Finding God

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen

 Several years ago I was asked to introduce a video presentation featuring a well known Catholic priest and personality to an all men's group at a local parish.  The presentation was to follow their annual general meeting so I waited in the hall until they completed their prepared agenda.  I had arrived just in time to hear the men conclude the business section of their meeting with a Rosary.  As is the habit its familiar refrain was recited with the usual vigour and haste.   I have often wondered about the value of such prepared and formal prayers.  Is it because it’s the dutiful Catholic thing to do, or do we believe that somehow it will please God in his lonely heavenly realm?  It did not appear as though the recitation moved anyone to a higher plain or prompt them to question a particular aspect or understanding of faith. Repetition can be a useful teaching tool for primary school students, but these were all mature men, lay and clergy combined.  Remember, the Rosary was originally created as a substitute to help illiterate monks recite a simple refrain after they lost the skill to recite the 150 Psalms.  

While the value of a repetitive prayer may be very  handy when difficult and demanding circumstances keep us from a clearer focus; it should not lead us to a form of unified boredom.  The Catholic Mass, except perhaps for the Liturgy of the Word, follows a predictable format.  However, Catholics will quickly point out that the Liturgy of Eucharist should be understood as the highlight of the celebration. It is here that the body of Christ takes the physical form of his presence among his people. How many times do we miss that opportunity through our lack of response?  I truly believe that God already rests deep within every indestructible soul. The play of Mass is purely intended to remind us of that fact.

 

     

Predictability and repetition may be helpful to guide us through a semblance of unified praise and worship but I have often wondered what would happen if the celebrant were to open the proceedings with the questions: “Why you are here and what do you want to do?”  It has been said, and rightfully so, that many of us have become spectators instead of participants in what should be high drama. After all we do not gather together to be entertained but to participate in our joint search for God and may reflect his image to all he places in our path. The clergy can help point the way but can never become the destination.

 

Many Catholics today continue to insist that Tradition and Scripture are the necessary tools to help us find our way to this inward reality.  For some that may indeed hold true – but it cannot be the only way. God meets us where we are not where others would have us be.  The way to God cannot be attained through formula but rather through the diversity congruent with  each unique human being.  Tradition must always remain open to question and inquiry recognizing that faith is a dynamic and can never remain static when held under the domain of the Holy Spirit. 

Finally it is not about a religious institution, nor about your neighbour, not about me, and not really about you the reader- it is simply about forming a direct relationship with God; or more specifically discovering the God within. For most of us that goal is not only scary but perhaps beyond our immediate imagination.

In order to develop that relationship and trust we need to let go of all our usual support systems.  Think of it in these terms.  You enter a forest to find God. You set out with a group of trusted friends armed with a book of instructions on how to survive in the woods, and knowledge gained from innumerable lessons previously provided in the  in the event you should lose your way.  On the third day of your journey you wake up in the middle of the night, from a deep sleep,  only to discover that everyone is gone.  You are completely alone and everything you need to survive has been taken.  What will you do?  How will you find your way home?

You will now have to make decisions based on your own judgment – but without the help of others.   At this point the advice others have given you, in good faith and to the best of their ability, could prove to be valuable but also useless – now you alone must decide.  What will give you the strength to carry on and find your way back home?

I’m sure you will immediately grasp the fundamental truth in this simple analogy.

 

But now here’s the Good News - we will all find God!  But we will also know that he found us first and that it had nothing to do with the morality of your neighbour; what the religious leaders or the church told you, or all of the issues   facing the world today, such as abortion, contraception, same-sex marriage, etc. etc.,   God will always reach beyond all our expectations and assumptions and he/she will never leave us orphans.

            

A Bishop’s Lament

Our Catholic bishops have been taught that they are the successors of the apostles and are therefore endowed with unquestionable knowledge and wisdom. Many were but a great number were not. Has anyone ever considered that the apostles would not qualify as Catholic bishops today? For example, the apostles:

• were allowed to marry
  
• continued to celebrate their Jewish heritage and traditions
  
• did not speak Latin
  
• never read the Bible (probably could not even read)
  
• did not receive indoctrination into Catholic Tradition and way of life.
  
• never recited the 'Hail Mary'.
• would not have understood the words 'Church', 'bishop', dogma, doctrine or term 'excommunication'
  
• would not have worn a crucifix
  
• did not wear a mitre or silk clothing
  
• lived in simple homesteads
  

Perhaps the only thing the apostles held in common with today's bishops is that they frequently misunderstood Jesus true message.


Now that we perhaps reached a better understanding of who our bishops are, we may begin to see how they have influenced our understanding of our Catholic Tradition as presented by Fr. Tom Doyle as follows:


The Church is a visible institution. The Church teaches as official dogma that the Church as we know it, that is, a hierarchical structure that is totally run by celibate male clerics (mostly bishops), was instituted by Jesus Himself. The Church teaches that the pope is the representative (Vicar) of Christ on earth. It teaches that Christ founded His church and left it in the control of the twelve apostles and explicitly willed that these apostles pass this power down to their successors. Consequently the official teaching is that the visible church is run by men who have been explicitly chosen by the Supreme Being. Furthermore the Church teaches that priests are fundamentally different than other humans. They are, in the words of John Paul II, uniquely configured to Christ. Catholics are taught to believe that priests are special. They represent Jesus Christ. They have very special spiritual powers. Their intercession is essential for anyone who wishes to make it to heaven in the next life.


This teaching is the foundation for the clerical culture that runs the Church. Clericalism is the belief that clerics (deacons, priests and bishops) are superior to lay persons and are rightfully entitled to deference, unquestioned respect and exemption from many of the obligations born by most lay people. This clerical world is the home of the men who make up the Church power structure. The Church teaches that this structure is the church. To be a Catholic, one must believe totally in the teachings about the nature of the church strictures and the sacredness of the Church's clerical ministers.


If all of these teachings were true, would there be a need for all of the secrecy? If these teachings were true, especially about the "Christ-like" nature of priests and bishops, would there be such widespread corruption, dishonesty and abuse found among clerics at every level?


If all of these things were true! The problem is that there is no authentic historical evidence that any of it is true. The various titles, roles and offices attributed to popes, bishops and priests are not products of divine revelation but of human invention, often as a response and reaction to serious external threats to the power and wealth of the clerical aristocracy. For example, and it's a good example, Papal Infallibility was literally invented by Pope Pius IX and forced through the First Vatican Council . . . for political reasons. The pope's kingdom, the Papal States, was threatened with dissolution by the Italian social upheaval at the time. Likewise the title "Vicar of Christ" was part of a conscious program of a medieval pope to fortify papal power. This title has had a long and complex and by no means consistent history. It was not applied to the Papacy until the 13th century when Pope Innocent III took it to enhance his overall program of actively concentrating just about all power in the Church in the papacy.


Consequently this massive institution seeks above all to preserve itself. Sexual abuse of children or anyone by members of the sacred elite is potentially disastrous for the image, credibility and hence the power of the Church. The bishops really believe that they are essential to the existence of the Church. Therefore protecting the hierarchy is essential and believed to be God's will. The popes and the bishops did not have to conspire to keep sexual abuse by clergy buried as deeply as possible. The secretive response is in the blood of the bishops. It is rooted in the fundamental urge to survive. Disruption and disintegration of the monarchical structures of the Church means the end of the system of power and control as we know it. This poses an unthinkable threat to the clergy and to the clerical world. The threat is personal because this world, this monarchical institution, this magical theological support system is the past, present and future of the bishops. It is their source of identity. To change or destroy it is a threat to the very being of the clerics who feed off of it.


Readers are invited to read Fr. Doyle's entire text at http://www.richardsipe.com/Doyle/2010/2010-07-25.htm


More than twenty five years ago, the Rev. Thomas Doyle warned the nation's Roman Catholic bishops about the church's looming sexual abuse nightmare. Since then, he has become a hero to the victims, speaking out on their behalf and helping them in legal cases in recent years. In doing so, Father Doyle also became a thorn in the side of the church hierarchy.For more on Fr. Doyle please read: http://www.snapnetwork.org/news/otherstates/doyle_loses_job.htm


The Lament of a bishop: "Wherever Jesus went there was a revolution; wherever I go people serve tea!" Anthony deMello, SJ.

A Matter of the Heart

The most frequent lines of defence used by some religious individuals to trump a religious argument is "the church teaches that . . . ." or "the church has always maintained that . . . ." or "the church fathers made it clear that . . . ." And finally, "the Bible says that . . ." Has it ever occurred to these individuals that while these are helpful tools, they need to first and foremost consult the ultimate authority within? That is where they will find the peace and compassion that will help them resolve many of the issues confronting them.

To claim victory on an argument merely on the basis of someone else's opinion ignores the hidden motives behind the original argument – more importantly it minimizes or devalues the potential of your own unique insight into the issue which may prevent you from searching for a deeper truth. Yes, you may be wrong but by expressing your own personal views but you will at last have claimed the very freedom that God gave us in the first place. This attitude will only help you to grow in wisdome and become more compassionate and understanding toward people. Conflicting ideas can give way to new understandings. We need to learn how to respond with God's wisdom and patience to any contrary views. Revelation has not happened once and for all time; it is an ongoing process that can never end, because there are always fresh teachings to be discovered. (Karen Armstrong 2007).
Tradition and scripture must therefore be interpreted not in historical terms but in our own modern everyday experiences.

The writings of the Church and the Bible are often expressed in obscure and complex terms. Some interpretations or passages have even been found to contradict each other. Words expressed in writing, when not taken to heart, have a habit of becoming absolute truths in the eyes of many a fundamentalist. And that is precisely why the ancient Israelites struggled so intensely with the question of committing their oral tradition to writing.

One of the most divisive issues to arise within our religious communities today concerns the question of homosexuality. To give readers an example of contradictory teachings on one of this issue I will compare the Roman Catholic teachings on homosexuality based on two separate but official Church documents not published less than twenty years apart. The 1969 Catholic Catechism describes homosexuality as follows: "It is not the fault of the individual if he or she is not attracted to the other sex. The causes of homosexuality are unknown. In their human isolation, they look for friendship. But even where they find true and loyal responses, the perfect fulfilment of their human longings is not granted them". Compare this compassionate view with the one expressed by Pope Benedict XVI as Cardinal to the Bishops of the Church, 'On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons'(1986) describing homosexuality as an intrinsic moral evil and that gay services are not to be tolerated and that Church facilities cannot be made available [for gays]".

Historically institutional religion has always assumed a supremist position on matters of morals and ethics. Yet there are plenty of examples of non Christians and non believer who have exhibited far greater moral ideals. There have been too many instances in history where unbending religious attitudes have been responsible for much human suffering. Humankind is a Holy gift from God, but we have shown that we are definitely capable of many unholy acts. Is does not help anyone when we defend our negative actions with words like "The dogmatic teaching of the Church is in no way affected by the question as to whether the Inquisition was justified in its scope, or wise in its methods, or extreme in its practice. The Church established by Christ, as a perfect society, is empowered to make laws and inflict penalties for their violation. Fortunately Pope John Paul II recognized it otherwise and declared the Inquisition as the "greatest error in church history".

Our very human errors and arguments for and against any religious issue must be overcome with the heart rather than the head. More importantly we need to recognize our individual and unique role in resolving these issues. It must not be left just to the institution or a literal interpretation of scripture.

It would be very different if Pro-Life and Pro-Choice groups where to dialogue about abortion if it were understood as embracing life from the Alpha to the Omega. Finger pointing and confrontational attitudes merely present fodder for the media. Morals and/or ethical values are usually taught or passed on by parents, teachers, etc., but more often directly through the experience of life's difficult circumstances. Only when we are prepared to surrender our frailties can we be open to the inner gift of compassion and understanding. This gift brings a growth that is beyond the scope of legislation and law making. By forcing people to choose on the question of abortion without having experienced God's gift of compassion is not the way Jesus taught.

On Change

To live is to change, and to be perfect is to change often - John Henry Newman

If there is one sure challenge we all face, beyond taxes and death, it is change. However, if there is one thing we all resist it is change. When religion talks about change it usually affirms that God never changes. When we give assent to this statement it is important to remember however, that it is our understanding of God that must change and be allowed to grow and expand. What we understood about God as children, will not and cannot serve us as adults. And so change for humanity is not only inevitable but totally necessary if we wish to grow into healthy spiritual beings.

Any religion that refuses to accept change on the basis that this is what our father’s taught us, and so on, is a religion that is still based on fear. When we read scripture and doctrine for the purpose of interpreting who or what is right and wrong, it is merely being used as a legal or historical document. Such limited views may introduce more doubt and fear. Fear to experience God who exists outside time and space. Fear to allow God to do what He does best. Fear to move into the unknown. Fear to embrace an ever expanding universe. The great litmus test for interpreting scripture and religious doctrine for me is ‘does it move me to Oneness’? Or does it cause me to feel separate from my neighbour? Any religion that espouses separation from its neighbours must be acting out of fear and suspicion. We have to learn to trust in God who will reveal our Oneness with the world. This for most of us this may require a quantum leap in change and understanding. But God is patient – change does not have to happen overnight – that’s we he gave us ‘time’!

Change can make us profoundly uncomfortable. Especially when it relates to religious issues. For example just this week the Vatican announced that they would welcome all disenfranchised Anglican priests to their flock. This offer was specifically aimed at celibate Anglican priest who are unhappy at women bishops and with the acceptance of homosexual clergy being introduced into the Church of England. It is interesting to note that during this same week a religious leader of note remarked that if the question regarding the role of women in the church, homosexuality were so important Jesus would have expounded on them not just once but again and again. Are these questions merely a matter of accepting change or do we feel we need to fight all God’s battles for him?

Religious traditionalist/fundamentalist usually resist change. Why? Because its supporters believe that since God does not change than neither should they. At the same time it helps to solidify their particular brand of doctrine. After all they will readily announce, “our religion has always maintained that . . . . .” and so on. Admittedly, we all tend to derive some degree of comfort out of fixed continuity. And when that continuity is disturbed or taken away we may even experience temporary feelings of insecurity or fear. Hence we will try to get back to that illusory space or time where we last experienced feelings of security and comfort. Rather than resist should we not ask ‘where is the gift in this”? As God’s creation is an ongoing thing so too we are called forward. This requires change. But we need not fear change. Change under God’s direction is filled with promise and salvation. It is a promise of healing, forgiveness, peace and un ending joy. All we have to do is be open to change.

On June 15, 2005 The Catholic New Times published the following article on the question of change:

When three Canadian Catholic cardinals recently returned from Rome, following the election of Pope Benedict XVI, Marc Cardinal Ouellet publicly responded to the question of change in the Vatican. "If there needs to be change, it needs to be in the world, not in the doctrine."



Compare this response to the following quote from Fr. Diarmuid O'Murchu in his book Quantum Theology. "Where religions have failed most dismally is in their perception and understanding of the world, which they all tend to dismiss as an inferior, ungodly, and transitory reality. This cosmology goes right back to the Agricultural Revolution, which projected the original mechanistic image that the world was an object to be conquered and .controlled. Adopting this worldview, the religions concocted a self-inflationary, eschatological myth, whereby the world would come to nothing and the religions themselves would triumph. What was intended to be an instrument of God became a god in its own right; religion became an outrageous form of idolatry."


Place these two quotes against the recent warnings from the UN on the state of our global environment ." An estimated 60 per cent of the ecosystems that support life on earth. Fresh water, fisheries and the atmosphere--are quickly being degraded and depleted. They are not expected to last past 2050."


If one takes the time to read O'Murchu's book one will quickly recognize that serious change in church doctrine is not only necessary but essential. Again Fr. Diarmuid states: "Instead of trying to conquer and eliminate the negative, we [must] try to comprehend (not distance) and appreciate its complementary role for the positive."


As God's co-creators, we share an equal and awesome responsibility to bring about those changes. For some, change may require a quantum leap in faith. Remember however, faith is never static and change is the very dynamic of the Holy Spirit.


O'Murchu brilliantly illustrates how 'collective sins' have lead to destructive 'systems' which prevent us from seeing our connectiveness to the world, and indeed the universe. How can we begin to realize our common God given responsibilities if we say: you need to change not us? It is only when we begin to see the bigger picture that we will be better prepared to accept God's universal plan for salvation. O'Murchu goes on to say that "Once we begin to understand and internalize the sacredness of life from within--ourselves, our planet, and our universe--then the classical academic search for an external agent may become quite irrelevant."


Is the Vatican ready for change?

This article was also later published in ‘Online Catholics', an independent Australian e journal under my name.


There are those who refuse to accept change and those who accept change as part of our evolutionary growth especially as it applies to spirituality. A Church that does not change cannot hope to serve those who live in the reality of the present. God the Creator of the ever expanding Universe meets us where we are today, not yesterday, not tomorrow but here in this Holy Instant. Salvation does not change our past, nor does it make promises for tomorrow, it is here in the moment.

"When we pray for miracles and nothing happens could it be because we did not want to accept change?"

"Seek not to change the world, but choose to change your mind about the world." A Course in Miracles

On Fundamentalism

"We must move from a belief-based religion to a practice-based religion, or little will change. We will merely continue to argue about what we are supposed to believe and who the unbelievers are." - Richar Rohr, The Naked Now

The words ‘religious fundamentalist’ bring to my mind such people as zealots, fanatics, cultists, militant believers,Traditionalists, Jesus freaks, TV evangelists, Bible thumpers, Holy Rollers and more recently apologists. All of these groups seem bent on protecting the purity of their particular faith or belief system – in extreme!. By clinging tenaciously to their religion, avoiding moderation and change, they want to introduce us to their limited religious views. In their world there is no room for middle ground, ecumenism and even in some instances, ‘compassion’. Their faith is understood through sharply defined doctrines and literal interpretations of Holy Scripture. Any deviations from the scripted word immediately becomes ‘suspect’ and may cause questioners to be branded as heretics or infidels. For these fundamentalist groups the religious world can only exist within narrow and confined boundaries. Practise of this immature religion usually consists of a ridged adherence to ritual and other public expressions of their faith. 'Group think' and religious membership is made the prerequisite, and uniformity at the expense of diversity is accepted as the norm. This will only produce a world where religious differences are finally resolved through much conflict, pain and suffering! Coupled with indifference, does this attitude not cause some people to reject religion altogether and (re)turn to the worship of many false gods or atheism?

But does this insanity not shout ‘stop’? Is it not time to admit that not one of us, Rabbi, Pope, or Mullah included, truly possesses a complete understanding of whom our unfathomable and unknowable God is? Noted theologian, author and Catholic priest, Hans Kung, has stated “there cannot be peace in the world until there is peace among the world’s religions”. "Have we yet to understand what it means to become as ONE, as it was/is accepted in the ancient mystical tradition of the world’s three major religions? Why do we think that our religion should be the only one? How did we become so ridged? Why are we so reluctant to move beyond our established faith tradition? Why are we so afraid of change? Who, and what are we not trusting in?

Can we perhaps begin by accepting that Holy Scripture at one time existed only as oral tradition? Stories that were shared around a fire, intended to highlight the origins of life the cosmos and our role in it. Just because they were oral does not mean that they were not inspired or conveyed a sacred message. It seems however that the Bible as a written word, in the hands of some fundamentalist, has largely become a legal document. A document to be used to spread condemnation instead of inspiration. The ancient Jewish leaders, while contemplating the conversion of oral tradition to writing, warned precisely against this. At the same time the accumulation of various commentaries on scripture has more often than not, lead to even greater divisions among the world’s religions. The world’s major religions all agree that there can only be one God but then why are there are so many different understandings of whom he/she/it is for all of us? And why are we so reluctant to share that same Deity? Has religion become too institutional? Why are most religions insistent on a common creed or belief system?

It is only through experience and constant awareness that we begin to understand and love – not through a belief system. It is only through experience and awareness that we begin to recognize the God that rests quietly within our hearts- not a belief system. It is only through life’s experiences and awareness that we begin to trust in the God that protects and comforts us – not a belief system. It is only through experience and awareness that we gain insight into our true purpose – not a belief system. It is only through experience and awareness of God that we can love him, our neighbour and ourselves. It is only through our unique experiences and awareness that we can begin to realize that we are not separate from one another or from God but that we are truly all ONE! I think it would be far more usefull, when speaking of God, that we begin our statement with "my experience of God is . . . ." rather than " I believe that . . "

We are unique individuals with unique experiences all seeking a common goal – to love and be loved unconditionally.