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

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: go Rat-zinger

Expand Messages
  • SCos
    uffe, that was a wonderful post and i agree with every word you said. there is no excuse for any wrong doing of the church, but hey! who s perfect?? i guess i
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 19, 2008
      uffe, that was a wonderful post and i agree with every word you said. there is no excuse for any wrong doing of the church, but hey! who's perfect??
       
      i guess i see abuse of power at every level, from local politics, to county and state and federal, from corporations to baby seals and even little league baseball. but nobody gets slammed like the old Big CC :)
      stephen
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 11:50 AM
      Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: go Rat-zinger

      Stephen,
      It's an interesting analysis with good points. The esoteric-exoteric controversy is always a
      delicate matter. A few questions though: You refer to Leadbetter, b

      Personally, I believe that there is not only two, but three Churches to be counted. The
      Church of Peter (Roman Catholic, doctrine of Faith), the Church of Paul (Protestant, critical,
      individualist), and the Church of John (Eastern, liturgical, mystical, expansive towards the
      esoteric). The Church of Peter is primarily based on the faculty of will. The Church of Paul
      on intellect. And the Church of John on the Heart. The prevalent illusions of each of these
      Churches corresponds with this scheme: 1. Misuse of the power of faith/doctrine. 2.
      secterianism and literalism (fundamentalism), and 3. emotionalism and nebulous kinds of
      mysticism.

      I don't think you can simply call the protestant path egotistical, though it is a normal
      Catholic conviction. But it is essentially individualizing and therefore often disposed
      towards secterianism or egotism. However - at least in theory - it allows the believer to
      form his own opinions of Truth on the basis of scripture and tradition (the principle of
      universal priesthood). And I think this is a very sound concept, although with many
      inherent dangers.

      Off course it is a lot more simple to simply believe in the authority of the pope. But such a
      belief in a custodian principle is not possible to everybody. And it will be ever more
      difficult to uphold, as the intellect and the "I" principle becomes a more and more
      prevalent power in humanity.

      You say:
      > it is remarkable that the big CC (as pauline leonard referred) has lasted some 11
      centuries since this spiritual event in humanity. now when people complain that " This
      institution is still persecuting some of the best and most independent thinkers within
      > the Church, carrying on show trials and robbing these people of their honor and
      livelihood."
      >
      > there is a reason for this and it serves a spiritual goal to preserve dogma. so now in the
      21st century we have 3 christian paths, the catholic and the eastern orthodox chose to
      presere dogma, as ordained in the 9th century. the 3rd is the wave of protestantism, which
      without dogma, is fractured into 33,000 different cultic sects. is a protestants desire to
      preservs its independant ego free from the errors and tortures of dogma worth the price
      of 33,000 different, very personal, very egotistical paths to Christ?? i know my answer to
      that question?

      Uffe: I don't think you can put it that way, as if the honorable goal of preserving dogma
      could legitimize the simple abuse of power. As in an inquisitorial showtrial with no proper
      defence, and no clear distinction between the accusing and the sentencing power. This
      cannot be defended with reference to dogma, or the institutions godgiven authority to
      preserve dogma.

      Such trials are acted out in the spirit of the inquisition, and not in the spirit of truth.
      Therefore you can never know if the accused were guilty of violating the dogma or not.
      What you know is, that certain people thought they were, and that they were condemned
      through an illegitimate trial.

      I have personally read all of the Authors mentioned: Teilhard de Chardin, Hans K√ľng,
      Edward Schillebeexcs, Leonardo Boff and Matthew Fox, and studied the proceedings of
      some of their trials. And the plain fact is this: none of them were justly trialed. None of
      them were by any sound doctrinal standards guilty of what they were accused of. The
      arguments of the congragation for the Doctrine of Faith were often so rediculous and lazy
      that you wouldn't believe it. Simple malreadings of the actual texts, reading with bad
      intent, not to understand, but to expell and destroy.

      I assure you, this is a fact. The decision to run people over was taken in advance, not
      during the trial itself, most likely by Ratzinger himself and his assistants. No defence, no
      argument, no documentation could ever get these people off the hook, once the minds of
      the accusers were set. And I can give you the documentation and titles of books and
      documents to read, if you like. You may begin with the autobiography of Matthew Fox,
      which is well worth reading by any standards.

      As I said, Ratzinger was the head of these show trials for more than 20 years. He acted as
      the judges under Stalin, i.e. in the spirit of the inquisition. Less violently off course, but
      still violent and painful enough for those who experinced it.

      I buy your picture of the parents as a general rule. But what do you do with parents, when
      they still act like violent assholes, who allways knows better, and claim their right to
      punish you, even when you are long since grown up and have earned the ability to form
      you own sound opinions of things?

      This is what happened to these people. They were sentenced by a lesser man, who is now
      declared pope.

      Uffe


      >
      > now, for me i look at the errors and tortures of dogma like one would look at their
      parents. (1) yes, my parents are assholes, but i will try to ride this family thing out and
      when i grow up, and become a mature responsible parent myself, i will try to do a better
      job than they did. (the orthodox) or (2), yes, my parents are assholes, so i will run away
      and start my own life without their error filled guidance and mental tortures (protestant),
      (except calvin kept the mental tortures). so, some of the kids that run away, go on to
      found ther own religions (33,000 of them) or some wake up at that special age of 30 and
      find a huge hole in their spiritual life and become those god-awful, born again christians
      who vote for bush. some others are born again and go back to the future and become,
      both born again and fundementalist!! (the mormons)
      >
      > so yes, there are problems staying on the dogma path, you have to sometimes swallow
      your egoistic pride and eat shit, like you did with your parents. but what is the other
      choice?? none of those 33,000 cultic sects will be around in 1000 years. but the
      archangels of eso/exo christianity will still be doing their job, trying to shape the evolution
      of humanity into a Christ filled trip, not an ego trip, while maintaining the separation
      designated by the spiritual worlds since day one. (although RS believed there was a jesuit
      conspiracy with the english secret brotherhoods, he never atrributed any such intelligence
      to the protestants)
      >
      > we do get bonuses every so often. the spiritual reinvigoration of humanity is planned by
      the great archons and anthroposophy is one such bonus. because, although spiritualism
      and theosophy of the 19th century was a spiritual renewal, it was not Christ centered like
      anthroposophy.
      >
      > stephen      
      >
      > i am thinking of the fun i could have with pope ratz when he gives mass in yankee
      stadium on sunday. when he does the prayer liturgy, to pray for the sick, etc., i could buy
      him a red vestament to wear and ask him to pray for the red sox to win another world
      series :)
      >



      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links

      <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/

      <*> Your email settings:
          Individual Email | Traditional

      <*> To change settings online go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/join
          (Yahoo! ID required)

      <*> To change settings via email:
          mailto:anthroposophy_tomorrow-digest@yahoogroups.com
          mailto:anthroposophy_tomorrow-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

      <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          anthroposophy_tomorrow-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.