Journal anthonycorlando's Journal: Benedict Allah
Poor Benedict, he can't help it...He was born with a silver halo up his...
Benedictus - latin for "the blessed". What Blessing is their in inciting world conflict? Though I admire His Holiness for condemning fanatacism and violence as "contrary to G*d's nature", his own arrogance ultimately contributes to the religious and cultural divisiveness that breeds such fanaticism. Catholic myself, I have difficulty seeing beyond the Papacy as a mere political force when it acts so irresponsibly. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope13sep13,0,3311596.story?coll=la-home-world
Catholics are asked to take it on faith that Catholic texts and teachings are the authoritative word of G*d. But we lack irrefutable physical proof that our way is the "right" way. It troubles me that the leader of our Church so easily unequivocally claims such epistemological certainty to divine ontological reality. By It's own admission, the Church has been wrong before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition
http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/pope-yad-vashem.htm
Since the Church has historically demonstrated fallibility, therefore it does NOT logically follow that Our way is RIGHT, Our dogma is RIGHT, and, thus, the corollary, those who believe otherwise are, by definition,... WRONG!
My personal view is that all spiritual traditions can be watered down to three primary elements:
1) communal norms to secure belongingness amongst the faith group (e.g.: initiation rights, attendance at group faith meetings, common vestments and social traditions, etc).
2) political authority of faith group leadership to dictate moral values (e.g.: selection of leadership, enforcement of behavioral restrictions, incitement of mass faith group to act upon leadership decisions, etc).
3) exploration of metaphiscal-spiritual "Truths" (e.g.: the nature of G*d, Humanity's place in the Universe, dispensation of the "soul" upon death, etc).
Wars are fought over the first two elemnts. But whatever one's religious affiliation, it is the Third element that is the true essence of spirituality. And it is exactly this element that no organized religion can lay claim to with exclusivity (absolute certainty ordained by G*d).
I liken G*d to being in a room with unlimited windows - whatever window we look through, we will Never see the entirety of what lies within as it is impossible to see all sides and angles simultaneously. Other religions may view through other windows but will be equally limited in their epistemological access. It just is not the nature of G*d that we can know much with absolute certainty.
But that is not to say we cannot gain "Knowledge". Almost all religions have some prohibition against killing innocents (suggesting no matter what doctrinal values one holds, the divine holds universally that we cherish our fellow Humans). In fact, the seemingly universal urge to worship the divine suggests to me there must be something we are all trying to view through our different windows.
Where does this leave us? Simply put, I believe All religions have something to offer. I believe it is irresponsible to neglect the shared need to explore the divine to fight over mere adherence to tradition (whether belongingness OR political in nature). I consider myself Catholic and Taoist but share significant beliefs with Presbyterians, Reform Jews, Buddhists, Wiccans, and nature worshiping traditions of some indigenous peoples (e.g.: Iroquois and other Native American traditions). I must admit substantial ignorance to anything but the most fundamental principles of Mormonism, Hinduism, and Islam (a deficeit I beg forgiveness for and hope to remedy).
Pope Benedict's reading of Emperor Manuel II's words: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Was not only highly insensitive but politically and socially irresponsible.
We live in a soundbite society - a world leader does not have the luxury of verbosity (leave that to academics). For a Pope who espouses a desire to "open 'genuine dialogue' among faiths and cultures" to utter such potentially inflamatory words amongst a world gripped by the type of religious fanatacism throttling the Middle East with reaches into all four corners of the globe, suggests to me that this speech was NOT, in fact, the will of G*d but contrary to it.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope15sep15,0,4229104.story?coll=la-headlines-world
Now more than ever the world misses the leadership of John Paul II. And I will now add to my prayers a petition that the Divine bless those who will die as a result of Benedict's poor word choice.
Benedictus - latin for "the blessed". What Blessing is their in inciting world conflict? Though I admire His Holiness for condemning fanatacism and violence as "contrary to G*d's nature", his own arrogance ultimately contributes to the religious and cultural divisiveness that breeds such fanaticism. Catholic myself, I have difficulty seeing beyond the Papacy as a mere political force when it acts so irresponsibly. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope13sep13,0,3311596.story?coll=la-home-world
Catholics are asked to take it on faith that Catholic texts and teachings are the authoritative word of G*d. But we lack irrefutable physical proof that our way is the "right" way. It troubles me that the leader of our Church so easily unequivocally claims such epistemological certainty to divine ontological reality. By It's own admission, the Church has been wrong before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition
http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/pope-yad-vashem.htm
Since the Church has historically demonstrated fallibility, therefore it does NOT logically follow that Our way is RIGHT, Our dogma is RIGHT, and, thus, the corollary, those who believe otherwise are, by definition,... WRONG!
My personal view is that all spiritual traditions can be watered down to three primary elements:
1) communal norms to secure belongingness amongst the faith group (e.g.: initiation rights, attendance at group faith meetings, common vestments and social traditions, etc).
2) political authority of faith group leadership to dictate moral values (e.g.: selection of leadership, enforcement of behavioral restrictions, incitement of mass faith group to act upon leadership decisions, etc).
3) exploration of metaphiscal-spiritual "Truths" (e.g.: the nature of G*d, Humanity's place in the Universe, dispensation of the "soul" upon death, etc).
Wars are fought over the first two elemnts. But whatever one's religious affiliation, it is the Third element that is the true essence of spirituality. And it is exactly this element that no organized religion can lay claim to with exclusivity (absolute certainty ordained by G*d).
I liken G*d to being in a room with unlimited windows - whatever window we look through, we will Never see the entirety of what lies within as it is impossible to see all sides and angles simultaneously. Other religions may view through other windows but will be equally limited in their epistemological access. It just is not the nature of G*d that we can know much with absolute certainty.
But that is not to say we cannot gain "Knowledge". Almost all religions have some prohibition against killing innocents (suggesting no matter what doctrinal values one holds, the divine holds universally that we cherish our fellow Humans). In fact, the seemingly universal urge to worship the divine suggests to me there must be something we are all trying to view through our different windows.
Where does this leave us? Simply put, I believe All religions have something to offer. I believe it is irresponsible to neglect the shared need to explore the divine to fight over mere adherence to tradition (whether belongingness OR political in nature). I consider myself Catholic and Taoist but share significant beliefs with Presbyterians, Reform Jews, Buddhists, Wiccans, and nature worshiping traditions of some indigenous peoples (e.g.: Iroquois and other Native American traditions). I must admit substantial ignorance to anything but the most fundamental principles of Mormonism, Hinduism, and Islam (a deficeit I beg forgiveness for and hope to remedy).
Pope Benedict's reading of Emperor Manuel II's words: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Was not only highly insensitive but politically and socially irresponsible.
We live in a soundbite society - a world leader does not have the luxury of verbosity (leave that to academics). For a Pope who espouses a desire to "open 'genuine dialogue' among faiths and cultures" to utter such potentially inflamatory words amongst a world gripped by the type of religious fanatacism throttling the Middle East with reaches into all four corners of the globe, suggests to me that this speech was NOT, in fact, the will of G*d but contrary to it.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope15sep15,0,4229104.story?coll=la-headlines-world
Now more than ever the world misses the leadership of John Paul II. And I will now add to my prayers a petition that the Divine bless those who will die as a result of Benedict's poor word choice.
Benedict Allah More Login
Benedict Allah
Slashdot Top Deals