- Hey Everyone,
It's so funny to me as I hear people disparaging Mr.Tomberg. He was a
great student of the Doctors. So he left. And he had a good reason
too. We actually are not aware of the deeper reason this man left but
we can be assured that someone who followed the Doctor as closely as
he had would have nothing but good things to do in a different realm.
It is very hard to get above the Doctor said this and the Doctor said
that in the various Steiner circles. And to many the fact that Mr.
Tomberg left is an insult in and of itself. The fact is that it was a
point of chosen action that will fufill itself at some later time. It
seems like everyone gets stuck in the here and now.
All things corrupt themselves and some of them never get off the
ground to actually come into fruition. The Doctors group has a chance
of this happening to if the divisions do not stop. If the thinking
does not preceed us into the future another initiative will have to
be started and we will just be spinning ourselves into a circle only
to be awakened at a later date.
The Pope serves in all ways. He is a catalyst to change and forward
motion even if the Pope seat falls. It is supposed to. Its part of
the coming and going of our universe. And unfortunately I see the
Doctors initiative falling as well and way before its time. It seems
unwilling to truly open up to the future and be aware completely in
the present. It is riding the Doctors coattails. There are a few that
have a chance to ride the wave and against the tide of those who wish
to stay in the kiddie pool and live on the Doctors thoughts versus
their own. Too bad. There is a reason we are all studying this
magificant man and it is not to live in his house it is to create our
There are people who call Maria a bitch so what. There are people who
call Mr. Tomberg far worse. When will we finally start living Christs
creed versus talking about it? And if we do not know how, then we
better fucking ask somebody.
All my best,
"Kerry has said that he personally opposes abortion but believes the
decision should be the woman's. (He is therefore 'pro-choice',
not 'pro-abortion' - though that defining nuance would probably be
beyond the grasp of barbarian minds.) And last week, the New York
Times reported that a group of American Roman Catholic bishops
were 'blanketing' their flock with the news that if they voted for
Kerry they would be committing a sin; and that they would have to
confess and repent their vote before they would be permitted to
receive holy communion again.
Again - let the reader pause and take that in.
The likeliest response, I imagine, will be incredulity. But
incredulity can be as reactionary as comedy. So pause for a moment
and really take that in.
And understand the danger in which the Republic - a nation founded
on the seminal principle of the separation of Church and State -
These bishops, let it be remembered, had nothing to say a year ago
when it was revealed that, for many years, large numbers of American
Roman Catholic bishops and priests had been exuberantly buggering
little boys. (To the contrary, their response had been to cover up
those crimes - not just 'sins', but crimes - quickly and quietly
transferring the criminals to other dioceses, where they were free
to start again from scratch, preying on the children of a new flock.)
Nor has it occurred to these bishops that it might be a sin to vote
for the man who unleashed unwarranted death and destruction upon
Iraq: an overwhelming military attack, with a bogus rationale,
resulting in the killing and maiming of tens of thousands of
innocent men, women and children. To the contrary: these Men of the
Cloth are avidly engaged in organisational work intended to deliver
the Catholic vote to the man who launched that gratuitous, and
ongoing, death and destruction. (Meanwhile, Catholics who vote for
Mr Kerry can go straight from the polling booth to the confessional
booth and repent their 'sin'.)
It's hard to imagine the shame and suffering of real Catholics faced
with such a debasement of their titular spiritual guides.
Dan Chaon again: 'I find myself particularly repelled by Bush's
professed 'Christianity', even as his Administration repudiates
every value that Christ represents.'
But that is G W Bush's real country, a country of churches and guns:
a place awash with Larkin's doctors and priests, and quite devoid of
newspapers, the 'Net - or, presumably, any scientist not actively
engaged in designing either bigger and better oil-drilling platforms
or the next generation of nuclear bombs.
For there are, in fact, today two Americas; and for more than a year
now - because that is how long this dangerously exacerbating
presidential campaign has been going on - one of them has, like a
black hole, been feeding itself by drawing all the forces of
darkness unto itself: the unreconstructed, and no longer so
covert, 'southern' racism; the mindless American bellicosity (surf
the US TV channels some idle evening and count: you'll find that at
least half of them are airing programmes or films featuring guns);
the isolationism, hubris and ignorance of the world; the lobotomised
and intolerant religiosity; and the age-old American paranoia - the
ineluctable product of metaphysical guilt - that produced 'Salem'
and, in our time, McCarthyism.
These are the Bush legions in the coming election: the National
Rifle Association; the evangelical and fundamental Christian
Churches (among which must be numbered, these days, American Roman
Catholicism); the impoverished and semi-literate descendants of the
Daughters of the American Revolution, from whose consciousness - as
they drive around swigging beer with shotguns clipped to the rear
windshields of their pick-ups, in a thousand two-mule southern
towns - the hope of spotting some innocent deer or beautiful buck to
kill is never very far; and, of course, big business - very big
business - those 'leaders of American industry and commerce' who
know that the current president's first order of business is to
license their looting of the US environment, Treasury and citizenry,
and who have no other interests.
These are Bush's People, and they are in fact the mirror image of
militant Islam: a fervid competing presence in the same jostling
And so Samuel Huntington was wrong: the real 'clash of
civilisations' in our time is not between cultures in discrete parts
of the world but, first and foremost, between civilisations within
the United States itself."