I have NEVER understood the need for religions to proselytize. If you've got a good "product" people should be flocking to you. This isn't exactly what you've addressed here, but it is one of my personal "I don't get it" things.
What I see with the religious "community" isn't so much keeping one's religion to themselves, it it the need to shout it out and shove it down everyone's throat that theirs is the "one, true way" and that their belief should transcend everything else.
It's interesting to contemplate the prehistoric roots of religion. Before a certain time, many early communities were built upon egalitarian care of each other without interpersonal violence or designation of master-to-slave hierarchies. (cf: The Dawn of Everything)
Something changed. The warrior/administrator evolved. He gave himself special qualities for the sake of keeping power and gathering wealth. He demanded a fancy funeral with promises of returning after life in order to continue the same. Ergo, the concept of god. Then he sent others to battle while he directed from behind. He called himself king.
With very few exceptions, this person was an adult male who repressed his own people as well as warring with other tribes. I tell myself nothing much has changed.
There is, of course, spirituality which is integral to most of us. It defines our place in the universe and our relationship with all creation. A truly spiritual person is at ease with being a temporary, small cog in the midst of wonder. It is not the same thing as religion at all.
HOPE ! You are! SO Close! to HIS Truth !! " A Truly Spiritual Person IS AT Ease, with Being a TEMPORARY Small Cog in THE HANDS, of a WONDERFULL, LOVING GOD! ETERNITY! Awaits US!
Ally (you are mine!) Years ago I had a friend (pastor) who obtained a PhD in divinity writing his dissertation on тАЬMarketing Christianity.тАЭ He related this to the task of marketing Protestantism and the distinctions between Presbyterianism, Methods, Baptists, Episcopalians, Lutherans (evangelicals were not in his marketing play book).
He seemed more focused on money than the moral teachings of Jesus Christ.
HmmтАж the story about your friend reminded me of my moment of epiphany when I was about 12. Being raised Catholic by a very religious Catholic mother, I had been attending an all-girls Catholic school ran by Maryknoll sisters who indoctrinated students about humility and compassion, yet lived a luxurious lifestyle AND discriminated against those of us who, not as wealthy as their favorite pupils, couldnтАЩt contribute regularly to their repetitive fundraising causes. I thought they were Capitalist ChristiansтАФyes, an oxymoron, but an accurate description of their agendas. And how can we forget the genocidal conquests that were carried out in the тАЬNew WorldтАЭ under the guise of evangelization by order of the Catholic rulers of Spain? Six centuries later, a similar genocide is being fostered by contemporary Catholic rulers who havenтАЩt changed one bit since the Middle Ages and are now vowing to make a dime by allying themselves with righteous politicians. Shameful!!!
Rose. CC=Capitalist Christians & Catholic Church (or am I repeating myself?) Francis, who preached poverty, was saintified, while, after his death, two of his principal followers were harshly treated for espousing poverty. Later one could purchase indulgences forgiving you for future sins, as the new St. PeterтАЩs was being financed.
Witzil doing this in Martin LutherтАЩs parish prmpted Luther to post the 95 theses and establish the Protestant church. (Soon thereafterLther married a former nun)
AhhhтАж those indulgences! I posted something about them elsewhere, earlier today. Technically, those who could (can?) afford them supposedly skip purgatory. No difference in death than in life, where our prisons are filled with those who canтАЩt afford decent legal representation. I donтАЩt believe in the Christian representation of hell, but I hope there is a karma, or a final justice system, that disburses accountability and due punishment to those who have earned it. At the top of my list of nominees: tfg
Also, on the subject of nuns, celibacy of Catholic priests and nuns is mostly a myth. IтАЩve visited several convents that had tunnels connecting to monasteries; buried within their walls were numerous fetusesтАФhmmmтАж were they aborted? The horror if hypocricy!
I am not sure of the celibacy issues but the concept of marriage of priests, nuns, popes, within the Catholic Church being forbidden early on except for the тАЬmarriageтАЭ to Jesus, insured all wealth, gold and power stayed within the Church and not frittered away in bloodline inheritances.
Michael Celibacy of priests was initiated in the 12th century. Popes and cardinals were clearly excluded. If you want a racy read, read the section on Renaissance Popes in Barbara TuchmanтАЩs book THE MARCH OF FOLLY. This includes the Trojan horse, the Brits in the American colonies, and Vietnam.
Her Renaissance popes would be in an X-rated movie rating. Bastard sons and 11-year-old cardinals.
This is interesting! The distinction among Christians that has long intrigued me is the one between denominations that emphasize hierarchy and those where congregations are more autonomous. This was a big driver of the Reformation, with the Catholic Church on the "most hierarchical" end and eventually the various Protestant denominations strung out on a continuum, with the Episcopalians/Anglicans not all that far from the Catholics and maybe the Friends at the other end. (I don't know much about the Orthodox tradition(s), but from the outside they seem to combine hierarchy with autonomy -- one of these days I'll learn more about how that works.)
The religions that proselytize (not all of them do) seem to think that they're doing unbelievers a favor by giving them the key to eternal life or heaven or a similar great reward. That's the theory, anyway. In practice? A quick review of the proselytizers' actions over the centuries, both with and without the sword, should give one pause.
I should add, though, that individual missionaries may be guided by genuinely altruistic motives and may improve the lives of those they attempt to convert. But I can't say the same for the institutions behind them.
One of the very first concerns of any biological organism is to replicate and reproduce. Without replication, they die out. Some factions of Christianity, just like some other religions one could name, resemble a cult, and one of the first things a cult has to do is self-preservation, just like a replicating organism, so that means make lots of babies and proselytize like mad. There's safety in numbers. They then keep their members in line and gain new ones by convincing them all these dire things will happen to them if they don't follow the rules, plus convincing them all these wonderful rewards await them in somewhere the sky. Rule by fear and promise them pie. All these religions are convinced THEY posses the "truth", so they then slaughter each other (and anyone else who doesn't believe as they do) to prove it, and whoever is left, wins. Welcome to the human race.
We have a fairly devout cult here; a Mormon offshoot called "General Assembly and Church of the Firstborn". They are very male dominated and anti medicine. I personally handled two death investigations of preventable origin: an infected wound that went untreated (of an adult), and appendicitis (of a 15 year old boy). Ironically, the adult was the father of the son, whose mother had remarried a man who lost his wife in childbirth (preventable, had there been medical intervention). The latter ended up as a criminal investigation that netted a conviction of Criminally Negligent Homicide for the parents.
I am a HUGE proponent of the separation of church and state. The 15 year old was a very difficult investigation for me, personally. It boils down to protecting children.
A good example about a religious organism dying out was the Shakers-they didn't marry/have children. They took in outsiders or orphan children who would live with them for periods of time by the individual's choice or grown up. But boy, were they great craftsmen, believed in laborsaving devices for workers, and entrepreneurs. (What we consider the standard flat corn broom was invented by them.) They came up with the concept of packaging seeds for sale, which still exists today. (a tidbit about the Shaker chairs-the cross bar slats were so the chairs could be hung on the walls to make sweeping easier.) (Yes, I've been to two or three Shaker villages.)
Could you be more specific about what or whom you consider "mind-bogglingly self centered and arrogant"? The way threading works in Substack, it's sometimes hard to tell what comments are replying to.
Separation of church and state: one must respect the law of the land, and keep ones religion to ones self.
I have NEVER understood the need for religions to proselytize. If you've got a good "product" people should be flocking to you. This isn't exactly what you've addressed here, but it is one of my personal "I don't get it" things.
What I see with the religious "community" isn't so much keeping one's religion to themselves, it it the need to shout it out and shove it down everyone's throat that theirs is the "one, true way" and that their belief should transcend everything else.
It's interesting to contemplate the prehistoric roots of religion. Before a certain time, many early communities were built upon egalitarian care of each other without interpersonal violence or designation of master-to-slave hierarchies. (cf: The Dawn of Everything)
Something changed. The warrior/administrator evolved. He gave himself special qualities for the sake of keeping power and gathering wealth. He demanded a fancy funeral with promises of returning after life in order to continue the same. Ergo, the concept of god. Then he sent others to battle while he directed from behind. He called himself king.
With very few exceptions, this person was an adult male who repressed his own people as well as warring with other tribes. I tell myself nothing much has changed.
There is, of course, spirituality which is integral to most of us. It defines our place in the universe and our relationship with all creation. A truly spiritual person is at ease with being a temporary, small cog in the midst of wonder. It is not the same thing as religion at all.
Excellent observations, Hope!
HOPE ! You are! SO Close! to HIS Truth !! " A Truly Spiritual Person IS AT Ease, with Being a TEMPORARY Small Cog in THE HANDS, of a WONDERFULL, LOVING GOD! ETERNITY! Awaits US!
Ally (you are mine!) Years ago I had a friend (pastor) who obtained a PhD in divinity writing his dissertation on тАЬMarketing Christianity.тАЭ He related this to the task of marketing Protestantism and the distinctions between Presbyterianism, Methods, Baptists, Episcopalians, Lutherans (evangelicals were not in his marketing play book).
He seemed more focused on money than the moral teachings of Jesus Christ.
HmmтАж the story about your friend reminded me of my moment of epiphany when I was about 12. Being raised Catholic by a very religious Catholic mother, I had been attending an all-girls Catholic school ran by Maryknoll sisters who indoctrinated students about humility and compassion, yet lived a luxurious lifestyle AND discriminated against those of us who, not as wealthy as their favorite pupils, couldnтАЩt contribute regularly to their repetitive fundraising causes. I thought they were Capitalist ChristiansтАФyes, an oxymoron, but an accurate description of their agendas. And how can we forget the genocidal conquests that were carried out in the тАЬNew WorldтАЭ under the guise of evangelization by order of the Catholic rulers of Spain? Six centuries later, a similar genocide is being fostered by contemporary Catholic rulers who havenтАЩt changed one bit since the Middle Ages and are now vowing to make a dime by allying themselves with righteous politicians. Shameful!!!
Rose. CC=Capitalist Christians & Catholic Church (or am I repeating myself?) Francis, who preached poverty, was saintified, while, after his death, two of his principal followers were harshly treated for espousing poverty. Later one could purchase indulgences forgiving you for future sins, as the new St. PeterтАЩs was being financed.
Witzil doing this in Martin LutherтАЩs parish prmpted Luther to post the 95 theses and establish the Protestant church. (Soon thereafterLther married a former nun)
AhhhтАж those indulgences! I posted something about them elsewhere, earlier today. Technically, those who could (can?) afford them supposedly skip purgatory. No difference in death than in life, where our prisons are filled with those who canтАЩt afford decent legal representation. I donтАЩt believe in the Christian representation of hell, but I hope there is a karma, or a final justice system, that disburses accountability and due punishment to those who have earned it. At the top of my list of nominees: tfg
Rose My indulgences include milk shakes and St Louis spare ribs, but, then, I am not Catholic.
LOL! ThatтАЩs a much tastier (and more palatable) indulgence, for sure!
Also, on the subject of nuns, celibacy of Catholic priests and nuns is mostly a myth. IтАЩve visited several convents that had tunnels connecting to monasteries; buried within their walls were numerous fetusesтАФhmmmтАж were they aborted? The horror if hypocricy!
I am not sure of the celibacy issues but the concept of marriage of priests, nuns, popes, within the Catholic Church being forbidden early on except for the тАЬmarriageтАЭ to Jesus, insured all wealth, gold and power stayed within the Church and not frittered away in bloodline inheritances.
Michael Celibacy of priests was initiated in the 12th century. Popes and cardinals were clearly excluded. If you want a racy read, read the section on Renaissance Popes in Barbara TuchmanтАЩs book THE MARCH OF FOLLY. This includes the Trojan horse, the Brits in the American colonies, and Vietnam.
Her Renaissance popes would be in an X-rated movie rating. Bastard sons and 11-year-old cardinals.
This is interesting! The distinction among Christians that has long intrigued me is the one between denominations that emphasize hierarchy and those where congregations are more autonomous. This was a big driver of the Reformation, with the Catholic Church on the "most hierarchical" end and eventually the various Protestant denominations strung out on a continuum, with the Episcopalians/Anglicans not all that far from the Catholics and maybe the Friends at the other end. (I don't know much about the Orthodox tradition(s), but from the outside they seem to combine hierarchy with autonomy -- one of these days I'll learn more about how that works.)
Susanna During my lifetime on various occasions I found comfort at Quaker meetings, where love and silence echoed through the services.
I ended up at Unitarian Universalism. Each congregation is different. We had 3 Quaker-style meetings in lieu of Sunday services each year.
The religions that proselytize (not all of them do) seem to think that they're doing unbelievers a favor by giving them the key to eternal life or heaven or a similar great reward. That's the theory, anyway. In practice? A quick review of the proselytizers' actions over the centuries, both with and without the sword, should give one pause.
I should add, though, that individual missionaries may be guided by genuinely altruistic motives and may improve the lives of those they attempt to convert. But I can't say the same for the institutions behind them.
It's evolution in action. Just like biological organisms, the religions that reproduce the most are the types that dominate.
One of the very first concerns of any biological organism is to replicate and reproduce. Without replication, they die out. Some factions of Christianity, just like some other religions one could name, resemble a cult, and one of the first things a cult has to do is self-preservation, just like a replicating organism, so that means make lots of babies and proselytize like mad. There's safety in numbers. They then keep their members in line and gain new ones by convincing them all these dire things will happen to them if they don't follow the rules, plus convincing them all these wonderful rewards await them in somewhere the sky. Rule by fear and promise them pie. All these religions are convinced THEY posses the "truth", so they then slaughter each other (and anyone else who doesn't believe as they do) to prove it, and whoever is left, wins. Welcome to the human race.
We have a fairly devout cult here; a Mormon offshoot called "General Assembly and Church of the Firstborn". They are very male dominated and anti medicine. I personally handled two death investigations of preventable origin: an infected wound that went untreated (of an adult), and appendicitis (of a 15 year old boy). Ironically, the adult was the father of the son, whose mother had remarried a man who lost his wife in childbirth (preventable, had there been medical intervention). The latter ended up as a criminal investigation that netted a conviction of Criminally Negligent Homicide for the parents.
I am a HUGE proponent of the separation of church and state. The 15 year old was a very difficult investigation for me, personally. It boils down to protecting children.
A good example about a religious organism dying out was the Shakers-they didn't marry/have children. They took in outsiders or orphan children who would live with them for periods of time by the individual's choice or grown up. But boy, were they great craftsmen, believed in laborsaving devices for workers, and entrepreneurs. (What we consider the standard flat corn broom was invented by them.) They came up with the concept of packaging seeds for sale, which still exists today. (a tidbit about the Shaker chairs-the cross bar slats were so the chairs could be hung on the walls to make sweeping easier.) (Yes, I've been to two or three Shaker villages.)
Mind-bogglingly self centered and arrogant.
Huh. Describes quite a few folks LFAA тАЬstudents тАЬ discuss here.
Could you be more specific about what or whom you consider "mind-bogglingly self centered and arrogant"? The way threading works in Substack, it's sometimes hard to tell what comments are replying to.
Apparently not...
Just a non-theist's perspective.