In this issue of the Stonyhill Newsletter I will continue our discussion about the future, or lack of one, for all mainline churches in the 21st century. I will continue to focus on the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, but of course all comments will apply with equal validity to the conservative and fundamental elements of all mainline religions.
Because many readers will undoubtedly find these articles challenging and perhaps disturbing, I want to state clearly up-front, that I am not anti-religion, nor am I anti-faith. I believe deeply in the formation of a compassionate, enlightened spirituality.
I also believe that our conservative imperialistic mainline religions, including Christianity, all appear to be rapidly approaching the end of their 2500 year reign. All religious dualism or primitive ego generated black-and-white claims of certainty regarding their faith beliefs, or claims to represent the only true faith, that are made by any religion, are simply dangerous forms of ignorance; a source of violence that our emerging global culture can no longer safely accept or tolerate.
At the end of each article I will continue to include some of the reforms I believe will be necessary for Christianity, and our other mainline religions to successfully survive in the 21st century
In the next issue of the Stonyhill Newsletter I will conclude this series on The Future of Mainline Churches in the 21st Century in Part 3. The full article, including all of the reforms that I believe will be needed for our mainline religions to survive in the 21st century, will be posted on the Stonyhill.com web site by the end of April.
Reflections on The Future of Mainline Churches In The 21st Century- Part 2
No matter how hard we try to ignore the reality, it is becoming painfully clear that the current black-and-white primitive ego thinking process, upon which virtually every mainline religion is constructed, appears to be incapable of helping humanity create a compassionate global culture.
Because of the rigidity and religious imperialism of their faith beliefs, our mainline religions are simply not capable of sustaining a non-judgmental compassion. Their primitive ego based need for the "absolute certainty of their unverifiable faith beliefs" predictably creates an intolerance that causes them to lose contact with their hearts. To state it simply, a primitive ego "absolute certainty" in one's faith beliefs inevitably creates conflict and is the anthesis of empathy and compassion.
Our mainline churches must be willing to reinvent themselves if they are to survive in the 21st century. This is especially true in Christianity. Most of the mainline denominations in the Christian church are declining in vitality and strength as elderly members die, and others, feeling forced to adopt the religious beliefs of an ancient pre-modern worldview in order to have a faith, elect to drop their membership. Bishop John Shelby Spong refers to these people as members of the Christian Alumni Association.
Christian alumni live in the 21st century and want a faith that speaks with intellectual integrity to their 21st century consciousness. They know that the issues and problems we face in the creation of a modern global culture cannot be effectively addressed, ethically or morally, using faith beliefs created by ancient pre-modern cultures.
Reformations of the World's Mainline Religions is Inevitable
As we become an increasingly diverse global culture, our mainline religions will need to demonstrate a willingness to voluntarily undergo fundamental changes in the rigidity of their current ideologies and theologies. Until they do, their imperialism will continue to create the vast majority of the violence we are currently experiencing around the world. It will only be a matter of time before the governments of our growing global culture address this source of violence and begin to flex their political and economic muscle to limit the social and financial privileges that our mainline churches depend upon for their survival.
The world's religious institutions could soon be subjected to the same rules and social constraints that other secular institutions currently have to obey. For example, churches could eventually be required to report and pay income tax on all forms of income and gifts, pay property and school taxes on all real-estate holdings, and pay sales tax on all purchases. Such legislation is already being publicly debated and could eventually bring an end of both the viability and influence of our mainline churches.
The younger generation of voters in Europe and America, unlike earlier generations, are more conscious of the fact that we are rapidly becoming a global, systemically interconnected, human culture that must quickly learn to move beyond the divisive issues of race, religion, and political tribalism that are creating so much conflict. These young people understand that the survival of our human civilization depends on our ability to work cooperatively with others, and virtually every political institution in the world is, out of necessity, beginning to wrestle with these important realities.
The backlash of fear and concern generated by the Bush administration's efforts to create an American Christian theocracy is already accelerating a growing secular restraint on religious institutions here in the United States. The following article in the New York Times is a recent example of this growing social backlash. In Cathedral City, California Jim Nimmons, pastor of the First Southern Baptist Church crawled onto the roof of his church recently with a can of red paint and simply wrote the word "eternity" across its shingles. In part, because of the religious imperialism implied, the town board is taking the church to court for violation of the town's "advertising" laws.
Social restraint on the worlds mainline religions will not come about over night. It will undoubtedly take years for political institutions to develop the will to make these kinds of change; but they are coming. The awakening of human consciousness is growing. We are no longer a medieval, uneducated, superstitiously based species that relies on educated religious leadership to keep us informed. Even the poorest and least educated know that the world is not flat, the earth does not revolve around the sun, and that the stars in the sky are not holes through which the glory of heaven is shinning.
Our willingness as a species to tolerate or ignore religious intolerance is rapidly fading. It no longer makes sense to our emerging 21st century global consciousness.
Liberal Christian Churches and Their Inability to Generate The Needed Theological Reforms
Liberal Christian churches tend to be intellectually open minded and concerned with social justice but their worship and basic theology is still very traditional, there is very little attention given to feminism, the marginalized such as gay and lesbians, authentic spiritual growth, or a true and open acceptance of truths contained in other religions.
Liberal religions embrace everything but they also studiously avoid offending anyone. To avoid looking intolerant, liberal Christian churches are unwilling to take a firm stand on important moral and ethical issues such as intolerance and injustice. When they do take a stand on these issues, they rarely enforce the new guidelines they legislate. For example, these churches may vote to prohibit the ordination of women or homosexual clergy using the concept of "equal but separate", but at the same time they will affirm the sanctity of women and gays. They refer to this middle of the road avoidance of offense as taking a "pastoral" approach. In liberal Christian churches, maintaining membership and unity of thought routinely takes priority over compassion and justice.
Any religion that refuses to take a clear stand on the important issues of justice and compassion is a religion that ultimately will not survive. It will become ideologically irrelevant and eventually fade away. The bottom line; it really does not make any difference whether they survive or not because no one knows what they really stand for anyway. Conservative and evangelical churches are growing because they do take clear stands on issues; despite the fact that they openly and publicly endorse intolerance and injustice in their imperialistic, black-and-white primitive ego faith beliefs.
To be a member of a Christian church should mean that your ultimate goal in life is to manifest compassion and perform concrete acts of loving-kindness. This is the theological bottom line of Christianity. In other words, all members of any Christian denomination should be willing to take a firm, unequivocal stand against any form of intolerance. And since the manifestation of compassion and justice is the stated goal and foundational belief of every mainline religion in the world, it should be reasonable to expect that every member of any mainline religion should also be willing to take a clear and unwavering ethical stand against intolerance and injustice.
In other words, a person of faith in any mainline church should always be willing to fully accept and offer compassion to others. At the same time, they should be willing to take a clear stand against the intolerance, judgmentalism, prejudice, bias, injustice, beliefs, or behaviors of any institution, groups, or individuals that cause pain or suffering to others, creates injustice, or assumes that other persons are in any way sub-human.
To avoid taking such a stand and then calling it "pastoral" as is commonly the case in liberal Christian churches means that they are willing to place the intolerance and injustice of black-and-white primitive ego thinking above compassion and acts of kindness. The ethical and moral values of their faith beliefs have become meaningless.
In most liberal churches, women are still often not allowed to be ordained, homosexuals are not allowed to be ordained, same sex marriages are prohibited, it is a sin for people with AIDS to wear a condom, and in the name of patriotism, the torture of prisoners is accepted and they openly condone preemptive war. Since the end always justifies the means in black-and-white primitive ego thinking, the collateral damage or death and maiming of non-combatant women, children, and the elderly, is ignored or tolerated because the "patriotic" war is fighting the "evil" intolerant and violent terrorists that want to do us harm. They are unable to see or acknowledge the beam in their own eye.
A person of faith in any mainline religion, especially Christians, should be willing to take a clear and unequivocal stand to support compassion and justice. Until they do, they may claim to be religious, and they may claim to be "pastoral", but the intolerance and suffering of others will not change.
Liberal churches attempt to ignore the fact that simply ignoring or condoning intolerance, to avoid offending the intolerant members of their congregation, simply leaves the intolerant members of their church in a position of power. The unchallenged power of these intolerant, black-and-white, primitive ego thinking people will continue to create conflict and violence to those who are the unfortunate targets of their intolerance and bigotry.
As one writer put it "there is no moral obligation or duty for a tolerant person to tolerate intolerance." Intolerant people play by different rules. They are unconcerned about compassion and justice. Only their beliefs are important.
Liberal churches avoid "offending" their intolerant religiously conservative members because they fear that they might cause these people to leave the church. Yet virtually no clergy or laity in any liberal mainline church would deny that their churches are in the process of slowly dying and fading away. Membership is down, tithing is down, and the majority of their members are retired and elderly. The holy "spirit" has left the building.
One has to wonder, and be willing to pose the question, if the church is dying anyways, why not take a clear stand against intolerance even if it means losing a few more members. Perhaps if our liberal mainline churches could find the will and courage to steadfastly and firmly stand against the evil and injustice of intolerance and prejudice, they might actually find their membership beginning to grow. Taking a clear stand against primitive ego dualism and intolerance could not hurt, and it just might help.
Reform #1)Mainline religions in the 21st century will need to teach that true spirituality and authentic spiritual growth are always about enlightenment, growth in self-awareness, and compassion; that compassion and rigid unverifiable faith beliefs are not compatible.
Reform #2) Mainline religions in the 21st century will need to practice and teach a matured middlepath consciousness; an enlightened observing ego thinking process that struggles to eliminate primitive ego black-and-white dualism by searching for the truth in all positions
(See Newsletter Issue #17 for a more in-depth discussion on the implications of reforms #1 and #2.)
Reform #3)
Mainline religion in the 21st century will need to embrace the concept veracity (embracing reality); in other words, the ability to fully embrace change, grow, and live "in" the 21st century.
Veracity is the willingness to live in the moment with the reality of "what is"; a commitment to see and accept things exactly as they are; to fully embrace reality. A commitment to live in the world we "know" means, for example, having the courage to live as mature, fully conscious adults in a world where there are no absolute black-and-white human truths; only relative and subjective truths.
No matter how strongly an individual or institution might believe that "absolute truth" exists, reality does not change; "absolute truth" is still an illusion of the primitive ego; a false belief. There are only "relative truths" in the human world. Because they are relative and subjective, all human beliefs need to be open to inquiry and verification.
It is important to note that some beliefs are called "faith" beliefs because they are not verifiable. They have to be taken on faith. Thus, to insist that a faith belief represents the illusion called "absolute truth" is not only psychotic thinking; it is a radical contradiction in terms. A belief cannot logically represent both "faith" and "absolute truth".
Implications of Reform #3
Religions in the 21st century will need to;
embrace the changes that come with modern scientific advancements such as evolution, astronomy, biology, physics, electronics.- embrace the changes that come with modern biblical scholarship and organizations such as the Jesus Seminar.
- abandon the literal interpretation of sacred scriptures and faith beliefs.
learn to metaphorically interpret sacred scriptures and adopt cosmologies and worldviews so as to be relevant and meaningful to an educated 21st century consciousness.
require rigorous evidence, verifiability, and open inquiry of all faith beliefs that claim to represent literal truth. - teach that all claims of absolute "truth" in human beliefs are an illusion; all human beliefs, including faith beliefs, are always subjective and relative.
no longer interpret scriptural mythology as literal or actual history. - reject the teaching of miracles that negate natural laws.
- teach that all church doctrine and scriptures are the creation of human beings, not God.
recognize that mainline church members want to be told the truth, not pre-modern superstitious beliefs. - embrace an intellectual integrity where questions and skepticism are both accepted and encouraged, and education is considered more important than ancient doctrines.
Reform # 4)
Mainline religions in the 21st century will need to shift their focus, priority, and institutional resources from the current goal of institutional survival, to the support and encouragement of authentic spiritual growth in their clergy and laity.
There is a significant lack of focus and support for the authentic spiritual growth and spiritual formation needs of both individual clergy and laity in virtually all mainline religions. The majority of Christian institutional resources, focus, time, energy, programs, policies, and priorities are currently directed primarily towards growth in membership, the maintenance of power, and institutional survival.
There is a clear connection between institutional discouragements of authentic spiritual growth and the declining health and vitality of our mainline churches. Nevertheless, clergy and laity who attempt to reform their institutional structures and encourage allocating more resources toward authentic spiritual growth often find themselves quickly marginalized. The development of spiritual skills such as silence, meditation, listening, growth in self-awareness, and simplicity are discouraged if it means that the institutional resources of the church are diverted from issues of survival, proselytizing, and maintaining unity of thought.
Implications of Reform #4
Institutional religions in the 21st century will need to;
- abandon their focus on institutional survival and redirect their institutional resources on supporting the authentic spiritual growth of clergy and laity as they struggle to grow in self-awareness and learn to deal with the beam in their own eye.
- recognize that unity of thought, growth in membership, and the issue of tithing are of lesser importance than compassion and concrete acts of kindness.
- be willing to abandon all programming that is not directly focused on compassion, authentic spiritual growth, and concrete acts of kindness.
- return to the concept that all religious institutions are based on compassion, feeding the poor, healing the sick, and tending to those unable to care for themselves. Any other application of institutional resources is essentially a distraction that limits the primary goal of bringing concrete acts of loving-kindness into the world.
- teach the skills of silence, calm, quiet, simplicity, and meditation---all of which come from an emptiness of primitive ego and support growth in personal self-awareness.
- teach that authentic spiritual growth is about transformation of self, not the conversion of others to religious beliefs that claim to represent the "truth".
- recognize that going into the world to make disciples for a particular religion is a form of intolerance and religious imperialism that assumes that the other person's religion or religious beliefs or spiritual path is inadequate or inferior or flawed. These intolerant assumptions are critical and judgmental and will inevitably lead to conflict and violence.
Reform # 5)
Mainline religions in the 21st century must learn to adopt a leadership role in the creation of 21st century ethical and moral guidelines for humanity.
The mainline religions must undergo a significant reformation of their theologies and faith beliefs if they are to provide effective leadership in the creation of ethical and moral guidelines for a global culture in the 21st century.
Because many of the unverifiable faith beliefs of our mainline religions are presented as "absolute truth", religion is currently obstructing critically needed changes and growth in human culture.
Our mainline churches need to embrace veracity, embrace reality, and stop interfering with humanity's need to ethically and morally address the critical issues that face us as a species as we move into the 21st century; racism, feminism, stem cell research, AIDS, environmental care of our planet, genocide, human rights violations, justice, population growth, collateral damage, and a more equitable distribution of the world's wealth to the poor.
Implications of Reform #5
Religions in the 21st century will need to;
- accept that the worlds uncontrolled population growth is one of the major issues threatening the future of human civilization and our ability to survive as a species. Rigid religious prohibitions against the use of condoms and other methods of birth control; including their use in the prevention and spread of AIDS, to protect a "soul" we do not know actually exists, is not only immoral and unethical, it simply does not make sense. Religion in the 21st century must learn to create effective 21st century moral and ethical guideline to address this issue.
- accept that the use of torture for any military or intelligence agency is a form of evil that must end. We must have enforceable moral and ethical guidelines to prevent the inhuman treatment of any human being. Our current administration recently vetoed a bill to block the use of torture by the American military and intelligence agencies. Religion in the 21st century must learn to create effective 21st century moral and ethical guideline to address this issue.
- understand that all collateral war damage to non-combatants; including women, children, and the elderly in places such as Iraq, Darfur, and Afghanistan, is a form of evil that must be addressed. Religion in the 21st century must learn to create effective 21st century moral and ethical guideline to address this issue.
- understand that direct or covert religious manipulation of any political, economic, legal, medical, or financial institution to perpetuate the black-and-white primitive ego prejudices or intolerance of faith beliefs created by ancient pre-modern cultures is clearly a form of evil. Religion in the 21st century must learn to create effective 21st century moral and ethical guideline to address this issue.
- human knowledge is said to be doubling every ten years. Religions in the 21st century must develop the ability to embrace all modern and postmodern approaches to human knowledge. Labeling advances in human knowledge as dangerous or irrelevant, disregarding advances in human knowledge, or attempting to stop advances in human knowledge simply to satisfy the religious beliefs of any ancient pre-modern culture must end. Instead of attempting to stop human knowledge and progress, religions must take a leadership role to establish an effective ethical and moral foundation for the incorporation of all existing and future advancements of human knowledge in the 21st century.
- recognize that a religion that cannot provide effective moral and ethical guidelines for a rapidly growing 21st century human consciousness is already irrelevant and outdated.
- labeling women, homosexuals, and AIDS victims as sub-human, blocking biological advances in stem cell research that could bring cures and healing to the sick or labeling such technology as sinful, forcing compliance with the sexual values and beliefs of a pre-modern culture, are all forms of ignorance. When they create pain and suffering for people, they represent evil. Religion in the 21st century must learn to effectively create the moral and ethical guideline to address all growth in the human community.
(This article will be concluded in Part 3 in the next issue of the Stonyhill Newsletter.)
PERSONAL THOUGHTS
Insisting on veracity (embracing reality) and intellectual integrity is critically important whether we are talking about religion, politics, or media reporting. Without it, we are condemned to live in a psychotic world at the mercy of those who would use power and mis-direction to control us. Only truth has the power to enable us to wrestle effectively with the important decisions and choices we need to make in the 21st century if we are to successfully evolve as a species.
This week Presidential candidate Barack Obama gave a speech on the subject of race that was one of the most inspiring speeches I have ever heard from a Presidential candidate. The entire speech can be heard at http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3511 and I would encourage all of my readers to listen to it regardless of your political leanings. If you miss this one, you will be missing what I believe is one of the greatest political speeches in our recent history as a nation.
This inspiring "middlepath" speech was Barack Obama's brilliant response to the racial intolerance and the mindless, primitive ego distortions of our American political process and our media. After listening to the speech, I would encourage you to go to http://foxattacks.com/virus to get a clear, but frightening look at the distortions that are being introduced once again by our public media in the current presidential election.
This short movie clip should anger and disturb anyone who believes in a free democratic press that reports the truth. The contrast between Barack Obama's response and the mud slinging, truth-distorting approach being used by our political process and our biased media could not be clearer.
The media apparently believes that we, the American public, are a group of mindless, ignorant sheep that will swallow whatever lies and intentional distortions of the truth we are offered as long as it comes to us on the six o'clock news. It is offensive to the intelligence of the American people.
I believe that it is time that we "encourage" our newspaper and television news agencies to begin publishing truths, not propaganda. I also believe that this lack of integrity on the part of our media is part of the reason that we are losing hope and faith in the political process of this country.
The primitive ego insists on being in control, and it is deeply invested in a "survival of the fittest" mentality regardless of whether the ends justify the means. Only power and winning are important for the primitive ego; truth, hope, intellectual integrity, and ethics have no value.
I hope that all readers will take the time to listen to both of these links. It's time that we speak up and insist on intellectual integrity and truth, not fabricated primitive ego generated distortions, in both our democratic political process and in the ethical reporting of reality and truth by our media. It is not the job of our media to "spin" the truth to suit the political purposes of a political party. I believe it is important for us to hold them to a much higher standard. In a democracy, the press and media are expected to report reality and truth to the best of their ability. It is the responsibility of the people to stay informed and responsibly act on the information provided by the press and the media.
Primitive ego thinking in our political process and the primitive ego distortions of reality currently being offered to us by our media is a sure recipe for disaster as we enter the 21st century. We are going to have enough trouble dealing with the problems that globalization will create in this century; we do not need political and media distortions of truth and reality to compound the problems.
SPIRITUAL PRACTICE
Growth in self-awareness and self-knowledge requires the ability to live with veracity and embrace reality. Only our observing ego, that part of us that pays attention to the reality of "what is", will support our growth in self-awareness. Our primitive ego on the other hand, will tend to focus on what others "should" be doing rather than on our own reality.
Learning to pay attention to "what is" is simple. For example, what kind of relationship do I have with those close to me? What do I need to change in those relationships? Have I found my "calling" in life; the thing I was born to do? Why not? What would I need to do to discover my "calling"? What is keeping me from taking charge of my own life?
If you watched the Fox video clip mentioned in the personal thoughts part of this newsletter, you might want to ask yourself "If this is true, what do I need to do to be well informed"? "What changes would I need to incorporate in my life"?
If we can learn to sit with questions such as these, and pay attention to what we know is "true" in what emerges, we will begin to grow in self-awareness. Eventually we will have the ability to embrace the truths that emerge and make the changes we need or want to make. The growth in self-awareness that comes from our observing ego's ability to "pay attention" to "what is" allows us to begin taking "pro-active" control of our own lives. This is in contrast to our primitive ego which tends to be "re-active" to outside stimuli; a reality that, more often than not, leaves us with a sense of powerlessness.
I am disgusted at the shallow, missing-the-point, sound-bite coverage of such a great and unusual speech. The media is intentionally playing the divisive issues, emphasizing Rev. Wright, and missing the whole point of a speech which lifts the conversation to a higher level. This is a great example of primitive-ego coverage of a middle-path speech. John from Rochester, NY.
The problem is not just what we don't know, but what we do know that ain't so. Mark Twain
No comments:
Post a Comment