It has been an exhausting 10 day trip to Italy, with a group of Catholics and a priest going to many of the greatest religious sites in the central part of the nation, starting at Rome. I did not know what to expect, and was somewhat skeptical about the value of the trip - I have never done a "tour" and thought I never would. This one had the drawbacks that I thought it would have - a rough schedule of hurry-up and ride that left me time for only two major entries in my journal (which I will share in the next few days), but it also had great pluses - we saw A LOT, from the catacombs in Rome to the grotto of St Michael near the Adriatic coast - and also were submerged - whether we wanted to be or not - in Catholicism, with daily mass in such places as the catacombs and the church of St Francis, and prayer on the bus to and from. This, in the long run, was a plus: we were not just tourists, but true pilgrims, and we felt it; and it was as it should be, considering the venue. While riding or enjoying a few leisurely moments, several thoughts came up. One was this:
What was the primary negative push away from Catholicism, and from true religion in general, in the technological world?
There are many things to consider - the impossibility of the scientific-based mind for miracles and the trend away from hierarchy towards individual consideration are two of them. But I think at bottom is something more important, although it does include the other two, and it is this: the trend away from religion stems from the dislike of post-modern Man for self-control and personal responsibility.
Let us take the example of Padre Pio, a modern day saint who has inspired a huge cathedral and hospital in the city of San Giovanni Rotondo. When we read of his interactions with his followers, it is much like following the interactions of Indian gurus with theirs. He could be gruff and painfully to the point: his was not a facade of easy forgiveness and easy, all-embracing love. Instead, those who confessed to him were often sent away (to return if they would) with such phrases as " Go away with your stench of sin!" He made it clear that there WAS sin, that we knew what it was, and that it was our responsibility to correct it or suffer the dire consequences of hell fire.
We do not like this - as the New Age philosophies clearly show. If we are spiritual at all - and most still are - we expect to be forgiven immediately, or feel that we are beyond a need for forgiveness, given that all will be right in the end. In true religion, at least when based in time (less than infinite time), this is not the case. We must choose the right path - which is often very difficult - or suffer the consequences. We do not like this - who are they to decide? And who, after all, is perfect?
We might see it differently, though. When I first started fixing up houses, I had particular trouble fixing a broken water line to an upstairs shower. A carpenter who I had hired to do some particularly difficult work was there, and I asked him, "what the heck. It's just a small leak. Don't you think I could live with it?" He was shocked and said in no uncertain terms, "you cannot have a water leak. Not one." Since then I have been amazed at my ignorance, but understand it: I had come from a background where all positions (such as in philosophy) could be argued. But in the real world, many, many things are black and white: if you jump off that cliff, you will die; if you let water leak, it will rot the house.
Such, it seems to me, is the position of the true religions; that is, that there are certain things in the spiritual world that simply are, and that you ignore them at your peril. Such it might be with certain behaviors that constitute what might be called "sin." It seems that many will not deal with that now; that all things must be negotiable. But what if they are not? And if that is so, could it be that the emerging world civilization is already beyond sin and personal responsibility? Could it be that we as a people might now be beyond what some call "being saved?" For to be saved might depend on a belief in a bedrock code of right and wrong, and admitting to those times when one is wrong, with appropriate remorse. Do we have such a code? And are we capable of accepting our lapses and making up for them?
If not, are we then beyond being saved, like the house with the leaking pipes whose owner refuses to fix them? And if so, what will happen to such a world?
And yet, in Sodom and Gomorrah, the Old Testament god of terror and implacable justice agreed to save the city for one - only one - decent man. He did not find one, and we know the fate. Yet we have many in our global city - all is probably not lost. But it is a consideration that perhaps, in the interface between the temporal and the spiritual, there are certain laws as implacable as that of water rotting cut wood. It might be something for our new age to consider. FK
What was the primary negative push away from Catholicism, and from true religion in general, in the technological world?
There are many things to consider - the impossibility of the scientific-based mind for miracles and the trend away from hierarchy towards individual consideration are two of them. But I think at bottom is something more important, although it does include the other two, and it is this: the trend away from religion stems from the dislike of post-modern Man for self-control and personal responsibility.
Let us take the example of Padre Pio, a modern day saint who has inspired a huge cathedral and hospital in the city of San Giovanni Rotondo. When we read of his interactions with his followers, it is much like following the interactions of Indian gurus with theirs. He could be gruff and painfully to the point: his was not a facade of easy forgiveness and easy, all-embracing love. Instead, those who confessed to him were often sent away (to return if they would) with such phrases as " Go away with your stench of sin!" He made it clear that there WAS sin, that we knew what it was, and that it was our responsibility to correct it or suffer the dire consequences of hell fire.
We do not like this - as the New Age philosophies clearly show. If we are spiritual at all - and most still are - we expect to be forgiven immediately, or feel that we are beyond a need for forgiveness, given that all will be right in the end. In true religion, at least when based in time (less than infinite time), this is not the case. We must choose the right path - which is often very difficult - or suffer the consequences. We do not like this - who are they to decide? And who, after all, is perfect?
We might see it differently, though. When I first started fixing up houses, I had particular trouble fixing a broken water line to an upstairs shower. A carpenter who I had hired to do some particularly difficult work was there, and I asked him, "what the heck. It's just a small leak. Don't you think I could live with it?" He was shocked and said in no uncertain terms, "you cannot have a water leak. Not one." Since then I have been amazed at my ignorance, but understand it: I had come from a background where all positions (such as in philosophy) could be argued. But in the real world, many, many things are black and white: if you jump off that cliff, you will die; if you let water leak, it will rot the house.
Such, it seems to me, is the position of the true religions; that is, that there are certain things in the spiritual world that simply are, and that you ignore them at your peril. Such it might be with certain behaviors that constitute what might be called "sin." It seems that many will not deal with that now; that all things must be negotiable. But what if they are not? And if that is so, could it be that the emerging world civilization is already beyond sin and personal responsibility? Could it be that we as a people might now be beyond what some call "being saved?" For to be saved might depend on a belief in a bedrock code of right and wrong, and admitting to those times when one is wrong, with appropriate remorse. Do we have such a code? And are we capable of accepting our lapses and making up for them?
If not, are we then beyond being saved, like the house with the leaking pipes whose owner refuses to fix them? And if so, what will happen to such a world?
And yet, in Sodom and Gomorrah, the Old Testament god of terror and implacable justice agreed to save the city for one - only one - decent man. He did not find one, and we know the fate. Yet we have many in our global city - all is probably not lost. But it is a consideration that perhaps, in the interface between the temporal and the spiritual, there are certain laws as implacable as that of water rotting cut wood. It might be something for our new age to consider. FK
RSS Feed