a_discussion_questio.htm). It is a discussion that should be an ongoing one, I believe, and it is in that spirit that I post here a few thoughts of my own that bear upon the questions I asked there. I may share some additional thoughts of mine on these themes in the near future.]
Some people have commented that they don't like the word "sacred." Admittedly, finding the right words are difficult whenever one speaks of deep matters. Indeed, as the mystics have said across the centuries, the deeper one goes, the less adequate any words are.
For now, at least, in the absence of any better words to use, I will stick with sacred. But I will also attempt to clarify what I mean by it by citing what I wrote in a discussion question I posted last month on my own website, "Where in Your Life Do You Encounter the Sacred":
For this discussion, the realm of the "sacred" will not necessarily have anything to do with any specific religious beliefs. What is meant, rather, is a sense of meaningfulness that is so big and full –and perhaps transcendent-that it breaks through our mundane experience of our world into something deeper.
I recognize that this will not solve all the problems: some people have such strong and aversive associations with the language of religion that there's no getting around that associative obstacle; other people may lack any direct personal experience of "meaningfulness that is so big and full--and perhaps transcendent" that it requires the kind of language that religions have employed to designate a breakthrough into other planes or realms of value or of our existence.
But there is no net that will catch every fish....
**************
One of my paramount concerns when it comes to the spiritual condition of America --"spiritual": there's another word doubtless problematic for many-- is that the "right" in our times has had a greater spiritual intensity about its values and goals than has the "progressive" (or "liberal" or "left") side of our divided society.
Even if the right has come under the sway of "daemonic" spirits, has been seduced into believing that evil forces represent the righteousness in whose garb they dress themselves, this has not lessened the power that comes from breaking through the mundane. Hitler would never have been able to mobilize his nation so effectively had he not connected them with something big and deep. (One of the more insightful biographies of Hitler is entitled THE PSYCHOPATHIC GOD.)
The discrepancy between the daemonically empowered right and the mundanely proasic liberal part of America brings to mind the famous line from Yeats, in his poem "The Second Coming":
The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.
*************
For someone who lived through, and fully participated in, the 1960s and 1970s, this spiritual shallowness of the progressive element of America comes as a big disappointment. It was not always so.
From amid the confusions and the errors and the sloth that were also part of the counter-culture, there are also a genuinely positive spirit that gave voice to some of the "sacred values" which our nation and our world genuinely need.
Part of this concerned a transformation of the human relationship with the rest of the natural world. In addition to the political dimension of "environmentalism" --indeed, the source of the passion that gave that political movement its impetus-- there was a spiritual dimension. In the matter of just a few years, the idea that there is something sacred about the biosphere --about the Creation, as some would also express it-- became a powerful force in America.
This spirit seems to have dissipated in today's America --even when we bother to talk about environmental issues, one would scarcely think that something deep and sacred is at stake-- but we can still get a sense of the former deeper vibrancy of such values from some old movies.
Andrew Bard Schmookler's website www.nonesoblind.org is devoted to understanding the roots of America's present moral crisis and the means by which the urgent challenge of this dangerous moment can be met. Dr. Schmookler is also the author of such books as The Parable of the Tribes: The Problem of Power in Social Evolution (SUNY Press) and Debating the Good Society: A Quest to Bridge America's Moral Divide (M.I.T. Press). He also conducts regular talk-radio conversations in both red and blue states.
After yesterday's vote on habeas corpus, the best analogy I could come up with was Ezekiel's vision of the Divine Presence leaving Jerusalem and the temple.
by
Ezekiel (16 articles, 12 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments)
on Friday, September 29, 2006 at 1:19:01 PM
This planet and all life on it are sacred to me. All living things are connected to eachother and to the Earth.
Speaking from a strictly scientific point of view, all life on our planet is composed of the same nucleotide bases, which code for the same amino acids. When you look at a plant, a goat or a human, the basic molecular building blocks are all the same in each organism, just in different arrangements.
It's amazing that such seemingly simple molecules can be arranged to create billions of complex life forms. So, since we're all built from the same materials, we should feel a respect for and connectedness to the other life on the planet; even hold it sacred.
But since neo-cons seem to hate all that sciencey stuff, I'll write from a religious point of view. This planet and all life on it are God's creations; it all belongs to him. When we abuse the planet and the other organisms we share it with, we're showing disrespect for God's creations, and thereby disrespecting him. People who truly beleive in a God who created the world should hold it sacred.
I don't know what Bible Ann Coulter reads, but nowhere in the KJV does God say anything about "the planet is yours, rape it."
by
Amanda Butler (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 21 comments)
on Friday, September 29, 2006 at 4:18:11 PM
Don't you get it? The Jesus movement in the 70s morphed into the charismatic church and is now the evangelical movement. I personally know people who went from Marxists to charismatics to evangelicals. These people just want absolute power. they saw that Americans would never accept a leftist dictatorship, so they went right, recruited the Christian churches and today we have a Republican party with absolute power. It's a lie that liberals aren't spiritual, but the idea that Democrats should violate the Constitution and support the church in the public sphere is ludicrous. Might as well just have one party and throw out the Constitution.
by
terri Kionka (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 83 comments)
on Friday, September 29, 2006 at 6:20:36 PM
I think the problem with the spirit of America today can be firmly placed upon the shoulders of people like Scary Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Jim and Tammy Fay, Oral Roberts, and the rest of the Religious Reich's vangard of money hungry god peddlers. I would also add that the preachers for the crop of Mega-churches also fall into this category.
They aren't selling spirituality. They are selling self-righteousness and fictional morality to a group of people who are desperate to find purpose and meaning in their lives. There is very little of the spirit in their messages. It's always about concentrating on the "sins" of others, and begging for cash. Since when did god need money? Didn't Jesus say, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and render unto god that which is god's?"
This has left America in a spiritual vacuum. It's no wonder people will look to some pretty far out sources for spiritual enlightenment. I myself have tried out some of these rather fringe belief systems, and found them all wanting.
I consider myself a pagan, only because by strictest definition, a pagan is someone who does not espouse christian beliefs. I have dabbled in Wicca, Druidism, Shamanism and Native American tradition, as well as Norse, and ancient Celtic tradition. To me, they all have something to offer. I cannot say I espouse one over the other.
I believe that the spirit of the universe is all powerful. I also believe that I don't need the intersession of other humans or deities in order to communicate with that spirit. In other words, I don't need to go through a priest to go through Jesus to get my messages to god. I can go directly to the source, which by the definition of one of my friends, makes me a sorcerer.
If the spiritual condition on the left is in disarray, perhaps it's because the god sold by the right is so vengeful and judgmental. The right thinks they have the ultimate lock on truth. Anyone who deviates from their narrow view is automatically on the outside looking in.
Therein lies my problem with so many religions. Dogma keeps so many on the outside. The faith of my father, Roman Catholicism, condemns me for no better reason than I am a homosexual. How could I be expected to want to be a part of a system of belief that tells my my whole existence is sinful and wrong, moreover, that because I am active in my sexuality, that I am condemned to hang out with Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, and Satan himself?
It matters little that I am honest. It matters little that I live a life dedicated to doing what is humanly right. It matters little that I am kind, generous (when I have money), giving, loving, nurturing, caring, or ethical. No, I am condemned for just being who I am.
I cannot and will not be a part of a system of belief that condemns me for who I am at my core. Therefore, I cannot and will not ever consider myself a christian, or a Republican...even if I have conservative beliefs on certain issues. I will not support a group that does not support me.
That leaves me few options as far as spirituality is concerned. That is why I consider myself a pagan. I can be who and what I am, and I don't have some sort of written or spoken dogma telling me I am wrong just for existing. I think I am a fairly spiritual person. I'll take my spirituality over the "spirituality" of the charlatans such as Scary Jerry Falwell, or the lunatic Pat Robertson any day!
They may think they have a monopoly on the spirit, but their actions speak so much louder than their pious and self-righteous words.
Blessed be!
Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments)
on Saturday, September 30, 2006 at 2:55:09 AM
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
