Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Stones to Bread-Re:Politics&Religion

Expand Messages
  • elaine upton
    Dear Starmann, and all following this thread, I will quote you/Starmann (and my earlier post) below here, and respond as I go. ... I don t remember talking
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 5, 2000
      Dear Starmann, and all following this thread,

      I will quote you/Starmann (and my earlier post) below here, and respond as I

      Elaine wrote:
      ><<I cannot separate "politics" from spirituality.

      Starmann replied:
      >Obviously---but this is your IDEA of spirituality, not the only one...

      I don't remember talking about my "IDEA of spirituality" in the post I
      sent. I merely said that I cannot separate politics and spirituality.
      Perhaps you see an "IDEA" where none is stated or even implied. You might
      consider asking me what is my idea, rather than making assumptions.

      OK, then here I am quoting the post I forwarded with statistics of
      Gov.George Bush's record on human rights and social initiatives in Texas:

      >The State of Texas, under the leadership of Governor George W. Bush is
      > > >
      > > >50th in spending for teachers

      Starmann replies:
      >Does more money make better teachers? Where?

      Starmann, I could ask you a question that is on a par with the one you ask:
      does less money make better teachers?--Really! I am quite aware that money
      is not everything. That's a given. Do we need to go there?

      Even though money is not everything, it can be useful, as many
      anthroposophists well know (consider the economic initiatives in the name of
      anthroposophy). To trail off in the clouds and forget about money is an
      ideal some carry. Is that your IDEA/L?--Obviously (or obviously to me), Gov.
      Bush spends money on what he finds important, and apparently he does not
      find teachers important, not relatively speaking. Unless he is like some,
      and thinks teachers live on air.
      The fact is, Starmann, your very computer costs money, money that somebody
      paid. Teachers can use money. It's a simple and as complicated as that.
      And no, more money does not make better teachers. But money can be used for
      exchange, so that teachers can have computers or books or firewood or axes
      to cut firewood or food in their stomachs, if you don't mind. And then they
      might walk into their classrooms at least in the flesh, incarnated in this
      world where money is a factor, and be human among other humans, their

      Read, if you will, Rudolf Steiner in the Fifth Gospel Lectures. He talks
      about the the Three Temptations of Jesus, after the baptism, receiving of
      the Christ, in the Jordan. The third temptation was to turn stones (gold,
      silver and such) into bread. There are some deep lessons there about money.
      I don't claim to have understood all these lessons. Rudolf Steiner says that
      even the Jesus, in the process of incarnating the Christ, did not fully deal
      with this temptation (though the four other gospels may lead one to think he
      did fully deal with it). He dealt with it only on the Cross, says Steiner,
      and this speaks to me, and leads me to more compassion for the struggles we
      encounter. As long as we are here, in the flesh (and that's part of the
      larger story of the WORD made FLESH--material and spiritual together), we
      shall not, according to Steiner, fully deal with this temptation of stones
      into bread. Our lives are constantly about turning stones into bread--yours,
      mine, and teachers in Texas.

      --The question for me is whether we are in the process of walking up that
      Hill to Golgotha. If we are walking, we will arrive ("Take up your Cross and
      follow me), and we will overcome, but it is a process, not one that is easy,
      and not one that even Jesus could easily overcome.

      The forwarded statistics on Bush continue:

      > > >49th in spending on the environment

      Starmann replies:
      >How much does "the environment" need? Nature seems pretty self-sufficient.

      No, my dear Starmann, nature is not at all self-sufficient. With all due
      respect (and i do mean respect, for we can all be misinformed), it is a
      naive romantic notion that nature is self-sufficient, especially in the
      world we live in. The idea that if we just leave nature alone, she will come
      round right is, my dear man, naiive (and i say that with a kind smile, and
      not with rancour, for i and any of us can be naive and well meaning). The
      amount of toxins that we humans fill nature with is astounding! We have a
      responsibility to work WITH nature to clean up the mess we make, and to stop
      making the mess. (As for the money part of this, see the "stones into bread"
      story above).

      OK, in the interest of making what could be an even longer post less long,
      and less repetitive, I will skip some here (delete) and move down to what i
      feel is another salient point in the discussion:

      Statistics on Bush:
      >((... big delete here, on a part about how you, Starmann don't use doctors
      >and don't need medical insurance--and i say that that may be fine for you,
      >but others may choose doctors and that is something that i have to respect.
      >Also, there is something at the end of your post about "far left
      >prejudices" in reference to my post. Call it what you like --I,too, do some
      >name calling, but ultimately I prefer to deal with the issues.)

      > > >1st in executions(avg.1 every 2 weeks for Bush's 5 years)

      Starmann replies:
      >Do you prefer giving violent thugs 3 meals a day for life? Is there any
      >then, that you can voluntarily pay for it through charities, and leave the
      >rest of us out?

      Starmann, are you really calling people, human beings, "violent thugs"? And
      do you call yourself an anthroposophist, a Christian?

      Christ-In-Me. I believe he said feed the hungry, clothe the naked. Do you
      carry more romantic idea/ls that this means to feed only the poor starving
      children and "innocents" of the world? Who is in more need of "feeding",
      spiritual-material food (for they come together)--who, i ask you, is in more
      need than one who has committed rape or murder? Are these to be excluded
      from salvation, transformation, entry into the Kingdom of Heaven?

      Speaking of stones,

      "Let him [or her] who is without sin cast the first stone."

      And let him or her who is moved feed the naked, in the spirit of the IDEAL
      placed before us by that Being of Light.

      Rudolf Steiner, somewhere (sorry, I don't remember where, but maybe someone
      can help) says that if you look rightly at the most violent criminal you
      will see that much more is there. Often, we do not know the karma of people.
      If we did, we might have more compassion, and would see that they need
      food(material and spiritual) and that there is a soul inside, a divine
      being, one who needs us--and yes, one whom we need, for we are all on this
      journey together.

      Without Satan, there would be no Christ...

      ((Or, as Yeats put it in one of his poems, its like dancer and dance: "And
      how can we tell the dancer from the dance!")


      Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.