Now I want to find both a spiritual claptrap emporium and a dime a dozen aisle!
Spiritual Hooligan
- Thread starter wil
- Start date
I'm sorry. I have to finish this. I'm prepared to accept that at this time his presence may be a gift. He really may be quite the impressive dude. Perhaps even his guitar skills are pretty good. But in the end it's going to get you crucified. In the end they'll kill you.
No primrose path to paradse. You have to tell your people that, too. Along with all the happy stuff. And anyone who does not, is just taking your money.. That's the part where this new agey 'enlightenment' stuff comes up against ageless wisdom. Imo.
Last edited:
William Goldman. I googled it, lol.
Perhaps he's not denying that. But I'm seeing a guy in a scarf leaning up a wall thinking he's enlightened and a gift to humanity. Certainly wisdom has to deal with pain. The great teachers reach out to the prisoners and poor and lost and sick and dying.
Last edited:
But it is spoken by Westley, to Buttercup, in The Princess Bride. Good movie.
Would it bother you if I admitted that I consider it a gift to be in the virtual presence of you all, here on interfaith.org?
Who is gonna crucify whom? Who is gonna kill whom? Who is promising a primrose pat or paradise?
See to me that's the thing be it 72 virgins or pearly gates...those are the primrose path being sold and I surely don't buy it. You don't know, you have no evidence of yet this pig in a poke are gladly sold let's pass the offering plate.
Ok it is a primrose path, but only once the "world' has been left behind, through whatever process. I think all religions say choose either God or mammon. Inner peace is freedom from worldly desire, etc.
Bodhisattva vow: not to accept freedom until all sentient beings are free. Sharing the suffering.
The collection plate money should go to charity. It's meant to. In fact nowadays they use a sort of sock thing, so you can drop a washer or a used bus ticket in there if you want, without the person next to you looking at you funny.
Last edited:
Aussie Thoughts
Just my 2 cents
And some ... it's just that aspect is a non-starter when you commodify spirituality. Everybody wants a bang for their buck, and the pseudo-spiritual snake-oil salesman offers just that.
Whereas, for those who bother to search:
Abba John said, "A monk is toil. The monk toils in all he does. That is what a monk is."
"Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water ... " etc.
And once you start reading the wisdom of the world ...
Here's something on humility...
An old man said, "... Every time a thought of superiority or vanity moves you, examine your conscience to see if you have kept all the commandments, whether you love your enemies, whether you consider yourself to be an unprofitable servant and the greatest sinner of all. Even so, do not pretend to great ideas as though you were perfectly right, for that thought destroys everything." (my emphasis)
Here's something on humility...
An old man said, "... Every time a thought of superiority or vanity moves you, examine your conscience to see if you have kept all the commandments, whether you love your enemies, whether you consider yourself to be an unprofitable servant and the greatest sinner of all. Even so, do not pretend to great ideas as though you were perfectly right, for that thought destroys everything." (my emphasis)
Ok, that is certanly true. Monasticism is a grim life of poverty and penance. But monasticism is not for most people. What I'm attacking is this glib use of the word 'enlightenment' by the new agers.
To me enlightenment probably begins with the realisation that 'the world' is not where contentment, happiness should be looked for.
'Fearing God' does bring worldly benefits too -- God feeds the ravens -- but not where they interfere with the soul, because the soul and heart is what God sees. Imo.
This guy is selling 'enlightenment' as the way to wealth and success.
Last edited:
Some religions/religious movements start out that way: Scientology, Law of Attraction/"The Secret"...
Just took a huge percentage outta the pulpit over here
When a priest puts on the stole of his authority and grants absolution, or blesses a rosary or a marriage, he acts as the minister of Christ because his ordination vows grant him authority to perform the sacraments. It is Christ who blesses and forgives, not the priest.
A magistrate doesn't have to be sinless to pass legal sentence. When he takes his place at the bench he becomes an agent of the king or state, which empowers him. It is the king/state which sentences or pardons.
On his own a priest has no power or authority. He can preach from the pulpit all he likes, it's just his personal opinion. You can grab him by the elbow when he's leaving and tell him your own opinions about what he said.
It's when he puts on the mantle of priesthood he becomes empowered by his vows as an agent of the higher authority.
Last edited:
Surely that has something to do with loving your enemies.
I bet Matthew Ferry feels he's empowered, too, and acting on behalf of a higher purpose.
I personally find it interesting how difficult it gets to draw the line.
A corrupt judge, is he really out of the picture when dispensing judgenent? Does one corrupt judge make the whole state corrupt? Who's sovereign then, if this were the case?
Ok. Let's start with the corrupt judge: his judgements are open to appeal and review. He might be clever but in the end the system is designed to detect and bring him down.
At any rate, what he's doing is wrong and abuse of power. The system does not endorse. The king doesn't like his ministers effectively stealing from him.
So who is going to argue from corrupt judges that the whole judicial system has to go?
Matthew Ferry announces himself enlightened; everyone understands that the title master or doctor etc, is bestowed at least by popular judgement -- not self announced -- and someone who does that is really just an object of disrespect unless the title is given him by others.
A priest makes vows to God. Lifelong vows. Some won't be able to keep them all the time. A very few might even go through the long initiation process with the deliberate intention of abusing their position. Some will commit crimes.
But nobody uses the fact there are weak or deliberately criminal judges as an argument against the whole judicial system?
Last edited: