Religious Studies of Bob Cardwell - a reusable non-linear personal web notebook

Eidetic vision is an intuition of the essence of a phenomenon.

Logic Must Prove the King James Bible

by Dr. Jack Hyles

A sermon preached in the First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana, by Dr. Jack Hyles in the Sunday evening service on April 8, 1984.

Matthew 24:35, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not
pass away."

I'm not attacking the Catholic church tonight. I'm not a Catholic. Maybe you noticed the sign out in front of our church that says, "First Baptist." I never think I'm being unkind if I have the same thing on the inside that we have on the outside. I want you to listen carefully. I'm going to state some facts about the Catholic church. They are facts; they are not railing accusations. They are facts, and any Catholic who is honest will tell you that what I'm going to say is true about the Catholic church. It is not a matter of my making false accusations; it's a matter of record.

I am also going to say some things about the charismatics tonight. I'm more Catholic than I am charismatic. I've got more respect for the pope than I do the P.T.L. Club, and I mean that. However, my respect for the pope is not really soaring! Don't get mad now. I want to help you. I'm simply saying that I'm going to give you some facts. I'm going to give some facts about the charismatics, and if a charismatic is honest, he will agree with the facts I'm going to give. There will be no accusations, no gossip and no slander; I will just give facts that any charismatic would give.

Also, I'm going to say some things tonight about Protestantism. In fact, I may not miss anybody tonight. Everything I say will be factual. I will be the kind of thing with which even the people about whom I speak will agree. So I want you to listen. With the battle raging as it is about the King James Bible, I think that any pastor ought to alert his people.

When I was a boy, from the time I remember-- I remember back when I was two and three years of age- until I went into the paratroopers in World War II when I was 18, my mother would read to me for 30 minutes every night from the Bible. Then she would hold it up and say, "This is the Word of God!" She did not say, "The manuscripts from which we got this are the Word of God." My mom didn't even know what a manuscript was. She just knew she had a Book that was the Word of God. That's all she knew. So, she said, "This is the Word of God." I would look at it, and I would have to say three times, "Mama, the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God."

I have Mama's Bible-- the same one she read-- in my office. I've had it there for years. I don't know how old it is, but I suspect it is 55 or 60 years old. It is the same Bible she used to hold up. I was thumbing through it the other day. On the inside, it says on the title page, "King James Bible." That's what it says. You know it worked. It's amazing how well Mama did before she found out that it wasn't the Word of God.

I've been going to Baptist churches for 51 years. Every pastor I've ever had preached from the King James Bible. He always said to the crowd, "Open your Bibles and let's hear what the Lord says." These pastors were not unfortunate enough to have sat at the feet of those with lower education--which calls itself "higher education."

It is amazing how well this nation did when we didn't know how ignorant we were. (Are you listening?) This is my fifth pastorate. I've seen miracles in my pastorates. I've preached over 41,000 times, and I've never yet preached a sermon that wasn't preached from the King James Bible. I really don't know what I've missed. To be quite frank with you, I've seen fellows who preach from other Bibles, and I somehow get the idea THEY are missing something. Dr. Evans, I've never seen a fellow really whoop it up about any other Bible. I've never heard a fellow say, "Blessed be God, let's look in the Book. Let's look in the Douay Version."

Did you ever go to mass and have the priest get up and say, "Hallelujah for the Word of God!" Don't get mad at me! I'm telling the truth. If you don't believe it, go next Sunday and see. He will usually use that prayer book and not a Bible.

Follow me. I've taught you about the textus receptus, Wescott and Hort, those manuscripts from which came the Douay Version that the Catholics use and the American Standard Version, which is highly overrated. The Wescott and Hort manuscripts came from the Vatican manuscripts that were hidden in the Vatican for years-- from whence came the Catholic Bible.

The textus receptus manuscripts are those from which we have gotten the King James, and they have been the evangelistic manuscripts, if you please. I won't go into that. I'm a textus receptus man. I haven't got a bit of patience with Wescott and Hort. Not a bit! In fact, I really have a hard time not being bitter against my Greek professors in college who taught me from Wescott and Hort Greek manuscripts. It upsets me greatly.

This is the message. The question at hand is this: Where is the final authority for church building and for Christian living? There are four different final authorities in American Christendom. I'm not talking about Mormonism and those who have other books. I'm talking about Christendom. There are four basic final authorities.

1. SOME VIEW THE CHURCH AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY. This is fact. Any honest Catholic priest will tell you that the Catholic position on the final authority is that the church has final authority. If you want to go a little farther than that, if the pope speaks ex cathedra, he is the final authority. Ask any Catholic or read any Catholic doctrine, and both will tell you that. I'm not trying to be critical. I'm telling you the truth. If a Catholic priest were standing here, he'd tell you the same thing.

Our Catholic friends believe that the church is the final authority. If the pope speaks ex cathedra, that's God speaking. I'm not being critical; I'm being factual. There is a second final authority.

2. SOME VIEW EXPERIENCE AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY. In other words, "It happened to me, so it's true. I was there when it happened, and I ought to know. I had an experience. I saw Jesus. I saw a vision. I have a word of knowledge." This is the charismatic position. Ask them. They will say, "I have a message from God, so this is God talking. God gave me a message." (The foolish thing about that is, if that is true, you had better start writing more Bible.)

When this happens, people believe the final authority comes from experience. God has supposedly given someone a message. Someone talks in tongues, and somebody else interprets what God said. However, the truth is, all that God has ever said to man is right here in this Book. This is it. This is God's complete revelation to man!

By the way, that is the basis of the whole thing: What is the final authority? There has to be some place, ladies and gentlemen, where we can say, "This is it, and what this says is the final word." So, our Catholic friends say the church is the final authority. Our charismatic friends go beyond the Bible and say human experience is the final authority.

3. SOME VIEW HUMAN REASONING AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY. That's what liberal people say. "Every man is searching for the truth, and every man gets a portion of it; so, nobody is wrong, and nobody is right. We are all searching, so it doesn't seem to me that God would make a Hell; therefore, there is no Hell. It doesn't make sense to me that God would let anybody go to Hell, so God wouldn't let anybody go to Hell. It doesn't make sense to me that God would regenerate anybody, so there is no such thing as regeneration." That's what most of our Protestant friends believe, and all the humanist crowd believes it. That's what the liberal believes. That's what 95% of all the people in the seminaries in America believe. That's what 95% of all the faculty and students in religious colleges in America believe-- the final authority is the human mind or human reasoning.

The average Protestant church in Hammond believes that. "I don't see how there could be a place with golden streets. If I don't see how there could be, there isn't one." That is idolatry in its most pagan form. "My mind is my God. What I can't conceive of, I won't believe. What I can't understand, I won't accept. So, I'll trim the Bible down to fit what I can believe. I just can't believe there is a God of wrath, so there is no God of wrath."

All right, we have the first three answers to the question, "What is the final authority?" The church is, according to our Catholic friends. Human experience is, according to our charismatic friends. Human reasoning is, according to our liberal and Protestant friends.

4. SOME VIEW THE BIBLE AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY. Every church in America in Christendom who had services this morning had a preacher who stood up and preached what he believed. He either preached that he believed that the final authority is the church, or that the final authority is human experience, or that the final authority is human reasoning, or that the final authority is the Bible.

The only authority that we as independent Baptists believe is the Bible. There was a day when I could say Baptists, but the truth is, most of the Southern Baptist colleges and seminaries are staffed by professors who don't believe that the Bible is the final authority. I may as well say it all. There's not a single Southern Baptist college or seminary to which I'd recommend anybody to go any more. None! I went to a Southern Baptist college and seminary. Thirty-five years ago, I heard a professor in my seminary say that he didn't believe the resurrection. He said that the resurrection was a bunch of blindfolded spirits in a vacuum. He said it. I was there. Think what they are saying now!

Consequently, independent Baptists believe that the only final authority for practice and doctrine of the Christian and the church is the Bible. I cannot speak ex cathedra. I cannot speak and say, "This is truth." All I can say is, "The Bible is truth." You see, I can't say, "I'm going to speak now, and this is God speaking through me." I don't much like people to pray, "Dear God, put the words in the mouth of our preacher." I think you can say, "Lead our preacher"; but if God puts the words in my mouth, we'd have more Bible.

See, I have no power in this church but the power of influence. Sometimes I wish I had more. Sometimes I wish I had power to make you ladies dress like I think you ought to dress. Sometimes I wish I had the power to make you adults have rules about your teenagers that I think you ought to have, but all I can do is influence you. I have no power. Officially, I have one vote in this church; that's all. I have no vote at deacon's meeting and one vote as a member of this church. The only power I have is my vote and the power of influence.

It was a good day for me when I decided that I was going to make my final authority the Word of God. I was taught in Southern Baptist schools to believe that the Southern Baptist program was it. One day I decided to just read my Bible and reorganize my church. I did. I decided to get the book of Acts and read it word for word to see what the New Testament church was all about. I cast aside all the tradition I had been taught, all the jargon I had been taught, all the catechisms to which I had been taught to swear allegiance, and I decided I was going to try to find out what kind of church the New Testament church really was.

Dr. Curtis Hutson gave the best compliment to First Baptist Church of Hammond that has ever been given in the SWORD OF THE LORD. He said that he was here for Pastors' School. He told how many conversions and baptisms we had the Sunday before. Then he said, "If God were writing the book of Acts today, He would write about the First Baptist Church of Hammond." That's the ultimate compliment.

You see, I decided that I was going to get my Bible down and decide what I thought the New Testament church was scripturally; then, that's what I was going to have in my church. I believe with all of my soul that the First Baptist Church of Hammond is as near as is humanly possible to being what the church in Jerusalem was 2,000 years ago. Where did I get that? I got it from the Bible. Do you know why we are scattered abroad winning souls all over this area? It's because the church in Jerusalem was "scattered abroad," and they "went every where preaching the word." (Acts 8:4) Do you know why we go house to house, knocking on doors? We do it because it says in Acts 5:42, "And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." We do it because that's what they did in the Bible.

Somebody says, "Well, we have different kinds of churches. You have a soul-winning church, and we have a deeper-life church." In the first place, it's a lie. There's no life as deep as a soul-winning life. However, they say, "We just have different kinds of churches." No, we don't. WE have a church, and you don't! Brother, the Bible is our charter to exist. If the Bible is not your final authority in practice and doctrine, then you are not a church. You might have the word "church" on the outside, but you are not a church.

Since the Word of God is our authority,-- hear me carefully-- we simply must have it. That's a profound statement. We've got to have it! I mean, shall we have an authority we can't find? Would God tell us His Word is the final authority and leave us without His Word? We must have a copy or we may as well join our Catholic friends and let the church be the basis for truth. If we have no Word of God, and if the Bible is not the Word of God, then we have only three other alternatives. We've got to say the final authority will be the church, or human experience, or human reasoning.

I'm saying, if we have no Bible that is the Word of God, then we have no way to go to the Book for the final authority. If one word in this Bible is not true, we don't know which one it is; so, once again, the mind of man or experience or the church is going to have to decide which one is true and which one is not true. If we are going to believe that the Word of God is the final authority, we've got to have a copy of it.

Let me ask you a question. Would God call a man to preach His Word and not give it to him? God calls a man and says, "I'm calling you. Spend you life preaching the Gospel. Preach the Word!" So, wouldn't He give him a copy of His Word?

I've said this so often, and I'll say it again and again. I would step down from behind this pulpit tonight and never walk in it again to preach if I didn't have the Word of God in my hand. I would not waste your time nor take your money unless I could say to you, "You have the Word of God. I have it, and it is preached here." I'm an honest man. This is what I've said before, and I'll say it again. If I did not believe that the Book I hold in my hand tonight was God's Word, I'd find out where it was. I'd go there and get a copy, print some copies for you and give you a copy. I mean, brother, if we don't have the Word of God in our hands, we have no place to go except to the human mind, human experience or the collective human mind which is the church. God would not reach down and give a divine call to a man and say, "I call you to preach My Word, but there is no copy of it any more."

I don't like a statement of faith that says, "We believe the Bible is the Word of God in the original manuscripts." In the first place, there are no original manuscripts anywhere in the world tonight. None! If the Word of God was only the original manuscripts, there is no Word of God available for mankind today. If I did not believe the Bible I hold in my hand was the Word of God, and I believed there were some manuscripts, I'd get on an airplane, fly to where they were, break in the building if I had to, get the original manuscripts, make copies of them and give you a copy. I'm not going to stand here as an imposter preaching a Book that is not the Word of God and giving you instructions on how to live from a Book that is not the Word of God! I'm not going to do it! I'm just not going to do it!.

Would God tell His people to live by the Word and not give it to them? Let me say this. Of all the nations on the face of this earth, America is the center of world evangelization. America is the only hope for the world to have the Gospel. Do you think that God would not give His Word to America? The countries of this world look to America for missionaries. They look to America for preachers. Every great movement of God in the world today was founded by a ministry or movement that was propelled by American evangelization. The mission movement was founded basically, by Hudson Taylor. Now, wait a minute. Of all the nations on the face of this earth, it just seems to me that God would give the key nation the Word of God.

Check the history of Christianity in America, and see how well we've done without all these extra Bibles. Check the history of the church in America from 1950 back, before every little preacher had the misfortune to sit at the feet of a college theologian. Do you know what? We won't have people who are just theologians teaching Bible at Hyles-Anderson College. Every teacher of Bible at Hyles-Anderson College is a preacher. We won't hire a theologian. No way! You say, "Are you opposed to theologians?" No, I'm just leery and wary of them. I am wary of those who dare to sit in judgment on the Bible. Brother, it seems to me if there is any place in the world where you ought to have your faith in the Bible stabilized, it's a Christian college or Christian seminary. However, the truth is, that's where you get your faith shaken.

That's one reason why some things bother me. It bothers me when people say, "We believe that the Bible, in the original manuscripts, is the Word of God." If that's true, we have no Bible. Did you hear what I said? We have no Bible. One day they did, but WE don't.

Dr. Ed Hindson of Liberty Baptist College said concerning I John 5:7, "Thus, according to John's account here, 'there are three that bear record in heaven.' The rest of verse 7 and the first nine words of verse 8 are not in the original and are not to be considered as part of the Word of God." I'd like to ask Mr. Hindson a question: "When did you see the original?" How does he know they are not in the original? Look at me now. How does he know? The only way an honest man can say they are not in the original manuscripts is to have seen them, and they are not available. Now, he could say they are not in some of the manuscripts that are considered the most ancient. I personally think he was saying that they are not in the Wescott and Hort. I can't prove that.

Before I get too rough on him, look at your Scofield Bible in I John 5:7, the verse Dr. Hindson quoted. Folks, I have no axes to grind. I have nobody's feelings to hurt. I've just got to have the Word of God; that's all. I've got to have it! The Bible says the Word of God is what we are supposed to preach. The Bible says, "Preach the Word."

Now, look at your Scofield Bible-- I John 5:7, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." Now look at that little "o" there in front of verse 7. Look in the center reference, and find the "o". Mr. Scofield says, "It is generally agreed that v. 7 has no real authority, and has been inserted."

I'd like to ask Mr. Scofield when he saw the original. He never saw it. Somebody who thought he was intellectual told that to somebody who thought he was intellectual who told somebody who thought he was intellectual. Listen, we don't want the intellectual community to think of us as being nincompoops, but I'd rather have a nincompoop with a revelation from God than to have an intellectual without a revelation from God.

We've got to have a final authority! If this Book is not true, then the church or human reasoning or human experience is the final authority. Listen! There are only two-- God and man. If God is not the final authority, man is the final authority. If we have no final authority in a book, then man has got to discern what God says; if man discerns what God says, then man becomes the final authority instead of God. So, Mr. Scofield had problems the day he came to this verse. How does he know? Pray tell me, what in the world he could have ever seen that would make him say that? He didn't see anything. He sat in somebody's Bible class and some Dr. Mess-'em-Up or Dr. McFuddle or Dr. Broad Stomach stood up and said, "Well, in the original manuscript..." which sounds scholarly; but nobody in our generation has seen them. Dr. So-and-So hasn't seen them, the professor in the seminary hasn't seen them and the college Bible professor hasn't seen them. Either what I hold in my hand is the Word of God, or we don't have any Word of God. I don't believe God would leave us without His Word. I don't believe that. I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT!

We need a Bible that we can understand and a Bible that is God's Word. It looks like anybody would agree that if God gives us the command to preach the Word, He would give us the Word to preach. That's logical. If God wants to say to a nation, "You are the custodian of world evangelization for a generation or two or three or four," it looks like God would give that nation the Word of God.

What is it? I would say it ought to be the one that has worked. Which one has worked? The one I hold in my hand right now. I has worked! It will work!

I'd like to say the same to our friends in the charismatic movement. You say, "Why do you stress it?" I stress it because the charismatic crowd is trying to teach our crowd every day that they've got something we don't have. Tonight, before I walked into this pulpit, one of our fine ladies came and told me of one of our men who has been swept aside. One of our good faithful men has been swept aside by the charismatic crowd. As pastor of this church, it is my job to warn you of wolves who are dressed like sheep.

If we don't have a Bible that's the Word of God, we've got to go to human reasoning. If God says to a church, "Build your church on My Word," God's got to give us His Word. Listen, God wouldn't be God is He told us to do something we couldn't do. Everything that God has ever commanded us to do, He has given us the wherewithal to obey that commandment. God has never commanded man to do anything that was unreasonable or impossible for man to do. When God calls a man to preach and says, "Preach the Word," God would have to give him a Word to preach. If God says to a church, "Build your church on My Word," to be God, He's got to give that church the Word of God.

Our Methodists seminaries say, "It's not verbally inspired." There was a day when John Wesley started that movement. He said the Bible was inspired, and they had the fire back in those days!

The Presbyterian seminaries say, "The Bible is not the Word of God," but John Calvin believed it, and they had the fire! John Knox and others believed it!

I'm saying that we've either go to admit this is the Word of God or we have to flee to the church, or to human reasoning or human experience as being the final authority. If there is no Word of God today, we have no other recourse. If God has not given us His Word, we have to decide what is God's Word. That's human reasoning.

By the way, basing a doctrine on human experience is idolatry. Basing a doctrine on the church being the final authority is idolatry. The church is the idol. Letting the pope speak ex cathedra and saying that it is God Who is speaking is idolatry. You're making him as God.

Human reasoning says that what we can reason, we'll believe. That's idolatry. So the truth is, you've got one choice of two. Either this Bible is the Word of God or we have no other place to turn but to idolatry. Did you hear me? Either this is the Word of God, or there is no place to turn but idolatry. Our three choices are human reasoning, human experience or the church, and they are each a form of idolatry. They are all three the same because making the church the final authority is done so by human reasoning. That means Catholicism is humanism, and the charismatic movement is humanism. It is man saying, "I was there. I felt it. God spoke, and here's what He said." That's human reasoning. It's humanism. So either this is the Word of God, or there is nothing left but humanism.

I'll tell you this. To whatever degree this Book is not believed, that society has the exact proportionate belief in humanism because there are only two choices available: God and man. If God hasn't told us what to do, man has got to tell us what to do. When a country does not believe this Book, it is totally humanistic. When a country leans away from this Book, it leans toward humanism. When a country is divided about this Book, it is divided about humanism.

I just don't believe that God would say, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature," (Mark 16:15) and not give us His Word to take with us. I just don't believe that God would say, "Train up a child in the way he should go," (Proverbs 22:6) and write the words of God "upon the door posts of thine house," (Deuteronomy 11:20) and "teach them your children," (Deuteronomy 11:19) unless there were a Word of God.

I don't think God would say, "Start a Bible college. Send out young men to proclaim the truth," unless God had given us the truth. I just don't believe that God would send young men to the mission fields without the Word of God. I don't think God would send Rick Martin halfway around the world to proclaim His Word without giving him a copy of it. I don't think God would send young men out from this church to build soul-winning churches without giving them His Word.

With all of my soul, I believe that the final authority for faith and practice for a church and for a life is the Word of God. I do not believe that I'm the final authority; nor the bishops or the cardinals-- nor are the Cubs or the White Sox!

Not long ago, then there was no pope, a fellow said, "I think Ernie Banks ought to be the next pope." "Why?" "Well, the Cardinals have had it long enough. It's time the Cubs got to have a pope!"

I'm not the final authority. "El papa" is not the final authority. He can wave his magic wand all he wants to. He can rustle his skirts all over the country. I'm simply saying, the Bible is the final authority, not man. I don't care what he is called, it is not man!

You say, "You're criticizing the pope." Whatever I've said about pope, I've said about me. FIRST I said, I'M NOT the final authority. THEN I said, "HE'S NOT the final authority." So our people have as much right to get mad as you Catholics do. Mr. Oral Roberts is not the final authority. The Bible is the final authority. I just don't believe God would leave us down here without a copy of His Word.

How can we know which is the real Bible? Well, you can scratch off the Revised Standard Version because the liberals put that one together. You can scratch off any Bible that came from Wescott and Hort because that comes from the Vatican manuscripts. I'd suggest you find the one that has worked.

Find the one that widows have read; find the one over which they've wept and prayed for their children. Find the one that dear mothers in the history of our country have read, loved and taught. Find the one for which faithful evangelists have given their lives and for which missionaries have circled the globe. Find the one that has caused people to leave home, family and friends to carry its message. Find it! Find the one Dwight Moody used. Find out which one Billy Sunday used. Find the one the great soul-winning churches in America use.

Find the one tested by time. Find the one that Adolph Hitler said he would destroy, but couldn't! Find the one about which Thomas Paine spoke when he said, "Within one generation, the Bible will not be printed anymore." However, as soon as he died, the same printing press on which he printed that garbage was used to print more Bibles. Find the one they can't destroy. Find the one that has stood the test of time. Find the one that liberals have tried to destroy, Hitlers have tried to burn, Mussolinis have tried to outlaw and Khrushchevs and Stalins have tried to burn! Find it! The Bible says, "My words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35) Find the one that has stood the test of time!

Don't find one that has a hippie on the outside of it and bunch of hippie jargon on the inside of it. Find the one that has stood the test of time! You say, "I don't understand those 'thees' and 'thous.'" "Thee" means "you." "Thou" means "you." "I" means "me." "We" means "us." You know it, and you know you know it! Not only that, but the Holy Spirit of God lives inside of you, and He's the author of this Book. If you can't understand a part of it, ask Him to teach you, and He will do it. He wrote it! We've got to have a Bible! We have got to have a Bible!

You say, "Boy, that's right. I'll tell you what, I believe it from cover to cover." Try OPENING the covers. "Boy, I believe every word of it." QUOTE a few of them! If we had Scripture quoting tonight, we've got Sunday school teachers here who know only, "Jesus wept," and if somebody said that verse before your turn came, you'd say, "He got mine." Read it! Memorize it! Study it! Love it! Teach it! Preach it! Live in it! It's the Word of God! You can depend on it.

Every jot and every tittle shall come to pass. Not one comma and not one punctuation mark shall pass away. Matthew 5:18, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matthew 24:35, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." I checked those words, "pass away," a little bit; a synonym for that phrase would be, "My word will always be alive." There never will be a day when somebody says, "Beloved, we are gathered here in the presence of 'Gawd' and these witnesses to remember the word of 'Gawd' that died." We never will! It will always be there. It always will.

I can't believe that God would give us a great commission and tell us to teach it, preach it and spread it, and not give us the truth to teach and preach and spread.

It was good for our fathers;
It was good for our fathers;
It was good for our fathers;
And it's good enough for me;
It was good for my mama;
It was good for my mama;
It was good for my mama;
And it's good enough for me.

[[A Brief History of the Catholic Mass: Introduction:http://www.bytrentplus.co.uk/klauser00.html]]

Here I summarise Theodor Klauser: A Short History of the Western Liturgy [1965] [1], effectively a history of the Catholic Mass. Although over 40 years old and not without significant limitations, it seems to be still in print (in its English translation: I don't know about the German original) and not to have been replaced by something more recent.

Theodor Klauser (1894-1984) was a German Catholic ecclesiastical historian etc. I undertook this summary simply in order to have a basic history of the Mass, but have come up with a lot more than I bargained for. As usual, any comments of my own are restricted to the notes. These are linked from the summary by the numbers in square brackets.

Introduction [pp 1-3]
Klauser likens the development of the liturgy to that of the ancient cathedrals, whose original designs are difficult to appreciate on account of later developments and accretions. He distinguishes four phases in the process. For each phase, he will provide a brief survey, look at important features revealed by research since the end of World War I and offer some reflections.

Here, each of Klauser's 4 chapters is allocated a separate page. The sections within each chapter here correspond to those of Klauser. To access the chapters, click on these links:

Ch 1: The Early Liturgy (to 570) [pp 5-44]
Ch 2: The Earlier Medieval Liturgy (570-1073) [pp 45-93]
Ch 3: The Later Medieval Liturgy (1073-1545) [pp 94-116]
Ch 4: The Tridentine Liturgy (from 1545) [pp 117-152]

NOTE
1 The summary
I have worked from the 1979 2nd English edition, a translation by John Halliburton from the 5th German edition.

With a notable exception for the case of Dom Odo Casel in Chapter 1, I ignore Klauser’s treatments of various scholarly contributions to research in the field of liturgical history and present just those conclusions he accepts. However, I do not ignore Klauser's polemical pro-reform reflections on liturgical matters, which were part of the debates around Vatican II.

I also ignore 4 appendices and a bibliography. The appendices provide Vatican II documents on the liturgy, a document of guidelines for liturgically appropriate church design, a translation of the Gloria, a page or so by the translator on post Vatican II liturgical documentation. The annotated bibliography of over 50 pages seems extremely disproportionate in relation to the nature and length of the text it supports. However, in the absence of other more detailed surveys of liturgical history, such a lengthy bibliography is no doubt justified.

Klauser faced the problem of not only characterising specific periods in the the development of the liturgy but also providing coherent accounts of the histories of specific aspects of the liturgy over multiple periods. His solution was to have a chapter each for four 500 year periods and to distribute the histories of specific aspects among the chapters. This means that each chapter has section surveying its period, followed by sections that may cover multiple periods. Thus the last chapter is nominally about the period from 1545 to the present, but a substantial section deals with the whole history of church architecture in relation to the liturgy. This sort of thing, combined with two other problems, makes for hazy chronology.

One of these two problems is that, especially for the earlier periods, the dates of particular developments in the liturgy are not available. The other is that even where helpful dates could easily have been added, specifically the dates of the historical personalities mentioned, Klauser has usually not bothered. I have inserted such dates. I have also supplied a little supporting historical information in the notes.

Another weakness is Klauser's unprepared use of specialised terminology that the reader of any introductory work like this should not be expected to know in advance: as in references to parts of the ancient liturgy. I have attempted to compensate for this.

Klauser's arguments are occasionally garbled. I have not tried to make sense of them if that was going to require me to interpret to a significant extent, rather than merely summarise. However, even when his argument is clear, Klauser does at times ramble repetitively, making the same point from slightly different angles. Here, on occasion, I have felt the need to cut the Gordian Knot and state the argument simply, somewhat in my own way.

My use of terms alternative to those of the author, as synonyms, may have misrepresented him to some extent. To give just one example, I have not concerned myself too much with the distinction between Bishop of Rome and Pope: I dare say there is a range of opinions as to the point in history at which the later name becomes acceptable.

Vatican II and all who sailed in her were drawing the Catholic Church closer to Protestantism. Klauser was certainly aboard. Thus, he seems to choose terminology congenial to Protestants (not calling early Roman bishops Pope, for instance).

To download the book [[go here|http://books.allathisfeet.com/Christian_Life/books/pdf/Triumphant_Faith.pdf]]

Course in Miracles (also referred to as ACIM or the Course) is a self-study curriculum for spiritual transformation. The book describes a non-dualistic metaphysics with the concept of forgiveness given practical application in daily living.

There is no author listed in the book but inside it Helen Schucman describes the process by which the material came to fruition. Schucman wrote the book with the help of William Thetford, based on an inner voice she identified as Jesus.[1][2] This edition, the most recent copyrighted one, is published by the Foundation for Inner Peace (FIP), the organization chosen by Schucman for this purpose. It consists of preface, text, workbook for students, manual for teachers, including clarification of terms, and two supplements. Kenneth Wapnick and Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM) was awarded the copyright to this edition after the original copyright was overturned. This edited version earned copyright status since it derives from the original manuscript as edited by Wapnick. FIP reports that two million volumes of A Course in Miracles have been published and disseminated worldwide since it first became available for sale in 1976. Additionally, the book has been translated into nineteen different languages with eight new translations underway.[3][4]

There is also a published edition of the book which is not under copyright—a version that contains Schucman's writings. It is published by A Course in Miracles Society (CIMS) and consists of forward, introduction, text, workbook for students, and manual for teachers. It is the manuscript that was retyped three times by William Thetford and Helen Schucman. They had divided the work into chapters and sections, and had given titles to each. They had removed a great deal of material from the early chapters, material they believed was meant for them personally.[5]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Background
o 1.1 Overview of origins
o 1.2 Editors
o 1.3 Distribution
o 1.4 Copyright litigation
* 2 Structure of material
o 2.1 Preface
o 2.2 Text
o 2.3 Workbook for Students
o 2.4 Manual for Teachers
o 2.5 Psychotherapy: Purpose, Process and Practice
o 2.6 The Song of Prayer: Prayer, Forgiveness, Healing
o 2.7 The Gifts of God
* 3 Reception
* 4 Notes
* 5 References
* 6 External links

[edit] Background
[edit] Overview of origins

A Course in Miracles was originally written in a collaborative venture by Schucman and Thetford.[1] In the beginning, the Voice (whom Schucman referred to as Jesus) described them as scribes.

In 1976, A Course in Miracles was published and distributed as a three-volume set—which had evolved from the original notes—and comprised three books: Text, Workbook for Students, and Manual for Teachers.

During the first 19 years of its circulation, A Course in Miracles was published, printed and distributed directly by the students of the work. In 1995, the printing and distribution of the work was licensed to Penguin Books for five years.
[edit] Editors
Kenneth Wapnick

When Schucman experienced some personal difficulties and hesitance after hearing the Voice, Bill Thetford, her work supervisor and friend, contacted Hugh Lynn Cayce (son of the celebrity psychic Edgar Cayce) at his Association for Research and Enlightenment in Virginia Beach, Virginia to seek his advice and counsel. Shucman later met with Cayce before she began to record the Course.

Father Benedict Groeschel, who studied under Thetford and worked with Schucman, arranged an introduction of Kenneth Wapnick to Schucman and Thetford in November 1972. In 1973, Schucman and Thetford presented the third draft of the complete manuscript to Wapnick and Groeschel. Wapnick subsequently became a teacher of the Course, co-founder and president of the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM), and a director and executive committee member of the Foundation for Inner Peace (FIP).

At the time, Wapnick was a clinical psychologist who directed a school for disturbed children and served as chief psychologist at Harlem Valley State Hospital from 1967 through 1972. In 1972, Wapnick left his Jewish faith and converted to Catholicism so he could become a monk.[6] Groeschel, a priest and a member of a Franciscan order, and who also had a doctorate in psychology, heard of Wapnick's conversion, which interested him, and so they met.

Wapnick reviewed the draft and discussed with Schucman further revisions that were needed to place the book in final form. Over the next thirteen months, Wapnick and Schucman edited the manuscript by rearranging necessitated by deleting personal material, changing chapter and section headings, and correcting various inconsistencies in paragraph structure, punctuation, and capitalization.[7] This editing process was completed in approximately February 1975.
[edit] Distribution
Yellow Criswell Version

The Foundation for Inner Peace (or FIP) was originally called the Foundation for Para-Sensory Investigations, Inc. (FPI)., and was founded on October 21, 1971 by Robert Skutch and Judith Skutch Whitson. Robert Skutch and Judith Skutch Whitson were married at the time of its inception, and have since become directors. Robert Skutch was a businessman and writer, who for many years had been a writer of television plays and advertising copy. Judith Skutch Whitson was a teacher and lecturer at New York University on the science of the study of consciousness and parapsychology. On May 29, 1975, Douglas Dean, a physicist engineer, introduced Schucman, Thetford, and Wapnick to Judith Skutch Whitson. Soon thereafter, they introduced her to the Course and the four of them met regularly to study, discuss, and share their common enthusiasm for it. At some point in 1975, Schucman appears to have authorized Skutch Whitson and Ken Wapnick to initiate the process of copyrighting ACIM and to assume responsibility themselves for the resulting copyright.

In mid-July 1975, Skutch Whitson met briefly with her doctoral adviser, Eleanor Criswell, who had a small printing company called Freeperson's Press. Criswell advised Skutch Whitson that she would be willing to assist in having the manuscript published and took responsibility for the manuscript pages, and in August 1975, they were taken to a Kopy Kat copy center in Berkeley, to be reproduced. In August 1975, Skutch Whitson organized a reception at 2000 Broadway, San Francisco, where Schucman and Thetford were introduced to a number of people. During this time period, a number of copies were distributed—hundreds according to Skutch Whitson and Skutch. The first edition of 100 copies of the Criswell edition was bound with a yellow cover and a copyright notice. Robert Skutch filed the copyright for ACIM for FIP on November 24, 1975, swearing to a date of first publication as October 6, 1975, in the form of the Freeperson Press edition. Zelda Suplee, director of the Erickson Educational Foundation,[8] a friend of Skutch Whitson, was given a copy of the uncopyrighted manuscript by Skutch Whitson prior to the publication of the Criswell edition. In 1976, Reed Erickson, a wealthy transsexual philanthropist,[9] received a copy of the manuscript, which he used as a basis for study by a group in Mexico. Erickson was the primary financial backer of the first hard-bound edition of the Course, donating $440,000 for this printing.[10] Later that year the FIP began to publish the Course in a set of three hardcover volumes. Five years later, in 1981, Schucman died of complications related to pancreatic cancer.

In 1983, control of the copyright was transferred to the FACIM as headed by Wapnick.

In 1985, the FIP began publishing the three volumes in a more manageable, single soft-cover volume, but without any editorial content changes.

In 1992, the FIP published a second hardcover edition, which contained some editorial content additions and minor changes. Amongst these changes were the addition of a verse-numbering system. It was Schucman's desire that a non-profit foundation publish the work[citation needed].

In 1995, FIP entered a five-year printing and distribution agreement, which expired in December 2000, with Penguin Books for $2.5 million. Currently some copies of some of the earlier draft versions of the book (which may or may not be complete, unadulterated or legal) are available both online and through private publishers.
[edit] Copyright litigation
Original logo of FIP, later adopted by the FACIM

Beginning in June, 1996, and ending in April, 2003, a copyright lawsuit initiated by Penguin Books and FIP was brought against the New Christian Church of Full Endeavor for their unlimited independent publication of substantial portions of A Course in Miracles. It was found that the contents of the FIP first edition, published from 1976 through 1992, are in the public domain. However, copyright in all of the changes introduced in the Second Edition remains intact, as does the copyright for the Text Preface and the two supplementary pamphlets, Psychotherapy and Song of Prayer, as well as Schucman's poetry, The Gifts of God.
[edit] Structure of material
[edit] Preface

The Preface was written in 1977 and was subsequently added to the published volume. The first two sections--"How It Came" and "What It is"--were written by Helen Schucman. The last section, "What It Says," was written by the process as described by Schucman.
[edit] Text

The Text contains the largest volume of material—containing 31 chapters—and discusses the theory upon which A Course in Miracles is based.
[edit] Workbook for Students

The Workbook contains 365 lessons, which are designed to help a student practice applying the principles set forth in the text.
[edit] Manual for Teachers

The Manual is presented with questions as the headings of each section followed by a discussion in answer format. The manual is based on the primary themes of 1) separate versus shared interests (shared interests is at the core of A Course in Miracles's concept of forgiveness); and 2) asking the Holy Spirit for help.[11] The Manual also includes a section entitled "Clarification of Terms" and an epilogue.
[edit] Psychotherapy: Purpose, Process and Practice

The psychotherapy pamphlet is an extension of the principles of A Course in Miracles and discusses the principle of healing within the context of a therapist-patient relationship.
[edit] The Song of Prayer: Prayer, Forgiveness, Healing

The song of prayer is another supplement and was written by the process as Schucman describes in the preface after there began to be among students a general misunderstanding of the practicing of the principles as the Course sets forth. This pamphlet introduces the ego concepts of asking-out-of-need, forgiveness-to-destroy and healing-to-separate, which are juxtaposed with the Holy Spirit's corrections for these concepts. The metaphor of a ladder of prayer is used to symbolize an evolving process of understanding and application.
[edit] The Gifts of God

Additional mention should be made of The Gifts of God, which was published after Schucman's death. It is a collection of poetry that Schucman wrote by the same process as she describes in the preface; however, her name does appear on the title of this anthology. The reason for this, Wapnick writes, is that unlike A Course in Miracles wherein Schucman got herself out of the way to let the material come through, with the poetry Schucman felt that her own voice joined in the collaboration of writing the poems.[12][13]
[edit] Reception

A Course In Miracles is widely distributed globally, forming the basis of a range of organised groups[14].

The teachings of A Course in Miracles have been supported by mainstream commentators and authors such as Eckhart Tolle,[15] Oprah Winfrey, Deepak Chopra, Wayne Dyer & Marianne Williamson and are supported by some "New Thought" churches, such as the Unity Church.[16]

Christian authors such as evangelical Bob Larson have criticized A Course In Miracles, saying it contradicts basic tenets of Christianity, twisting its core teachings and "deceiving people who are sincerely looking for God." Larson also criticizes Marianne Williamson personally, saying that her work on behalf of ACIM denies "essential qualities of faith" such as guilt and forgiveness, and necessitates the Biblically forbidden practice of transpossession mediumship.[17] Evangelical editor Elliot Miller says that Christian terminology employed in ACIM is "thoroughly redefined" to resemble New Age teachings. Other Christian critics say ACIM is "intensely anti Biblical" and incompatible with Christianity, blurring the distinction between creator and created and forcefully supporting the occult and New Age world view.[18]

Skeptic Robert T. Carroll criticizes ACIM as "a minor industry" that's overly commercialized and characterizes it as "Christianity improved", saying its teachings are not original and suggesting they are culled from "various sources, east and west".[19]

Theologian Anton van Harskamp notes that the metaphysics of The Course in Miracles is inconsistent with that of Christianity in that its “story of creation is totally different from the Christian one.” Accordingly to van Harskamp, in looking at "the suffering in the world, 'the Course' says that this world cannot be created by a God.” In the Christian conception “creation is good” “but at the same time it is impossible to say this about everything that exists.”[20]

In comparing the metaphysics of The Course in Miracles Course to that of Gnosticism, theologian W. Norris Clarke notes the "deep Gnostic inheritance of the Course" and that both share a "deep distrust and denigration of matter, as something evil and unworthy of God's love." [21]
[edit] Notes

1. ^ a b "About the Scribes". Foundation for Inner Peace. http://www.acim.org/Scribing/about_scribes.html. Retrieved 2007-04-29.
2. ^ Foundation for Inner Peace. (1992). A Course In Miracles. Foundation for Inner Peace. pp. vii–viii. ISBN 0-9606388-9-X.
3. ^ "ACIM Volumes Published". Foundation for Inner Peace. http://www.acim.org/welcome.html/. Retrieved 2009-09-28.
4. ^ "ACIM Translation Program". Foundation for Inner Peace. http://www.acim.org/Translations/index.html#history. Retrieved 2009-01-01.
5. ^ Course in Miracles Society (CIMS)
6. ^ "Introduction to Forgiveness and Jesus". Ken Wapnick Web Site. http://www.miraclestudies.net/Forgive_Jesus4.html. Retrieved 2011-02-21.
7. ^ "The Story of A Course In Miracles = Documentary where Bill Thetford, Helen Schucman, and Ken Wapnick talk about A Course In Miracles". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpJ6BO8xeDA. Retrieved 2011-02-21.
8. ^ Devor, Aaron H., Ph.D.. "Reed Erickson (1912–1992): How One Transsexed Man Supported ONE." (PDF). Univerisy of Victoria, BCA. http://web.uvic.ca/~ahdevor/ReedErickson.pdf. Retrieved 2006-07-04.
9. ^ Devor, Aaron H., Ph.D.. "Reed Erickson and The Erickson Educational Foundation". University of Victoria, BCA. http://web.uvic.ca/~erick123/. Retrieved 2006-07-04.
10. ^ U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York (2003-10-24). "Opinion, Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) ruling (#03-08697) dismissing complaint and granting judgment" (PDF). http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/Pdf/D02NYSC/03-08697.PDF. Retrieved 2006-07-06.
11. ^ Wapnick, Kenneth (2007). Journey Through the Manual of A Course in Miracles, p. 3. Foundation for A Course in Miracles. ISBN 978-1-59142-207-5.
12. ^ Wapnick, Kenneth (1991). Absence From Felicity: The Story of Helen Schucman and Her Scribing of A Course in Miracles. Foundation for Inner Peace, pp. 401–407. ISBN 0-933291-08-6 (pbk.)
13. ^ Schucman, Helen (2d. printing, 1988). The Gifts of God. Foundation for Inner Peace, p. xx. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 81-70309.
14. ^ Bradby, Ruth, "A course in miracles in Ireland". 147 - 162 in Olivia Cosgrove et al. (eds), Ireland's new religious movements. Cambridge Scholars, 2011
15. ^ "Ripples on the Surface of Being". EnlightenNext magazine. http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j18/tolle.asp. Retrieved 2011-02-21.
16. ^ "A Course In Miracles the Movie". Avaiya. http://store.avaiya.com/ACIM_p/acim.htm. Retrieved 2009-09-28.
17. ^ Larson, Bob (2004). Larson's Book of World Religions and Alternative Spirituality. Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.. ISBN 9780842364171. http://books.google.com/books?id=vnAk9WefhfwC&pg=PA128&dq=larson+%22a+course+in+miracles%22+christian+critique&hl=en&ei=nqjmTNvUAoKClAe3rLmdCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false.
18. ^ Newport, John P. (1998). The New Age movement and the biblical worldview: conflict and dialogue. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 9780802844309. http://books.google.com/books?id=Rxss1cqHWYIC&pg=PA176&dq=%22a+course+in+miracles%22+christian+criticism&hl=en&ei=QKvmTJSQIMWclgf3qJGfDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false.
19. ^ Carroll, Robert Todd (2003). The skeptic's dictionary: a collection of strange beliefs, amusing deceptions, and dangerous delusions. John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 9780471272427. http://books.google.com/books?id=6FPqDFx40vYC&pg=PA84&dq=skeptic+%22a+course+in+miracles&hl=en&ei=2q7mTK74OsSclgfIyOXhCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=skeptic%20%22a%20course%20in%20miracles&f=false.
20. ^ http://www.bezinningscentrum.nl/teksten/anton_eng/mireng.htm
21. ^ Wapnick and Clarke. (1995) A Course in Miracles and Christianity: A Dialogue p. 28. Foundation for a Course in Miracles.

[edit] References

* Foundation for Inner Peace (1996). A Course in Miracles (2d ed., newly rev.). New York: Viking Penguin. ISBN 0-670-86975-9.
* Foundation for Inner Peace (1992). Psychotherapy: Purpose, Process and Practice (2d. ed.). Glen Ellen CA: Foundation for Inner Peace. ISBN 0-9606388-6-5.
* Foundation for Inner Peace (1992). The Song of Prayer: Prayer, Forgiveness, Healing (2d. ed.). Glen Ellen CA: Foundation for Inner Peace. ISBN 0-9606388-4-9.
* Miller, D. Patrick (2008). Understanding A Course in Miracles: The History, Message, and Legacy of a Spiritual Path for Today. Berkeley: Celestial Arts/Random House. ISBN 978-1-58761-312-8. A journalistic overview of the history, major principles, criticism, and cultural effects of ACIM.
* Skutch, Robert (1996). Journey Without Distance: The Story Behind A Course in Miracles. Mill Valley: Foundation for Inner Peace. ISBN 1-883360-02-1. Discusses the pre-publication history of ACIM.
* Vahle, Neal (2009). A Course in Miracles: The Lives of Helen Schucman and William Thetford. San Francisco: Open View Press. ISBN 978-1-61623-788-2. This book shows how Schucman and Thetford were affected by the teaching in ACIM.
* Wapnick, Kenneth (1999). Absence from Felicity: The Story of Helen Schucman and Her Scribing of A Course in Miracles (2d ed.). New York: Foundation for A Course in Miracles. ISBN 0-933291-08-6. Discusses Helen Schucman and the pre-publication history of ACIM.
* Schucman, Helen (1989). The Gifts of God. Berkeley: Celestial Arts. ISBN 0-89087-585-5. (contains 114 poems that share the spiritual content of the Course as well as the prose poem "The Gifts of God," which summarizes the teachings of the Course)
* Williamson, Marianne (1996). A Return to Love: Reflections on the Principles of A Course in Miracles. New York: HarperCollins. ISBN 0060927488. Widely-read adaptation of ACIM principles.
* U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York (2003-10-24). "Opinion, Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) ruling (#03-08697) dismissing complaint and granting judgment" (PDF). http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/Pdf/D02NYSC/03-08697.PDF. Retrieved 2006-07-06.
* U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York (2000-07-21). "Opinion, Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) ruling (#00-07413) summary judgment denied" (PDF). http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/Pdf/D02NYSC/00-07413.PDF. Retrieved 2006-07-06.
* U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York (7 May 2003). "Opinion, Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) ruling (#03-04125) motion to admit evidence" (PDF). http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYSC/03-04125.PDF. Retrieved 2006-07-06.

[edit] External links
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
A Course in Miracles
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: A Course in Miracles

* Foundation for Inner Peace: Publisher and Distributor of "A Course in Miracles"
* Foundation for "A Course in Miracles": A Teaching Institute for "A Course in Miracles", founded by Kenneth and Gloria Wapnick
* Course in Miracles Society CIMS non-profit organization founded 2000, Publisher and Distributor of "A Course in Miracles" uncopyrighted 1972 edition

* For a more comprehensive aggregated list of related links to ACIM, visit: A Course in Miracles at the Open Directory Project, a link aggregation project.

[hide]v · d · eA Course in Miracles
Books
A Course in Miracles • The Disappearance of the Universe • A Return to Love
People
Helen Schucman • William Thetford • Kenneth Wapnick • Gary Renard • Robert Perry • Marianne Williamson
Related articles
Forgiveness • Endeavor Academy
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Course_in_Miracles"
Categories: 1975 books | Channelled texts | Christian mysticism | Christian studies books | New Age texts | A Course in Miracles

A Man's Duties to Himself

http://radicalacademy.com/prcminicourseethics2.htm

The duties of a man in respect to himself are duties of soul and of body. Duties of soul are those of the mind or intellect, and those of the will, for intellect and will are the faculties or operating-powers of the soul. In point of intellect, man has the duty of knowing what is necessary for the attainment of his purpose in existing. Thus, man has the duty of knowing what makes acts morally good, of knowing how to keep his own acts morally good. For the rest, man does well to acquire such free (or non-necessary) knowledge as will enable him to live becomingly on earth and to support his dependents. This secondary duty is strict in some (as in those who have dependents) and less strict in others, and nonexistent in an exceptional few. In point of the will, man must steadily choose what is morally right and good.

Duties of a man towards his body and its life, as well as towards certain other things connected more or less directly with life, are both positive and negative. Thus, a man must conserve life and bodily integrity (this is an inalienable right and a duty, and only exceptional circumstances which offer place for heroism constitute an exemption or rather a higher interpretation of this duty). A man does not own his body. He cannot take his life, he cannot mutilate his body, he cannot unreasonably suffer its enslavement by his own will, he cannot sell it or its irreplaceable members. Here we see the negative side of the duty of a man towards his body and its life.

In addition to the goods of body and soul which man must preserve and not wantonly destroy, there are other goods which man has ordinarily the duty to procure and maintain. Such are his good name, his honorable status in life, sufficiency of means for decent support of self and dependents. If no injury to others is involved, a man may heroically sacrifice some or all of these goods for a higher motive and for his higher perfection

http://radicalacademy.com/prcminicourseethics1.htm


A Mini-Course in Ethics

The Ethical Question is the question of the morality of free and responsible human conduct. It is the question of right, of wrong, and of duty, in man's conscious and deliberate activity. The department of philosophy which answers this question is called Moral Philosophy or Ethics.

This science grows out of the rest of philosophy. For when we have a philosophical grasp of the possibility of achieving certitude and of right formulas for reasoning out truth, then we are necessarily aware of the need of the true program for right human living.

This mini-course is divided into the following two Sections:

    * Section 1 - General Ethics
    * Section 2 - Individual and Social Ethics

Section 1: General Ethics

Topics:

    * a. Human Acts;
    * b. Ends of Human Acts;
    * c. Norms of Human Acts;
    * d. Morality of Human Acts;
    * e. Properties and Consequences of Human Acts.

 

a) Human Acts

The term human act has a fixed technical meaning. It means an act (thought, word, deed, desire, omission) performed by a human being when he is responsible; when he knows what he is doing and wills to do it. An act is perfectly human when it is done with full knowledge and full consent of the will, and with full and unhampered freedom of choice. If the act is hampered in any way, it is less perfectly human; if it is done without knowledge or consent it is not a human act at all. An act done by a human being but without knowledge and consent is called an act of a person but not a human act. In the terminology of classical realistic philosophy, a human act is actus humanus; an act of a person is actus hominis.

The essential elements of a human act are three: knowledge, freedom, actual choice.

(1) Knowledge: A person is not responsible for an act done in ignorance, unless the ignorance is the person's own fault, and is therefore willed (vincible ignorance), in which case he has knowledge that he is in ignorance and ought to dispel it. Thus, in one way or another, knowledge is necessary for responsible human activity.

(2) Freedom: A person is not responsible for an act over which he has no control, unless he deliberately surrenders such control by running into conditions and circumstances which rob him of liberty. Thus, in one way or another, freedom is necessary for every human act.

(3) Actual choice or voluntariness: A person is not responsible for an act which he does not will, unless he wills to give up his self-control (as a man does, for instance, in allowing himself to be hypnotized, or by deliberately becoming intoxicated). Thus, in one way or another, voluntariness or actual choice enters into every human act.

Now, a human act is a willed act. It proceeds from the will, following the knowledge and judgment of the mind or intellect. Since what refers to the freewill is usually described as moral, a human act is a moral act. Since the will is free, a human act is a free act.

A human act comes from the will directly or indirectly. When the act itself is the choice of the will, it comes directly from the will and is said to be willed in se or in itself. When the act comes indirectly from the will, inasmuch as the will chooses rather what causes or occasions the act than the act itself, it is said to be willed in its cause or in causa. Thus a man who wills to become intoxicated, wills it directly or in se; a man who does not wish to become intoxicated, but who seeks entertainment where, as experience tells him, he is almost sure to become intoxicated, wills the intoxication indirectly or in causa. This distinction of direct and indirect willing (or direct and indirect voluntariness) raises a notable issue, and we have here two of the most important principles (that is, fundamental guiding truths) in all ethics.

These are:

(1) The Principle of Indirect Voluntariness: A person is responsible for the evil effect of a cause directly willed when three conditions are met:

    * when he can readily foresee the evil effect, at least in a general way;
    * when he is free to refrain from doing what causes the evil effect; and
    * when he is bound to refrain from doing what causes the evil effect.

But is the agent (that is, the doer of an act) not always bound to avoid what causes an evil effect? Is not the fact that the effect is evil a sufficient reason for rendering the act which leads to it unlawful? Not always, for sometimes the act has two effects, one good and one evil. In this case, the following principle applies:

(2) The Principle of Twofold Effect: A person may lawfully perform an act which has two effects, one good and one evil, when the following conditions are met:

    * when the act which has two effects is not in itself an evil act;
    * when the evil effect does not come before the good effect so as to be a means to it;
    * when there exists a reason, proportionately weighty, which calls for the good effect;
    * when the agent B (that is, the doer or performer of the act) intends the good effect exclusively, and merely permits the evil effect as a regrettable side-issue.

Sound human reason vindicates the value and trustworthiness of these two leading ethical principles. The basic law of morals, -- called the natural law, -- is summed up in this plain mandate of reason:

We must do good; we must avoid evil.

And, developing the second point, -- that is, the avoidance of evil, -- we have this basic rational principle:

We must never do what is evil, even though good may be looked for and intended as a result of it.

Human acts are modified, that is, affected, and made less perfectly human, by anything that hampers or hinders any of the three essentials of human action: knowledge, freedom, voluntariness. Chief of the modifiers of human acts are these:

(1) Ignorance. Ignorance that may be overcome by due diligence is called vincible ignorance or culpable ignorance; ignorance that cannot be expelled by due diligence is called invincible ignorance or inculpable ignorance. The reasoned ethical principle on this point is: Invincible ignorance destroys voluntariness and relieves the agent of responsibility; vincible ignorance lessens but does not remove voluntariness and responsibility.

(2) Concupiscence. By concupiscence we mean any of the g human impulses or tendencies technically called the passions. These are: love, hatred, grief, desire, aversion, hope, despair, courage, fear, anger. When concupiscence sweeps upon a person without his intending it, it is called antecedent concupiscence; when a person wills it (as in the case of a man who nurses his injuries, or stirs himself to revenge, or who allows a suddenly envisioned obscene image to remain in his mind or before his eyes) it is called consequent concupiscence. The ethical principle here is: Antecedent concupiscence lessens voluntariness and responsibility but does not take them away; consequent concupiscence does not lessen voluntariness and responsibility.

Of all the types of concupiscence which influence human acts, fear has a peculiar significance, and we have a special reasoned principle for it: An act done from a motive of fear is simply voluntary; the agent is responsible for it, even though he would not do it were he not under the sway of fear. Of course, if the fear is so great that it renders the agent insane at the moment of his act, he is incapable of a human act and is not responsible. Civil law make provisions for the nullifying of contracts made under the stress of fear (that is, of threat, or duress), for the common good requires that people be protected from the malice of unscrupulous persons who would not hesitate to enforce harmful bargains by fearsome means.

(3) Violence. Coaction or violence is external force applied by a free cause (that is, by human beings) to compel a person to do something contrary to his will. The ethical principle with respect to violence is: An act owing to violence to which due resistance is made, is not voluntary, and the agent is not responsible for it.

(4) Habit. Habit is a readiness, born of repeated acts, for doing a certain thing. The ethical principle is: Habit does not take away voluntariness; acts done from habit are voluntary, at least in cause, as long as the habit is permitted to continue.

b) Ends of Human Acts

An end is a purpose or goal. It is that for which an act is performed. It is the final cause of an act.

An end intended for itself is an ultimate end; an end intended as a measure or means of gaining a further end is an intermediate end. The first end (in order of attainment) is proximate; other ends are remote. An ultimate end is ultimate in a certain series of ends, or it is the crowning end of all human activity. The ultimate end of a series is called relatively ultimate; the crowning end of all human activity is called absolutely ultimate.

A young man entering medical school has, as proximate and intermediate ends, the passing of his exams, and the advance from the first to the second class; more remote ends are the exams and classes further on; the ultimate end of the whole series of his studies and efforts is the status of a physician. But this end is relatively ultimate, not absolutely so. Why does he wish to be a physician? Perhaps to do good and to have an honorable means of livelihood. But why does he want this? For a full life, a rounded satisfaction in his earthly existence? But why does he want these things? Inevitably, in view of a still further end. For all human ends are directed, in last analysis, to an all-sufficing absolutely ultimate end. This is the completely satisfying end or good; it is the Supreme and Infinite Good; it is the Summum Bonum; and, for theists, it is God.

An end as a thing desired or intended is called objective. The satisfaction looked for in the attainment and possession of the objective end, is the subjective end.

Man, in every human act, strives for the possession of good (for end and good are synonymous), and for infinite good or God. This is the absolutely ultimate objective end of all human activity. And man strives for the infinite good as that which will boundlessly satisfy; he looks for complete beatitude or complete happiness in the attainment and possession of God. This is the absolutely ultimate subjective end of all human activity.

Saint and sinner alike are striving towards God. The Saint is striving in the right direction, and the sinner in the wrong direction. But it is the one Goal they are after, that is, the full, everlasting, satisfaction of all desire. The good man in his good human acts and the evil man in his evil human acts are like two men digging for diamonds; the one digs in a diamond mine, the other perversely digs in a filthy heap of rubbish; the one works where diamonds are to be found, the other's work is hopeless of success. But it is to find diamonds that both are working.

Man necessarily (and not freely) intends or wills the supreme and absolute end of all human acts. Man freely (and not necessarily) chooses the means (that is, intermediate ends) by which he expects, wisely or perversely, to attain that end.

c) Norms of Human Acts

A norm is a rule; it is the measure of a thing. The norm of human acts is the rule which shows whether they measure up to what they should be, and indicates the duty of bringing them up to full standard of what they ought to be. The norms of human acts are law and conscience. More precisely, the one norm of human acts is law applied by conscience.

Law is an ordinance of reason promulgated for the common good by one who has charge of society.

Fundamentally, law is an ordinance of Infinite Reason for all mankind and for every creature. In this sense, law means the Eternal Law which is God's plan and providence for the universe. Inasmuch as this law is knowable by a normal mind which reasons to it from the facts of experience, the Eternal Law is called the natural law. For when a person ceases to be a baby and becomes responsible, this is owing to the fact that he recognizes the following truth: "There is such a thing as good; there is such a thing as evil; I have a duty to avoid evil and to do good."

A child of ten that knew no distinction between lies and truth, theft and honesty, obedience and disobedience, would rightly be classed as an imbecile. Indeed, we say that a person "comes to the use of reason" when he begins to have a practical grasp of three things: good, evil, duty. In other words, reason makes evident the basic prescriptions of the natural law.

The natural law is general. But man needs, in addition to general prescriptions for conduct, special determinations of the law such as, for instance, the enactments of the State in civil and criminal laws.

Law is for the common good. Special regulations for individuals or groups are called precepts. A precept is like a law inasmuch as it is a regulation or an ordering unto good. A precept is unlike a law inasmuch as it is rather for private than for common good. In human laws and precepts, a further distinction is made. A law is territorial; it binds in a certain place and not in other places; a precept is personal, and it binds the person subject to it wherever he may be. Again, a law endures even though the actual persons who formulated and promulgated it are dead and gone; a precept ends with the death (or removal from office) of the preceptor.

True law is a liberating force, not an enslaving one. A true law may be compared to a true map. The map does not enslave the traveler, but enables him to make his journey without hindrance or mishap. The man who says he will not be enslaved by maps, is a prey to ignorance, and is thus truly enslaved; the man who uses the map is liberated from the enslavement of ignorance and is freed to make the journey. For liberty does not include in its essence the ability to do wrong. This ability is a sad condition of earthly human existence; it is not a part of liberty itself. God can do no wrong, yet God is infinitely free. The souls in heaven can no longer sin, and yet they have not lost freedom, but have used freedom and brought it to its crowning perfection. Man's freedom is freedom of the choice of means to his ultimate end; when the end is attained, means are no longer needed, and the freedom which won to success is forever crowned in full perfection.

Law that is set down in recorded enactments is called positive law. The moral law as knowable to sound human reason (that is, the Eternal Law as so knowable) is called, as we have seen, the natural law. A law is called moral if it binds under guilt. It is called penal if it binds under penalty (such as a fine). It is called mixed if it binds under both guilt and penalty. It is a debated question among ethicians whether there can be a law that is entirely and exclusively penal.

All true laws have sanctions, that is, inducements (of reward or punishment prescribed) sufficient to make those bound by them obedient to their prescriptions. Human positive law usually has the sanction of penalty, not of special reward.

In individual human acts, law is applied by conscience.

Conscience is the practical judgment of human reason upon an act as good, and hence permissible or obligatory, or as evil, and hence to be avoided.

Conscience is the reasoned judgment of the mind. It is no instinct, no sentiment, no prejudice born of custom or what moderns call mores; it is no "still small voice"; it is no "little spark of celestial fire." It is the pronouncement of reason, the reason with which we work out a problem in mathematics, -- only, to be called conscience it must be the working out of a judgment or pronouncement in the domain of morals, of duty.

When the judgment of conscience squares with facts, conscience is called correct or true. When the conscience-judgment is out of line with facts, conscience is called false. When the conscience-judgment is wholly assured and unhesitant, conscience is called certain. When the conscience judgment is hesitant, and amounts to no more than opinion, conscience is called doubtful.

Doubt is speculative when it is a lack of certainty about what is true; it is practical when it is a lack of certainty about what is to be done. A doubt is positive when the mind hesitates between two opposites because there seems good reason for each; it is negative when the mind hesitates because there seems no good reason on either side. A most important reasoned principle is the following: It is never lawful to act while in a state of positive practical doubt. The doubt must be dispelled and replaced by at least moral certitude.

To dispel positive practical doubt, a person must use the direct method of study, inquiry, finding all the facts. If this method prove unsuccessful, or if it cannot be applied, then the indirect method (called the appeal to the reflex principle) must be employed. This means that the person in doubt about the licitness or illicitness of an act can make sure that he is not bound by applying the reflex principle: A law that is of doubtful application cannot beget a certain obligation. In this case, certitude is attained, not of the case itself, but of the person's freedom from obligation: thus, it is an indirect certitude.

Out of the use of the reflex principle just mentioned, emerges the theory called Probabilism. It amounts to this : If there exists a solidly probable opinion against the applicability of a law in a given case, that law is of doubtful applicability. In other words, it is a doubtful law. But a doubtful law cannot beget a certain obligation. Therefore, if there exists a solidly probable opinion against the applicability of a law in a given case, there is no obligation.

The moral system of Probabilism is of value only when there is question of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of an act; it has no place when the question is one of the validity or invalidity of contract. Further, the phrase "a solidly probable opinion" does not mean a strong inclination or liking on the part of the agent; it means a reasoned opinion, especially such as is defended by men of known learning and prudence.

Probabilism, or the application of the reflex principle, a doubtful law does not bind, cannot be employed except in the failure or the inapplicability of the direct method of solving a doubt. Nor can it be used when there is question of a clear and definite end to be achieved.

d) Morality of Human Acts

Morality is the relation of human acts to the norm or rule of what they ought to be. As we have seen, the norm of human acts is law applied by conscience. And the basic law is the Eternal Law, especially as this is knowable by sound human reason (it is then called the natural law). The squaring up of free and responsible human conduct with law as applied by conscience is the morality of human acts; the lack of such agreement of human acts with their norm is immorality. But, as we have indicated, morality is generally used to signify the relation (whether of agreement or disagreement) of human acts to their norm or rule. Thus we speak of morally good acts and of morally bad acts.

A human act considered as such, as an act, as a deed performed, stands in agreement or out of agreement with the norm of what it ought to be. Thus it has objective morality. Many mistaken people of our day, especially those of university training, are fond of talking as though a human act took all its morality from the intention of the agent, or from his viewpoint. They are full of expressions such as, "As I see it ... ," "To my mind . . . ," "I don't look at it in that way . . . ," "It's all in the point of view . . ." etc. Now, there is an immense field for human opinion. Where certitude cannot be had, opinion is the best man can achieve. But in matters of essential morals, certitude can be had (as we have seen, by direct method, or, this failing, by the reflex method). Hence the lawfulness or unlawfulness of an act, -- its morality, in short, -- is never a matter of opinion, viewpoint, prejudice, or preference. It is a matter of fact. It is an objective thing. Human acts have objective morality.

A person blamelessly mistaken about the objective morality of an act is exempt (by reason of invincible ignorance) from responsibility for such act. Thus, a person who is invincibly ignorant of the fact that a lie is always unlawful, and who is convinced with full certitude that in certain circumstances a lie is permissible, is not guilty of formal falsehood for telling such a lie. But this does not mean that the objective morality of a lie is a fiction or an illusion; it does not mean that the morality of an act depends on the agent's convictions. The lie is objectively evil and remains so. Only, in the case mentioned, invincible ignorance excuses the agent from responsibility for it. And so much the worse for the agent, for ignorance is always a blight and a burden.

Some acts have their objective morality in themselves by reason of their nature. Murder, lying, calumny, injustice, are examples of acts intrinsically evil. Respect for life, truthfulness, charity, justice, are examples of acts intrinsically good. Other human acts have their objective morality by reason of positive law, which is an extrinsic determinant. Thus, hunting out of season, violating the speed laws, are acts objectively but extrinsically evil. Obeying civil ordinances, performing the duty of true citizens as expressed by law, are, in the main, acts objectively but extrinsically good. The basic virtue of being a good citizen, however, is intrinsically good.

In the concrete, as a deed done, every human act has true objective morality. But when a human act is considered in the abstract, in general, and not as a concrete deed performed, it is sometimes found to be indifferent, and neither good nor bad. In other words, some human acts are not intrinsically good or intrinsically evil in themselves as abstractly considered. But in their actual performing, they take on morality (and truly objective morality) from the circumstances.

For the determinants of morality are the act performed and the circumstances of the act performed.

The act performed is technically known as the object. Human acts that have intrinsic morality are good or evil by reason of the object, that is the act itself. Such acts, if evil, are never permissible. If good, and if circumstances do not vitiate them, they are lawful. Some of them are not capable of being vitiated by circumstances, and these are always lawful, and also of obligation. Such, for example, is the duty of professing the truth, of working justice to all men.

The circumstances of an act performed determine its morality when the object does not do so. Circumstances are various, but the most important are those of person, of the intensity of the act, of place, of time, of helping influences in the act, of manner, and of intention. The last named (that is intention of the agent or doer) is the most notable circumstance.

Of circumstances in general, the ethical principles are these:

    * an indifferent act is made good or evil by circumstances;
    * a good act may be made evil by circumstances but an evil act cannot be made good by circumstances;
    * an act is made better or worse by circumstances;
    * a circumstance gravely evil ruins the morality of the whole act and makes it evil;
    * a circumstance slightly evil, which is not the entire motive of a good act, does not utterly destroy its goodness.

Of intention in special, the ethical principles are these:

    * a good act done for a good intention has an added goodness from the intention, and a bad act for a bad intention has an added evil from the intention;
    * a good act for a bad intention is wholly evil if the intention is gravely evil or if it is the whole motive of the act;
    * a good intention cannot make a bad act good, but a bad intention vitiates a good act;
    * an indifferent act may be made good or evil by its intention.

For an act to be lawful, that is, morally right and good, it must square with all the requirements of object, circumstances, intention. For an act to be evil, it must fail to square with any one of the requirements. The axiom is:

An act to he good must be entirely good; it is vitiated (wholly or partially) by any defect.

e) Properties and Consequences of Human Acts

A property of an act is anything that belongs by natural necessity to the act. Now, a human act is a free and deliberate act of a responsible being who is its author. It follows, that such an act is imputable to its author, to his credit or discredit, that is, as a merit or a demerit. Thus, properties of human acts are imputability, merit, demerit.

A human act once performed sets a precedent for the agent. It marks a path which he has traversed. It cuts a groove, so to speak, for his action. And therefore he tends to act in the same way again. In a word, human acts tend to follow patterns called habits. By habit in the present instance we mean an operative habit, a habit of acting. Such a habit is an inclination, born of frequently repeated action, for acting in a certain way.

An operative habit that is morally good is called a virtue. An operative habit that is morally bad is called a vice. Virtues and vices are the consequences of human acts.

The chief-virtues are prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance. These are called the cardinal virtues (from the Latin cardo, -- stem cardin-, "a hinge") because all other virtues depend on them as a door depends on its hinges.

Vice, or habit of evil doing, is a habitual defect, a habitual failure to measure up to the norm of right conduct and of the virtues. A single bad act is a sin, but not a vice. Vice is the habit of sin. It stands opposed to virtue either by defect or by excess, but in either case it is a habitual failure (a negative thing) to measure up to the standard of what a human act ought to be.

Summary of the Section

In this Section we have defined human act, and have determined its essential elements as knowledge, freedom, voluntariness.

We have learned that other names for the human act are free act, moral act, willed act.

We have discussed voluntariness in se and in causa, and have learned two outstandingly important principles, viz., the principle of indirect voluntariness and the principle of twofold effect.

We have considered the modifiers of human acts: ignorance, concupiscence, violence, habit.

We have seen that a human act is necessarily directed to an end, and, in last analysis, to the absolutely ultimate end or Supreme Good which is God.

We have noticed that man's freedom is freedom of choice of means to the ultimate end, not freedom to set up a new ultimate end.

We have learned the norm of human acts as law applied by conscience.

We have defined law, and have several classifications of it, and have contrasted it with precept.

We have seen that conscience is the judgment of practical reason in matters of right and wrong, and not some mysterious inner voice like Kant's Categorical Imperative.

We have noticed the necessity of man's acting with a certain conscience, and we have studied the direct and the indirect method of banishing doubt and achieving certitude.

We have spoken of Probabilism.

We have defined the morality of human acts, and have investigated its determinants.

We have indicated the properties of human acts as imputability, merit, and demerit; and we have seen that human acts tend to consequences called virtues and vices.

http://cbhministries.org/abcs.php

ABC's of Salvation

A is for Admit
Admit you're a sinner. Everyone has done things that displease a Holy God. No one can live up to His standards. He says no sin can enter heaven. Something must be done to get rid of your sin.

Romans 3:23 “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

Revelation 21:27 “There shall by no means enter it (heaven) anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.”

B is for Believe
Believe Jesus died on the cross for you. God loves you and wants you to become His child. He loves you so much that He sent His Son, Jesus, to shed His blood to save you from your sins. He took your place on the cross, and suffered the punishment you deserve. Believe that He died for you, was buried, and rose again on the third day.

1 Peter 2:24 “Who Himself (Jesus) bore our sins in His own body on the tree (cross), that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness.”

Colossians 1:14 “In whom (Jesus) we have redemption (salvation) through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.”

Acts 16:31 “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.”

C is for Confess
Confess your sinfulness to God, and turn from it. Call upon Jesus to save you-trust in Him as your Savior from sin. This may be a simple but sincere cry from your heart, or it may be expressed out loud.

Luke 18:13 “God be merciful to me a sinner.”

Romans 10:9 “If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”

Romans 10:13 “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

If you believe in Jesus and have placed your faith and trust in Him, God has forgiven you. Then you, along with all the others who believe in Jesus, will spend eternity in heaven with Him.

Saint Albertus Magnus, O.P. (1193/1206 - November 15, 1280), also known as Saint Albert the Great and Albert of Cologne, was a Dominican [[friar]] and bishop who achieved fame for his comprehensive knowledge of and advocacy for the peaceful coexistence of science and religion. He is considered to be the greatest German philosopher and theologian of the Middle Ages. He was the first among medieval scholars to apply Aristotle's philosophy to Christian thought. Roman Catholic Church honors him as a Doctor of the Church, one of only 33 persons with that honor.

James Packer observed,

“American Christianity is a thousand miles wide and one inch deep.”

Daniel Quinn's The Story of B: Ecology And Culture Collapse

Aug 10, 2010 Mario Rader

The Story of B (sequel to Ishmael) offers a theory of culture collapse based on ecology, totalitarian agriculture, culture change and human overpopulation.

Did you ever have this unfathomable gut feeling that something is wrong with this world, very, very, if not fundamentally, wrong? Or did you ever wonder whether or not this world we are living in right now really is what the German philosopher G.W. Leibniz claimed to be the "best among all possible worlds?"

Daniel Quinn’s The Story of B is the literary sequel to the Ted Turner Award-winning novel Ishmael of 1991. Similar to its predecessor, it is not so much a literary revelation but a flat-out epiphany of mental and spiritual yield. It is one of those rare books which irrevocably changes the way you think about our world.

The Story of B: Infiltrating the Inner Circle of the Antichrist

Father Jared Osborne is the quintessential mouthpiece of Quinn’s narrative. He is a Laurentian priest who is given a special assignment by his superiors. A man called B is said to give very peculiar lectures among people in Central Europe; lectures which contain unconventional and dangerous thoughts. And it is Osborne who is supposed to infiltrate the inner circle of B (also known as: the Antichrist).

Osborne travels to Germany and, at first, reports back to his superiors. But the more he becomes acquainted with B's movement, the more he is also familiarized with the content of B's lectures. He soon realizes that what B propagates is of such validity that his church is bound to label B as the Antichrist. The truth that B teaches pulls the rug out from under not only Osborne’s church but any of the world religions.

When B is assassinated Osborne realizes who the true villain is. No longer does he remain affiliated with his church but instead joins B's movement under the lead of Shirin, a female associate. With Shirin as the new B, however, there is even more danger in store for Osborne.

Totalitarian Agriculture and Human Overpopulation

The group surrounding B may be fictional, the theory propagated, however, is anything but. It is a theory which, in essence, explains the collapse of both Eastern and Western culture. Their origin is one and the same, which is why there is no such division as 'East' and 'West.' It is one culture whose existence dates back to the Agricultural Revolution 10,000 years ago.

The Agricultural Revolution brought about what is known among ecologists as totalitarian agriculture. For the sake of food production almost all other forms of livelihood were ousted. New land was acquired, rivals were killed and their food supply was destroyed. What people living within this totalitarian system did can be summarized as follows: Take, take, take. Hence, the culture of 'Takers.'

As a result of totalitarian agriculture, the increased food production led to a rise in population which again required more and more food. To cut a long story short, a spiral was set in motion which led to today's overpopulation. By now, this particular culture of Takers amounts to a staggering 99,8 % of the world population.

The ABC of Ecology: Culture of Leavers and Takers

By contrast, the cultures living before the Agricultural Revolution, our ancestors of so-called pre-history, indigenous people and tribesmen, respected the ABC of ecology: competition and co-existence. They only took from Nature what they needed for survival and left the rest alone. Hence, the culture of 'Leavers.' Most importantly, one tribe never imposed its way of life on other tribes.

While the Leavers' way of life worked for over 3 million years, our culture has succeeded in pushing the world towards collapse within a mere 10,000 years. Both over-produced food and over-produced population have entailed and still do entail: war, famine, slavery, genocide, rebellion and crime, to name but a few. And it is due to these epiphenomena of totalitarian agriculture that the culture of Takers has been rendered nothing but a meaningless mythology.

Daniel Quinn (or B) summarizes the ensuing culture collapse as follows: "Order and purpose are replaced by chaos and bewilderment. People lose the will to live, become listless, become violent [...] and take to drink, drugs, and crime [...] Laws, customs and institutions fall into disuse and disrespect, especially among the young who see that even their elders can no longer make sense of them."

Culture Change as Spiritual Edutainment

Doubtless, The Story of B has extensive deficiencies on a purely literary level. The novel's characters are fairly flat. Dialogs lack in subtext as well as emotional quality. Moreover, the plot and its twists are contrived and predictable for the most part. But for all that, it should become apparent to any alert reader that the literary fabrication which Daniel Quinn uses is just a tool to spread a message so profound that it verges on the spiritual.

The Story of B is not just entertainment for entertainment's sake but more of what could be called spiritual edutainment. Its deeper message 'educates' readers in ways unthinkable as far as school, college or university are concerned. The novel delivers insight and produces awakening, and in doing so might become a triggering event for all those who have always felt that something is wrong with this world, very, very, if not fundamentally, wrong.

Enlightenment 2.0: Why Religious Salvation is Irrelevant

Daniel Quinn's novel may have a profound effect on readers who cling to the idea of salvational religion. Salvation, however, as Quinn (or B) argues, is an idea precipitated by the detrimental effects of totalitarian agriculture. Due to war, famine or crime, for instance, people began to think that they needed salvation. Without totalitarian agriculture there would be no such evils and the idea of salvation would become totally irrelevant. That the church in Quinn's narrative feels threatened by a theory that questions its very right to exist is part and parcel of the literary suspense. For what else is Quinn's novel but just literature, right?

Sources:

Quinn, Daniel (1996). The Story of B. New York: Bantam Books.
Copyright Mario Rader. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

http://www.thefullwiki.org/Christian_angelic_hierarchy

[img[http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/06/1/7/8/30573023794245438.jpg]]

http://www.universalclass.com/i/course/angels-101.htm

Anthropomorphism is a topic that has attracted much attention from both medieval Muslim theologians and modern Western scholars. By examining the development of the medieval Muslim Rationalist-Traditionalist discourse surrounding this issue, and Western academic discussions of that discourse, I shall attempt to explain why the issue of anthropomorphism has repeatedly dominated discussions on Islamic theology. I will also attempt to show how various associations made with Muslim Rationalism and Traditionalism have influenced Western perceptions of these movements.

=====
Anthropomorphism is the attribution of uniquely human characteristics to non-human creatures and beings, natural and supernatural phenomena, material states and objects or abstract concepts. Subjects for anthropomorphism commonly include animals and plants depicted as creatures with human motivation able to reason and converse, forces of nature such as winds or the sun, components in games, unseen or unknown sources of chance, etc. Almost anything can be subject to anthropomorphism. The term derives from a combination of the Greek ἄνθρωπος (ánthrōpos), "human" and μορφή (morphē), "shape" or "form".

Humans seem to have an innate capacity to project human characteristics in this way. Evidence from art and artifacts suggests it is a long-held propensity that can be dated back to earliest times. It is strongly associated with the art of storytelling where it also appears to have ancient roots. Most cultures possess a long-standing fable tradition with anthropomorphised animals as characters that can stand as commonly recognised types of human behaviour. The use of such literature to draw moral conclusions can be highly complex.

Within these terms, humans have more recently been identified as having an equivalent opposite propensity to deny common traits with other species - most particularly apes - as part of a feeling that humans are unique and special. This tendency has been referred to as Anthropodenial by primatologist Frans de Waal.

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/New-ascension2.jpg]]

The Apostles' Creed, an important prayer which begins the Rosary, can
be traced in its present form back to around the 7th or 8th century AD. It appeared in slightly different forms in documents as early as the year 200 AD. Although this prayer was probably not composed as we know it by the Apostles themselves, it nonetheless reflects their teachings, as well as those found in the New Testament.

The Apostles' Creed is divided into what we refer to as 12 articles.
Like the Nicene Creed that we recite at Mass, it is a solid profession of the fundamental truths of our faith:

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth; (The 1st article)
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; (The 2nd)
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
Born of the Virgin Mary, (The 3rd)
Suffered under Pontius Pilate,
Was crucified, died, and was buried. (The 4th)
He descended into hell;
The third day he rose again from the dead; (The 5th)
He ascended into Heaven,
And is seated at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty;
(The 6th)
From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.
(The 7th)
I believe in the Holy Spirit, (The 8th)
The Holy Catholic Church,
The Communion of Saints, (The 9th)
The forgiveness of sins, (The 10th)
The resurrection of the body, (The 11th)
And life everlasting. Amen. (The 12th)
It’s hard to summarize the Apostles' Creed in a few short paragraphs.
The current Cathecism of the Catholic Church offers some 200-plus pages of excellent analysis of this prayer. The earlier Roman Cathecism (known also as the Cathecism of the Council of Trent, from the 16th century)
goes to similar lengths! Still there are a few points worth mentioning on some of the articles.

Although the Apostles' Creed covers Christ's life in a short summary, it by no means slights the Father or the Holy Spirit! Indeed, in the first article we affirm our faith in the God the Father. He is the first person of One God that has existed throughout eternity in the Holy Trinity, in three coequal persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit:

•The Father as Creator;
•The Son as the begotten Word made flesh and our Redeemer; and
•The Holy Spirit as the one who proceeds from the Father and Son and can help us attain the essential attributes of holiness.
(These include what we call the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit: wisdom, understanding, knowledge, counsel fortitude, piety, and fear of the Lord.)

In the first few centuries of the Church, some people couldn’t quite grasp the concept of the Holy Trinity and sought to refute either Christ's divinity or His humanity.

We see this today in books such as The Da Vinci Code which imply that His divinity was a fourth century fabrication. Nothing could be further from the truth! One can look at such works as Amy Welborn’s best seller de-coding Da Vinci for quite a few facts debunking this claim, (de-bunking Da Vinci, as it were)!

As St. Peter wrote in one of his New Testament letters “We have not by following artificial fables made known to you the power, and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ; but we were eyewitnesses of his greatness” (2 Peter 1:16).

He described in further detail in this letter our Lord’s transfiguration once
in which He appeared to be "shining, exceedingly white as snow" while conversing with Moses and Elijah (Mark 9:2-4).

St. John, for his part, mentioned signs Jesus showed of his divinity in his Gospel, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31)

(So much for Our Lord’s just being some wise philosopher, as some people would have you believe these days!)

St. Thomas Aquinas, in a lengthy commentary on the Apostles' Creed, noted concerning the third article (concerning Our Lord’s conception and birth) that Jesus “became man that He might make man divine.”

He also pointed out in referring to the articles in the Apostles' Creed concerning Jesus's suffering, death, and glorious ascension into Heaven (Articles 4-6) that these events took place in accordance with His own will and by His own power, for our sake.

(The Ascension of our Lord is depicted in this painting at left by the Northern Italian painter Andrea Mantegna from the 15th Century.)

As Jesus put it in John’s Gospel: “I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have the power to lay it down, and
I have the power to take it up again.” (John 10:17-18)

The line in the fifth Apostles' Creed article “He descended into hell” is also written in some sources as “He descended to the dead.” This refers not only to the place of eternal torment of the damned that we rightly dread, but also in this specific instance to a more benign place for the souls of the just who had died before Jesus.

Our Lord opened the gates of Heaven for them upon His death and resurrection. (And, indeed, those gates are open for all of us who die in a state of grace, free from mortal sin, to join Him in Eternal Life!)

Jesus's place at the right hand of the Father, in Article 6 of the Apostles' Creed, is meant to show us His special place with His Heavenly Father as one with Him, in a manner that we can understand as human beings. St. Paul makes reference to this when he urges us to “seek the things that are above; where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God” (3 Col. 3:1).

It also highlights our Lord's role as the one mediator between God and Man. Who better to bridge the gap between us and our Creator than God Himself in the person of His Son! Indeed, through Jesus we can call God the Father Our Father, as we say in the Lord's Prayer.

In article 7 of the Apostles' Creed, note that Christ will return and will judge all of us, living and dead, in the Last Judgment, separating the sheep from the goats (Matt. 25:32-33), the just from the wicked, as it were. The former will have eternal Life and joy in Heaven (touching on Article 12 here) and the latter will be in eternal misery in Hell.

This general judgment will basically reaffirm the particular judgment
each of us will receive upon our death, as to whether or not our ultimate destination is Heaven or Hell. This will be based on our actions in this life (in what we have done and what we have failed to do, as we say at Mass) and on how receptive we have been to God's graces.

We need not fear this judgment. We must prepare for it by living lives of faith, love and obedience to God. Having a strong prayer life can be a great help in this regard!

The subsequent articles of the Apostles' Creed follow a natural sequence. The Holy Spirit guides and instructs the Catholic Church, from which comes the Communion of Saints (Articles 8 and 9). This includes those of us in the Church living on earth, those in purgatory, and all those in Heaven.

Thus the Communion of Saints follows from the Church which follows from its founder, Our Lord Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit. (Jesus himself sent the Holy Spirit, whom He called the paraclete, to help build His church.)

Likewise, when God forgives us our sins (Article 10 of the Apostles'
Creed) in the Church's sacrament of penance we may better merit the “resurrection of the body” (Article 11) in which we will be raised up to Heaven, with our glorified bodies united with our souls, at the Last Judgment.

Let us all pray to live our lives, with God's help and grace, in such a manner that at our death, as we read in the famous prayer Anima Christi, He might summon us so that with His saints we may praise Him forever in the bliss of heaven. Talk about life everlasting (article 12)! This wonderful hope for an Eternity of Love in the peace of Christ makes a fitting end to the Apostles' Creed.

 (from the Greek: ἄσκησις, áskēsis, "exercise" or "training") describes a lifestyle characterized by abstinence from various sorts of worldly pleasures often with the aim of pursuing religious and spiritual goals. Some forms of Christianity (see especially: Monastic life) and the Indian religions (including yoga) teach that salvation and liberation involve a process of mind-body transformation effected by exercising restraint with respect to actions of body, speech, and mind. The founders and earliest practitioners of these religions (e.g. Buddhism, Jainism, the Christian desert fathers) lived extremely austere lifestyles refraining from sensual pleasures and the accumulation of material wealth. This is to be understood not as an eschewal of the enjoyment of life but a recognition that spiritual and religious goals are impeded by such indulgence.

Those who practice ascetic lifestyles do not consider their practices virtuous in themselves but pursue such a lifestyle in order to encourage, or 'prepare the ground' for, mind-body transformation.

In the popular imagination, asceticism may be considered obsessive or even masochistic in nature. However, the askēsis enjoined by religion functions in order to bring about greater freedom in various areas of one's life (such as freedom from compulsions and temptations) and greater peacefulness of mind (with a concomitant increase in clarity and power of thought).

The Ashʿari theology (Arabic الأشاعرة al-asha`irah) is a school of early Muslim speculative theology founded by the theologian Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari (d. 324 AH / 936 AD). The disciples of the school are known as Ash'arites, and the school is also referred to as Ash'arite school.

It was instrumental in drastically changing the direction of Islamic theology, separating its development radically from that of theology in the Christian world.
Contents
[hide]

    * 1 Overview
    * 2 Promoting figures
          o 2.1 Al-Ash'ari
          o 2.2 Al-Ghazali
          o 2.3 Other figures
    * 3 Influence and modern assessment
    * 4 See also
    * 5 References
    * 6 External links

[edit] Overview

In contrast to the Mutazilite school of Islamic theology, the Asharite view was that comprehension of unique nature and characteristics of God were beyond human capability. And that, while man had free will, he had no power to create anything. It was a taqlid ("faith" or "imitation") based view which did not assume that human reason could discern morality. This doctrine is now known as occasionalism. However, a critical spirit of inquiry was far from absent in the Asharite school. Rather, what they lacked, was a trust in reason itself, separate from a moral code, to decide what experiments or what knowledge to pursue.

Contrary to popular opinion, the Asharites (or "traditionalists") were not completely traditionalist and anti-rationalist, nor were the Mutazilites (or "rationalists") completely rationalist and anti-traditionalist, as the Asharites did depend on rationality and the Mutazilites did depend on tradition. Their goals were the same, to affirm the transcendence and unity of God, but their doctrines were different, with the Asharites supporting an Islamic occasionalist doctrine and the Mutazilites supporting an Islamic metaphysics influenced by Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism. For Asharites, taqlid only applied to the Islamic tradition and not to any other, whereas for Mutazilites, taqlid applied equally to both the Islamic and Aristotelian-Neoplatonic traditions. In his introduction to Al-Ghazālī’s The Decisive Criterion of Distinction Between Unbelief and Masked Infidelity, Sherman Jackson writes:[1]

    Meanwhile, rationalist writings reflect a clear and sustained recognition of the authority of the Aristotelian-Neoplatonic tradition, including the propriety of following it by way of taqlīd. Traditionalists, on the other hand, use reason – even aspects of Aristotelian reason – but they do not recognize the tradition of Aristotelian reason as an ultimate authority.

Factors affecting the spread of the school of thought include a drastic shift in historical initiative, foreshadowing the later loss of Muslim Spain and Columbus' landing in the Western Hemisphere - both in 1492. But the decisive influence was most likely that of the new Ottoman Empire, which found the Asharite views politically useful, and were to a degree taking the advantages of Islamic technologies, sciences, and openness for granted. Which, for some centuries after as the Ottomans pushed forth into Europe, they were able to do - losing those advantages gradually up until The Enlightenment when European innovation finally surpassed and eventually overwhelmed that of the Muslims.

[edit] Promoting figures

[edit] Al-Ash'ari

Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari was noted for his teachings on atomism, among the earliest Islamic philosophies, and for al-Ash'ari this was the basis for propagating a deterministic view that Allah created every moment in time and every particle of matter. Thus cause and effect was an illusion. He nonetheless believed in free will, elaborating the thoughts of Dirar ibn Amr' and Abu Hanifa into a "dual agent" or "acquisition" (iktisab) account of free will.[2]

While al-Ash'ari was opposed to the views of the Mu'tazili school for its over-emphasis on reason, he was also opposed to the views of certain orthodox schools such as the Zahiri (literalist), Mujassimite (anthropomorphist) and Muhaddithin (traditionalist) schools for their over-emphasis on taqlid (imitation) in his Istihsan al‑Khaud:[3]

    "A section of the people (i.e., the Zahirites and other orthodox people) made capital out of their own ignorance; discussions and rational thinking about matters of faith became a heavy burden for them, and, therefore, they became inclined to blind faith and blind following (taqlid). They condemned those who tried to rationalize the principles of religion as `innovators.' They considered discussion about motion, rest, body, accident, colour, space, atom, the leaping of atoms, and attributes of God, to be an innovation and a sin. They said that had such discussions been the right thing, the Prophet and his Companions would have definitely done so; they further pointed out that the Prophet, before his death, discussed and fully explained all those matters which were necessary from the religious point of view, leaving none of them to be discussed by his followers; and since he did not discuss the problems mentioned above, it was evident that to discuss them must be regarded as an innovation."

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/Aspirations-Pic2.jpg]]

Do you feel too pressed for time to pray? These short prayers (also known as aspirations) can help! They're are easy to learn. A good many of them are easy to memorize as well! They can provide you with a great way to stay in touch with our Lord and our Blessed Mother, especially for those times you feel most at your wits end!

At times like these when it seems like nothing is going right don’t lose hope! You can stay close to Jesus and Mary with these aspirations, many of which come from old prayer books. (These prayers are great in good times or bad!)

Be inspired by with these short prayers by our Lord’s words: “pray always” (Luke 21:36) and by St. Paul’s as well: “pray without ceasing” (1 Thes 5:17)!

Here’s a good one to both our Lord and his Blessed Mother, for starters:

Jesus, Mary, I love you. Save souls!

Here’s a good one to the Holy Spirit. This one is especially good when said with any prayer to the Holy Spirit, but is good all on its own, especially in those times you feel most in need of His counsel, comfort, and strength!

O Holy Spirit, sweet Guest of my soul, abide in me and grant that I may ever abide in Thee.

We’ve grouped these others into the following categories:

ASPIRATIONS (SHORT PRAYERS) TO OUR LORD
(It has been noted, incidentally, that a very good effective prayer is just to say the name of Jesus!)

Blessed be God!

Blessed be the name of the Lord!

Divine Heart of Jesus, convert sinners, save the dying, deliver the holy souls in purgatory.

Eucharistic Heart of Jesus, increase in us our Faith, Hope and Charity.

Good Jesus, give me a deep love for Thee, that nothing may be too hard for me to bear from Thee.

Heart of Jesus, burning with love for us, set our hearts on fire with love of Thee.

Heart of Jesus, I put my trust in Thee!

Jesus I trust in You!

Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make our heart like unto Thine.

Jesus, my God, I love Thee above all things!

Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!

May the most just, most high, and most adorable will of God be done in all things, praised and magnified forever.

My God and my all.

My Jesus, mercy!

My Lord Jesus Christ, for the sake of Thy sufferings, grant me such faith, hope, charity, sorrow for my sins, and love of prayer as will save and sanctify my soul.

My Lord, grant that I may love Thee, and that the reward of my love may be to love Thee ever more and more.

My sweetest Jesus, be not my Judge, but my Savior.

O Good Jesus, shelter me from the evil one, shed Thy dew upon me to calm my soul, and dwell in me fully, that I may wholly love Thee.

O Good Jesus, my God and my All, keep me ever near Thee, let nothing for a moment separate me from Thee.

Praised be Jesus Christ, now and forevermore.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, Thy kingdom come!

Savior of the world, have mercy on us.

Sweet Heart of Jesus, be my love!

Sweet Heart of my Jesus, grant that I may ever love Thee more.

We adore and praise Thee, most holy Lord Jesus Christ, because by Thy holy cross Thou hast redeemed the world.

ASPIRATIONS TO OUR LORD IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT

Jesus, my God, here present in the Sacrament of Thy love, I adore Thee.

O Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, have mercy on us.

O Jesus, in the most holy Sacrament, have mercy on us.

Praised and adored forever be the most holy Sacrament.

We adore Thee, thou true Bread of angels.

ASPIRATIONS TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

Mary, Virgin Mother of God, pray to Jesus for me.

Sweet Heart of Mary, be my salvation!

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.

Our Lady of Lourdes, pray for us!

Mary, our hope, have pity on us!

Mary, most sorrowful, Mother of Christians, pray for us.

O Mary, virgin Mother of God, pray to Jesus for me.

My Queen! my Mother! remember I am thine own. Keep me, guard me, as thy property and possession.

O Mary, thou didst enter the world without stain; do thou obtain for me from God, that I may leave it without sin.

ASPIRATIONS TO THE HOLY FAMILY

Jesus, Mary, Joseph!

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, bless us now and at the hour of our death.

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, I give You my heart and my soul. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, assist me in my last agony. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, may I breathe out my soul in peace with You.

Averroism is the term applied to either of two philosophical trends among scholastics in the late 13th century, the first of which was based on the Arab philosopher Averroës or Ibn Rushd's interpretations of Aristotle and his reconciliation of [[Aristotelianism]] with the Islamic faith.[citation needed] European philosophers in turn applied these ideas to Aristotle's writings and their relation to the Christian faith. Besides Averroes, the main philosophers involved in the movement were Siger of Brabant and Boetius of Dacia.[citation needed]

The main ideas of the earlier philosophical concept of Averroism — found in Averroës' commentaries to Aristotle — were:

    * there is one truth, but there are (at least) two ways to reach it: through philosophy and through religion;
    * the world is eternal;
    * the soul is divided into two parts: one individual, and one divine;
    * the individual soul is not eternal;
    * all humans at the basic level share one and the same divine soul (an idea known as monopsychism);
    * resurrection of the dead is not possible (this was put forth by Boëtius);

This standpoint resulted in two condemnations in 1270 and 1277 by bishop Etienne Tempier of the Roman Catholic Church. Tempier specified 219 different unacceptable Averroist theses. It has been pointed out[1] that Tempier's main accusations are almost identical to those brought by Al-Ghazali against philosophers in general in his Incoherence of the Philosophers, which Averroes had tried to demonstrate to be unjustified.

To resolve the problem, Siger tried to claim that there existed a "double truth": a factual or "hard" truth that is reached through science and philosophy, and a "religious" truth that is reached through religion. This idea had not originated in Averroës; his idea was that there was one truth reached in different ways, not two truths. He did however believe that Scripture sometimes uses metaphorical language, but that those without the philosophical training to appreciate the true meaning of the passages in question were obliged to believe the literal meaning.
Giovanni di Paolo's St. Thomas Aquinas Confounding Averroës.

The later philosophical concept of Averroism was the idea that the philosophical and religious worlds are separate entities. However, upon scrutinizing the 219 theses condemned by Tempier, it was obvious that not many of them originated in Averroës. Radical Aristotelianism and heterodox Aristotelianism were the terms commonly used for a while to refer to the actual philosophical movement started by Siger and Boëthius and differentiate it from Averroism; nowadays most scholars just call it Averroism as well.

Thomas Aquinas specifically attacked the doctrine of monopsychism in his book De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas. In this context, the term Averroism is used correctly.

Although condemned in 1277, many Averroistic theses survived to the 16th century and can be found in the philosophies of Giordano Bruno, Pico della Mirandola, and Cesare Cremonini.These theses talk about the superiority of philosophers to the common people and the relation between the intellect and human dignity.

[[Benedict Spinoza]] was also notably influenced by Averroism, his [[pantheism]] flowing from Averroistic [[monopsychism]], as was Spinoza's belief in the higher state of the philosophers and tendencies toward [[secularism]].

The ideas on the separation of philosophy and religion found in Averroism were influential in the development of modern secularism.[2][3] As a result, some Muslim scholars consider Averroes the founding father of secular thought in Western Europe.[4]

[[Part 1 Lessons|http://youall.com/plp/SVbblbk01less01to04.pdf]]

[[Part 2 Lessons|http://youall.com/plp/SVbblbk02less05to08.pdf]]

[[Part 3 Lessons|http://youall.com/plp/SVbblbk03less09to12.pdf]]

[[Bible Study Tool Kit|http://youall.com/plp/SVbklt%20toolbox.pdf]]

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/StJohnsAshfield_StainedGlass_GoodShepherd_Face.jpg/600px-StJohnsAshfield_StainedGlass_GoodShepherd_Face.jpg]]

1. Who wrote the first four books of the New Testament?

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Mark Gospel of Luke Gospel of John

2. Who wrote the first five books of the Old Testament?

Most conservative scholars hold that the Pentateuch was written by Moses.

3. What two Old Testament books are named for women?

Esther and Ruth.

4. What are the Ten Commandments?

1. I am the Lord your God; you shall have no other gods before Me.

2. You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.

3. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.

4. Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.

5. Honor your father and your mother.

6. You shall not murder.

7. You shall not commit adultery.

8. You shall not steal.

9. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

10. You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife: or anything that belongs to your neighbor. (Exodus 20:2-17)

5. What is the Greatest Commandment?

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." (Matthew 22:37,38)

6. What is the second Greatest Commandment?

"Love your neighbor as yourself." (Matthew 22:39)

7. What is the Golden Rule?

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." (Matthew 7:12)

8. What is the Great Commission?

"Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I will be with you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:19,20)

9. What was the test of a prophet, to know that he was truly from God?

He had to be 100% accurate in his prophecies. The penalty for a false prophet was death by stoning. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)

10. To whom did God give the 10 Commandments?

Moses. (Exodus 20)

11. Which two people did not die?

Genesis 5:24 says that Enoch, who was Noah's great- grandfather, "walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away." The other was the Old Testament prophet Elijah, who was taken up to heaven in a whirlwind with a chariot and horses of fire. (2 Kings 2:11)

12. What is the root of all kinds of evil?

The love of money. (1 Timothy 6:10)

13. What is the beginning of wisdom?

The fear of the Lord. (Psalm 111:10)

14. Who delivered the Sermon on the Mount?

The Lord Jesus. (Matthew 5-7)

15. How did sickness and death enter the world?

Romans 5:12 says that sin entered the world though one man, and death through sin. The fall of man is recorded in Genesis 3, where God's perfect creation was spoiled by Adam's sin.

16. Who was the Roman governor who sentenced Christ to death?

Pontius Pilate. (Matthew 27:26)

17. Who are the major prophets?

Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel.

18. What people group is the Old Testament about?

The Hebrews, who became the nation of Israel. They were descendants of Abraham though Isaac.

19. What happened while the Lord Jesus was in the desert for 40 days?

He was tempted by the devil. (Matthew 4:1) Hebrews 4:15 tells us that He was tempted in every way, just as we are: yet was without sin.

20. How many people were on Noah's ark?

Eight: Noah and his wife, his three sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and their wives. (Genesis 7:13)

21. Who was the first murderer?

Cain, who killed his brother Abel. (Genesis 4:8)

22. Which person was afflicted with terrible trials but trusted God through it all?

Job. (See Book of Job)

23. Who was Israel's most well-known and well-loved king?

David. (1 Chronicles 29:28)

24. Who was "the weeping prophet?"

Jeremiah.

25. Who was thrown into the lion's den?

Daniel. (Daniel 6)

26. Who were the two people in the famous fight with a stone and a sling?

David and Goliath. (1 Samuel 17)

27. What is the book of Acts about?

The early years of the church, as the gospel begins to spread throughout the world.

28. What are epistles?

Letters.

29. On what occasion was the Holy Spirit given to the church?

Pentecost. (Acts 2:1-4)

30. Whom did God command to sacrifice his only son?

Abraham. (Genesis 22:2)

31. What was the Old Testament feast that celebrated God's saving the firstborn of Israel the night they left Egypt?

Passover. (Exodus 12:27)

32. Who was the Hebrew who became prime minister of Egypt?

Joseph. (Genesis 41:41)

33. Who was the Hebrew woman who became Queen of Persia?

Esther. (Esther 2:17)

34. Who was the pagan woman who became David's great-grandmother?

Ruth. (Ruth 4:17)

35. Which angel appeared to Mary?

Gabriel. (Luke 1:26)

36. How did the Lord Jesus die?

He gave up His life while being crucified. (John 19:18)

37. What happened to Him three days after He died?

He was raised from the dead. (John 20)

38. What happened to the Lord Jesus 40 days after His resurrection?

He ascended bodily into heaven. (Acts 1:9-11)

39. What should we do when we sin, in order to restore our fellowship with God?

1 John 1:9 tells us, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

40. How did the universe and world get here?

Genesis 1:1 tells us, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." We are told further in Colossians 1:16 and 17 that the Lord Jesus Christ was the one who did the creating.

41. Where did Satan and the demons come from?

Satan was originally the best and the brightest angel, but he sinned in his pride, wanting to be God. Some of the angels followed him, and these "fallen angels" were cast out of heaven. (Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28)

42. Who directed the writing of the Bible?

The Holy Spirit. (2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:21)

43. Where was the Lord Jesus before He was conceived in Mary?

In heaven. (Philippians 2:6-11, 1 Corinthians 15:49)

44. Who taught in parables?

The Lord Jesus. (Matthew 13:3) Jesus' Parables

45. What are parables?

A short, simple story with a spiritual point.

46. Which two animals talked with human speech?

The serpent in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:3) and Balaam's donkey (Numbers 22:28)

47. With which woman did David commit adultery?

Bathsheba. (2 Samuel 11)

48. Which one of their sons succeeded David as king?

Solomon. (2 Samuel 12:24)

49. Who was the female judge of Israel?

Deborah. (Judges 4:4)

50. Who was the wisest man in the world?

Solomon. (1 Kings 3:12)

51. Who was the first man?

Adam. (Genesis 2:20)

52. Who was the most humble man on earth?

Moses. (Numbers 12:3)

53. Who was the strongest man on earth?

Samson. (Judges 13-16)

54. Where were the two nations of God's people taken into captivity?

Israel was taken into Assyria (2 Kings 17:23), and Judah into Babylon (2 Chronicles 36:20).

55. Which cupbearer to a foreign king rebuilt the wall of Jerusalem?

Nehemiah. (Nehemiah 2:5)

56. Who were the two Old Testament prophets who worked miracles?

Elijah and Elisha. (1 Kings 17 - 2 Kings 6)

57. Which Old Testament prophet spent three days in the belly of a great fish?

Jonah. (Jonah 1:17)

58. What is the last book of the Old Testament?

Malachi.

59. For which Israelite commander did the sun stand still?

Joshua. (Joshua 10)

60. Who was the first king of Israel?

Saul. (1 Samuel 13:1)

61. Who built the temple in Israel?

Solomon. (1 Kings 6)

62. Which of the twelve tribes of Israel served as priests?

Levites. (Deuteronomy 10:8)

63. Which city fell after the Israelites marched around it daily for seven days?

Jericho. (Joshua 6:20)

64. What did God give the Israelites to eat in the wilderness?

Manna and quail. (Exodus 16)

65. Which two people walked on water?

Jesus and Peter. (Matthew 14:29)

66. Who was the first martyr?

Stephen. (Acts 7)

67. Who betrayed Jesus to the priests, and for how much?

Judas betrayed Him for 30 pieces of silver, the price of a slave. (Matthew 26:14-15)

68. What is the Lord's Prayer?

Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. (Matthew 6:9-13)

69. Who was the first person to see the risen Lord?

Mary Magdalene. (John 20:16)

70. Which prophet and cousin of the Lord was beheaded?

John the Baptist. (John 14:10)

71. To what country did the young Jesus and His parents escape when Herod was threatening His life?

Egypt. (Matthew 2:13-15)

72. What was Christ's first miracle?

He turned water into wine at the wedding at Cana. (John 2:11)

73. Which one of the Lord's personal friends did He raise from the dead?

Lazarus. (John 11)

74. Who was the greatest missionary of the New Testament?

Paul. (see book of Acts)

75. Who was Paul's first partner?

Barnabas. (Acts 13:2)

76. Whom did an angel release from prison?

Peter. (Acts 12)

77. Which event caused God to splinter human language into many tongues?

The building of the Tower of Babel. (Genesis 11)

78. Which chapter of an Old Testament prophet's book gives a detailed prophecy of the Messiah's death by crucifixion?

Isaiah 53.

79. Who wrestled all night with the Lord and was left with a permanent limp?

Jacob. (Genesis 32:22-32)

80. Which two pastors did Paul write letters to?

Timothy and Titus.

81. Who was hailed as a god when he was bitten by a snake but nothing bad happened?

Paul. (Acts 28:5-6)

82. Which two New Testament writers were brothers of the Lord Jesus?

James and Jude. (Matthew 13:55)

83. Which two New Testament books were written by a doctor?

Luke and Acts. (2 Timothy 4:11)

84. Who had a coat of many colors?

Joseph. (Genesis 37:3)

85. In what sin did Aaron lead the Israelites while his brother Moses was up on the mountain talking to God?

They made an idol in the form of a golden calf. (Exodus 32)

86. How many books are there in the entire Bible?

66: 39 in the Old Testament, and 27 in the New Testament.

87. What's the difference between John the Baptist and the John who wrote several New Testament books?

John the Baptist was a prophet who proclaimed the kingdom of God was near in preparation for his cousin Jesus' ministry. The John who wrote the gospel of John, the epistles: 1, 2 and 3 John: and Revelation, was one of the twelve apostles and one of those closest to the Lord, along with Peter and James. He called himself "the disciple whom Jesus loved."

8. Who saw the Lord appear to him in a burning bush?

Moses. (Exodus 3)

89. How many sons did Jacob have?

Twelve. They were the ancestors of the twelve tribes of Israel. (Genesis 35:22)

90. Who gave up his birthright for a bowl of stew?

Esau. (Genesis 25:33)

91. Which Psalm starts out, "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want?"

Psalm 23.

92. Who disowned the Lord Jesus three times before a cock crowed?

Peter. (Matthew 26:69-75)

93. What did the Lord do just before the Last Supper to demonstrate His love and humility?

He washed the disciples' feet. (John 13:5)

94. Where is the New Testament "Hall of Faith?"

Hebrews 11.

95. Who appeared with the Lord in glory on the Mount of Transfiguration?

Elijah and Moses. (Mark 9:4) Transfiguration

96. Who is the second Adam?

The Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Corinthians 15:45-49)

97. Which Old Testament prophet married a prostitute because God told him to?

Hosea. (Hosea 1:2)

98. What are the two sacred ordinances that the Lord commanded us to observe?

Baptism (Matthew 28:19,20) and Communion, or the Lord's Table (1 Corinthians 11:23-26).

99. What are supernatural enablings that allow a believer to serve the Body of Christ with ease and effectiveness?

Spiritual gifts. (Romans 12:6-8, 1 Corinthians 12, Ephesians 4:8-13, 1 Peter 4:10-11)

100. Whose tomb was Christ buried in?

Joseph of Arimathea. (Matthew 27:57-60)

101. Who wrote the book of Hebrews?

Nobody knows.

102. Which is the "epistle of joy?"

Philippians.

103. What is the book of Revelation about?

The end of the world.

104. Who is the bride of Christ?

The church: that is, all who have trusted Him for salvation. (Ephesians 5:25-27, Revelation 19:7-8)

Body of Christ

http://www.biblelogic.com/

Book of Romans

www.GotQuestions.org

Author: Romans 1:1 identifies the author of the Book of Romans as the Apostle Paul. Romans 16:22 indicates that Paul used a man name Tertius to transcribe his words.

Date of Writing: The Book of Romans was likely written between 56-58 A.D.

Purpose of Writing: Paul was excited about being able to at last minister in this church, everyone was well aware of that fact (Romans 1:8-15). It was written from Corinth just prior to Paul’s trip to Jerusalem to deliver the alms that had been given for the poor there. He had intended to go to Rome and then on to Spain (Romans 15:24). His plans were interrupted when he was arrested in Jerusalem. He would eventually get to Rome as a prisoner. Phoebe who was a member of the church at Cenchrea near Corinth (Romans 16:1) most likely carried the letter to Rome.

Key Verses: Romans 1:16, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the Salvation of every one who believes, first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.”

Romans 3:9-11, “What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written: ‘There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God.”

Romans 3:21, “But now a righteousness from God apart from the Law, has been made known, to which the Law and Prophets testify.”

Romans 5:8, “But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”

Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Romans 8:9, “you however, are controlled not by the sinful nature, but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.”

Romans 8:37-39, “For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Romans 10:9-10, “That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.”

Romans 12:1, “Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, Holy and pleasing to God, this is your Spiritual act of worship.”

Romans 12:19, “Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord,”

Romans 15:13, “May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in Him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Romans 16:17, “I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.”

Brief Summary: The Book of Romans can be divided into four sections: Righteousness Needed, 1:18 - 3:20; Righteousness Provided, 3:21 - 8:39; Righteousness Vindicated, 9:1 - 11:36; Righteousness Practiced, 12:1 - 15:13. The main theme of this letter is obvious of course, it is Righteousness. Guided by the Holy Spirit Paul first condemns all men of their sinfulness. He expresses his desire to Preach the truth of God’s Word to those in Rome. It was his hope to have assurance that they were staying on the right path. He strongly points out that he is not ashamed of the Gospel, because it is what every one need to direct them to Salvation.

Paul points out again that God did not demand that men have their lives straightened out before coming to Christ. Because, it is a fact that while we were still sinners He, Christ died on a cross for our sins. When we turn our lives over to Jesus Christ, we are no longer controlled by our sin nature, but we are controlled by the Spirit. If we make confession that Jesus is Lord, and believe that He is raised from the dead, we are saved, born - again. We need to live our lives offered to God as a living sacrifice to Him. Because, that should be our highest desire to worship Him so. We cannot please Him by living according to this world and its pleasures. We need to keep our eyes on Jesus at all times.

Never seek to take revenge on anyone because it is God’s place to repay, and we need to leave it Him. We need to feed the hungry and quench their thirst. Nothing is ever accomplished if we are overcome by evil, but evil, we need to overcome evil with good. May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in Him, so that you m ay overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Practical Application: It is very difficult to summarize the Book of Romans. It is so full of truth! The Book of Romans tells us about God, who He is and what He has done. It tells us of Jesus Christ, what His death accomplished. It tells us about ourselves, what we were like without Christ and who we are after trusting in Christ. Perhaps the best application of Romans would be to apply Romans 1:16 and not be ashamed of the Gospel. Instead, let us all be faithful in proclaiming it!

Read the whole book or download it [[here|http://www.homechurchresources.com/pdf%20books/Life%20Eternal_hell_final.pdf]]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Religious_studies_books

[[Read article on whether a Mason can be a Christian|http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/davidriggs/can-christian-be-mason.PDF]]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_and_Religion:_West_and_East

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
When Richard Foster began writing Celebration of Discipline more than 20 years ago, an older writer gave him a bit of advice: "Be sure that every chapter forces the reader into the next chapter." Foster took the advice to heart; as a result, his book presents one of the most compelling and readable visions of Christian spirituality published in the past few decades. After beginning with a simple observation--"Superficiality is the curse of our age.... The desperate need today is not for a greater number of intelligent people, or gifted people, but for deep people"--Foster's book moves to explain the disciplines people must cultivate in order to achieve spiritual depth. In succinct, urgent, and sometimes humorous chapters, Foster defines a broad range of classic spiritual disciplines in terms that are lucid without being too limiting and offers advice that's practical without being overly prescriptive. For instance, after describing meditation as a combination of "intense intimacy and awful reverence," he settles into such down-to-earth topics as how to choose a place and a posture in which to meditate.

Perhaps most interesting and useful is Foster's chapter on the controversial Christian discipline of submission. According to Foster, submission does not demand self-hatred or loss of identity. Instead, it simply means growing secure in the conviction that "our happiness is not dependent on getting what we want" but on the fulfillment that naturally flows from love of one's neighbors. Such wise and encouraging suggestions have helped many readers to discard the idea that discipline is an onerous duty and to move toward a liberating and simpler idea of discipline--whose defining character, as Foster never forgets, is joy. --Michael Joseph Gross
Review
“This seminal work on the practice of spiritual disciplines is never outdated.” (Relevant Magazine )

“If everybody in the country could read—and heed—this book, what a difference it would make to the planet.” (Madeleine L'Engle )

“Foster has challenged us to see Christian faith … as a life of spiritual transformation.” (Brian D. McLaren, author of A New Kind of Christian )

“Foster has taught me more about prayer and living faithfully than just about any other living author.” (Lauren Winner, author of Girl Meets God )

“Richard Foster has given us a rare gift... The celebration of each discipline in this book hands us a tool that can be useful in helping us to integrate our inner and outer lives.” (Macrina Wiederkehr, O.S.B., author of A Tree Full of Angels )

“The best modern book on Christian spirituality..... No other book apart from the Bible has been so helpful to me in the nurturing of my inward journey of prayer and spiritual growth.” (Ronald J. Sider, executive director, Evangelicals for Social Action )
See all Editorial Reviews
Product Details

* Hardcover: 228 pages
* Publisher: HarperSanFrancisco; 3rd edition (October 5, 1988)
* Language: English
* ISBN-10: 0060628391
* ISBN-13: 978-0060628390
* Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.8 x 0.9 inches
* Shipping Weight: 10.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
* Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars See all reviews (172 customer reviews)
172 Reviews
5 star:
(122)
4 star:
(29)
3 star:
(12)
2 star:
(2)
1 star:
(7)

› See all 172 customer reviews...
* Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #1,943 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Would you like to update product info, give feedback on images, or tell us about a lower price?

More About the Author
Richard Foster
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

› Visit Amazon's Richard Foster Page

Customer Reviews
172 Reviews
5 star:
(122)
4 star:
(29)
3 star:
(12)
2 star:
(2)
1 star:
(7)

Average Customer Review
4.5 out of 5 stars (172 customer reviews)

Share your thoughts with other customers:
Create your own review
Most Helpful Customer Reviews

264 of 290 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars Let's recognize the danger here..., August 1, 2003
By
H. David Peirce "Zossima" (Houston, TX USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth (Hardcover)
This is a Christian classic. Foster has written a comprehensive guide to spiritual disciplines. It is deep, yet accessible. Most of the reviews here agree with that.

I've read this book 5 times in 8 years. I've been in churches where multiple people were reading it at the same time. I've been in small groups where everyone read it together. I've seen mature Christians read it. I've seen new Christians read it. And I've concluded that THIS BOOK CAN BE DANGEROUS.

The reason I say that is that even in the most non-legalistic churches I've ever seen, I've seen immature Christians stumble in part because they are overwhelmed by everything in this book. And when I say "stumble", I'm talking about people going back into severely addictive lifestyles. And the pressure they felt from feeling like they have to do all these disciplines contributed to that.

Unfortunately, it's easy for any of us to filter even the most well-intentioned, well-written book through our false self, that part of us that is performance- and fear-oriented. Spiritual disciplines do not change us; they open our hearts to the change that the Spirit of God wants to bring.

Again, I think this is a phenomenal book. But lest we feed our heads instead of our hearts and lest we frustrate ourselves with a standard of righteousness that Foster never intended, I'd like to humbly, humbly suggest some things:
* I personally recommend that people start with Henri Nouwen's "Way of the Heart" for a primer on spiritual discipline. It is just much simpler. The big stuff can come later. (Other books by Merton, Nouwen, Keating, etc., will work just as well.)

* Get a spiritual director--I'm not talking about a pastoral counselor, though it may be a pastor; I'm talking about a spiritually mature guide who is only interested in your spiritual development, not your money or your time.

* Read this book with other people who can provide feedback to you on how they see you responding.

* Keep it simple: Pray, pray, pray; trust the Lord to guide your heart into other disciplines. Attempt other disciplines when your motivation is to honor God and mortify your flesh, not when it is to "get something", even if that "something" is spiritual maturity.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comments (3)

66 of 72 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars The Scriptural Keys to Living a Devout and Holy Life, January 23, 2001
By
Cameron B. Clark (Bristow, Virginia United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)
This review is from: Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth (Hardcover)
I first discovered "Celebration of Discipline" through Terry Glaspey's "Great Books of the Christian Tradition." Glaspey listed Foster's book as one of the top ten (cream-of-the-crop) books that every Christian ought to read and know. His opinion is obviously shared by many others as shown in Christianity Today's listing of "Celebration of Discipline" as one of the top twenty most influential books of the 20th century. Why is the book so influential? Because it gives Christians important and practical details regarding the scriptural key (self-discipline) to living a holy life which is the door to true liberty in all its facets. The 12 spiritual disciplines he expounds on, if faithfully practiced, will lead to inward and outward harmony (wholeness; holiness) with oneself as well as social harmony with others both within and without (as an evangelistic light) the corporate body of Christ. Four disciplines are allotted to each one of the spheres (inward, outward, and corporate) and valuable insights from the spiritual masters within Christian history are provided as supplements to the biblical foundation that grounds the book.

Another book that makes a nice companion to this one is Dallas Willard's "The Spirit of the Disciplines." Willard's book is highly recommended by Foster who considered it the book of the decade (1980s) and now considers Willard's new book "The Divine Conspiracy" as the one he has been searching for all his life because of its biblically comprehensive, holistic and practical nature. Both Foster and Willard value the deep, spiritual insights of the older Christian classics (including those penned by so-called Christian "mystics") as seen by their many references and quotes. Also, both authors have seen that the deep spirituality that underlies those classics flowed from a self-disciplined life. Those who think that God will progressively sanctify them apart from their obedient and disciplined life are sorely mistaken and, if they don't change their thinking and practices, are in for a rude awakening.

A few words regarding the spiritual discipline of meditation are in order. Meditation in general involves learning through practice to control one's thoughts and redirect one's attention for the purpose of sustained concentration on a given object (whether physical via the eyes or mental via the imagination or spirit). This is NOT always easy, especially at first, because our thoughts tend to be wild and bounce disjointedly from thought to thought in a stream of consciousness. This is one reason why vocal prayer (which IS easy) is important during private prayer times to aid in concentration. This is also important to understand in order to appreciate the purpose of repetition in, for example, Eastern Orthodox practice (read "The Way of a Pilgrim" and notice the anonymous author's use of the Jesus Prayer and its corresponding fruit in his life). This is NOT "vain" repetition, but repetition with an important, sacred goal! Having made this point, I appreciate Foster's emphasis on obedience. He stated that "Christian meditation, very simply, is the ability to hear God's voice and obey his word." Obedience is indeed integral to Christian meditation and holy living because the Christian purpose of such a discipline is to sensitize us to the Holy Spirit's "still, small" voice. I also appreciated Foster's balanced understanding of detachment and attachment. He stated: "The detachment from the confusion all around us is in order to have a richer attachment to God." Amen! I am glad to find myself in a growing company of Christians of various denominations who appreciate the importance of Foster's book and the greater importance of practicing the disciplines in order to live a "devout and holy life" (*) that is pleasing and acceptable to God. (* Also recommended: William Law's "A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life")
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comments (2)

41 of 45 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars A True Celebration, April 12, 2001
By
Mark Jones (Watkinsville, GA United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)
This review is from: Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth (Hardcover)
_Celebration of Discipline_ is one of the finest Christian books of our time. I read it as an "assignment" with a men's study group, and at first, was a bit ambivalent about this ethereal-sounding spiritual book from a Quaker. I began it reluctantly, but shortly realized that what I was reading was solid, no-holds barred steps towards maturity in Christ, through discipleship and productive living.

Foster speaks of the "inward disciplines" the "outward disciplines" and the "corporate disciplines" of the Christian life. As I flip through the book, I find myself in need of a tune-up.

It's that kind of book. It's one that you'll never master, but the joy is in the journey, and in following the Savior with the full passion of your heart. He's calling us to the life of Discipline and discipleship, not to a willy-nilly external Christianity. _Celebration_ is a breath of fresh air in an era of "easy believism" and cheap grace.

Foster has touched a generation of believers with this timeless classic.

A cell church is a Christian church structure centering on the regular gathering of cell groups. Small group ministries are often called cell groups, but may also be called home groups, home friendship groups, home care groups, house fellowships, or life groups.

A definition of a cell church is notably tricky. A church with cell groups is not necessarily a cell church. A cell church must be composed of cell groups and centered around them. In cell churches, a cell leader (if any) is considered to be effectively a pastor or mentor within the church.

John Wesley used a form of cell group structure which he called Class Meetings as he formed his Methodist societies into national movement, first in Great Britain and later in the United States of America in the 18th Century.

[edit] Cell structure

There are a number of structures used to organize and coordinate multiple cells within a church.

* The G12 Vision consists of a leadership cell consisting of 12 people who each facilitate and lead their own cell group.
* A Tree Network consists of multiple cell group leaders that report directly to a cell coordinator. Each cell coordinator manages multiple cells in this way, and several cell coordinators may be present in a single cell church. Additional levels of hierarchy may be added as well depending on the size of the cell church. While similar to a G-12 Structure, it is unrelated in inspiration.

[edit] External links
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_church"
Category: Christian group structuring

http://www.housechurch.com/?gclid=COztlt_XjJgCFSMgDQodKiOkCw

The term Chaplet is used commonly to designate Roman Catholic prayer forms which use prayer beads, but are not necessarily related to the Rosary. Some of these chaplets have a strong Marian connotation, others are more directly related to Jesus or the Saints. Chaplets are considered "personal devotionals," and there is no set form and therefore they vary considerably. While the usual five decade rosary may be referred to as a chaplet, often chaplets have fewer beads than a traditional rosary and a different set of prayers. Common Chaplets include:

* Chaplet of Divine Mercy, using ordinary rosary beads of five decades.
* Chaplet of the Five Wounds of Jesus
* Chaplet (Little Crown) of the Infant Jesus, made up of three and twelve beads.
* Chaplet of the Sacred Heart, consisting of 33 small beads, 6 large beads, a centerpiece, a Crucifix and a Sacred Heart Medal.
* Little Chaplet of the Holy Face, to honor the Five Wounds of Jesus Christ, composed of a cross and six large beads and thirty-three small.
* Chaplet of the Precious Blood, consisting of thirty-three beads in seven groups.
* Chaplet of Black Madonna of Częstochowa, made up of nine beads with a crucifix and a medal of Our Lady of Czestochowa.
* Chaplet of Our Lady, Star of the Sea, consisting of a medal of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, three separate beads, and 12 additional beads.
* Chaplet of the Immaculate Conception, also called the Crown of Stars, consisting of 3 groups of 4 beads, with a medal of the Immaculate Conception. [1]
* Chaplet (Rosary) of the Seven Sorrows of Mary, made up of seven groups of seven beads. Also known as the Dolour beads.[1]
* Chaplet of Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha, composed of eight brown, eight red and eight crystal beads.
* Chaplet of Saint Anthony, made up of thirteen sets of three beads.
* Chaplet of Saint Joseph, which is divided into 15 groups of four beads consisting of one white and three purple beads.
* Chaplet of Saint Patrick, made up of twelve beads symbolizing the twelve perils of St. Patrick
* Chaplet of Saint Philomena, consisting of three white beads and thirteen red beads.
* Bridgettine Rosary, consisting of six decades of ten beads each. There are three additional beads at the end.
* Little Flower Chaplet, made of one large bead and twenty-four smaller beads.
* Chaplet of the Way of the Cross, made of fifteen groups of three beads, etc.
* Chaplet in Honor of the Holy Infant of Good Health, said on the standard Dominican Rosary.
* Chaplet of Saint Michael the Archangel,[2] comprising nine groups of four beads each, consisting of three Hail Marys and one Our Father in each. (Each of the nine groups is said in honor of one of the nine choirs of angels.)

The Chaplet of the Divine Mercy is a Roman Catholic devotion based on the visions of Saint Mary Faustina Kowalska (1905-1938), known as "the Apostle of Mercy."[1] She was a Polish sister of the Congregation of the Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy and canonized as a Catholic saint in 2000.

The chaplet is often said as a rosary-based prayer with the same set of rosary beads used for reciting the Holy Rosary or the Chaplet of Holy Wounds. However, the chaplet may also be said without beads, usually by counting prayers on the fingertips.[2]
Contents

Message and promises
The chaplet is often recited on beads as a rosary-based prayer

According to Saint Faustina's visions, written in her diary, the chaplet's prayers for mercy are threefold: to obtain mercy, to trust in Christ's mercy, and to show mercy to others.[3][4]

According to Saint Faustina's visions, Jesus Christ promised that all who recite this chaplet at the hour of death or in the presence of the dying will receive great mercy. She wrote that Jesus said:

"....When they say this Chaplet in the presence of the dying, I will stand between My Father and the dying not as the just judge but as the Merciful Savior."

Jesus also promised that anything can be obtained with this prayer if it is compatible with His will. Saint Faustina recounts in her diary that, in her vision, she saw an angel sent to a city to destroy it. Saint Faustina began to pray for God's mercy on the city and felt the strong presence of the Trinity. After she prayed the internally-instructed prayers, the angel was powerless to harm the city. In subsequent revelations, Saint Faustina learned that the prayers she spoke were to be taught to all the people of the world.[5]

According to Roman Catholic tradition, the chaplet may be said at any time, but it is said especially on Divine Mercy Sunday and Fridays at 3:00 PM. The Chaplet is prayed daily at the National Shrine of The Divine Mercy in Stockbridge, MA. In the Philippines, Singapore and Hong Kong the "3 o'clock Prayer" is broadcast on radio broadcasting & television stations daily at 3:00 p.m. In 2000, Pope John Paul II ordained the Sunday after Easter Divine Mercy Sunday, where Roman Catholics remember the institution of the Sacrament of Penance. The hour Jesus died by crucifixion, 3:00 PM (15:00), is called the Hour of Mercy. In novena, the chaplet is usually said each of the nine days from Good Friday to Divine Mercy Sunday.

Pope John Paul II was instrumental in the formal establishment of the Divine Mercy devotion and acknowledged the efforts of the Marian Fathers in its promotion in a Papal Blessing in 2001, the 70th anniversary of the revelation of the Divine Mercy Message and Devotion. Although the prayers said on the beads of the rosary chain share specific similarities in the Chaplet of Divine Mercy and the Chaplet of Holy Wounds, these are distinct chaplets and were introduced over 20 years apart, one in Poland, the other in France.[6]

The Divine Mercy devotion is also observed by the Universal Anglican Church http://uanglican.org.
[edit] Icon

Jesus told Saint Faustina, "Paint an image according to the pattern you see with the signature: Jesus, I trust in You… I promise that the soul that will venerate this image will not perish. I also promise victory over its enemies already here on earth, especially at the hour of death. I, myself will defend it as my own glory…I am offering people a vessel with which they are to keep coming for grace to the Fountain of Mercy. That vessel is this image with the Signature 'Jesus, I Trust in You."[7] The chaplet is associated with two main icons painted in conformity with the visions St. Faustina received. The most widely used is a Polish image painted by Adolf Hyla. Hyla was compelled to paint the icon in thanksgiving for having survived World War II. In the image, Jesus stands with one hand outstretched in blessing, the other clutching the side wounded by the spear, from which proceed beams of falling light, red and white in color. An explanation of these colors was given to Saint Faustina by Jesus himself saying, "The two rays represent blood and water."[8] This has been attributed to the "blood and water" referenced in the Gospel of John, (John 19:34) and which is also mentioned in the optional of the Chaplet. The words “Jesus I Trust in Thee” usually accompany the image, (“Jezu Ufam Tobie” in Polish). The original Divine Mercy image was painted by Eugene Kazimierowski in Vilnius, Lithuania under St. Faustina's direction. However, according to her diary, she cried upon seeing that the finished picture was not as beautiful as the vision she had received. After much distress, Jesus comforted Saint Faustina saying, "Not in the beauty of the color, nor of the brush is the greatness of this image, but in My grace."[7] The picture was widely used during the early years of the devotion, and is still in circulation within the movement, though the Hyla image appears to be the more commonly used.
[edit] Intentions

The Chaplet may be said alone or as part of a Novena. The novena prayers for each of the nine days ask for God's mercy on a different group of people:

* First Day - all mankind, especially all sinners.
* Second Day - the souls of priests and religious.
* Third Day - all devout and faithful souls.
* Fourth Day - the pagans and those who do not believe in God and who do not yet know Christ.
* Fifth Day - the souls of heretics and schismatics
* Sixth Day - the meek and humble souls and souls of little children.
* Seventh Day - souls who especially venerate and glorify Christ's mercy.
* Eighth Day - souls who are detained in Purgatory.
* Ninth Day - souls who have become lukewarm (meaning Catholics who fail to express the full devotion of their faith e.g. by going to Mass every Sunday, going to Confession, etc.)

[edit] Prayer groups

The Eucharistic Apostles of the Divine Mercy group is a rapidly growing community that holds regular meetings in which the Divine Mercy prayers are cited. There are numerous groups all over the world, being operated by different facilitators. In total there are 16 functioning EADM groups. They can be found at:

* Africa - Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria,Cameroon, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda
* Asia - India, Singapore, Philippines and Samoan Islands
* Australia - South Australia
* Europe - Portugal
* North America - Arizona, Florida, Saskatchewan and Toronto
* South America - Ecuador

Chrismation is the name given in Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches, as well as in the Assyrian Church of the East, Anglican, and in Lutheran initiation rites, to the Sacrament or Sacred Mystery more commonly known in the West as confirmation, although Italian normally uses cresima (chrismation), rather than confermazione (confirmation).

The term chrismation is used because of the chrism (perfumed holy oil, usually containing myrrh (μύρον), and consecrated by a bishop) with which the recipient of the sacrament is anointed, while the priest speaks the words sealing the initiate with the Gifts of the Holy Spirit.

[img[http://www.swordofthespirit.net/bulwark/christ-word-life.jpg]]

http://christianuniversityglobalnet.com/

http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/christian-ethics/

Christian Ethics

The Christian Ethics section contains material on natural law theory, divine command theory, moral relativism (with a detailed piece on cultural relativism, and just war theory.
Natural Law Theory

The material on natural law theory briefly outlines this approach to ethics, contrasting classical natural law theory with its Thomist development.
Divine Command Theory

The divine command theory section includes a discussion of the most common objection to divine command theory, namely the Euthyphro dilemma, and a summary of Plato’s dialogue, the Euthyphro, in which this argument has its origins. The various specific objections to divine command theory that are raised by the Euthyphro dilemma, the independence problem, the arbitrariness problem, the emptiness problem, and the problem of abhorrent commands, each receive individual attention.
Moral Relativism

The section on moral relativism begins with an explanation of the view that morality is relative, that there are no absolute ethical truths. Two forms of relativism are distinguished: ethical subjectivism and cultural relativism. These are then contrasted with the view, sometimes mistaken for relativism but actually consistent with moral objectivism, that different people have different duties depending on their circumstances.

Also available is a more detailed look at cultural relativism, the theory that moral truths only hold relative to specific cultural contexts. This consists of an overview of this theory, and some comments about its strengths and weaknesses.
Just War Theory

Just war theory concerns when it is legitimate to go to war. Based on Thomas Aquinas’s account, it identifies various conditions that must be met; for instance, war can only justly be waged with right intentions, and when there is some probability of success.

[[Get PDF of Minister's Manual Here|http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CGAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baylor.edu%2Ftruett%2Fpdfs%2Fbooks%2Fministersmanual.pdf&rct=j&q=Minister%27s%20Service%20Manual&ei=SY73TZi2FYmw0AHdyrzCCw&usg=AFQjCNGWFXPVCaJ6R_pnduu69gFLtiWWdw&sig2=Iyfra2jfG0r0j6gENrvNtA&cad=rja]]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Christian_studies_books

Christian Mysteries
Main article: Sacrament

The term is used in Eastern Christianity to refer to what the Western Church currently calls Sacraments and Sacramentals. In the Early Church they were kept hidden from the pagans — the so-called Disciplina arcani — lest they become objects of ridicule. As the Age of Persecution ended, the secrecy was gradually relaxed. But the term continued to be used. Originally the term "Mystery" was used in both the East and the West, as shown from the "Mystagogical Homilies" of St. Cyril of Jerusalem and the work, "On the Mysteries" by St. Ambrose of Milan.

The terms Sacrament and Sacramental are terms which the Western Church has carefully defined in Canon Law. Thus, for instance, the Council of Trent declared there to be exactly seven sacraments. The Eastern Churches, in contrast, have never defined the Mysteries in such precise terms. And, though the Western Church teaches that the consecrated bread and wine of the Eucharist are one Sacrament, the Divine Liturgy refers to the Eucharist as the Mysteries, in the plural. Orthodox Christians have always received Holy Communion in both species (both the Body and the Blood), and even reserve both in the tabernacle.

The word mysterion (μυστήριον) is used 27 times in the New Testament. It denotes not so much the meaning of the modern English term mystery, but rather something that is mystical. In the biblical Greek, the term refers to "that which, being outside the unassisted natural apprehension, can be made known only by divine revelation."[1]

For the Eastern Orthodox, Christian life is centered in the Mystery of the Incarnation of Christ, the union of God and man. However, the redemption of man is not considered to have taken place only in the past, but continues to this day through [[theosis]].[2] The Sacraments, or Sacred Mysteries are the most important means by which the faithful may obtain union with God, provided they are received with faith after appropriate preparation. Orthodox Christians believe that God is present everywhere and fills all things by his Divine grace, and that all of creation is, in some sense, a "sacrament." However, they believe that "He is more specifically and intensively present in [those] particular and reliable manners which He Himself has established,"[3] i.e., in the Sacred Mysteries.

Though Orthodox instructional materials may list seven Sacred Mysteries (Baptism, [[Chrismation]], Confession, Holy Communion, Marriage, Ordination, and [[Unction]]), it must be understood that the term is not limited to these seven. The Sacred Mysteries can be defined as "those holy acts through which the Holy Spirit mysteriously and invisibly confers Grace (the saving power of God) upon man."[4]

Writing of Christian mysticism, Evelyn Underhill defined it this way,

Mysticism is the art of union with Reality. The mystic is a person who has attained that union in greater or less degree; or who aims at and believes in such attainment.[1]

Mysticism is an art or a practice of the spiritual person, and for the Christian mystic, it is the spiritual practice in relation to and of God. The attributes and means by which Christian mysticism is studied and practiced are varied. Ranging from ecstatic visions of the soul's mystical union with God to simple prayerful contemplation of Holy Scripture (i.e., Lectio Divina[2]), this article addresses the practice of the inner, spiritual activity which is broadly known within the Christian tradition.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Mysticism in general
* 2 Types of Mysticism
* 3 Practice
o 3.1 Influential Christian Mystics and Texts
+ 3.1.1 Biblical Influences
+ 3.1.2 Greek Influences
+ 3.1.3 Early Christians
+ 3.1.4 Middle Ages and Renaissance
+ 3.1.5 Renaissance, Reformation and Counter Reformation
o 3.2 Similarities in teachings, non-orthodox teachings
* 4 See also
* 5 Bibliography
* 6 External links
* 7 Notes and references

[edit] Mysticism in general
Unbalanced scales.svg
An editor has expressed a concern that this section lends undue weight to certain ideas relative to the section as a whole. Please help to discuss and resolve the dispute before removing this message. (January 2011)
Main article: Mysticism

The Concise Oxford Dictionary explains the word mystic as follows "a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity or identity with or absorption into the Deity or the ultimate reality or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the understanding.

The following different alternatives are listed. 1. Mysterious and awe-inspiring 2. Spiritually allegorical or symbolic 3. Occult, esoteric 4. Of hidden meaning"

The Latin root word for mysticism means "initiated person" derived from its root word again meaning "close the eyes or lips, initiate"[3]
[edit] Types of Mysticism

Mysticism, in general terms, is frequently classified in three distinctive types:[4][5][6]:

1. Mysticism in nature, (e.g., experiencing a oneness with nature, sometimes referred to as "panenhenic")
2. Monistic mysticism, (i.e., introverted, absorptive, such as found in Buddhism and Hinduism) and
3. Theistic mysticism (i.e., God-centered experience regarding a "transcendent and supreme reality."[7]).

Christian mysticism, therefore, is of the theistic type.

Within specifically Christian terms, the practice of mysticism is both regarded as including two types:

1. Apophatic (imageless, stillness, and wordlessness) -- e.g., The Cloud of the Unknowing, Meister Eckhart; and
2. Cataphatic (imaging God, imagination or words) -- e.g.,The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola, Dame Julian, Francis of Assisi,[8]This second type is considered by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite [9], Guigo II [10],and others, as an earlier phase in the spiritual development of the mystic.

[edit] Practice
This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (January 2011)

Christian mysticism advocates teachings that for Christians the major emphasis of mysticism concerns a spiritual transformation of the egoic self, the following of a path designed to produce more fully realized human persons, "created in the Image and Likeness of God" and as such, living in harmonious communion with God, the Church, the rest of humanity, and all creation, including oneself. For Christians, this human potential is realized most perfectly in Jesus, precisely because he is both God and human, and is manifested in others through their association with him, whether conscious, as in the case of Christian mystics, or unconscious, with regard to spiritual persons who follow other traditions, such as Gandhi. The Eastern Christian tradition speaks of this transformation in terms of theosis or divinization, perhaps best summed up by an ancient aphorism usually attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria: "God became human so that man might become god."[11]

Going back at least to Evagrius Ponticus and Pseudo-Dionysius, Christian mystics have pursued a threefold path in their pursuit of holiness. While the three aspects have different names in the different Christian traditions, they can be characterized as purgative, illuminative, and unitive, corresponding to body, soul (or mind), and spirit. The first, the way of purification, is where aspiring Christian mystics start. This aspect focuses on discipline, particularly in terms of the human body; thus, it emphasizes prayer at certain times, either alone or with others, and in certain postures, often standing or kneeling. It also emphasizes the other disciplines of fasting and alms-giving, the latter including those activities called "the works of mercy," both spiritual and corporal, such as feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless.

Purification, which grounds Christian spirituality in general, is primarily focused on efforts to, in the words of St. Paul, "put to death the deeds of the flesh by the Holy Spirit" (Romans 8:13). The "deeds of the flesh" here include not only external behavior, but also those habits, attitudes, compulsions, addictions, etc. (sometimes called egoic passions) which oppose themselves to true being and living as a Christian not only exteriorly, but interiorly as well. Evelyn Underhill describes purification as an awareness of one's own imperfections and finiteness, followed by self-discipline and mortification. Because of its physical, disciplinary aspect, this phase, as well as the entire Christian spiritual path, is often referred to as "ascetic," a term which is derived from a Greek word which connotes athletic training. Because of this, in ancient Christian literature, prominent mystics are often called "spiritual athletes," an image which is also used several times in the New Testament to describe the Christian life. What is sought here is salvation in the original sense of the word, referring not only to one's eternal fate, but also to healing in all areas of life, including the restoration of spiritual, psychological, and physical health.

It remains a paradox of the mystics that the passivity at which they appear to aim is really a state of the most intense activity: more, that where it is wholly absent no great creative action can take place. In it, the superficial self compels itself to be still, in order that it may liberate another more deep-seated power which is, in the ecstasy of the contemplative genius, raised to the highest pitch of efficiency. Mysticism: A Study in Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness by Evelyn Underhill (Public Domain)

The second phase, the path of illumination, has to do with the activity of the Holy Spirit enlightening the mind, giving insights into truths not only explicit in scripture and the rest of the Christian tradition, but also those implicit in nature, not in the scientific sense, but rather in terms of an illumination of the "depth" aspects of reality and natural happenings, such that the working of God is perceived in all that one experiences. Underhill describes it as marked by a consciousness of a transcendent order and a vision of a new heaven and a new earth.

The third phase, usually called contemplation in the Western tradition, refers to the experience of oneself as in some way united with God. The experience of union varies, but it is first and foremost always associated with a reuniting with Divine love, the underlying theme being that God, the perfect goodness,[12] is known or experienced at least as much by the heart as by the intellect since, in the words 1 John 4:16: "God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God and God in him." Some approaches to classical mysticism would consider the first two phases as preparatory to the third, explicitly mystical experience, but others state that these three phases overlap and intertwine.

Author and mystic Evelyn Underhill recognizes two additional phases to the mystical path. First comes the awakening, the stage in which one begins to have some consciousness of absolute or divine reality. Purgation and illumination are followed by a fourth stage which Underhill, borrowing the language of St. John of the Cross, calls the dark night of the soul. This stage, experienced by the few, is one of final and complete purification and is marked by confusion, helplessness, stagnation of the will, and a sense of the withdrawal of God's presence. This dark night of the soul is not, in Underhill's conception, the Divine Darkness of the pseudo-Dionysius and German Christian mysticism. It is the period of final "unselfing" and the surrender to the hidden purposes of the divine will. Her fifth and final stage is union with the object of love, the one Reality, God. Here the self has been permanently established on a transcendental level and liberated for a new purpose.[13]

Another aspect of traditional Christian spirituality, or mysticism, has to do with its communal basis. Even for hermits, the Christian life is always lived in communion with the Church, the community of believers. Thus, participation in corporate worship, especially the Eucharist, is an essential part of Christian mysticism. Connected with this is the practice of having a spiritual director, confessor, or "soul friend" with which to discuss one's spiritual progress. This person, who may be clerical or lay, acts as a spiritual mentor.
[edit] Influential Christian Mystics and Texts
[edit] Biblical Influences

Hebrew Scriptures

Wiki letter w cropped.svg This section requires expansion.

Old Testament prophets seem rooted in a direct consciousness of the Divine Presence e.g. Ezekiel. Several psalms suggest a similar mystical awareness e.g. Psalm 73:23-26.

Christian Scriptures

Wiki letter w cropped.svg This section requires expansion.

The mystical experience of the apostles, Peter, John, and James, at the Transfiguration of Jesus, is confirmed in each of the Synoptic Gospels. Jesus led the three to the top of Mount Tabor. Before the eye of the disciples, he was transformed. His face shone like the sun, and his cloths became brilliant white. Elijah and Moses appeared to them. Then “A cloud came, overshadowing them and a voice came out of the cloud, and said “This is my beloved Son. Listen to him.""[14] In his letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul refers to what tradition says was his own mystical experience [15]as well as traces of mysticism in Galatians 2:20.
[edit] Greek Influences

While not Christian, the influences of Greek thought are apparent in the earliest Christian Mystics and their writings. Plato (428–348 BCE) is considered the most important of ancient philosophers and his philosophical system provides the basis of most later mystical forms. Plotinus (c. 205 – 270 CE) provided the non-Christian, neo-Platonic basis for much Christian, Jewish, and Islamic mysticism.[16]
[edit] Early Christians

* Justin Martyr (c. 105-c. 165) used Greek philosophy as the stepping-stone to Christian theology. The mystical conclusions that some Greeks arrived at, pointed to Christ. He was Influenced by: Pythagoras, Plato, Plotinus, Aristotle as well as Stoicism.
* Origen (c. 185 – 254): On Principles, Against Celsus. Studied under Clement of Alexandria, and probably also Ammonius Saccus (Plotinus' teacher). He Christianized and theologized neo-Platonism.
* Athanasius - The Life of Antony (c, 360)
* Augustine (354–430): De Trinitate, Confessions. Important source for much mediaeval mysticism. He brings Platonism and Christianity together. Influenced by: Plato and Plotinus.
* Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (c. 500) - Mystical Theology

[edit] Middle Ages and Renaissance

* John Scotus Eriugena (c. 810 – c. 877): Periphyseon. Eriugena translated Pseudo-Dionysius from Greek into Latin. Influenced by: Plotinus, Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius.
* Meister Eckhart (1260-1327)
* Anonymous - The Cloud of the Unknowing (c. 1375)
* Catherine of Sienna (1347-1380) - Letters
* Walter Hilton (c. 1340-1396) - The Ladder of Perfection (a.k.a., The Scale of Perfection)
* Julian of Norwich (1342- c. 1416) - Revelations of Divine Love (a.k.a, Showing of Love)

[edit] Renaissance, Reformation and Counter Reformation

* Teresa of Avila (1515–1582): Influenced by: Augustine.
* St. John of the Cross (Juan de Yepes) (1542–1591): Influenced by: Teresa of Avila.
* Jacob Boehme (1575–1624): Considered a major figure in German mysticism.
* William Law (1686–1761): English mystic interested in Jacob Boehme, and wrote several mystical treatises.

[edit] Similarities in teachings, non-orthodox teachings
Unbalanced scales.svg
An editor has expressed a concern that this section lends undue weight to certain ideas relative to the section as a whole. Please help to discuss and resolve the dispute before removing this message. (January 2011)

Similarities in teachings of the three schools exists, in particular with regards to Soteriology teachings, (differing from that of mainstream Christian theology), but also with regards to the following topics:

* Redemption
* Atonement
* Christology
* Altered state of consciousness
* anthropology
* Mystical theology
* Open theism
* Holy Spirit Divine Functions

[edit] See also
Christianity portal
Spirituality portal

* Ascetical Theology
* Asceticism
* Christian meditation
* Christian Mysticism in Ancient Africa
* Christian mythology
* Christian Soteriology
* Contemplative Prayer
* Early Christianity
* Eastern Christianity
* German mysticism
* Orthodox gnosiology
* Hellenistic philosophy and Christianity*
* Jesus Prayer
* Lectio Divina
* Mystical marriage
* Mystical theology
* Mysticism – a discussion of the mystical elements of Christianity along with many other non-Christian religions
* Neoplatonism and Christianity
* Open theism
* Quietism (Christian philosophy)
* Soteriology
* Spanish mystics
* Theosophy

[[Go to topics here|http://www.ivmdl.org/cbec.cfm]]

[img[http://www.keyway.ca/gif/rights.gif]]

[[Audio Sermons|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/progrep.htm]]


[[Daily Sermon|http://www.keyway.ca/]]

[[Christian Holy Days|http://www.keyway.ca/m2c.htm]]

[[Sermons on Holy Days|http://www.keyway.ca/m2c.htm#sands]]

[[Studies on Jesus Christ|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/christ.htm]]

[[Studies on Bible History|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/biblhist.htm]]

[img[http://www.keyway.ca/gif/crosses.gif]]
[[Study on Cross or Stake|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/biblhist.htm]]

[[Curiosities in the Bible|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/curious.htm]]

[[Search all of Daily Studies by Keyword|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/sitemine.htm]]

[img[http://www.keyway.ca/jpg/piano.jpg]]
[[Some Christian Hymns|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/keyway08.htm]]  

How to be a true Christian Study
	[[Lesson 1 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060709.htm]]
     	[[Lesson 2 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060710.htm]]
	[[Lesson 3 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060711.htm]]
	[[Lesson 4 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060712.htm]]
	[[Lesson 5 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060713.htm]]
	[[Lesson 6 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060714.htm]]
	[[Lesson 7 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060715.htm]]
	[[Lesson 8 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060716.htm]]
	[[Lesson 9 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060717.htm]]
	[[Lesson 10 True Christian|http://www.keyway.ca/htm2006/20060718.htm]]

/***
|Name:|CloseOnCancelPlugin|
|Description:|Closes the tiddler if you click new tiddler then cancel. Default behaviour is to leave it open|
|Version:|3.0.1 ($Rev: 3861 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-03-08 10:53:09 +1000 (Sat, 08 Mar 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#CloseOnCancelPlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
***/
//{{{
merge(config.commands.cancelTiddler,{

	handler_mptw_orig_closeUnsaved: config.commands.cancelTiddler.handler,

	handler: function(event,src,title) {
		this.handler_mptw_orig_closeUnsaved(event,src,title);
		if (!store.tiddlerExists(title) && !store.isShadowTiddler(title))
			story.closeTiddler(title,true);
	 	return false;
	}

});

//}}}

[[Go here to see the lessons|http://youall.com/plp/screen.html]]

[[Complete Religious Books Online|http://www.religion-online.org/listbooks.asp]]

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/johngentry/book-mormon.pdf

The Critique of Pure Reason (German: Kritik der reinen Vernunft [1]) by Immanuel Kant, first published in 1781, second edition 1787, is one of the most influential works in the history of philosophy. Also referred to as Kant's "first critique," it was followed by the Critique of Practical Reason and the Critique of Judgement.

[[Read Our Daily Bread|http://odb.org/]]

[[Read My Utmost to his Highness|http://www.myutmost.org/]]

[[Read RBC Utmost|http://utmost.org/]]

[[To read today's devotional go here|http://www.myutmost.org/]]

[img[http://www.rbc.org/uploadedImages/Site-Wide_Promotions/OnLine_Offers/Banners/oswaldOnlineOfferBanner.gif]]

Oswald Chambers (1874-1917) was a Scottish minister and teacher whose teachings on the life of faith and abandonment to God have endured to this day.

This daily devotional is a collection of his teachings compiled by his wife into a daily devotional format. It's presented here in the original English. His wife's comments may be found in the Foreword.

We publish this with the prayer that Oswald Chambers' teachings will help you grow in your walk with Christ.
 
Taken from My Utmost for His Highest by Oswald Chambers. (c) l935 by Dodd Mead & Co., renewed (c) 1963 by the Oswald Chambers Publications Assn., Ltd., and is used by permission of Discovery House Publishers, Box 3566, Grand Rapids MI 4950l. All rights reserved.

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/Karl_Marx.jpg/100px-Karl_Marx.jpg]]

[[Online Course Here|http://davidharvey.org/]]

Study Guides
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/daskapital/summary.html
http://tinyurl.com/69224x


Das Kapital (IPA: [das kapiˈtaːl]) (Capital, in the English translation) is an extensive treatise on political economy written in German by Karl Marx and edited in part by Friedrich Engels. The book is a critical analysis of capitalism and its practical economic application and also, in part, a critique of other related theories. Its first volume was published in 1867.
Contents
[hide]

    * 1 Themes
    * 2 Publication
    * 3 Influences
    * 4 Volume I
    * 5 Volume II
    * 6 Volume III
    * 7 Volume IV
    * 8 See also
    * 9 Online editions
    * 10 External links
          o 10.1 Synopses

[edit] Themes

The central driving force of capitalism, according to Marx, was in the exploitation and alienation of labour. The ultimate source of the new profits and value-added was that employers paid workers the market value of their labour-capacity, but the value of the commodities workers produced exceeded that market value. Employers were entitled to appropriate the new output value because of their ownership of the productive capital assets. By producing output as capital for the employers, the workers constantly reproduced the condition of capitalism by their labour.

However, though Marx is very concerned with the social aspects of commerce, his book is not an ethical treatise, but an attempt to explain the objective "laws of motion" of the capitalist system as a whole, its origins and future. He aims to reveal the causes and dynamics of the accumulation of capital, the growth of wage labour, the transformation of the workplace, the concentration of capital, competition, the banking and credit system, the tendency of the rate of profit to decline, land-rents and many other things.

Marx viewed the commodity as the "cell-form" or building unit of capitalist society—it is an object useful to somebody else, but with a trading value for the owner. Because commercial transactions implied no particular morality beyond that required to settle transactions, the growth of markets caused the economic sphere and the moral-legal sphere to become separated in society: subjective moral value becomes separated from objective economic value. Political economy, which was originally thought of as a "moral science" concerned with the just distribution of wealth, or as a "political arithmetick" for tax collection, gave way to the separate disciplines of economic science, law and ethics.

Marx believed the political economists could study the scientific laws of capitalism in an "objective" way, because the expansion of markets had in reality objectified most economic relations: the cash nexus stripped away all previous religious and political illusions (only to replace them, however, with another kind of illusion—commodity fetishism). Marx also says that he viewed "the economic formation of society as a process of natural history". The growth of commerce happened as a process which no individuals could control or direct, creating an enormously complex web of social interconnections globally. Thus a "society" was formed "economically" before people actually began to consciously master the enormous productive capacity and interconnections they had created, in order to put it collectively to the best use.

Marx’s analysis in Capital, then, focuses primarily on the structural contradictions, rather than the class antagonisms, that characterize capitalist society—the “contradictory movement [gegensätzliche Bewegung] [that] has its origin in the twofold character of labour,” rather than in the struggle between labor and capital, or rather between the owning and the working classes. These contradictions, moreover, operate (as Marx describes using a phrase borrowed from Hegel) “behind the backs” of both the capitalists and workers, that is, as a result of their activities, and yet irreducible to their conscious awareness either as individuals or as classes. As such, Capital, does not propose a theory of revolution (led by the working class and its representatives) but rather a theory of crises as the condition for a potential revolution, or what Marx refers to in the Communist Manifesto as a potential “weapon,” “forged” by the owners of capital, “turned against the bourgeoisie itself” by the working class. Such crises, according to Marx, are rooted in the contradictory character of the commodity, the most fundamental social form of capitalist society. In capitalism, improvements in technology and rising levels of productivity increase the amount of material wealth (or use values) in society while simultaneously diminishing the economic value of this wealth, thereby lowering the rate of profit—a tendency that leads to the peculiar situation, characteristic of crises in capitalism, of “poverty in the midst of plenty,” or more precisely, crises of overproduction in the midst of underconsumption.

[edit] Publication

Marx published the first volume of Das Kapital in 1867, but he died before he could finish the second and third ones which he had already drafted; these were edited by his friend and collaborator Friedrich Engels and published in 1885 and 1894. As can be seen in the original title pages of the final two volumes, Engels listed Marx as the author.

[edit] Influences
Das Kapital in Yiddish

Marx bases his work on that of the classical economists like Adam Smith, David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill and even Benjamin Franklin. However, he reworks these authors' ideas, so his book is a synthesis that does not follow the lead of any one thinker. It also reflects the dialectical methodology applied by G.W.F. Hegel in his books The Science of Logic and The Phenomenology of Mind, and the influence of French socialists such as Charles Fourier, Comte de Saint-Simon, and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.

Marx said himself that his aim was "to bring a science [i.e. political economy] by criticism to the point where it can be dialectically represented", and in this way to "reveal the law of motion of modern society". By showing how capitalist development was the precursor of a new, socialist mode of production, he aimed to provide a scientific foundation for the modern labour movement. In preparation for his book, he studied the economic literature available in his time for a period of twelve years, mainly in the British Museum in London.

Aristotle, and Greek philosophy in general, was another important (although often neglected) influence on Marx’s analysis of capitalism. Marx’s education at Bonn centered on Greek and Roman poets and philosophers. The dissertation he completed at the university was a comparison of the philosophy of nature in the works of Democritus and Epicurus. A number of scholars, moreover, have argued that the basic architecture of Capital – including the categories of use and exchange value, as well as the “syllogisms” for simple and expanded circulation (M-C-M and M-C-M’) – was derived from the Politics (Aristotle) and the Nicomachean Ethics. Moreover, Marx’s description of machinery under capitalist relations of production as “self-acting automata” is a direct reference to Aristotle’s speculations on inanimate instruments capable of following commands as the condition for the abolition of slavery.

[edit] Volume I

    Main article: Capital, Volume I

[edit] Volume II

    Main article: Capital, Volume II

[edit] Volume III

    Main article: Capital, Volume III

[edit] Volume IV

A so-called Volume IV is claimed by some, apparently constituted from fragmentary notes that were written prior to the publication of Das Kapital (full text linked below).

[edit] See also

    * Accumulation by dispossession
    * Etienne Balibar
    * Capital, Volume I
    * Capital (economics)
    * Capital accumulation
    * Capitalism
    * Commodity fetishism
    * Cost of capital
    * Culture of capitalism
    * History of theory of capitalism
    * Krisis Groupe
    * Labor theory of value
    * Law of accumulation
    * Law of value
    * Marx's theory of alienation
    * Primitive accumulation of capital
    * Profit
    * Relations of production
    * Return on capital
    * Surplus labour
    * Surplus value
    * Valorisation
    * Value added

[edit] Online editions

[[Overview]]

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/cogdill/denomin.pdf

[[Many devotionals located here|http://christianuniversityglobalnet.com/mod/resource/view.php?id=283]]

Disciplina Arcani or Discipline of the Secret or Discipline of the Arcane, is a theological term used to describe the custom which prevailed in Early Christianity, whereby knowledge of the more intimate mysteries of the Christian religion was carefully kept from non-Christians and even from those who were undergoing instruction in the faith.[1]

Disciplina arcani
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Disciplina Arcani or Discipline of the Secret or Discipline of the Arcane, is a theological term used to describe the custom which prevailed in Early Christianity, whereby knowledge of the more intimate mysteries of the Christian religion was carefully kept from non-Christians and even from those who were undergoing instruction in the faith.[1]
Contents
[hide]

    * 1 Disciplina Arcani in the early stages of Christianity
    * 2 The Object of the Discipline
    * 3 See also
    * 4 References
    * 5 Basic Bibliography
    * 6 External links

[edit] Disciplina Arcani in the early stages of Christianity

The idea of a disciplina arcani, a law imposing silence upon Christians with respect to their rites and doctrines, has been well-studied in the past century.[2] Some[citation needed] state that a nucleus of oral teaching was inherited from Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism and formed the basis of a secret oral tradition in the early stages of Christianity. This nucleus of oral teachings (which reflected older traditions and which can be shown to form the background of both Jewish Christian and Gnostic conceptions),[3] formed what came to be called disciplina arcani in the 4th century.[4][5]
[edit] The Object of the Discipline

It is characteristic of the disciplina that the subject of the silence was not the dogma and the sacramental gift, but the elements and the ritual performance.[6] Origen, in Contra Celsum, argues that it is the doctrine of the Christians, and not only their rites, which should be secret in character.[7] Even if the elements of ritual performance, such as missa fidelium and other Christian rites were under the disciplina arcani during the early stages of Christianity (especially during the 3rd-4th century), nobody at the present time can definitively state which other subjects comprised the disciplina. Indeed, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, St. Basil, St. Ambrose of Milan and many other Church Fathers of early Christianity mention an "oral tradition," as in St. Basil's appeal to the "unwritten tradition" in de Spiritu Sancto:

    "Of the dogmata and kerygmata, which are kept in the Church, we have some from the written teaching (εκ της εγγραφου διδασκαλιας), and some we derive from the Apostolic tradition, which had been handed down en mistirio (εν μυστηριω). And both have the same strength (την αυτην ισχυν) in the matters of piety. [...] They come from the silent and mystical tradition, from the unpublic and ineffable teaching".[8]

Divine Command Theory

The name “divine command theory” can be used to refer to any one of a family of related ethical theories. What these theories have in common is that they take God’s will to be the foundation of ethics. According to divine command theory, things are morally good or bad, or morally obligatory, permissible, or prohibited, solely because of God’s will or commands.

Divine command theory is often thought to be refuted by an argument known as the Euthyphro dilemma. This argument is named after Plato’s Euthyphro, the dialogue in which it has its origin (although contrary to popular belief the argument isn’t actually stated there).

The Euthyphro dilemma begins by posing a question: Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God? Whichever way the theist answers this question, problems are thought to follow.

If the theist gives the first answer to the Euthyphro dilemma, holding that morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, then he faces the independence problem; if morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, then they must be morally good prior to and so independently of God’s willing them. This is clearly inconsistent with divine command theory; the divine command theorist must give the second answer to the Euthyphro dilemma.

If the theist gives the second answer to the Euthyphro dilemma, holding that morally good acts are morally good because they are willed by God, then he faces the arbitrariness problem, the emptiness problem, and the problem of abhorrent commands.

The arbitrariness is the problem that divine command theory appears to base morality on mere whims of God. If divine command theory is true, it seems, then God’s commands can neither be informed nor sanctioned by morality. How, though, can such morally arbitrary commands be the foundation of morality?

The emptiness problem is that on the divine command analysis of moral goodness, statements like “God is good” and “God’s commands are good” are rendered empty tautologies: “God acts in accordance with his commands” and “God’s commands are in accordance with his commands”.

The problem of abhorrent commands is that divine command theory appears to entail that if God were to command abhorrent acts—malicious deception, wanton cruelty, etc.—those acts would become morally good.

Divine command theory is by no means the only ethical theory in the Christian tradition, so the theist need not be overly concerned even if these objections were thought to be successful. There are, however, theological reasons why the theist might be attracted to divine command theory and so want to defend it. God is claimed to be the creator of all things, and therefore the creator of our moral obligations. God is claimed to be sovereign, to have the authority to tell us how we are to live our lives.

There are also a number of biblical examples of God commanding acts that would otherwise be thought to be morally wrong, acts such as plundering the Egyptians [Exodus 11:2] or preparing to sacrifice one’s son [Genesis 22:2], thus rendering them morally good. These considerations can most easily, though not only, be accommodated within a divine command theory of ethics.

Divinity and divine (sometimes 'the Divinity' or 'the Divine') are broadly applied but loosely defined terms, used variously within different faiths and belief systems — and even by different individuals within a given faith — to refer to some transcendent or transcendental power, or its attributes or manifestations in the world. The root of the words is literally 'Godlike' (from the Latin 'Deus', cf. Dyaus, closely related to Greek 'Zeus', Divan in Persian and Deva in Sanskrit), but the use varies significantly depending on which god is being discussed. This article outlines the major distinctions in the conventional use of the terms.

For academic or professional uses of the terms, see Divinity (academic discipline), or Divine (Anglican)

http://www.ivpress.com/hardsay/

How strange is this accusation that the Lord may be sleeping and need to be aroused! Other psalms, including Psalms 7, 35, 59, 73 and 74, also speak of God as sleeping or arising from sleep, just as other Near Eastern deities are said to do. But Psalm 121:4 asserts just the opposite: "Indeed, he who watches over Israel will neither slumber nor sleep."

Bernard Batto has attempted to argue that in Near Eastern mythology to sleep undisturbed was a symbol of the supreme deity's unchallenged authority. He further argued that the motif as applied to Yahweh expressed Israel's belief in Yahweh's absolute kingship. He could be counted on to "awaken" and to maintain justice and order.

Batto's explanation of Psalm 121:4 is not satisfactory; the sleeping deity image here, he counters, is turned around as an image of one who is ever vigilant, allowing not the slightest evil to be tolerated. Exactly; but which is correct? Or are we to have it both ways: Yahweh sleeps but he never slumbers? Furthermore, why is Elijah's taunt effective when he mockingly suggests that the prophets of Baal should call louder to awaken him, for he is known to sleep at times? Surely Elijah is not reciting their theology approvingly.

Batto believes that the motif of divine rest is connected with the theme of sleeping. In this association of ideas, he may well be on to something important. Scripture does declare that as God concludes his work in creation he rests. Is it from this moment of leisure that he isnow called to "awake" and act on behalf of the one in trouble? It is to be noted that Psalms 7, 35 and 59 are all laments of an individual who is in dire straits. But in each case they are confident that God will "arise" in time to vindicate them. Thus there is an element of poetic license and the use of an anthropomorphism to describe God's action.

Psalm 44 represents the believing community's search for answers after suffering military defeats of national proportion. The problem raised was this: if the king and the people have been faithful to the covenant (Ps 44:18-22), then why was God unfaithful to his promise to deliver and defend?

There is no attempt here to give either a theological or a practical solution. In fact, this psalm is one of the clearest examples of a search for some cause or reason for national disasters besides deserved punishment by God for sin and guilt. The psalmist exclaims in exasperation, "Yet for your sake we face death all day long" (Ps 44:22). The wrath they experienced on this occasion had little to do with their sin but more to do with the spiritual battle between their enemies and the Lord they served. Theirs was a faith that went beyond any available evidences or handy theologies, but they continued to believe, to trust and to pray.

Accordingly, the psalm contrasts the glorious past (Ps 44:1-8) with some present disaster (Ps 44:9-16). God seemed not to have been with the army when they had gone out to battle (Ps 44:9). Israel's defeat had made them a reproach and the scorn of their enemies (Ps 44:13-14). All this had happened even though Israel had not forgotten God (Ps 44:17-18); nevertheless, God had crushed them with a humiliating defeat (Ps 44:19).

In spite of all of this ignominy and shame, their prayer and hope still centered on the Lord (Ps 44:23-26). This prayer is phrased in military terms. The call for God to awake and to arouse himself here does not refer to sleep but to a military action similar to that in the Song of Deborah in Judges 5:12: "Wake up, wake up, Deborah! Wake up, wake up, break out in song! Arise, O Barak! Take captive your captives." The same battle chant was used time and time again when the ark of the covenant was raised at the head of the procession as Israel went forth into battle: "Whenever the ark set out, Moses said, `Rise up, O LORD! May your enemies be scattered; may your foes flee before you' " (Num 10:35).

The prayer is for divine help in the crisis that may have continued even though the battle had been lost. Perhaps the same war continued. "Rise up and help us" (Ps 44:26), they cried in the psalm. But the final word of the psalm is the confidence that God would yet help them because of his unfailing love- that word of grace which occurs in the Old Testament over two hundred and fifty times and speaks of God's unmerited loving kindness, mercy and grace (Ps 44:26).

Therefore, this psalm does not contradict the psalm which assures us that our God never slumbers or sleeps. He does not! That God sometimes defers his punishments and extends apparently unwarranted tolerance to the wicked and their evil indicates to the superficial observer that God sleeps and needs rousing. But such divine long suffering and mercy must not be confused with indifference or unawareness on his part. Furthermore, the language is not the language of weariness or slumber, but the language of a call for God to march forth to defend his holy name and his kingdom.

.........

Bernard Batto, "When God Sleeps," Bible Review 3 (1987): 16-23, and "The Sleeping God: An AncientNear Eastern Motif of Divine Sovereignty," Biblica 68 (1987): 153-77.

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/SaintDominic.jpg/200px-SaintDominic.jpg]]

The Order of Preachers (Latin: Ordo Praedicatorum), after the 15th century more commonly known as the Dominican Order or Dominicans, is a Catholic religious order, founded by Saint Dominic in the early 13th century in France. Membership in the Order includes the friars,[1] the nuns, the sisters, and lay persons affiliated with the Order (formerly known as tertiaries).

A number of other names have been used to refer to both the order and its members.

* In England and other countries the Dominicans are referred to as Blackfriars on account of the black cappa or cloak they wear over their white habits. Dominicans were Blackfriars, as opposed to Whitefriars (i.e., the Carmelites) or Greyfriars (i.e., Franciscans). They are also distinct from the Augustinian Friars (the Austin friars) who wear a similar habit.
* In France, the Dominicans are also known as Jacobins, because their first convent in Paris bore the name Saint Jacques, and Jacques is Jacobus in Latin.
* Their identification as Dominicans gave rise to the pun that they were the Domini canes, or Hounds of the Lord.[2]

Members of the order generally carry the letters O.P. after their name.

Founded to preach the gospel and to combat heresy, the Order is famed for its intellectual tradition, having produced many leading theologians and philosophers. The Dominican Order is headed by the Master of the Order, who is currently Father Carlos Azpiroz Costa.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Foundation
* 2 History
o 2.1 Middle Ages
o 2.2 Reformation to French Revolution
o 2.3 Nineteenth century to present
* 3 Divisions
o 3.1 Nuns
o 3.2 Sisters
o 3.3 Laity
* 4 Spirituality
o 4.1 Rosary
* 5 Mottos
* 6 Dominican saints and blesseds
* 7 See also
* 8 References
* 9 External links
o 9.1 Other

[edit] Foundation
This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (July 2008)

Like his contemporary Francis of Assisi, Dominic saw the need for a new type of organization to address the needs of his time, and the quick growth of the Dominicans and Franciscans during their first century confirms that the orders of mendicant friars met a need.[3]

Dominic saw the need to establish a new kind of order when travelling through the south of France. He had been asked to accompany his bishop from Osma on a diplomatic mission to Denmark, to arrange the marriage between the son of King Alfonso VIII of Castile and a niece of King Valdemar II of Denmark. At that time the south of France was the stronghold of Albigensian thought, centered around the town of Albi.

This unorthodox expression of Christianity held that matter was evil and only spirit was good, a fundamental challenge to the notion of incarnation, central to Roman Catholic theology. The Albigensians, more commonly known as the Cathars (a heretical gnostic sect), lived very simply and saw themselves as more fervent followers of the poor Christ. Dominic saw the need for a response that would take the good elements in the Albigensian movement to sway them back to mainstream Christian thought. The mendicant preacher emerged from this insight. Unfortunately, Dominic's ideal of winning the Albigensians over was not held by all office bearers and the population of Albi was decimated in the Albigensian crusade.

Dominic became the spiritual father to several Albigensian women he had reconciled to the faith, and he established them in a convent in Prouille. In 1207 Dominic was given authority over the convent by the local bishop. This convent would become the foundation of the Dominican nuns, thus making the Dominican nuns older than the Dominican friars.

Dominic sought to establish a new kind of order, one that would bring the dedication and systematic education of the older monastic orders like the Benedictines to bear on the religious problems of the burgeoning population of cities, but with more organizational flexibility than either monastic orders or the secular clergy. Dominic's new order was to be a preaching order, trained to preach in the vernacular languages but with a sound background in academic theology. Rather than earning their living on vast farms as the monasteries had done, the new friars would survive by begging, "selling" themselves through persuasive preaching.

Saint Dominic established a religious community in Toulouse in 1214, to be governed by the rule of St. Augustine[4] and statutes to govern the life of the friars, including the Primitive Constitution.[5] (The statutes were inspired by the Constitutions of Prémontré.) The founding documents establish that the Order was founded for two purposes -- preaching and the salvation of souls. The organization of the Order of Preachers was approved in December 1216 by Pope Honorius III (see also Religiosam vitam; Nos attendentes).

The Order's origins in battling heterodoxy influenced its later development and reputation. Many later Dominicans battled heresy as part of their apostolate. Indeed, many years after St. Dominic faced off against the Cathari, the first Grand Inquistor of Spain would be drawn from the Dominican order, Tomás de Torquemada.

[edit] History

The history of the Order may be divided into three periods:

* The Middle Ages (from their foundation to the beginning of the sixteenth century);
* The Modern Period up to the French Revolution;
* The Contemporary Period.

[edit] Middle Ages
Doctor Angelicus, Doctor Universalis St. Thomas Aquinas considered by the Catholic Church to be its greatest theologian, is girded by angels with a mystical belt of purity after his proof of chastity

The Dominican friars quickly spread, including to England, where they appeared in Oxford in 1221.[6] The thirteenth century is the classic age of the Order, the witness to its brilliant development and intense activity. This last is manifested especially in the work of teaching. By preaching it reached all classes of Christian society, fought heresy, schism, and paganism by word and book, and by its missions to the north of Europe, to Africa, and Asia passed beyond the frontiers of Christendom. Its schools spread throughout the entire Church; its doctors wrote monumental works in all branches of knowledge and two among them, Albertus Magnus, and especially Thomas Aquinas, founded a school of philosophy and theology which was to rule the ages to come in the life of the Church. An enormous number of its members held offices in Church and State -- as popes, cardinals, bishops, legates, inquisitors, confessors of princes, ambassadors, and paciarii (enforcers of the peace decreed by popes or councils).

The expansion of the Order was not without its problems. The Order of Preachers, which should have remained a select body, developed beyond bounds and absorbed some elements ill-fitted to its form of life. A period of relaxation ensued during the fourteenth century owing to the general decline of Christian society. The weakening of doctrinal activity favoured the development here and there of the ascetic and contemplative life and there sprang up, especially in Germany and Italy, an intense and exuberant mysticism with which the names of Meister Eckhart, Heinrich Suso, Johannes Tauler, and St. Catherine of Siena are associated. (See German mysticism, which has also been called "Dominican mysticism.") This movement was the prelude to the reforms undertaken, at the end of the century, by Raymond of Capua, and continued in the following century. It assumed remarkable proportions in the congregations of Lombardy and the Netherlands, and in the reforms of Savonarola at Florence.

At the same time the Order found itself face to face with the Renaissance. It struggled against pagan tendencies in humanism, in Italy through Dominici and Savonarola, in Germany through the theologians of Cologne but it also furnished humanism with such advanced writers as Francesco Colonna (writer of the Hypnerotomachia Poliphili) and Matteo Bandello. Its members, in great numbers, took part in the artistic activity of the age, the most prominent being Fra Angelico and Fra Bartolomeo.

[edit] Reformation to French Revolution
Bartolomé de Las Casas, as a settler in the New World, he was galvanized by witnessing the brutal torture and genocide of the Native Americans by the Spanish colonists. He became famous for his advocacy of the rights of Native Americans, whose cultures, especially in the Caribbean, he describes with care

The modern period consists of the three centuries between the religious revolution at the beginning of the sixteenth century (Protestantism) and the French Revolution and its consequences. At the beginning of the sixteenth century the order was on the way to a genuine renaissance when the Revolutionary upheavals occurred. The progress of heresy cost it six or seven provinces and several hundreds of convents, but the discovery of the New World opened up a fresh field of activity. Its gains in America and those which arose as a consequence of the Portuguese conquests in Africa and the Indies far exceeded the losses of the order in Europe, and the seventeenth century saw its highest numerical development. The sixteenth century was a great doctrinal century, and the movement lasted beyond the middle of the eighteenth century. In modern times the order lost much of its influence on the political powers, which had universally fallen into absolutism and had little sympathy for the democratic constitution of the Preachers. The Bourbon courts of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were particularly unfavourable to them until the suppression of the Society of Jesus.

In the eighteenth century, there were numerous attempts at reform which created, especially in France, geographical confusion in the administration. Also during the eighteenth century, the tyrannical spirit of the European powers and, still more, the spirit of the age lessened the number of recruits and the fervour of religious life. The French Revolution ruined the order in France, and the crises which more or less rapidly followed considerably lessened or wholly destroyed numerous provinces.

[edit] Nineteenth century to present

The contemporary period of the history of the Preachers begins with the restorations of provinces undertaken after the revolutions which had destroyed the Order in several countries of the Old World and the New. This period begins more or less in the early nineteenth century. The revolutions not having totally destroyed certain of the provinces, nor decimated them, simultaneously, the Preachers were able to take up the laborious work of restoration in countries where the civil legislation did not present insurmountable obstacles.

During this critical period the number of Preachers seems never to have sunk below 3,500. The statistics for 1876 give 3,748 religious, but 500 of these had been expelled from their convents and were engaged in parochial work. The statistics for 1910 give a total of 4,472 religious both nominally and actually engaged in the proper activities of the Order. In the year 2000, there were 5,171 Dominican friars in solemn vows, 917 student brothers and 237 novices.[7] Their provinces cover the world,[8] and include four provinces in the United States.
Spanish Mendicant friars from the Order of Preachers at Saint Thomas Aquinas' School, Caracas, Venezuela, 1952

In the revival movement France held a foremost place, owing to the reputation and convincing power of the orator, Jean-Baptiste Henri Lacordaire (1802-1861). He took the habit of a Friar Preacher at Rome (1839), and the province of France was canonically erected in 1850. From this province were detached the province of Lyon, called Occitania (1862), that of Toulouse (1869), and that of Canada (1909). The French restoration likewise furnished many laborers to other provinces, to assist in their organization and progress. From it came the master general who remained longest at the head of the administration during the nineteenth century, Père Vincent Jandel (1850-1872). Here should be mentioned the province of St. Joseph in the United States. Founded in 1805 by Father Edward Fenwick, afterwards first Bishop of Cincinnati, Ohio (1821-1832), this province has developed slowly, but now ranks among the most flourishing and active provinces of the order. In 1910 it numbered seventeen convents or secondary houses. In 1905, it established a large house of studies at Washington, D.C., called the Dominican House of Studies.

The province of France has produced a large number of preachers, several of whom became renowned. The conferences of Notre-Dame-de-Paris were inaugurated by Père Lacordaire. The Dominicans of the province of France furnished most of the orators: Lacordaire (1835-1836, 1843-1851), Jacques Monsabré (1869-1870, 1872-1890), Joseph Ollivier (1871, 1897), Thomas Etourneau (1898-1902). Since 1903 the pulpit of Notre Dame has been occupied by a Dominican. Père Henri Didon (d. 1900) was one of the most esteemed orators of his time. The house of studies of the province of France publishes L'Année Dominicaine (founded 1859), La Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Theologiques (1907), and La Revue de la Jeunesse (1909).

French Dominicans founded and administer the École Biblique et Archéologique française de Jérusalem founded in 1890 by Père Marie-Joseph Lagrange O.P. (1855-1938), one of the leading international centres for Biblical research. It is at the École Biblique that the famed Jerusalem Bible (both editions) was prepared.

Likewise Yves Cardinal Congar, O.P., one of the emblematic theologians of the Twentieth century, was a product of the French province of the Order of Preachers.

The province of the Philippines is recruited from Spain, where it has several preparatory houses. In the Philippines it has charge of the University of Santo Tomas -- the Pontifical and the Royal university under the Spanish colonial government for nearly three centuries. For nearly half a century, it was the oldest university under the flag of the United States which later occupied the Philippines. The Order also has several colleges including the Colegio de San Juan de Letran, and six establishments. In China it administers the missions of North and South Fo-Kien, in the Japanese Empire, those of Formosa (now Taiwan) and Shikoku, besides establishments at New Orleans, at Caracas, and at Rome. The province of Spain has seventeen establishments in the Peninsula and the Canaries, as well as the missions of Urubamba, Peru. Since 1910 it has published at Madrid an important review, La Ciencia Tomista. The province of the Netherlands has a score of establishments, and the missions of Curaçao and Puerto Rico. Other provinces also have their missions. That of Piedmont has establishments at Constantinople and Smyrna; that of Toulouse, in Brazil; that of Lyon, in Cuba, that of Ireland, in Australia and Trinidad and Tobago; that of Belgium, in the Belgian Congo (now Democratic Republic of the Congo), and so on.
Dominican in habit

Doctrinal development has had an important place in the restoration of the Preachers. Several institutions besides those already mentioned have played important parts. Such is the Biblical school at Jerusalem, open to the religious of the Order and to secular clerics, and which publishes the Revue Biblique. The faculty of theology of the University of Freiburg, confided to the care of the Dominicans in 1890, is flourishing and has about 250 students. The Collegium Angelicum, established at Rome (1911) by Master Hyacinth Cormier, is open to regulars and seculars for the study of the sacred sciences. To the reviews mentioned above must be added the Revue Thomiste, founded by Père Thomas Coconnier (d. 1908), and the Analecta Ordinis Prædicatorum (1893). Among the numerous writers of the order in this period are: Cardinals Thomas Zigliara (d. 1893) and Zephirin González (d. 1894), two esteemed philosophers; Father Alberto Guillelmotti (d. 1893), historian of the Pontifical Navy, and Father Heinrich Denifle, one of the most famous writers on medieval history (d. 1905).

[edit] Divisions

[edit] Nuns

The Dominican nuns were founded by St. Dominic even before he had established the friars. They are contemplatives in the cloistered life. In somewhat-dated parlance, they are the Second Order in the Order of Preachers. The nuns celebrated their 800th anniversary in 2006.[9]

[edit] Sisters

Dominican sisters carry on a number of apostolates. They are distinct from the nuns. The sisters are a way of living the vocation of a Third Order Dominican.

As well as the friars, Dominican sisters live their lives supported by four common values, often referred to as the Four Pillars of Dominican Life, they are: community life, common prayer, study and service. St. Dominic called this fourfold pattern of life the "holy preaching." Henri Matisse was so moved by the care that he received from the Dominican Sisters that he collaborated in the design and interior decoration of their Chapelle du Saint-Marie du Rosaire in Vence, France.

[edit] Laity

Dominican laity are governed by their own rule, the Rule of the Lay Fraternities of St. Dominic, promulgated by the Master in 1987.[10] It is the fifth Rule; the first was issued in 1285.[11]

[edit] Spirituality

The Dominican Order came into being in the Middle Ages at a time when religion began to be contemplated in a new way. Men who gave themselves and their souls completely into the keeping of God were no longer expected to stay behind the walls of a cold and quiet cloister. Instead, they traveled among the people, taking as their examples the apostles of the primitive Church. Out of this ideal emerged two orders of mendicant friars: one, the Friars Minor, was led by Francis of Assisi; the other, the Friars Preachers, by Dominic of Guzman.

The man who established the Dominican Order offered his followers a lofty and abiding cause. Dominic inspired his followers with loyalty to learning and virtue, a deep recognition of the spiritual power of worldly deprivation and the religious state, and a highly developed governmental structure.[12] He also produced a resourceful and talented group people who succeeded in converting Albigensians to the orthodox faith.[12] At the same time, Dominic inspired the members of his Order to develop a "mixed" spirituality. They were both active in preaching, and contemplative in study, prayer and meditation. The brethren of the Dominican Order were urban and learned, as well as contemplative and mystical in their spirituality. While these traits had an impact on the women of the Order, the nuns especially absorbed the latter characteristics and made those characteristics their own. In England, the Dominican nuns blended these elements with the defining characteristics of English Dominican spirituality and created a spirituality and collective personality that set them apart.

As the father of the Order of Preachers, Dominic had a lasting influence on a group of people who sought to fulfill his ideals. As a young adolescent, he had a particular love of theology and the Scriptures became the foundation of his spirituality.[13] Dominic studied in Palencia for a decade and maintained a dedication to purpose and a self-sacrificing attitude that caused the poor of the city to love him. During his sojourn in Palencia, Spain experienced a dreadful famine, prompting Dominic to sell all of his beloved books and other equipment in order to help his neighbors.[14]

Dominic was also noticed by important members of the religious community of Spain. After he completed his studies, Bishop Martin Bazan and Prior Diego d'Achebes appointed Dominic to the cathedral chapter and he became a regular canon under the Rule of St. Augustine and the Constitutions for the cathedral church of Osma. At the age of twenty-four or twenty-five, he was ordained to the priesthood.[15]

In the spring of 1203, Dominic joined Prior Diego on an embassy to Denmark for the monarchy of Spain. Dominic was fired by a reforming zeal after they encountered Albigensian heretics at Toulouse. He set about reconverting the region to orthodox Christianity.[16] On the return trip to Spain, the two brethren met with a group of papal legates who were determined to triumph over the Manichean menace. Prior Diego saw immediately one of the paramount reasons for the spread of the unorthodox movement: the representatives of the Holy Church acted and moved with an offensive amount of pomp and ceremony. On the other hand, the Cathars lived in a state of apostolic self-sacrifice that was widely appealing. For these reasons, Prior Diego suggested that the papal legates begin to live a reformed apostolic life. The legates agreed to change if they could find a strong leader. The prior took up the challenge, and he and Dominic dedicated themselves to the conversion of the Albigensians.[17]

As time passed, Prior Diego sanctioned the building of a monastery for girls whose parents had sent them to the care of the Albigensians because their families were too poor to fulfill their basic needs.[18] The monastery was at Prouille[19] and would later become Dominic's headquarters for his missionary effort there.[20] Prior Diego died, after two years in the mission field, on his return trip to Spain. When his preaching companions heard of his death, all save Dominic and a very small number of others returned to their homes.[18]

In July of 1215, with the approbation of Bishop Foulques of Toulouse, Dominic ordered his followers into an institutional life. Its purpose was revolutionary in the pastoral ministry of the Catholic Church. These priests were organized and well trained in religious studies. Many men influenced the shape and character of the Dominican Order, but it was Dominic himself who combined the available components into a vital and vigorous, whole existence.[21] Dominic needed a framework--a rule--with which to organize these components. The Rule of St. Augustine was an obvious choice for the Dominican Order, according to Dominic's successor, Jordan of Saxony, because it lent itself to the "salvation of souls through preaching".[22] By this choice, however, the Dominican brothers designated themselves not monks, but canons-regular. They could practice ministry and common life while existing in individual poverty.[23]

Dominic's education at Palencia gave him the knowledge he needed to overcome the Manicheans. With charity, the other concept that most defines the work and spirituality of the Order, study became the method most used by the Dominicans in working to defend the Church against the perils that hounded it, and also of enlarging its authority over larger areas of the known world.[24] In Dominic's thinking, it was impossible for men to preach what they did not or could not understand. When the brethren left Prouille, then, to begin their apostolic work, Dominic sent Matthew of Paris to establish a school near the University of Paris. This was the first of many Dominican schools established by the brethren, some near large universities throughout Europe.[25]

The spiritual tradition of Dominic's Order is punctuated not only by charity, study and preaching, but also by instances of mystical union. The Dominican emphasis on learning and on charity distinguishes it from other monastic and mendicant orders. As the Order first developed on the European continent, learning continued to be emphasized by these friars and their sisters in Christ. These religious also struggled for a deeply personal, intimate relationship with God. When the Order reached England, many of these attributes were kept, but the English gave the Order additional, specialized characteristics. This topic will be discussed at more length below.

Dominic's search for a close relationship with God was determined and unceasing. He rarely spoke, so little of his interior life is known. What is known about it comes from accounts written by people near to him. St. Cecilia remembered him as cheerful, charitable and full of unceasing vigor. From a number of accounts, singing was apparently one of Dominic's great delights.[26] Dominic practiced self-scourging and would mortify himself as he prayed alone in the chapel at night for 'poor sinners.' He owned a single habit, refused to carry money, and would allow no one to serve him.[27]

The spirituality evidenced throughout all of the branches of the Order reflects the spirit and intentions of its founder, though some of the elements of what later developed may have surprised the Castilian friar. Fundamentally, Dominic was "a man of prayer who utilized the full resources of the learning available to him to preach, to teach, and even materially to assist those searching for the truth found in the gospel of Christ. It is that spirit which [Dominic] bequeathed to his followers".[28]

Humbert of Romans, the Master General of the Order from 1254 to 1263, was a great administrator, as well as preacher and writer. It was under his tenure as Master General that the sisters in the Order were given official membership. Humbert was a great lover of languages, and encouraged linguistic studies among the Dominicans, primarily Arabic, because of the missionary work friars were pursuing in the East. He also wanted his friars to reach excellence in their preaching, and this was his most lasting contribution to the Order. The growth of the spirituality of young preachers was his first priority.[29] He once cried to his students: ". . . consider how excellent this office [of preaching] is, because it is apostolic; how useful, because it is directly ordained for the salvation of souls; how perilous, because few have in them, or perform, what the office requires, for it is not without great danger. . . . Item, take note that this office calls for excellency of life, so that just as the preacher speaks from a raised position, so he may also preach the Gospel from the mountain of an excellent life"[30]

Humbert is at the center of ascetic writers in the Dominican Order. In this role, he added significantly to its spirituality. His writings are permeated with "religious good sense," and he used uncomplicated language that could edify even the weakest member.[31] Humbert advised his readers: "[young Dominicans] are also to be instructed not to be eager to see visions or work miracles, since these avail little to salvation, and sometimes we are fooled by them; but rather they should be eager to do good in which salvation consists. Also, they should be taught not to be sad if they do not enjoy the divine consolations they hear others have; but they should know the loving Father for some reason sometimes withholds these. Again, they should learn that if they lack the grace of compunction or devotion they should not think they are not in the state of grace as long as they have good will, which is all that God regards".[32]

The English Dominicans took this to heart, and made it the focal point of their mysticism, as will be seen below.

Another who contributed significantly to the spirituality of the Order is Albertus Magnus, the only person of the period to be given the appellation "Great". His influence on the brotherhood permeated nearly every aspect of Dominican life. Albert was a scientist, philosopher, theologian, spiritual writer, ecumenist, and diplomat. Under the auspices of Humbert of Romans, Albert molded the curriculum of studies for all Dominican students, introduced Aristotle to the classroom and probed the work of Neoplatonists, such as Plotinus.[33] Indeed, it was the thirty years of work done by Thomas Aquinas and himself (1245-1274) that allowed for the inclusion of Aristotelian study in the curriculum of Dominican schools.[34]

One of Albert's greatest contributions was his study of Dionysus the Areopagite, a mystical theologian whose words left an indelible imprint in the medieval period. Magnus' writings made a significant contribution to German mysticism, which became vibrant in the minds of the Beguines and women such as Hildegard of Bingen and Mechthild of Magdeburg.[35] Mysticism, for the purposes of this study, refers to the conviction that all believers have the capability to experience God's love. This love may manifest itself through brief ecstatic experiences, such that one may be engulfed by God and gain an immediate knowledge of Him, which is unknowable through the intellect alone.[36]

Albertus Magnus championed the idea, drawn from Dionysus, that positive knowledge of God is possible, but obscure. Thus, it is easier to state what God is not, than to state what God is: ". . . we affirm things of God only relatively, that is, casually, whereas we deny things of God absolutely, that is, with reference to what He is in Himself. And there is no contradiction between a relative affirmation and an absolute negation. It is not contradictory to say that someone is white-toothed and not white".[37]

Albert the Great was the first theologian to clarify how wisdom and understanding enhance one's faith in God. According to him, these are the tools that God uses to commune with a contemplative. Love in the soul is both the cause and result of true understanding and judgement. It causes not only an intellectual knowledge of God, but a spiritual and emotional knowledge as well. Contemplation is the means whereby one can obtain this goal of understanding. Things that once seemed static and unchanging become full of possibility and perfection. The contemplative then knows that God is, but she does not know what God is. Thus, contemplation forever produces a mystified, imperfect knowledge of God. The soul is exalted beyond the rest of God's creation but it cannot see God Himself.[38]

By 1300, the enthusiasm for preaching and conversion within the Order lessened. Mysticism, full of the ideas Albertus Magnus expostulated, became the devotion of the greatest minds and hands within the organization.[39] It became a "powerful instrument of personal and theological transformation both within the Order of Preachers and throughout the wider reaches of Christendom.[40]

Although Albertus Magnus did much to instill mysticism in the Order of Preachers, it is a concept that reaches back to the Hebrew Bible. In the tradition of Holy Writ, the impossibility of coming face to face with God is a recurring motif, thus the commandment against graven images (Exodus 20.4-5). As time passed, Jewish and early Christian writings presented the idea of 'unknowing,' where God's presence was enveloped in a dark cloud. These images arose out of a confusing mass of ambiguous and ambivalent statements regarding the nature of God and man's relationship to Him.[41]

Other passages attest to the opposite circumstance: that of seeing God and talking with Him. Obviously, the conflict between seeing and not-seeing exists in early texts as well as later ones. It also permeates the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. The consequence is a paradox that emerges repeatedly throughout Christian Scripture and the mysticism found in the early foundations of the Church.[42]

All of these ideas associated with mysticism were at play in the spirituality of the Dominican community, and not only among the men. In Europe, in fact, it was often the female members of the Order, such as Catherine of Siena, Mechthild of Magdeburg, Christine of Stommeln, Margaret Ebner, and Elsbet Stagl,[43] that gained reputations for having mystical experiences.

Although Dominic and the early brethren had instituted female Dominican houses at Prouille and other places by 1227, some of the brethren of the Order had misgivings about the necessity of female religious establishments in an Order whose major purpose was preaching, a duty in which women could not traditionally engage. In spite of these doubts, women's houses dotted the countryside throughout Europe. There were seventy-four Dominican female houses in Germany, forty-two in Italy, nine in France, eight in Spain, six in Bohemia, three in Hungary, and three in Poland.[44] Many of the German religious houses that lodged women had been home to communities of women, such as Beguines, that became Dominican once they were taught by the traveling preachers and put under the jurisdiction of the Dominican authoritative structure. A number of these houses became centers of study and mystical spirituality in the fourteenth century. There were one hundred and fifty-seven nunneries in the Order by 1358. In that year, the number lessened due to disasters like the Black Death.[45]

In places besides Germany, convents were founded as retreats from the world for women of the upper classes. These were original projects funded by wealthy patrons, including other women. Among these was Countess Margaret of Flanders who established the monastery of Lille, while Bal-Duchesse at Oudergern near Brussels was built with the wealth of Adelaide of Burgundy, Duchess of Brabant (1262).[46]

Female houses differed from male Dominican houses in a lack of apostolic work for the women. Instead, the sisters chanted the Divine Office and kept all the monastic observances.[47] Their lives were often much more strict than their brothers' lives. The sisters had no government of their own, but lived under the authority of the general and provincial chapters of the Order. They were compelled to obey all the rules and shared in all the applicable privileges of the Order. Like the Priory of Dartford, all Dominican nunneries were under the jurisdiction of friars. The friars served as their confessors, priests, teachers and spiritual mentors.[48]

Women could not be professed to the Dominican religious life before the age of thirteen. The formula for profession contained in the Constitutions of Montargis Priory (1250) demands that nuns pledge obedience to God, the Blessed Virgin, their prioress and her successors according to the Rule of St. Augustine and the institute of the Order, until death. The clothing of the sisters consisted of a white tunic and scapular, a leather belt, a black mantle, and a black veil. Candidates to profession were tested to reveal whether they were actually married women who had merely separated from their husbands. Their intellectual abilities were also tested. Nuns were to be silent in places of prayer, the cloister, the dormitory, and refectory. Silence was maintained unless the prioress granted an exception for a specific cause. Speaking was allowed in the common parlor, but it was subordinate to strict rules, and the prioress, subprioress or other senior nun had to be present.[49]

Because the nuns of the Order did not preach among the people, the need to engage in study was not as immediate or intense as it was for men. They did participate, however, in a number of intellectual activities.[50] Along with sewing and embroidery, nuns often engaged in reading and discussing correspondence from Church leaders. In the Strassburg monastery of St. Margaret, some of the nuns could converse fluently in Latin. Learning still had an elevated place in the lives of these religious. In fact, Margarette Reglerin, a daughter of a wealthy Nuremberg family, was dismissed from a convent because she did not have the ability or will to learn.[51]

As heirs of the Dominican priory of Poissy in France, the Dartford sisters were also heirs to a tradition of profound learning and piety. Sections of translations of spiritual writings in Dartford's library, such as Suso's Little Book of Eternal Wisdom and Laurent du Bois' La Somme le Roi, show that the "ghoostli" link to Europe was not lost in the crossing of the Channel. It survived in the minds of the nuns. Also, the nuns shared a unique identity with Poissy as a religious house founded by a royal house. The English nuns were proud of this heritage, and aware that many of them shared in England's great history as members of the noble class, as will be seen in the next chapter.

Devotion to the Virgin Mary was another very important aspect of Dominican spirituality, especially for female members. As an Order, the Dominicans believed that they were established through the good graces of Christ's mother, and through prayers she sent missionaries to save the souls of nonbelievers.[52] All Dominicans sang the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin each day and saluted her as their advocate.[52]

In England, the Dominican Province began at the second general chapter of the Dominican Order in Bologna during the spring of 1221. Dominic dispatched twelve friars to England under the guidance of their English prior, Gilbert of Fresney. They landed in Dover on August 5, 1221. The province came officially into being at its first provincial chapter in 1230.[53]

The English Province was a component of the international Order from which it obtained its laws, direction and instructions. It was also, however, a group comprised of Englishmen. Its direct supervisors were from England, and the members of the English Province dwelt and labored in English cities, towns, villages, and roadways. English and European ingredients constantly came in contact. The international side of the province's existence influenced the national, and the national responded to, adapted, and sometimes constrained the international.[54]

The first Dominican site in England was at Oxford, in the parishes of St. Edward and St. Adelaide.[55] The friars built an oratory to the Blessed Virgin Mary[56] and by 1265, the brethren, in keeping with their devotion to study, began erecting a school. Actually, the Dominican brothers likely began a school immediately after their arrival, as priories were legally schools.[57] Information about the schools of the English Province is limited, but a few facts are known. Much of the information available is taken from visitation records.[58] The "visitation" was a section of the province through which visitors to each priory could describe the state of its religious life and its studies to the next chapter. There were four such visits in England and Wales--Oxford, London, Cambridge and York.[59] All Dominican students were required to learn grammar, old and new logic, natural philosophy and theology. Of all of the curricular areas, however, theology was the most important. This is not surprising when one remembers Dominic's zeal for it.[60]

English Dominican mysticism in the late medieval period differed from European strands of it in that, whereas European Dominican mysticism tended to concentrate on ecstatic experiences of union with the divine, English Dominican mysticism's ultimate focus was on a crucial dynamic in one's personal relationship with God. This was an essential moral imitation of the Savior as an ideal for religious change, and as the means for reformation of humanity's nature as an image of divinity. This type of mysticism carried with it four elements. First, spiritually it emulated the moral essence of Christ's life. Second, there was a connection linking moral emulation of Christ's life and humanity's disposition as images of the divine. Third, English Dominican mysticism focused on an embodied spirituality with a structured love of fellow men at its center. Finally, the supreme aspiration of this mysticism was either an ethical or an actual union with God.[61]

For English Dominican mystics, the mystical experience was not expressed just in one moment of the full knowledge of God, but in the journey of, or process of, faith. This then led to an understanding that was directed toward an experiential knowledge of divinity. It is important to understand, however, that for these mystics it was possible to pursue mystical life without the visions and voices that are usually associated with such a relationship with God.[36] They experienced a mystical process that allowed them, in the end, to experience what they had already gained knowledge of through their faith only.[62]

The center of all mystical experience is, of course, Christ. English Dominicans sought to gain a full knowledge of Christ through an imitation of His life. English mystics of all types tended to focus on the moral values that the events in Christ's life exemplified. This led to a "progressive understanding of the meanings of Scripture--literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical"[63]--that was contained within the mystical journey itself. From these considerations of Scripture comes the simplest way to imitate Christ: an emulation of the moral actions and attitudes that Jesus demonstrated in His earthly ministry becomes the most significant way to feel and have knowledge of God.[63]

The English concentrated on the spirit of the events of Christ's life, not the literality of events. They neither expected nor sought the appearance of the stigmata[64] or any other physical manifestation. They wanted to create in themselves that environment that allowed Jesus to fulfill His divine mission, insofar as they were able. At the center of this environment was love: the love that Christ showed for humanity in becoming human. Christ's love reveals the mercy of God and His care for His creation. English Dominican mystics sought through this love to become images of God. Love led to spiritual growth that, in turn, reflected an increase in love for God and humanity. This increase in universal love allowed men's wills to conform to God's will, just as Christ's will submitted to the Father's will.[65]

Concerning humanity as the image of Christ, English Dominican spirituality concentrated on the moral implications of image-bearing rather than the philosophical foundations of the imago Dei. The process of Christ's life, and the process of image-bearing, amends humanity to God's image.[66] The idea of the "image of God" demonstrates both the ability of man to move toward God (as partakers in Christ's redeeming sacrifice), and that, on some level, man is always an image of God. As their love and knowledge of God grows and is sanctified by faith and experience, the image of God within man becomes ever more bright and clear.[67]

As the image of God grows within man, he learns to rely less on an intellectual pursuit of virtue and more on an affective pursuit of charity and meekness. Meekness and charity guide Christians to acknowledge that they are nothing without the One (Christ) who created them, sustains them, and guides them. Thus, man then directs his path to that One, and the love for, and of, Christ guides man's very nature to become centered on the One, and on his neighbor as well.[68] Charity is the manifestation of the pure love of Christ, both for and by His follower.

Although the ultimate attainment for this type of mysticism is union with God, it is not necessarily visionary, nor does it hope only for ecstatic experiences; instead, mystical life is successful if it is imbued with charity. The goal is just as much to become like Christ as it is to become one with Him.[69] Those who believe in Christ should first have faith in Him without becoming engaged in such overwhelming phenomena.

The Dominican Order was affected by a number of elemental influences. Its early members imbued the order with a mysticism and learning. The Europeans of the Order embraced ecstatic mysticism on a grand scale and looked to a union with the Creator. The English Dominicans looked for this complete unity as well, but were not so focused on ecstatic experiences. Instead, their goal was to emulate the moral life of Christ more completely. The Dartford nuns were surrounded by all of these legacies, and used them to create something unique. Though they are not called mystics, they are known for their piety toward God and their determination to live lives devoted to, and in emulation of, Him.

Dartford Priory was established long after the primary period of monastic foundation in England had ended. It emulated, then, the monasteries found in Europe--mainly France and German--as well as the monastic traditions of their English Dominican brothers. As already stated, the first nuns to inhabit Dartford were sent from Poissy Priory in France.[44]

Evidence for the strength of the English Dominican nuns' vocation is strong itself. Even on the eve of the Dissolution, Prioress Jane Vane wrote to Cromwell on behalf of a postulant, saying that though she had not actually been professed, she was professed in her heart and in the eyes of God. This is only one such example of dedication. Profession in Dartford Priory seems, then, to have been made based on personal commitment, and one's personal association with God.[70]

[edit] Rosary

Throughout the centuries, the Holy Rosary has been an important element among the Dominicans.[71] Pope Pius XI stated that:

The Rosary of Mary is the principle and foundation on which the very Order of Saint Dominic rests for making perfect the life of its members and obtaining the salvation of others.[72]

Histories of the Holy Rosary often attribute its origin to Saint Dominic himself through the Blessed Virgin Mary.[73] Our Lady of the Rosary is the title received by the Marian apparition to Saint Dominic in 1208 in the church of Prouille in which the Virgin Mary gave the Rosary to him. For centuries, Dominicans have been instrumental in spreading the rosary and emphasizing the Catholic belief in the power of the rosary.[74]

On January 1, 2008, the Master of the Order declared a year of dedication to the Rosary.[75][76]

[edit] Mottos

* Laudare, Benedicere, Praedicare

To praise, to bless and to preach
(from the Dominican Missal, Preface of the Blessed Virgin Mary)

* Veritas

Truth

* Contemplare et Contemplata Aliis Tradere

To study and to hand on the fruits of study (or, to contemplate and to hand on the fruits of contemplation

Be aware of and avoiding Christmas and Religious Hiccups:

Speak up when you hear spurs or offensive jokes about the cultural or spiritual beliefs.
Make calendars for upcoming year to include the important dates of others by circulating the calendars requesting staff/consumers additions regarding dated and holiday.
Refrain from playing Christmas music to the entire unit.
Make a commitment to learn about religious difference.

Ramadan: the oldest holy period in the Islamic year held during the entire 9th lunar month of the year. This the month in which the Qura’n was revealed. During this time almost all Muslims over the age of 12 fast from sunup to sundown.

Hanukkah: is an eight day days Jewish holiday which may fall anytime from late November to late December. It celebrates the re-kindling of the temple menorah at the time of the Maccabee rebellion; by lighting of 9 candles on the Menorah each night of the holiday; one on the first night, two on the second and so on.

Rosh Hashannah: is the Jewish New year and celebrates the creation of the world and is a time for reflection on the past year.

Yom Kippur: is the Day of Atonement and is the most solemn day of the Jewish Year.

Christmas: is an annual observation of the birth of Jesus. The word in late old English, Cristes Maesse meant the Mass of Christ. In most European Countries, gifts are exchanged on Christmas Eve in keeping with the belief that the baby Jesus was born on the night of the 24th. The United States began celebrating in the first half of the nineteenth century with celebrations during Sunday schools. The theme promotes goodwill, compassion, and peace.

Kwanzaa: is a celebration established in 1866 by Maulana Karenga an African American scholar and activist who wanted to demonstrate: the importance of gathering of family and friends, reverence for the creator and creation, recommitment to truth justice and respect of others and nature.

Eid al-Adha

Eid al-Adha or the Festival of Sacrifice is a religious festival celebrated by Muslims worldwide in commemoration of the willingness of Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) to sacrifice his son as an act of obedience to God. The devil tempted Ibrahim by saying he should disobey God and spare his son. As Ibrahim was about to sacrifice his son, God intervened and instead provided a lamb as the sacrifice. This is why on this day Muslims all over the world, who have the means, sacrifice an animal (usually a goat or sheep) as a reminder of Ibrahim's obedience to God. (Islam names Ishmael as the son who was to be sacrificed, whereas the Judeo-Christian faiths name Isaac).

Eid al-Adha begins with a short prayer followed by a sermon. Prayers are followed by visits with family and friends, and the exchange of greetings and gifts. The festivities generally last for three days. At some point, members of the family will visit a local farm or otherwise will make arrangements for the sacrifice of an animal. The meat is then shared equally with family, friends, as well as the poor members of the community. The act symbolizes our willingness to give up things that are of benefit to us or close to our hearts, in order to follow Allah's commands. It also symbolizes our willingness to give up some of our own bounties, in order to strengthen ties of friendship and help those who are in need.

Eid al-Adha annually falls on the 10th day of the month of Dhul Hijja of the lunar Islamic calendar, the day after the pilgrims conduct Hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia. Eid al-Adha occurs approximately 70 days after the end of the month of Ramadan.

This year Eid al-Adha is being celebrated on Monday, December 8th

Use non-specific holiday decorations to promote the spirit of the season, highlighting themes common to most; humanity, tolerance, faith, and caring.
Provide the opportunity for employees/consumers to talk about their differences and share holiday traditions and family customs.

EVOLUTION OF RELIGIOUS
AND PHILOSOPHICAL
CONSCIOUSNESS

[[Read PDF of article here.|http://mises.org/reasonpapers/pdf/15/rp_15_1.pdf]]

This is the html version of the file http://mises.org/reasonpapers/pdf/15/rp_15_1.pdf.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
Page 1
WUME
ON THE ORIGIN AND
EVOLUTION OF RELIGIOUS
AND PHILOSOPHICAL
CONSCIOUSNESS
DONALD
W.
LMNGSTON
Emory
University
A
Ithough Hume often speaks of philosophy and religion as
dif'ferent forms of experience, they are so intimately con-
nected that
the
one
cm-not
he understood without u n d e r t d i n g
the other. Both have evolved over time, intermingling to form
qualitatively different forms of experience in which their original
identities me partidly submerged roughly in the way that colors
such
as
blue and yellow may be mixed and submerged into the
new color of green. Yet one of the identities may be strong enough
to appear in something of its original form as in a yellowish or
bluish green. And, of course, both identities
can
be recovered
through analysis. In what follows I e
ine Hume's views on the
nature and origin of religious and philosophical forms of con-
sciousness; how they have evolved to form distinctive modes of
religious and philosophicad existence; and whether, if at dl, these
modes of existence are beneficial to society.
It was
a
rationalistic prejudice, strong in Hume's time, that
the
first religion
was
theism and that it was known by the first
men
through the design argument.
This
rational form of theism
has since been corrupted by custom a d prejudice into polytheism
Reason Papem No.
15 (Summer 1990) 3-23.
Cowright
0
1990.
Page 2
4
ON PAPERS NO.
15
and into superstitious forms of theism. Sir Isaac Newton states
the view
as
follows: ''SO then the farst religion
was
the most
rational of all others till. the nations corrupted it. For there is no
way (wth out revelation) to come to ye knowledge of a Deity but by
the frame of nature."'
Hume rejected the rationalistic account of the first religion
offered by Newton, Clarke, and other "religious philosophers" in
favor of a causal, evolutionary account. That account employed
three original propensities of human nature which are necessary
for Hume's genealogy not only of religion but, as we shall, see, of
philosophy as well.
(1)
Men have a disposition to believe in
"invisible, intelligent power" as the cause of things. This disposi-
tion is "diffused over the human race, in d l places m d in all
ages..." (NHR, p.
25). (2)
Faced with the flux and contrariety of
phenomena, men would despair of understanding the causes of
things, "were it not for a propensity in human nature, which Peads
into
a
system, that gives them some seeming satisfaction9'
WHR,
p. 33). The system may be metaphorical
as
in reiigion or concep-
tual as
in
philosnphyj
but a
system of some sort there will be. (3)
'There
is an univerd tendency amongst mankind to conceive all
beings like themselves, and to trmfer to every object those
qualities, with which they are fmiliarly acquainted, and of which
they are intimately conscious"
WNR,
p.
33).
Because these propensities are universal, religion
is;
natural
to man, but it is not inevitable. Propemitiw have varying
strength, and the progensities that make religious belief possible
"may easily be perverted by various accidents and causes,
and...may
by
an extraordinary concurrence of circumstances, be
altogether prevented" (NNR, pp.
25-26).
m a t then were the
particular circumstances of the first men such that the above
propensities expressed themselves in the form of religion and not
in some other form?
Wume supposes that the first men must have been primitive
and barbarous. wthout the arts and sciences, man was little more
than a "necessitous animal" whose main concern was survival.
What prompted the first act of critical reflection was not admira-
tion of regularity and order in the universe but fear at the sudden
occurrence of unexpected events which threatened Pife and secu-
rity. The remlarities of nature were abmrfted into habit and did
not surface
as
objects of attention. It was frightening events
Page 3
RELIGIOUS
PWLOSOPIjBCdL CONSCIOUSNESS
5
contrary to expectation such as a monstrous birth or a violent clap
of thunder that triggered the three propensities mentioned above
and gave rise to the first explanation of events. This first account
was, and had to be, anthropomorphic, metaphorical, and practi-
cal.
Intelligent power was metaphorically read into the contrary
event itself: neptune is the violence of a sea at storm. Eventually
the human propensity
to
view things systematically was trig-
gered. Neptune is identified not only with the stormy
sea
but also
with the sea when d m . The god is seen to be related to other
gods, and, in time, the entire world is populated with gods.
Polytheism, then, was not only the first religion, it was the
first systematic account of events, and so is the origin of all
theoretical science and philosophy. Although polytheism is the
remote ancestor of theorizing, its rationale is practical not theo-
retical. The gods are the invisible powers which control contrary
events. To understand is to placate
an
arbitrary and demanding
personality. The logic of the system is not "the pure love of truth"
or "speculative curiosity" about the cause of order in the world,
but fear
CNHR,
p,
32).
Locd deities are pr&d
not out of admi-
ration but for the advantage of the believer. The
local
god is
flattered
as
being greater than alien gods and free of their limits.
These e s r a t e dpr d e s eventually free the god from all limits
of the visible world, and he is represented as the only true god,
a
perfect being who transcends the world of space and time and who
is
its
creator. In this way theism evolves out of polytheism.
But what emerges is not the "true" or "philosophical theism"
which Mume accepts.2 True theism is the belief in a perfect,
supreme intelligence who created a universe governed by law.
Such a belief, Hume
says,
conform to "the principles of reason
and true philosophy," and inspires men to scientific inquirby into
the laws that govern the universe and to mord conduct. It should
%banish every thing frivolous, unreasonable, or inhuman from
religious worship, and set before men the most illustrow exam-
ple,
as
well
as
the most commanding motive of justice and
benevolence" VVHEb, p.
59).
Only
a
being who could inspire such
practice is worthy of what Hume calls "rational worship and
adoration" WHR, p.
52).
True theism entails a belief in a "general providencew but not
in a ""grticu%s providence." The former is the belief that the
universe is the result of purposive intelligence which expr
Page 4
6
ON PAgERS NO. 15
itself in the form of law. The latter is the belief that the creator
""disturbs.. .at every turn, the settled order of events, by particular
volitiom"
WHR,
p. 50). m a t Hume
calls
'%utulgar theism" carries
with it belief in
a
particular providence, and so
is
not fully
emancipated from it polytheistic root%--the rationale of which is
nothing but
a
strategy for effecting
a
particular providence. Vull-
gar
theism, then, contains
a
contradiction, The same being repre-
sented as perfect and not governed by human passions is also
viewed as "the particular cause of health or sickness; plenty or
want; prosperity or adversity" and capable of responding to pray-
ers. But a being who respon& to prayers has pslssions very like
OUF
Own.
The propensity sf the imagination to metaphorically identify
invkible, intellient power with visible things exacerbates the
contradiction and generates what Hume calls
a
"flux and reflux"
of polytheism and theism.
The
abstract conception of a perfect
being renders the "active imagination of men, uneasy9'
(FSE-R,
p. 57). Soon an order of "inferior mediators or subordinate agents
me
invented which interpose betwixt
mankind
and their supreme
deity9'
WMR,
pp.
57-58).
These demigods or middle beings resem-
ble the human and are seized upon to satisfy the polytheistic need
for
"'a
particular providence." Thus theism desen* insensibly
back to idolatry: 'The virgin Mary, ere checkt by the reformation,
had proceeded, from being merely a good woman to usurp many
attributes of theAmighty9'
WWR,
pp.
52-53).
Eventually the very
vulgarity of these middle beings is seen to conflict with the notion
of a perfect being, and the religious mind bgins again the painful
ascent back in the direction of theism only to fall, in time, back
towards polytheism, The absurd "flux and reflux" of polytheism
and theism
can
be rstrained and moderated, but it can never be
overcome
VJHR, p. 58).
ORIGIN
OF
PWLOSQPI"SAND TRUE
ISM
The view of Newton and other religious philosophers that
theism (established by the design arwment) was the first religion
implied also that the first theists were philosophers and that
religion and philosophy were cwdensive
in
their origins. Hume
argues
to the contrargr that the first philosophers were polytheists
and that pl$heism itself is a form of atheism. Comseqeaently, the
Page 5
mLIGIOUS AND PHILOSOPHIC& CONSCIOUSmSS
7
first philosophers were atheists. Why Hume thought polytheism
to be a form of atheism will. be examined shortly. In the meantime,
we should
ask
what were the conditions which made philosophical
questioning possible. Hume's answer is the cultivation of the a t s
and the security brought on by "the institution of good govenment"
UVHR, p. 35). The rationale of polytheism is fear brought on by
extraordinary life-threatening events. The normal regularities of
experience are absorbed into habits which have proved successful
in the struggle for survival and never surface as objects of atten-
tion or curiosity. But with the appearance of the arts and good
government, security and leisure emerge, and a space is opened
up in which, for the first time, regularity and order become objects
of attention. "Superstition flourishes when life is governed by
accident" WHR, p. 35).
As
makers of society, men become aware
of order in their own works and this enables them to attend to
order and replarity in the world. Philosophy
has
its origin in the
polis of polytheistic culture.
-7
nume mentions 'Thaies, Anaximander," and "Anaximenes,
Heraclitus" as the first philosophers. They all sought to
give
an
ultimate explanation of the world by fixing on some privileged
item in the world, '%re, water, air, or whatever they established
to be .the ruling element" a d metaphorically identifgring it with
the whole WHR, pp. 43, 44ny 45). In these first theories, three
principles of philosophical reflection are manifest: the principles
of ultimacy, autonomy, and dominion. Philosophical theory is
ultimate: it transcends the world of experience and is uncondi-
tioned. The thought behind it is radimlly autonomous: it is en-
tirely emancipated from polytheistic custom and tradition. There
is no attempt, for
ple, to p r o d ean explanation of the world
as
a whole by magnifying the powers of one of the gods within the
world, Philosophical theory extends dominion over everything
within its scope, and
its
scope
is
total: the go& themselves are
generated from the ultimate cause and are subject to
its
laws
WHR,
p. 45).
Hume seems to think that philosopKcal reflection with its
demand for ultimaq, autonomy, and dominion is sui genen's, the
result of natural propensities which spontaneously arise under
conditions of security and leisure. That these conditiom first
appeared in plytheistic culture was
an
mident, though one for
which
a
b t o r i d explanaLion
can
be given. The sudden appearance
Page 6
8
ON PAPEW NO. 15
of critical pa%ilossphical reflection in the world may
be
seen
as
a
leap to
a
higher form of human eqerience. The e r i e n c e
is
of
a
higher form
because
it
is
more inclusive:
(41)
the
gods
were offered
by
polytheists
as
explanations not of regularity and order but of
frightening and extraordinary events; with the emergence of
philosophy, regularity and order are objects of speculation; (2) an
explanation is now possible for the gods themselves.
Hume stresses the fact that the fiwt philosophers were athe-
ists and, indeed, that polytheism itself was. atheistic. The polythe-
ists were atheists not because they denied the existence of
a
supreme author of the universe, but because they simply had no
such idea. Theirs was an atheism of innocence or ignorance. Hume
describes the first philswphers
as
"superstitious atheists," who
had no notion of a '%"being, that corraponk to our idea of a deity-
No first principle of mind or thought: No supreme government
and administration: No divine contrivance or intention in the
fabric of the world'WHR, p. 38). And so 'Thales, haximander,
and the eariy p'nilosophers, who redly
were
atheists"
had
no
difficulty giving an ultimate explanation of the world based on
radically autonomous reason while at the same time being "very
orthodox
in
the pagan creed" WHR,
p.
an).
The development of philosophical theism out of philosophical
atheism is different from the development of vulgar theism out of
polytheism. The latter is motivated by fear, the former by the
original human propensity to order experience into
a
system.
Hume describes this
as
the motive sf "speculative curiosity" or
"the pure love of truth" WHR, p.
32).
Philosophical theism
emerges by critical reflection on the thinking of the first philo-
sophical atheists, a d its appearace, Hume thinks, marks a
superior achievement in understanding. The reason is that the
imagination can understand reality only by metaphorically iden-
tieing its own pasts with the world: 'The mind rises gradually,
from inferior to superior: By abstracting from what
is
imperfect,
it forms an idea of perfection: And slowly distinguishing the
nobler parts of its frame from the grosser, it learns to transfer
only the former, much elevated and refined, to its divinity" WNR,
p.
24).
The great achievement of the first philossphers was to shift
polytheistic attention away from the contraieties of experience
to the ewerielace of replasity. It was
now
not the horror of a
momtrous birth which demanded errp%amtion in the form of a
Page 7
RELIGIOUS
PHILOSOPI.IICAL CONSCIOUSNESS
9
"particular providence" but the regularity of normal birth. How-
ever, the first philosophers were limited by the rationale of poly-
theism insofar
as
they metaphorically identified the "secret and
unknown causes" of the world by reflecting on themselves
as
passive recipients of nature. The objects of attention were regu-
larities and cycles such
as
birth and death, and the explanatory
entities were such things as water, air, earth, and fire. The
polytheistic philosophers had not yet learned to distinguish '"he
nobler parts" of their frame "from the grosser." They had not yet
achieved a deep view of themselves
as agents.
But Hume holds that once men have established the habit of
organizing the regularities of experience into systems, they nat-
urally begin to view these systems
as a
unity which is the result
'
of intelligent activity: "A purpose, an intention, a design is evident
in every thing, and when our comprehension
is
so far enlarged
as
to contemplate the first rise of this visible system, we must adopt,
with the strongest conviction, the idea of some intelligent cause
or author." And
the
'"uniform maxims
...
which prevail throi the
whole frame of the universe, naturally, if not necessarily, lead
us to conceive this intelligence
as
single and individual
..."
(NHR, p. 92).
Philosophical theism does not arise out of fear but from the
speculative play of the intellect
as
it searches in its own nature
for metaphors with which to understand the world. Man emerges
from being a passive recipient of nature to being an autonomous
agent. Nature is no longer conceived as an order of cycles deter-
mined by the power of fire, water, air and the like: what Hume
calls the 'blind, unguided powers of nature"
UVHR,
p. 4411).
Rather, nature
is
conceived
as
an intelligible system guided by a
general providence, and man is conceived asan agent participat-
ing in this divine activity.
Although philosophical theism arises naturally, it is not a
natural belief on the order of belief in external objects and causal
regularities. Hume taught that such belie& are universal and, in
primitive form, are shared even with animals. They cannot be
suppressed by reflection alone. True theism, then,
is
not natural
in that it occurs everywhere and at all times, but it
is
natural in
that it spontaneously arises in the security of thepolis after men
have established the habit of oganizing regularities into systems:
"it scarce seems possible, that any one of good understanding
Page 8
10
ON PAPERS NO. 15
should reject that idea, when once it
is
su
ted to him9' WHR,
p.
92).
Moreover, true theism is a hardy plant; and although
difficult to start (being the contingent result of historical circum-
stances and philosophical reflection), once planted it needs little
care. It is, in part, for this reason that Hume rejected the theory
of the religious philosophers that theism, founded on reflection,
must have been the first reIigion and had since been corrupted by
polytheism: "If these opinions be founded in arguments so clear
m d obvious as to carry conviction with the generality of mankind,
the same arguments, which at first diffused the opinions, will still
preserve them in their original purity..
.
.Reason, when very obvi-
ous, prevents these corruptions: When abstruse,
it
keeps the
principles entirely from the knowledge
06
the vulgar, who are
done liable to corrupt any principles7
sr
opinions" WHR, p.
29).
'I'rue theism, then,
is a
belief won
by
a philosophical elite, and
in
the philosophical community
is
vrrtually irreversible. Philoso-
phers, however, are not free of the prejudices of the wider vulgar
community of which they are
a
part;
and
so p-hiiosophicai theism
is
never held in pure fom. Hume taught as a principle that one
should not expect coherence of belief in abstract theories, espe-
cially theories of religion and philosophy WHB, p. 7811). Hume
mentiom Anaxdlgora as "the first undoubted theist mong the
philosophers9' followed by Socrates, Xenophon, and Plato.
All
of
these were very much under the influence of polytheistic super-
stitions. Xenophon, Hume observes, was in the grip of auguries,
mrifices, oracles, and beliefs such
as
that sneezing is a lucky
e
was
true of most other pagan philosophid
theists, including Wume's own hero Ciceso
m,
p. 73). The
Stoics were especially remarkable for blending philosophical the-
ism with pagan superstition: "the force of their mind, being all
turned to the side of morals, unbent itself in that of religion"
CNHR,
p. 77). Marcus Aurelius "received many admonitions from
the gods in
his
sleep," and Tanaetius was the only Stoic, amongst
the Greeks, who so much asdoubted with regard to augeries and
divinations." Epictetus blieved in the ""language of rooks and
ravens9Y(NNB pp, 77).
Turning to modern theists, Hume o b s v e :
'3
maintain, that
Newton, Locke, Clmke, etc. being
hi-
or
Sscinians,
were very
sincere in the creed they profest: And 1 always oppse this argu-
ment to some libertines, who
will
needs have
it,
that it was
Page 9
RELIGIOUS
PHILOSOPHICU CONSCIOUSNESS
11
impossible, but that these great philosophers must have been
hypocrites" UVm, p. 79). Indeed, the philowphical libertines
themselves may not know what they really believe. They may
accept the tenets of philosophid theism and many of the tenets
of vulgar theism while denying them. And
so
"might seem deter-
mined infidels, and enemies to the established religion, without
being so in reality; or at least, without knswing their own minds
in
that particular" (NHTR, p. 74).
RELATION
OF RELIGION
P L O S O P
IN ANCIENT AND MODERN SOCIET
The polytheistic religions of the ancient world were typically
state reli@ons. The
Lask
of these civic religions was to preserve
the sacred tradition of the political community and its relation to
the divine order. Hume observes that polytheistic religion was
remmhbly tolerant about the gods of other polytheistic regimes.
T'ne case was otherwise with theism: 'The intolerance of almost
all religions, which have maintained the unity
of
godj is as
remarkable
as
the contrary principle in polytheists
....
So sociable
is
polytheism"
WHR,
p. 61). Moreover, theism
is
not only intoler-
ant towards other religiom, it ten& to give rise to implacable
divisions within the theistic society between orthodox and heret-
ical
sects. One supreme object of worship demands one form of
worship and one creed: "the several sects fall naturally into
animosity, and mutually dischare on each other, that sacred zeal
and rancour, the most furious and impladle of all human pas-
sions" WHR, pp. 59-60). Theism generates actual violence within
the theistic community and rquires an oppr-ive
regime to
contain it. Polytheism, of course, has also been inhumane and at
times has even required human mcrifice in its rituals. But though
such practices are abhorrent, Hurne observes that sacrificing
a
few individuals chosen by lot
does
not affect the rest of society
very
much: W e r e a s virtue, knowldg, love of liberty, are the
qualities, which
a l l
home the fatal vengeance of inquisitors; and
when expelled, leave the society in the most shaaneful imorance,
corruption, and bonda*" (NHR, pp. 61-62). Hume concludes that
""few corruptions of idolatry and polythebm are more pernicious
to
politid society than this corruption of theism, when wried to
the utmost height"
UVNR,
p. 61).
Page 10
12
SON PAPERS NO. 15
Although theism
is
more intolerant than polytheism, it is not
the only form of thinking that isintolerant and in same respects
it is not the worst. Philosophy, which first appeared in polytheistic
society2 brought with it
a
form of intolerance and hostility peculiar
to itself. PhiIosop&ica% comsciousness, as we have seen, is struc-
tured by the principles of ultimacy, autonomy, and dominion.
Philosophid d
eernents are ultimate, and each antagonist
thinks that
his
o
inion has
a
title to rule: philosophers should
be kings. Moreover, philosophical beliefs are determined by the
thinker's autonamous
reason
and cannot be abandoned
an
pain of
losing his integrity as
a
thinker and, indeed,
as
an
existent.
For it
is a
peculiarity of philosophid thinlning to exercise total domin-
ion over the thinker and to define the meaning and d u e of his
entire existence.
Tb
abandon his p%%i%omphica%
&lie&
is
nothing
less than to betray the meaning m d worth of his own existence.
Philosophy is generated out of the free play of "spculative curi-
osity,"
and
so,
even more than
vulgar
theism, tends to break up
into sects which stand in impladie opposition.
it is
for this
ren-n
Hume taught
that
philosophical sects
in
polytheistic soci-
ety were more zealous and fanatical than religious sects
(N19R,
p. 63)- Philosophy, however, was not
a
threat to society because it
was
contained by the polytheistic civic religion. As long
as
the
regime itself
was
not threatened, philosophy flourkhd in innu-
merable sects each holding
a
self-proclaimed title to truth and
dominion at the expense of the others: Epicureanism, stoicism,
cynicism, skepticism, Pytbagoreanism, the peripatetic philoso-
phy, etc.
Over time philosophy spread throughout the learned part of
the polytheistic world, bringing with it the natural (though not
inevitable) inclination to theism that Wume think attends phil-
osophical
consciousness.
So by the time Chrktianity appeared in
the polytheistic world, intellectual circumstances, at least, were
ripe for its reception: "where theism forms the fundamental
y popular religion, that tenet
is so
conformable to
that philosophy is apt to incorporate itself with
such a system of theology" UVMR, p.
65).
The merger of pre-philo-
sophis theism (Christianity) and phillosophy is the union of two
distinct forms of intolerance and oppression driven by different
motives. Philosophy is motivated by ""speculative curioity';
vulgar theism by insecurity
and fear.
&though pre-philosophic
Page 11
RELIGIOUS
IPMILOSOPHICa CONSCIOUSNESS
13
vulgar theism tends to produce warring sects, it is not as prolific
as
philosophy (with its free and autonomous play of the specula-
tive intellect) in generating them. This means that
a
vulgar
pre-philosophic theism that
takes
on philosophical shape and
seeks to justify itself philosophically will generate a qualitatively
distinct form of religion that would be the most intolerant and
oppressive imaginable. The philosophical part of the religion will
generate endless sects, and these will be a blend of philosophical
arrogance (due to ultimq, autonomy, and dominion) with the
insecurity and fear due to vulgar theism. This newphilosophical
religion will both constantly generate these sects and be forced to
suppress them.
To
return to the color metaphor. The mixing of vulgar pre-
philosophic theism with philosophy produces
a
new but di
able hue. The Christianity that emerged at the close of the pagan
world is just such a blend: "But
as
philosophy was widely spread
over the world, at the time when Christianity arose, the teachers
of the new sect were obliged to form
a
system of speculative
opinio -...to explain, comment, confute, and defend with all the
subtilty of argument and science. Hence naturally arose keenness
in dispute, when the Christian religion
e to be split into new
divisions and heresies: And this keennm assisted the priests in
their policy, of begetting a mutual hatred and antipathy among
their deluded followers"
WHR,
pp. 62-63). It
is
in large part its
capture by philosophical consciousness that %as contributed to
render
CKRISTENDOM
the scene of religious wars and divi-
sions"
(NNR,
p.
62).
But the civil discord within Christendom has not always taken
the same form. Wume distinguishes between ancient and modern
forms of civil discord within Christendom. These can be explained
in the following way. Those born in a theistic culture who me
inclined to philosophical reflection will have little trouble seeing
their own philosophid reason confirmed by the theistic tradition:
"speculative reassners naturally carry on their assent, and em-
brace
a
theory, which has been instilld into them by their earliest
education, and which
also
po
some degree of consistence
and
unifomity"
CNNR,
p. 65). Given this merger of philosophy
and vulgar theism two things might happen:
(1)
the philosophic
part (motivated by speculative curiosity and the love of truth)
could replate the w l rtheistic part (motivated by insecurity
Page 12
14
REASON PAPEM NO.
15
and fw-which Nume
calk
"superstition"); or (2) the supersti-
tious part could regulate the philosophical part to serve its own
ends. Typicallyj it is the latter that happens: "But as these appear-
ances do often,
all
of them, prove deceitful [that philosophy and
vulgar
theism are compatible], philosophy will soon find herself
very unequally yoaked with her new associate;
and
instead of
regulating each principle,
as
they advance together, she
is
at
every turn perverted to serve the purp
of superstition" UVPIR,
p.
65).
Such was the case with ancient Christendom, but in
modern times the philosophic part of Christianity has been pro-
gressively moving to the surface.
In the
his to^
of England,
Hume charts the beginning of the
change at the fifteenth centuryc The conflict in modern religion
htween Catholicism and Protwtatism
is
interpreted
as
the
internecine struggle within Christendom between
its vulgar
the-
istic part and its philosophic part. Hume developed two critical
concepts with which to understand the conflict: '3nthusiasm" and
""Superstition." Protestantism is regularly identified with the
frmer, 6at:thcrlickm
w:th the latter. Both contain
the
helief
of a!
popular religion in
a
particular providence. MTkat distinguishes
them is that
is founded on piety to
a
tradition and
to its rituds; whereas 'knthusiasm9' rejects trdition in favor of
the authority of the interpretations of one's own mind. In the
History,
Wume observes that Protestantism and especially
Puritanism resembles more a system of metaphysia than
a
religion. Protestantism is to be compared to the "'Stoics [who] join
a philosophical
enthusiasm to
a
religious superstition" (NHR,
p.
77).
The expression "philosophical enthusiasm9' is important,
for it means that there
is
a form of fanaticism peculiar to the
philosophical mind itself. We have observed Hume's teaching that
philosophy naturally divides into sects and that philosophical
sects in the mcient world were more fanatical than religious ones.
This process was played out again after the Reformation
as
philosophical enthusiasm (which was the sublimated logic of
Protestantism) shattered the Reformation into countless sects,
each claiming an ultimate title to dominion.
The most radicad elprwion of the philomphiml enthusiasm
internd to Protestantism wcurrd
in
the English civil war, which
ined
in
the volumm covering the Stuut En@
in
the
Histoy
ofE1.gland.
Europe stood wtonished to see the Puritm
Page 13
RELIGIOUS
PHILOSOPPIICAI, CONSCIOUSNESS
15
make war on their sovereign, Charles I, and eventually execute
him. Once in controt the Puritans the
lves split into warring
sects each with a theory of the ultimate foundatiom of society and
government which they were prepared to impose on others by
force. The result was a dictabrship under Cromwell where the
whole of saciety was regulated by religious-philosophical theory.
Hume observes that this was carried
so
far
as
to attempt even the
regulation of recreation. The Puritans set aside the second Tues-
day in the month for recreation, but
as
Hume dryly observes,
"the people were resolved to be merry when they themselves
pleased, not when the parliament should prescribe it to them"
(27,
v,
pp. 452-53n).
The degree of regulation imposed by the Puritans resembles
the total dominion over the life of the indiGdual claimed by the
philosophid sects of the ancient world. The civic character of
polytheistic religion meant that "religion had, in ancient times,
very little influence on common life, and that, after men had
performed their duty
...
at the temple, they thought, that the gods
left the rest of their conduct to the
Ives
..."
(EM,
p.
341).
But
with the birth of philosophy a new guide to life appeared which
demanded total control:
'TI
those ages, it was the business of
philosophy alone to replate men's ordinary behaviour and
deportment; and
...
this being the sole principle, by which
a
man
could elevate himself above his fellows, it acquired ascendent
over many, and produced great singularities of maxims and
conduct"
(E,
p. 341). The total control demanded by philo-
sophical consciousness was confined by the polytheistic mag-
istrate, in the ancient world, to private sects. But in modern
Christendom, philosophical consciousness is internal to the
state religion. Consequently, its demand for dominion "is now
supplied by the modern religion, which inspects our whole
conduct, and prescribes an universal rule to our actions, to our
words, and to our very thoughts and inclinations"
(EM,
pp.
341-43).
Emphasis must be placed on what Hume calls "'the
modern religion9' which is not merely vulgar theism (supersti-
tion), but vulgar theism blended with philosophy (philosophical
enthusiasm). It is its philosophical component that, in large
part, gives modern religion, such
as
that of the Puritan regime,
its totalitarian character.
A
centugy later the philosophical
element in modern religion had gained such ascendencyl that
Page 14
16
ON P M E B NO. 15
Hume could say that "reli@on
...
isnothingbut
a
species of philos-
ophy"
( E q
p. 146).
By the time of the Enlighknment, then, a radical change had
occurred in the relation of philmphy to religion in European
culture. Christendom began as a marriage of "pphosophical en-
thusiasm" and
'"vulgar
theism." In Hume's time the tables had
turned, and the theistic part of Christianity, at Ieast in the learned
world, sought to justify itself in purely secular philosophid
terms. The governing maxim of many theists was no longer
Augustine's "credo ut intelligam," but the Enlightenment maxim
that one should proportion one's belief to the evidence, where
evidence was thought of as empirid and scientific.
As
religion
b e m e more philosophical, it became more secular. The secular-
ization of reIion was part
sf
a
wider wculmization of society,
and
ss
Mume could observe in
174.2:
'There has been a sudden
and
sensible change in the opinions of men within these last fifty
years, by the progress of learning and of liberty. Most people,
in
this island, have divested themselves of ail superstitious rever-
ence to names and authority: The clergy have much lost their
credit: Their pretensions and doctrines have been ridiculed; and
even religion
can
cely support itself in the world. The mere
n m e of king commands little respest; and to talk of a king
as
God's vice-regent on earth, or to give him any of those magnnificent
titles, which formerly dazzled mankind, would but excite laughter
in every one" (E, p.
51).
In this climate of opinion, philosophical
consciousness began to appear on the scene entirely emancipated
from
its connection with vulgar theism.
m e n he wrote the Deatise, Hume thought of these emanci-
pated philosophers as forming an elite group which did philosophy
mainly for the pleasure of it, but might also hope to be of some
use to society by suggwting reforms for improvement. In the first
Enquiry, Hume thought that the superior stability of modern
governments over ancient ones
was
due in part
La
the cu%tivation
of philosophy
@U,
p.
10).
In the TI-eatzse, he presented emanci-
pated philosophy under modern conditions
as
a benevolent force,
Even its errom, being confined to
a
few, are of little danger to
Page 15
RELIGIOUS
PHLOSQPHICAL CONSCIOUSNESS
17
society. "Qnerdly speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous;
those in philwphy only ridiculow9'
(T,
p.
272).
Hume, however,
does not deny that philosophy is a potential threat to society, for
in the same passage he mentions the cynics as a sect "who from
reasonings purely philosophical ran into
as
great extravagancies
of conduct as any Monk or Demise that ever was in the world" (T,
p. 272). This is compatible with his position in "'Of Parties,"
written shortly after the Treatise, that philosophied sects in the
ancient world were more fanatical than parties of religion.
Hume did not
ask,
in the 'Deatise, why one should expect
philosophy in modern society to be
a
benevolent force. In the
Essays, he explained how 'hilomphical enthusiasm9' in the an-
cient world was contained by the non-philosophical pagan civic
religion. But this solution is not possible in modern society since
the state religion ("the modern religion"), in Hume9s view, embod-
ies the errors of 66philosophieal enthusiasm9kithin itself. The only
restraint on emancipated philosophical error in modern society
must come from phiiosophy itself. And the question arises of
whether the elite, philosophidly reflective part of society
p
a
be
expected to w r y out the sort of selfcriticism that would keep
philosophical criticism moderate and humane. The question was
not a lively one for Hume when he wrote the Pe&kse because the
number of emancipated philomphers was small and the structure
of society was such that they had little influence. The pressing
problem for Hume
inn
the Treatise was not the errors of philosophy
emmcipated from vulgar theism but the errors of religious phi-
losophy.
But the question of whether emancipated philosophy would
have critical self-knowledge sufficient to r e c o z eand correct its
own errors began to be pressing
as
philosophy became more and
more ppulm. The philosophes saw themselves
as
an elite van-
guard leading the masses to higher philosophical self-conscious-
ness.
Diderot wrote: "Let
us
hasten to make philosophy
The
phenomenon of philosophid cowiowness on a popular
level was more advanced in Britain than in France. Hume ob-
served that it had given rise to a radically different sort of political
party which was unique to modern times and which he viewed
with alarm. This new sort of party was based not on interest or
&&ion
but on metaphysical principle:
Tarties
from principle,
espwially &t&
spulative principle,
are
h o r n only
to
modern
Page 16
18
ON
PAPEM
NO, 15
times, and are, perhaps, the most extraordinary and unaccount-
able
phmnomenon,
that has yet appear& in human affairs" (E,
p. 60).
Such parties were possible only in an age in which philosoph-
ical consciousness had in some way filtered down to the populace.
Centuries of instruction by Christendom with its union of philos-
ophy and vulgar theism had made it possible for even the vulgar
to participate in
a
confused sort of philwphicaf-religious think-
ing. But now the philosophical consciousness informing modern
political parties is entirely secular, as Hume makes clear
in
"Of
the Original Contract" where he observes that "no party, in the
present age,
can
well support itself, without
a
philosophical or
speculative system of principles, annexed to
its
political or prac-
tieall one;
we
accordingly find, that each
of
the factions, into which
this nation is divided, has reared up a fabric of the former kind,
in order to protect
and
cover that scheme of actions, which it
pursues"
(E,
p.
465). Politics in modern society is
metaphysical
politics. The implacable opposition and fanaticism of the ancient
phl!oso=hicd sects
which had
heen contained by the p
-
civic
religion could now be reenacted in the politid arena, The spec-
hcular errors and absurdities of philowphid reflection, the total
imversiom sf experience, and the diemtion from common life that
isapeculiarity of the philosophical intellect are no longer confined
to the closet but are free to inform pubIic poIicy.
The philosophical intellect informed by the principles of ulti-
macy, autonomy, and dominion is free to indulge the wildest and
most dangsous theories about the
seal.
It naturally gives rise to
endless sects each with a claim on the real and a title to rule, The
greatest m e and attention is needed, ewn among the most
responsible philosophers, to avoid being miseided by the illu-
sion-m&ing character of their own autonomous philosophical
reflection. But such m e and attention has seldom been exercised
by philosophers and is certainly not to
be
expected of the new
philosophieally informed masses: 'The people being commonly
very rude builders, especially in this s u l a t i v eway, and more
specially still, when actuated by party zeal;
...
their workmanship
must be a little unshpely, and dkover evident marks of that
violence and hurry, in which it
was
raised" (E9
p.
466). The
populaee is now vulnerable to
a
new breed of demapaes who
will lead
their deluded followers by the passions, not of reliaous
Page 17
RELIGIOUS AND PKILOSOPHICfi CONSCIOUSNESS
19
fanaticism, but of "philosophical enthusiasm."
Diderot had isstled the d l to make philosophy ppular. By the
next century,
M M
could write: "the philosophical consciousness
itself has been pulled into the torment of struggle. What we must
accomplish is the ruthless criticism of all that exists.'* Where
Diderot and Marx celebrated the capture of all aspects of human
existence by secular philosophical consciousness, Hume lamented
it, referring to his own time, mdonically, as "his philossphic age9'
(EM,
p. 19'711). Hume considered this a disaster not because there
is anything wrong with critical reflection or theorizing
as
such
but because there is something seriously wrong with philosophi-
cal
theorizing improperly conceived. In Part
Book
I
of the
Deatise of Human Natum, Hume forged
a
distinction between
true and false philosophical criticism-a distinction of the great-
est importance for undershnding his philosophical and historical
writings. 1 have discussed this fundmental distinction elsewhere
and cannot do justice to it
But
this
can
be said. Hume tries
to show in %ooki,
Past
Tv'that the traditiond notion of phiiosoph-
i a l reflection (i.e., reflection informed by the principles of ulti-
macy, autonomy, and dominion) distorts, constricts, and if pur-
sued consistently finally alienates one entirely from the experi-
ence of common life. Hume carries the reader dialectically
through "a gradation of three opinions, that rise abow each other,
according as the persons, who form them, acquire new degrees of
reason and knowledge. These opinions are that of the vulgar, that
of
a
false philosophy,
and
that of the true; where we shall find
upon enquiry, that the true philosophy approaches nearer to the
sentiments of the vulgar, than to those of a mistaken knowledge"
(T, p.
223,
emphasis mine).
Vulgar consiousness
is
not unreflective or uncritical; rather,
it is merelyphilosoghically unreflective consciousness. False phi-
losophy is
vulgar
comiousness come to philosophical self-aware-
ness.
Such thinking structured by the principles of ultimacy,
autonomy, and dominion imagines itself emmcipated from all the
prejudices and custom of common life and with the authority to
totally restructure vulgar consciousness in a philosophically ac-
ceptable way. Hume tries to show, however, that philosophical
criticism which comistently supposes itself emancipated from all
the prejudices and custom of common life ends
in
total skepti-
cism. Philosophem
in
fact seldom end in total skepticism, only
Page 18
2
0
ON PAPERS
NO.
15
because they are not really emancipatd from the prejudices of
common life but unknowingly s m u l ein same favorite prejudice
which gives content to and hides w h t are otherwientirely
empty philosophical principles. True philosophy emerges when
the philosopher recognizes that this
is
the condition of philosoph-
ical reflection and comes to affirm the prejudices of common life
as the ground of thought and proceeds to form critical principles
within that ground and not in oppmition to it.
Hume's reform of philosophy in Book
I,
Part
HV
requires that
one abandon the principle of autonomy (the philosopher
is
not the
spectator of common life but aparticipant
in
it) and the principle
of
dominion
(it is not autonomous reason that has
a
title to rule
but custom-and custom is always
social,
requiring deference to
others). True phi%owphy is critical refleetion on custom carried
out within, the domain of custom. It
is,
if one likes, criticism of
custom, by custom, and for custom. Or
as
Hume puts it: 'T'hillo-
sophical decisions are nothing but the reflectism of common life
methodized
and corrected"
(EU,
pa
162).
The false philosophical consciousness imagines itself the sov-
ereign spectator of the whole of custom. Custom
is
no longer
a
mode of participation but an alienated obect of reflwtion. The
philosopher seeks a theory of this tohlity purged of the authority
of any custom within it. But such theories always end in taking
a
favorite part of custom and ontologically reducing much, if not all,
of the rest to it: 'TVhen
a
philosopher
has
once laid hold of
a
favousite principle, which perhaps accounts for many natural
effmb, he extends the
e principle over the whole creation, and
reduces to it every phaenomenon, though by the most violent and
ning"'
(23,
p. 159). Thus Thales took water and re-
duced everything to it. The history of philosophy is filled with such
magical invessiom. Benevolence
is
really self-love, property is
theft, to
be is
to
be
perceived, man is condemned to freedom, etc.
Oakshott once observed that eveything Marx touched turned to
uesstition.
Hume taught that everything the false philosopher
touches
is
transformed into
a
strange inverted world over which
the philosopher alone has dominion. Hume, like O&eshott, rec-
oaized in false philosophial consciousness a secular form of
superstition: 'Do you come to a philompher as to a
cunning man,
t %earn wmething by magic or witchcrafi, beyond w b t
can
be
known by common prudence and discretion"?" (E, p. 16%).
Page 19
RELIGIOUS
PMILQSQPMICAL CONSCIOUSNESS
21
mE
TREATISE
POSTMODERN
CULTURE
Hume recognized his own
age
as one in which philosophical
consciousnw was on the way to becoming the dominant form of
culture. In our own time it has become the dominant form: we live
in what might be called the first philosophic
age.
Hume taught
that modern philosophic religion imp
universal rules "to our
action, to our words, and
to
our very thoughts and inclinations"
(EM,
pp. 341-43). Likewk, secular philosophical consciousness
informs every aspect of contemporary culture. Writing at the
height of the cold war Camus had this to say about the dominion
of (what Hume would have called) false philosophid conscious-
ness in politics: 'These are crimes of passion and crimes of logic
....
We are living in the era of
...
the perfect crime. Our criminals are
no longer helpless children who could plead love
as
theis excuse.
On
the contrary, they are adults, and they
philosophy, which can be used for
purp
forming murderers into judg
es....
I:
mere ingenuous times, whez
the tyrant razed cities for his own greater glory, when the slave
chained to the conqueror's chariot was dr
d through the re-
joicing streets
...
the mind did not reel before such unabashed
crimes, and judgment remain& uncloudd. But slave amps
under the
flag
of freedom, masacres justified by philanthropy
...
in
one sense cripple judgment. On the day when crime dons the
apparel of innocence through a curious transposition peculiar to
our timeeit is innocence that is
called
upon to justify itelf."
The spntanmus collapse of communist regimes throughout
eastern Europe may
be
viewed
as
the long overdue Numean
unmasking by "true philosophy" of the spechcular absurdities of
failed economic systems ruling in the name of social justice and
of totalitarian regimes ruling in the mme of human freedom.
m a t Canus called
"a
curious trmpsition9' of concepts "peculiar
to
our times" is what Hume d l e d "philosophical chymistry"
(alchemy) whereby false philosophical consciousnm inverts the
object of its reflection into its opposite
(EM,
p.
297).
If the cold
wm
is over, the politid world we live in is still very much a world
of contraq philosophid system seeking inslantiation and do-
minion. And so it
is
a world vulnerable to the seculm superstitions
of
fahe
pbilmphid thmrizing. And not just the politid world. The
whole of altua"e:
mods,
art, litel-ature, mhit&ure, manners, and
Page 20
22
ON PMERS; NO.
16
language are vulnerable to the inversions of 6'philosophicd chym-
istry"
as
carried out by countless forms of "critical theory" such
as
structuralism, deconstructionism, feminism, etc., each seeking
dominion through the ancient philosophid project of "unmask-
ing" and "consciousness raising." But if Hume9s teaching in Book
I, Part
IV
of the Treatise that there is a distinction between true
and false forms of philosophical comiousness is correct, then
some of the unmaskers will need to
be
unrnasked and some of the
consciousness raisers will need to have their consciousness raised
from the level of false philosophy to that of "true philosophy
[which] approaches nearer to the sentiments of the
vulgar,
than
to those of a mistaken knowledge"
(T,
g.
223).
In
a
philosophic
age,
the discovery of this distinction between
true and false philosophical criticism is of fundamental ethical
importance. It is of ethical importance because in
a
philosophic
age
no normative question of practice
can
escape being structured
by philosophical consciousness whose dominion, by the very na-
ture of philosophiml thinking, is and must be total. Spinoza could
C:+IA
L;"
=,eat
-
wark
0x1
su%+ance Ethics
bem1_1se
he
thought
the
question of being
is
prior to the question of how to h e . But
modern thinkers after Hume and &nt rejected this thesis in
favor of the doctrine t h t substaxace itself is structured by hum=
consciousness.
In
Book
I,
Part
F(7
of the Deatise Hume shows how
philosophical consciousness itself is a deeper notion than sub-
stance insofar as substance
is a
construction of philosophical
consciousness.
In
a philosophic age all objects of culture are
philosophically canstrmted objects. (This ispart of what
is
meant
by describing contemporary culture as "pmtmodern.") In such
an
age it is not the question of being but an understanding of the
difference between true and false philosophical consciousness
that is prior to the question of how to live. In this way the Treatise,
especially Book 1, Pmt
N,
is
a
deep work in ethics.
The Enlightement also imagined itself t o p
to the problem of ethics. That solution was for philosophical
consciousness ta purge itself of vulgar theism and to replace it as
the dominate form of culture. It never occurred to thephilosophes
that the philosophical intellect itself might contain
a
form of error,
superstition, self- deception, and destmction the qua1 ts anfihing
in
w u l p
theism.
This
error
is dl
the more dficult to dkowr
because philosophial reflection (informed by the principles of
Page 21
RELIGIOUS
PmLOSOPI%ICAE CONSCIOUSNESS
23
ultinaacy, autonomy, and dominion)
is
done in the name of
reason,
n" be a source of error and self-deception? In
this naive confidence in the philosophical intellect
as
self justify-
ing, Diderot issued the call to make philosophy popular. But
before this call had gone out, Hume had already seen, in the
Treatise,
the need for
a
radical criticism of philosophy itself. In
the heyday of the Enlightenment Hume had issued a call for a
deeper form of Enlightenment, one devoted to unmasking the
kingdom of darkness internal
to
the philosophical intellect itself.
It was
a
call that in our "postmodern" culture has scarcely been
heard.
1.
Quoted by James Force in 'The Newtonians and Deism" in James Force
and Richd Popkin, Essays on the Context, Nature, and Influence of
dsmc
Newton's Theology (Dordrecht: Kluwei;
19901,
p,
59.
2.
I
have discussed the nature of Rume's belief in %hilosophical theism"
in
Hmek Philosophy of Common Life (Chicago
and
London: University of
Chicago Press,
19841, &ape 6,
3. Quoted in Thomas A. Spragens, The Imny
of
Liberal Reason (Chicago
and
iondon: University
of
Chicago Press,
19811, p. 83.
4. KarEMarz on Revolution, 13 vols., Saul
K.
Padover,
ed.
and trans.
(New
York: McGraw Hill,
1971), I,
p.
516.
5. See Hume% Philomphy of Common Life, chap. 1.
6. Michael Oakeshott, On Hwnan Conduct (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1975),
p. 309.
7. Albert
Camus,
The Rebel (New York: Vintage Books,
19561,
p. 23.
Page 22
Abbreviations for David Hume's Works
Used Throughout This Volume
E
Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary, ed. Eugene
F.
Miller.
Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1985.
EU
David Hume's Enquiries Concerning Human Understand-
ing, ed.
L.
A.
Selby-Bigge, 3rd ed. revised
P. H.
Nidditch. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1975.
I
An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding, ed. C.
W.
Hendel. Indianapolis, Ind.
:
Bobbs-Merrill, 1955;
EM
Enquiries
Concerning the
P
inciples of Morals, ed. L.
A.
Selby-Bigge, 3rd ed.
revised
P. H.
d
idditch. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975.
H
The History ofEngland, From the Invasion of Julius Caesar
to the Abdication of
Jams
the Second, 1688, based on the edition
of 1778 with the author's last corrections and improvements. 6
vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1983.
L
The Letters of David Hume, J.
Y. T.
Grieg. 2 Vols. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1932.
NHR
The Natural History of Religion, ed.
A.
Wayne Colver
and
DHR
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, ed. John
Valdimir Price. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976.
T
A
IFeatise of Human Nature, ed.
L.
A.
Selby-Bigge, 2nd
edition with text revised and variant readings by
P.
H.
Nidditch.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.
Page 23
A Journal of Interdischlinary Nrmative Studies
Essays to Commemorate the
250th
Amiversary
sf the Completion of David Rme's
A
neatise ofRurnan Nature
Eldited by
Stuanl
D.
Warner
Articles
Hume on the Origin and Evolution of Religious
and Philosophical Consciousness
.......................
Donald W Livingston 3
The %rtue of Political Skepticism
.....................................
James King
24
Hume's Account of Property
........................................
Nicholas Capaldi
47
David Hume on the Public Interest
...............................
Stuart D. Warner
74
Spinoza and Hume on Indi,viduals
...........
Douglas Den Uyl and Lee Rice
91
Natural Rights, Philosophical Realism, and Hume's
Theory of Common Life
.................................
Douglas B. Rasmussen
118
Discussion Notes
In Defense of Moore's "'Proof of an External World"
......
John O. Nelson
137
Race Isn't Merit
.............................................................
Eugene Sapadin
141
Book Reviews
William
6.
Scott and David K. Hart's Organizational
Values in America
...................................................
David L Norton
149
Hans-Hermann Hoppe's
A
:rheor-y of Socialism
and Capitalism
............................................................
Daniel Shapiro
154
m M O N PMERS
is published1 at the Department of Philosophg
Auburn University,
AL
36849.
Send orders
($7.00
per copy in US and
Canada,
$8.00
elsewhere; make check payable to Reason Papers) to
Professor Tibor
R.
Machlan, Reason Papers, Department of Philosophy,
Auburn U v e r i t y
AAE
36849.
Manuscripk should be accompanied with
return postage and envelope. Col3pight01990 by the Department of
PElosophy,
Auburn
University.
All
rights reserved.
No.
15
SUMMER
1998

[[Read book here|http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=587580]]

On Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life. - Review - book review
Donald A. Nielsen

On Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life, edited by N. J. ALLEN, W. S. F. PICKERING, and W. WATTS MILLER. London and New York: Routledge, 1998, xi + 224 pp. $50.00.

The work of Emile Durkheim and his school has been the subject of increasing attention recently, much of it devoted to The elementary forms of religious life. The present volume, one in the series "Routledge Studies in Social and Political Thought," is a valuable addition to this trend. It contains fifteen essays drawn from a larger pool of papers presented at a 1995 conference sponsored by the British Centre for Durkheimian Studies, an institution which has advanced both the translation of Durkheimian texts (e.g. Robert Hertz on sin, expiation, and religion) and the publication of much related research.

Each essay in the volume examines a particular aspect of Durkheim's landmark study. The common focus on a single text is particularly welcome. From these close alternative readings, rooted in specific problems and questions, interpretations emerge which challenge our inherited images of Durkheim and explore new paths in the sociology of religion, the sociology of knowledge, and social theory and philosophy. The authors operate with analytical and historical sophistication and few readers will fail to be stimulated by the treatments, even when they disagree with them. The discussions have a broad range, linking the "primitive" and "modem" with "post-modern" concerns. While readers will undoubtedly be attracted to different items on the menu, few will leave the table hungry or fail to devour with gusto the thirteen page bibliography of Durkheimiana at the end.

Despite the common focus on Forms, the book's range of topics defies easy summary. Pickering's introduction gives an insightful analysis of the issues raised by each essay and helpfully groups the papers into four general sections -- methodology, belief, ritual, and epistemology. The chapters cluster around common substantive themes which repeatedly surface in the various discussions. I found several of these thematic foci especially productive. Werner Gephart (Ch. 10) contrasts the vitalist element in Durkheim's work, especially the role of collective memory and the sacred, with his analysis of institutions, while discussing commemorative rites and the cult of anniversaries, including the Holocaust and others from WWII. William Ramp (Ch. 11) looks at the relationships among collective effervescence, differentiation/de-differentiation, and symbolism, linking Durkheim to Bataille in a fruitful way through an examination of transgression, while N. J. Allen (Ch. 12) creatively employs the notion of effervescenc e to breathe new life into the old question of the origins of society. Demes Nemedi (Ch. 13) sharply delineates the ambiguities in Durkheim's treatment of ritual as both social reproduction and social creation and demonstrates the anomalous place of cultural innovation in his theory.

Other themes also receive suggestive treatment. Durkheim's theory of ideology, including the ideas of the soul and the sacred, is examined by Kenneth Thompson (Ch. 7), who discusses contemporary social movements and practices such as body tatooing within this context. In a related vein, Giovanni Paoletti (Ch. 6) dissects Durkheim's ideas on the cult of images and symbolic representations through a sharply focused reading of Forms, Ch. VII, Bk. II (on the origin of the totemic principle), while Malcolm Ruel (Ch. 8) criticizes the limited appropriation of Durkheim's ideas about beliefs and rites by the symbolic anthropologists.

Some of the contributors focus more on Durkheim and his intellectual environment -- for example, his use of Spencer and Gillen (Howard Morphy, Ch. 1), the debate between Durkheim and Levy-Bruhl (Dominique Merllie, Ch. 2), the ideas of Durkheim and Boutroux on religion and science (Robert Alun Jones, Ch. 3), the conflicting origins in Robertson-Smith and Sylvain Levi of Durkheim's theories of sacrifice (Ivan Strenski, Ch.9), and the problem of belief in Durkheim, Renouvier, Kant and others (Sue Stedman Jones, Ch.4). These essays sharpen our understanding of the historical context of Durkheim's work. The volume ends on a "logical" note with two related essays, on Durkheim's theory of the causes and functions of the categories (Ch. 14 by Warren Schmaus) and on problems of conformity and non-contradiction in Durkheim and philosophy (Ch. 15 by Terry Godlove).

Although the authors generally present their cases clearly and coherently, readers should be forewarned: they often cover difficult ground. The book will probably be more attractive to Durkheim specialists and graduate students than to novices in the field. This is especially true of the essays dealing with problems of philosophy, methodology, and epistemology. The essays which focus more on Durkheim's substantive themes and extend his insights to the study of current issues will probably engage a wider audience. In either case, the reading is well worth the effort.

Study Guide for Test #1

1. O’Leary argues that pop culture must be understood in relation to 1) external historical events and 2) the internal logic of the developing media in question. Use The Matrix to explain both aspects of his claim.
Weber
2. Using at least 2 passages from the text, explain PRECISELY what Weber means by “the spirit of capitalism”? Note: you get no credit—zippo!—if you do not use two texts!
3. Then explain why Weber calls this ‘spirit’ worldly asceticism, as opposed to the other-worldly asceticism practiced by monks and nuns.
4. Weber analyzes this “spirit” as an irrational (to people who are traditionalist) form of ‘rationalization.’ For example, he writes that the Puritans valued labor not for the sake of labor but because God valued rational labor in a calling.
• How did this rationalization contribute to the birth and progress of capitalism?
• Why does Weber contend this rationalization became an iron cage?
5. Explain the base/superstructure problem. Then using at least one passage from Weber’s text, explain Weber’s answer to this problem. Note: no text, no credit.

6. Weber replaces the base/superstructure lens with:
a. a dialectic between base and superstructure
b. disciplinary power
c. the iron cage of church corruption
d. the social construction of norms

7. Weber claims that the Puritan campaign against the temptations of the flesh was really a struggler against the irrational use of wealth. Why does he think this? What social institution (or lifestyle) did this lead the Puritans to promote and sacralize?
8. Use Weber to explain changes in the Nation of Islam with respect to a) class and b) religious ideology.
9. Explain elective affinity and how this concept helps Mamiya avoid the error of analyzing religion only through its elite leaders. Then use the concept of elective affinity to explain why audiences might generate different interpretations of The Matrix.

Durkheim
10. Using pages 311-315 from The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, explain how Durkheim balances and negotiates the believer’s point of view and the analysis generated by the sociologist of religion. You must refer in detail to this particular passage.
11. What are the categories of the understanding? How does Durkheim think they are related to religion?
12. Use at least two passages from Durkheim to explain what Durkheim means when he says that the idea of society is the soul of religion. Note: no texts, no credit.
13. Durkheim thinks that humans transcend the particulars of their individual lives when:
a. God speaks to them through the Bible
b. God speaks to them through a prophet
c. they are moved by the spirit of capitalism
d. they participate in group rituals
14. Durkheim thinks that all societies must have ideals. T/F?
15. For Durkheim, religion’s purpose is to generate social ideals in people’s minds. T/F?
16. Durkheim’s analysis of religion focuses on: a. beliefs b. the spirit of capitalism
c class d. the economic base e. the superstructure f. the cult g. pastoral power
17. Why does Durkheim think effervescence is so crucial in religion and in society?
18. What kind of necessity does Durkheim think that socially constructed categories have? a. a priori b. absolutely none c. normative d. that’s the way the world is
19. Explain the notion of an invented tradition, using sumo as your example.

Foucault
20. Describe the epistemic rupture that Foucault identifies between pre-modern punishment and modern punishment. Be sure to give an example of each, and to clarify the two things that change in the transition from pre-modern to modern.
21. Foucault argues that the soul is constructed as a political technology by which modern society accesses and disciplines the body. Pick one passage in Foucault where he makes this argument, and explain what it means. Note well: no text, no credit!
22. Using a text from Foucault, explain what Foucault means when he says that in modern societies, power is “disciplinary.” Note well: no text, no credit!
23. Explain what Foucault means by “docile bodies.” Note well: no text, no credit!
24. The type of soul which Discipline and Punish claims that modern power produces:
a. a religious soul marked by sin and seeking salvation from Christ
b. a soul who is a pilgrim in a valley of tears
c. the individual who follows tradition blindly and without question
d. the normative individual who seeks to embody norms—i.e. to be “normal.”

25. Foucault replaces the base/superstructure lens with:
a. technologies of power (such as the examination)
b. an analysis that reduces knowledge to being a mere mask for power
c. an analysis that reduces knowledge to being a mask for economic interest
26. Foucault points to the changes between the execution of Damiens and the way we execute people today as proof that Western society is becoming more humane. T/F?
27. Explain how the examination is a technology by which modern power produces individuals (and therefore the ‘soul’).
28. Explain how the architecture of the Panopticon produces a soul.

29. Foucault thinks that power produces knowledge. T/F?
30. Foucault thinks that the fact that power penetrates knowledge means that such knowledge is therefore false and not really “true” knowledge. T/F?
31. Foucault thinks that knowledge is nothing but a mask for power. T/F?
32. Foucault thinks that power in modern societies is essentially negative – in the sense that what power does is to take things away, to repress people. T/F?
33. While Foucault acknowledges that power in modern societies can be negative, he also thinks that power in modern societies works more often by being positive—in the sense of empowering people, amplifying what they are capable of doing and being. T/F?
34. What is a shot/reverse-shot sequence? What does it normally do? How (according to Halberstam) is it interrupted in Boys Don’t Cry to allow us, not merely to look at Brandon, but (more humanely) to look with Brandon?
35. Circle as many as apply--Foucault thinks that the object of modern punishment is:
a. the body, yes, but only accidentally as a way to get to the soul
b. the theatrical display of the divine legitimation of the nation
c. the soul, yes but as a way to get to the body
d. to cause sufficient pain to exact retribution for the victim(s)
e. to cause as much pain as possible to demonstrate the sovereign power of the state
f. to cause as much pain as possible to demonstrate the sovereign power of the king
CAREFUL: THIS IS A TRICK QUESTION

Omi and Winant
Polygenesis vs. monogenesis Epiphenomenon Niche edge effect
Racial formation – racialization – racialized society (in Emerson and Smith)
Racial state and its 4 components Cultural tools
Evangelicalism/ “engaged orthodoxy” vs. traditional fundamentalism
Free will individualism Relationalism (in the context of evangelicals)

35. Omi and Winant claim that they developed the idea of racial formation to break thru 2 habits of thought: 1) thinking of race as essence; and 2 thinking of race as an illusion. Write an essay in which you explain what is wrong with each of these habits of thought, and how racial formation can help s think differently and thus avoid these two mistakes.
36. Why do they think it is wrong to treat race as an epiphenomenon?
37. Why do Emerson and Smith think that studies which assess racial attitudes in the US miss the bat if all these studies do is as questions like: Are you personally prejudiced?
38. Explain Emerson and Smith’s claim that today’s institutions can be most effective at reproducing racialization if their leaders are not especially personally prejudiced.
39. Emerson and Smith note white evangelicals having great difficulty in seeing racial formation. They deny the idea that this difficulty is a result of white evangelicals either lying or protecting their own advantages. They trace this difficulty instead to religion hence the book’s title “Divided by Faith.” Use Ann Swidler's notion of "cultural toolkit” to explain the role of religion.
40. Why do Emerson and Smith think that racial formation mitigates against ending racism by forming intimate personal relationships across races? Why do they think friendships are not enough to end racism?
41. Emerson and Smith argue that competition among religious groups drives them to be what they do not want to be: homogeneous. Explain why they think this. .
42. Why do Emerson and Smith think it matters if “the 11 o’clock hour on Sunday remains one of the most segregated hours in US society”? Why do they think it matters if religious institutions remain segregated? {Note, they are talking about Christianity because it is the majority religion. One could make similar arguments about Buddhism, for instance: white Anglo-Buddhists get together in one group, ethnic Asians in another).

Please note: I reserve the right to adjust questions about Omi and Winant and to add questions on Panopticism and Jakobsen after we have covered them in class.

[[Power Point Presentation on Religion|http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=25&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.paradigmpublishers.com%2Fresrcs%2Fuser%2Facischap15.ppt&ei=Rv41SZO4EYis8gSSpLiDCA&usg=AFQjCNFhsO4JKgn-yhS7Jx7wLmgv5Yem9g&sig2=kBacLqPhXIuccojsbz5VXg]]

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/24/Emile_Durkheim.jpg/150px-Emile_Durkheim.jpg]]

Émile Durkheim (French pronunciation: [dyʁkɛm]; April 15, 1858 – November 15, 1917) was a French sociologist whose contributions were instrumental in the formation of sociology and anthropology. His work and editorship of the first journal of sociology, L'Année Sociologique, helped establish sociology within academia as an accepted social science. During his lifetime, Durkheim gave many lectures, and published numerous sociological studies on subjects such as education, crime, religion, suicide, and many other aspects of society. He is considered as one of the founding fathers of sociology and an early proponent of [[solidarism]].

* 1 Biography
o 1.1 Early years
o 1.2 Middle years
o 1.3 Later years
* 2 Theories and ideas
o 2.1 Social facts
o 2.2 Education
o 2.3 Crime
o 2.4 Law
o 2.5 Suicide
+ 2.5.1 Egoistic suicides
+ 2.5.2 Altruistic suicides
+ 2.5.3 Anomic suicides
+ 2.5.4 Fatalistic suicides
o 2.6 Religion
* 3 Literature
* 4 See also
* 5 References
* 6 External links

[edit] Biography

[edit] Early years

Émile Durkheim was born in Épinal, Lorraine on 15 April 1858. He came from a long line of devout French Jews; his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather had been rabbis. At an early age, he decided not to follow in his family's rabbinical footsteps. Durkheim himself would lead a completely secular life. Much of his work, in fact, was dedicated to demonstrating that religious phenomena stemmed from social rather than divine factors. While Durkheim chose not to follow in the family tradition, he did not sever ties with his family or with the Jewish community. Many of his most prominent collaborators and students were Jewish, and some were blood relations.

A precocious student, Durkheim entered the École Normale Supérieure (ENS) in 1879. The entering class that year was one of the most brilliant of the nineteenth century and many of his classmates, such as Jean Jaurès and Henri Bergson would go on to become major figures in France's intellectual history. At the ENS, Durkheim studied with Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges, a classicist with a social scientific outlook, and wrote his Latin dissertation on Montesquieu.[1] At the same time, he read Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer. Thus Durkheim became interested in a scientific approach to society very early on in his career. This meant the first of many conflicts with the French academic system, which had no social science curriculum at the time. Durkheim found humanistic studies uninteresting, and he finished second to last in his graduating class when he aggregated in philosophy in 1882.

[edit] Middle years

There was no way that a man of Durkheim's views could receive a major academic appointment in Paris, and so after spending a year studying sociology in Germany he traveled to Bordeaux in 1887, which had just started France's first teacher's training center. There he taught both pedagogy and social science (a novel position in France). From this position Durkheim reformed the French school system and introduced the study of social science in its curriculum. However, his controversial beliefs that religion and morality could be explained in terms purely of social interaction earned him many critics.

The 1890s were a period of remarkable creative output for Durkheim. In 1893 he published The Division of Labour in Society, his doctoral dissertation and fundamental statement of the nature of human society and its development. Durkheim's interest in social phenomena was spurred on by politics. France's defeat in the Franco-Prussian War had created a backlash against secular, republican rule and many considered a vigorously nationalistic approach to rejuvenate France's fading power. Durkheim, a Jew with a sympathy towards socialism, was thus in the political minority, a situation which galvanized him politically. The Dreyfus affair of 1894 only strengthened his activist stance.

In 1895 he published Rules of the Sociological Method, a manifesto stating what sociology was and how it ought to be done, and founded the first European Department of Sociology at the University of Bordeaux. In 1898 he founded the journal L'Année Sociologique in order to publish and publicize the work of what was by then a growing number of students and collaborators (this is also the name used to refer to the group of students who developed his sociological program). And finally, in 1897, he published Suicide, a case study which provided an example of what the sociological monograph might look like. Durkheim was one of the founders in using quantitative methods in criminology during his suicide case study.

[edit] Later years

In 1902 Durkheim finally achieved his goal of attaining a prominent position in Paris when he became the chair of education at the Sorbonne. Because French universities are technically institutions for training secondary school teachers, this position gave Durkheim considerable influence - his lectures were the only ones that were mandatory for the entire student body. Despite what some considered, in the aftermath of the Dreyfus affair, to be a political appointment, Durkheim consolidated his institutional power by 1912 when he was permanently assigned the chair and renamed it the chair of education and sociology. It was also in this year that he published his last major work, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life.

World War I was to have a tragic effect on Durkheim's life. Durkheim's leftism was always patriotic rather than internationalist — he sought a secular, rational form of French life. But the coming of the war and the inevitable nationalist propaganda that followed made it difficult to sustain this already nuanced position. While Durkheim actively worked to support his country in the war, his reluctance to give in to simplistic nationalist fervor (combined with his Jewish background) made him a natural target of the now-ascendant French right. Even more seriously, the generation of students that Durkheim had trained were now being drafted to serve in the army, and many of them perished as France was bled white in the trenches. Finally, Durkheim's own son died in the war — a mental blow from which Durkheim never recovered. Emotionally devastated and overworked, Durkheim collapsed of a stroke in Paris in 1917. He recovered over several months and resumed work on La Morale.

Durkheim died from exhaustion on November 15, 1917, at the age of 59. He lies buried at the Cimetière du Montparnasse in Paris.

[edit] Theories and ideas

[edit] Social facts

Main article: Social fact

Durkheim was concerned primarily with how societies could maintain their integrity and coherence in the modern era, when things such as shared religious and ethnic background could no longer be assumed. In order to study social life in modern societies, Durkheim sought to create one of the first scientific approaches to social phenomena. Along with Herbert Spencer, Durkheim was one of the first people to explain the existence and quality of different parts of a society by reference to what function they served in maintaining the quotidian, and is thus sometimes seen as a precursor to functionalism. Durkheim also insisted that society was more than the sum of its parts. Thus unlike his contemporaries Ferdinand Tönnies and Max Weber, he focused not on what motivates the actions of individuals (methodological individualism), but rather on the study of social facts, a term which he coined to describe phenomena which have an existence in and of themselves and are not bound to the actions of individuals. He argued that social facts had an independent existence greater and more objective than the actions of the individuals that composed society and could only be explained by other social facts rather than, say, by society's adaptation to a particular climate or ecological niche.

[edit] Education

Durkheim was also interested in education. Partially this was because he was professionally employed to train teachers, and he used his ability to shape curriculum to further his own goals of having sociology taught as widely as possible. More broadly, though, Durkheim was interested in the way that education could be used to provide French citizens the sort of shared, secular background that would be necessary to prevent anomie in modern societies. It was to this end that he also proposed the formation of professional groups to serve as a source of solidarity for adults.

Durkheim argued that education has many functions:

1. To reinforce social solidarity
* History: Learning about individuals who have done good things for the many makes an individual feel insignificant.
* Pledging allegiance: Makes individuals feel part of a group and therefore less likely to break rules.
2. To maintain social roles
* School is a society in miniature. It has a similar hierarchy, rules, expectations to the "outside world". It trains young people to fulfill roles.
3. To maintain division of labour.
* School sorts students into skill groups, encouraging students to take up employment in fields best suited to their abilities.

[edit] Crime

Durkheim's views on crime were a departure from conventional notions. He believed that crime is "bound up with the fundamental conditions of all social life" and serves a social function. He stated that crime implies, "not only that the way remains open to necessary change, but that in certain cases it directly proposes these changes... crime [can thus be] a useful prelude to reforms." In this sense he saw crime as being able to release certain social tensions and so have a cleansing or purging effect in society. He further stated that "the authority which the moral conscience enjoys must not be excessive; otherwise, no-one would dare to criticize it, and it would too easily congeal into an immutable form. To make progress, individual originality must be able to express itself...[even] the originality of the criminal... shall also be possible" (Durkheim, 1895).

[edit] Law

Beyond the specific study of crime, criminal law and punishment, Durkheim was deeply interested in the study of law and its social effects in general. Among classical social theorists he is one of the founders of the field of sociology of law. In his early work he saw types of law (characterised by their sanctions) as a direct reflection of types of social solidarity. The study of law was therefore of interest to sociology for what it could reveal about the nature of solidarity. Later, however, he emphasised the significance of law as a sociological field of study in its own right. In the later Durkheimian view, law (both civil and criminal) is an expression and guarantee of society's fundamental values. Durkheim emphasised the way that modern law increasingly expresses a form of moral individualism - a value system that is, in his view, probably the only one universally appropriate to modern conditions of social solidarity.[2] Individualism, in this sense, is the basis of human rights and of the values of individual human dignity and individual autonomy. It is to be sharply distinguished from selfishness and egoism, which for Durkheim are not moral stances at all. Many of Durkheim's closest followers, such as Marcel Mauss, Georges Davy, Paul Fauconnet, Paul Huvelin, Emmanuel Levy and Henri Levy-Bruhl also specialised in or contributed to the sociological study of law.

[edit] Suicide

In Suicide (1897), Durkheim explores the differing suicide rates among Protestants and Catholics, explaining that stronger social control among Catholics results in lower suicide rates. According to Durkheim, Catholic society has normal levels of integration while Protestant society has low levels. There are at least two problems with this interpretation. First, Durkheim took most of his data from earlier researchers, notably Adolf Wagner and Henry Morselli, who were much more careful in generalizing from their own data. Second, later researchers found that the Protestant-Catholic differences in suicide seemed to be limited to German-speaking Europe and thus may always have been the spurious reflection of other factors.[3] Despite its limitations, Durkheim's work on suicide has influenced proponents of control theory, and is often mentioned as a classic sociological study.

Durkheim's study of suicide has been criticized as an example of the logical error termed the ecological fallacy[4][5]. Durkheim's conclusions about individual behaviour (suicide) are based on aggregated statistics (the suicide rate among Protestants and Catholics). This type of inference is often misleading, as is shown by the examples of Simpson's paradox.[citation needed]

Durkheim stated that there are four types of suicide.

[edit] Egoistic suicides

Egoistic suicides are the result of a weakening of bonds integrating individuals into the collectivity: in other words a breakdown of social integration. It is symptomatic of a failure of economic development and division of labour to produce Durkheim's organic solidarity. The remedy lies in social reconstruction.

[edit] Altruistic suicides

This occurs in societies with high integration, where individual needs are seen as less important than the society's needs as a whole. As individual interest was not important, Durkheim stated that in an altruistic society there would be little reason for people to commit suicide. He stated one exception; if the individual is expected to kill themselves on behalf of the society. Various examples of this type of suicide would be suicide bombers who are willing to take their lives for their religions or a Japanese samurai committing suicide (seppuku) as a service to his/her feudal lord.

[edit] Anomic suicides

Anomic suicides are the product of moral deregulation and a lack of definition of legitimate aspirations through a restraining social ethic, which could impose meaning and order on the individual conscience. This is symptomatic of a failure of economic development and division of labour to produce Durkheim's organic solidarity. The remedy lies in social reconstruction.

[edit] Fatalistic suicides

This type of suicide seems to occur in overly oppressive societies, causing people to prefer to die than to carry on living within their society. This is an extremely rare reason for people to take their own lives, but a good example would be within a prison; people prefer to die than live in a prison with constant abuse. [6]

[edit] Religion
This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (May 2008)

In classical sociology, the study of religion was primarily concerned with two broad issues:

1. How did religion contribute to the maintenance of social order?
2. What was the relationship between religion and capitalist society?

These two issues were typically combined in the argument that industrial capitalism would undermine traditional religious commitment and thereby threaten the cohesion of society. More recently the subject has been narrowly defined as the study of religious institutions. In his article, 'The Origin Of Beliefs' Émile Durkheim placed himself in the positivist tradition, meaning that he thought of his study of society as dispassionate and scientific. He was deeply interested in the problem of what held complex modern societies together. Religion, he argued, was an expression of social cohesion. His underlying interest was to understand the existence of religion in the absence of belief in any religion's actual tenets. Durkheim saw totemism as the most basic form of religion. It is in this belief system that the fundamental separation between the sacred and the profane is most clear. All other religions, he said, are outgrowths of this distinction, adding to it myths, images, and traditions. The totemic animal, Durkheim believed, was the expression of the sacred and the original focus of religious activity because it was the emblem for a social group, the clan. Religion is thus an inevitable, just as society is inevitable when individuals live together as a group.

Durkheim thought that the model for relationships between people and the supernatural was the relationship between individuals and the community. He is famous for suggesting that "God is society, writ large." Durkheim believed that people ordered the physical world, the supernatural world, and the social world according to similar principles.

Durkheim’s first purpose was to identify the social origin of religion as he felt that religion was a source of camaraderie and solidarity. It was the individual’s way of becoming recognizable within an established society. His second purpose was to identify links between certain religions in different cultures, finding a common denominator. Belief in supernatural realms and occurrences may not stem through all religions, yet there is a clear division in different aspects of life, certain behaviours and physical things.

In the past, he argued, religion had been the cement of society--the means by which men had been led to turn from the everyday concerns in which they were variously enmeshed to a common devotion to sacred things. His definition of religion, favoured by anthropologists of religion today, was, "A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, i.e. things set apart & forbidden-- beliefs and practices which unite in one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them."

Durkheim believed that “society has to be present within the individual.” He saw religion as a mechanism that shored up or protected a threatened social order. He thought that religion had been the cement of society in the past, but that the collapse of religion would not lead to a moral implosion. Durkheim was specifically interested in religion as a communal experience rather than an individual one. He also says that religious phenomena occur when a separation is made between the profane (the realm of everyday activities) and the sacred (the realm of the extraordinary and the transcendent); these are different depending what man chooses them to be. An example of this is wine at communion, as it is not only wine but represents the blood of Christ. Durkheim believed that religion is ‘society divinised’, as he argues that religion occurs in a social context. He also, in lieu of forefathers before who tried to replace the dying religions, urged people to unite in a civic morality on the basis that we are what we are as a result of society.

Durkheim condensed religion into four major functions:

1. Disciplinary, forcing or administrating discipline
2. Cohesive, bringing people together, a strong bond
3. Vitalizing, to make more lively or vigorous, vitalise, boost spirit
4. Euphoric, a good feeling, happiness, confidence, well-being

[edit] Literature

* Durkheim, The Division of Labour in Society, (1893) The Free Press reprint 1997, ISBN 0684836386
* Durkheim, Rules of Sociological Method, (1895) The Free Press 1982, ISBN 0029079403
* Durkheim, On the Normality of Crime (1895)
* Durkheim, Suicide, (1897), The Free Press reprint 1997, ISBN 0684836327
* Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, (1912, English translation by Joseph Swain: 1915) The Free Press, 1965. ISBN 0-02-908010-X, new translation by Karen E. Fields 1995, ISBN 0029079373
* Durkheim, Professional Ethics and Civic Morals, English translation by Cornelia Brookfield (1955) Routledge, 1992, ISBN 0-415-06225-X
* Steven Lukes, Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work, a Historical and Critical Study. Stanford University Press, 1985.
* Jack D. Douglas, The Social Meanings of Suicide. Princeton University Press, 1973.
* Roger Cotterrell, Emile Durkheim: Law in a Moral Domain. Stanford University Press, 1999.
* W. S. F. Pickering, Durkheim's Sociology of Religion: Themes and Theories Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.
* Susan Stedman Jones, Durkheim Reconsidered Polity, 2001.

[edit] See also

* Normlessness
* Social innovation
* Social control
* Social relation
* Anomie
* Gabriel Tarde
* [[Solidarism]]

[edit] Reference

Esoteric Christianity is a term which refers to an ensemble of spiritual currents which regard Christianity as a mystery religion,[1][2] and profess the existence and possession of certain esoteric doctrines or practices,[3][4] hidden from the public but accessible only to a narrow circle of "enlightened", "initiated", or highly educated people.[5][6]

These spiritual currents share some common denominators, such as:
Mystery religion

Early Christians used the word μυστήριον (mysterion) to describe the Christian Mystery. The Old Testament versions use the word mysterion as an equivalent to the Hebrew sôd, "secret" (Proverbs 20:19; Judith 2:2; Sirach 22:27; 2 Maccabees 13:21). In the New Testament the word mystery is applied ordinarily to the sublime revelation of the Gospel (Matthew 13:11; Colossians 2:2; 1 Timothy 3:9; 1 Corinthians 15:51), and to the Incarnation and life of the Saviour and his manifestation by the preaching of the Apostles (Romans 16:25; Ephesians 3:4; 6:19; Colossians 1:26; 4:3). Theologians give the name mystery to revealed truths that surpass the powers of natural reason,[9] so, in a narrow sense, the Mystery is a truth that transcends the created intellect. The impossibility of obtaining a rational comprehension of the Mystery leads to an inner or hidden way of comprehension of the Christian Mystery that is indicated by the term esoteric in Esoteric Christianity.[2]

    Even though revealed and believed, the Mystery remains nevertheless obscure and veiled during the mortal life, if the deciphering of the mysteries, made possible by esotericism, does not intervene.[10]

This esoteric knowledge would allow a deep comprehension of the Christian mysteries that otherwise would remain obscure.
Ancient roots

Some modern scholars believe that in the early stages of Christianity a nucleus of oral teachings were inherited from Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism which formed the basis of a secret oral tradition, which in the 4th century came to be called the disciplina arcani, which mainstream theologians believe contained only liturgical details and certain other traditions which remain a part of some branches of mainstream Christianity (for example, the doctrine of Transubstantiation is thought to have been a part of this by Catholic theologians).[8][11][12] Important influences on Esoteric Christianity are the Christian theologians Clement of Alexandria and Origen, the main figures of the Catechetical School of Alexandria.[13]

Origen was a most prolific writer - according to Epiphanius, he wrote about 6,000 books[14] - making it a difficult task to define the central core of his teachings. The original Greek text of his main theological work De Principiis only survives in fragments, while a 5th century Latin translation was cleared of controversial teachings by the translator Rufinus, making it hard for modern scholars to rebuild Origen's original thoughts. Thus, it is unclear whether reincarnation and the pre-existence of souls formed part of Origen's beliefs.

While hypothetically considering a complex multiple-world transmigration scheme in De Principiis, Origen denies reincarnation in unmistakable terms in his work, Against Celsus and elsewhere.[15][16]

Despite this apparent contradiction, most modern Esoteric Christian movements refer to Origen's writings (along, with other Church Fathers and biblical passages[17]) to validate these ideas as part of the Esoteric Christian tradition.[18]
Early modern forms

In the later Middle Ages forms of Western esotericism, for example alchemy and astrology, were constructed on Christian foundations, combining Christian theology and doctrines with esoteric concepts.[19]

Giovanni Pico della Mirandola's Apologia ("Apologia J. Pici Mirandolani, Concordiae comitis" published in 1489) states that there are two types of "magic", which are theurgy (divine magic), and goetia (demonic magic). These disciplines were explained as the "Operation of the Stars", just as alchemy was the "Operation of the Sun", and astrology the "Operation of the Moon." Kabbalah was also an active discipline. Esoteric Christian practitioners might practice these forms or traditions, which made them adepts, alchemists, astrologists, and Hermetic Qabalists, while still being Esoteric Christian practitioners of a passive discipline which helped them better use the "mystery knowledge" they gained from the elite, or Higher Beings.

In the 16th and 17th centuries this was followed up by the development of Theosophy and Rosicrucianism.[20] The Behmenist movements also developed around this time, as did Freemasonry.
Modern forms

Many modern Esoteric Christian movements acknowledge reincarnation among their beliefs, as well as a complex energetic structure for the human being (such as etheric body, astral body, mental body and causal body). These movements point out the need of an inner spiritual work which will lead to the renewal of the human person according to the Pauline sense. Rudolf Steiner and Max Heindel gave several spiritual exercises in their writings to help the evolution of the follower. In the same direction are Tommaso Palamidessi's writings, which aim at developing ascetic techniques and meditations. In Bulgaria Peter Deunov opened an Esoteric Christian School, which he called School of the Universal White Brotherhood. It consisted of two classes of students and had 22 school years. George Gurdjieff called his teaching The Fourth Way—the way of conscience, whereby the student learns to work with and transform the negativity and suffering of one’s ordinary life to come to real life (“Life is real only then, when I Am.”). According to all of these esoteric scholars, the ensemble of these techniques (often related with Eastern meditation practices such as chakra meditation or visualization) will lead to salvation and to the total renewal of the human being. This process usually implies the constitution of a spiritual body apt to the experience of resurrection (and therefore called, in Christian terms, resurrection body).[21][22][23] Some Esoteric Christians today also incorporate New Age and traditional "magical" practices in their beliefs, such as Qabalah, theurgy, goetia, alchemy, astrology, and hermetism.[24]
See also

Schools

    "There can be no question of the intimate Christian character and design of the Degree (...) In the Rites and Ceremonies of this Degree, we have presented a Third Temple, successor to both the Temple of King Solomon and to the Temple of Zerubbabel -- the spiritual Temple, the building of which is the ultimate objective of Freemasonry. The Wisdom, Strength, Beauty which supported the ancient Temple are replaced by the Christian pillars of Faith, Hope and Charity; the great Lights remain, for they are not only the essence of Freemasonry, but also fundamentals in their symbolic truths and in the realities of some in the building of true character; the three lesser lights give way to thirty-three, which to most interpreters represent the thirty-three years of the Messiah's sojourn on the earth."[25]
    "then as "PHREE MESSEN" or children of light they are instructed in methods of building a new temple without sound of hammer, and when the spirit realizes that it is far from its heavenly home, a prodigal, feeding upon the unsatisfactory husks of the material world, that apart from the Father it is "POOR, NAKED AND BLIND," when it knocks at the door of a mystic temple like that of the Rosicrucians and asks for light, when it receives the desired instruction after due qualification by building and ethereal soul-body, a temple or house eternal in the heavens, not made with hands, and without sound of hammer, when its nakedness is clothed with that house (see Cor. 4.5,) then the neophyte receives "THE WORD," the open sesame to the inner worlds and learns to travel in foreign parts in the invisible worlds. There he takes soul-flights into heavenly region and qualifies for higher degrees under more direct instruction from THE GRAND ARCHITECT OF THE UNIVERSE, who fashioned both heaven and earth. (...) There are 3x3 degrees in the lesser Mysteries; when the candidate has passed the 9th Arch [18/33], he is in the Holy of Holies, which forms the gate to greater fields beyond the scope of Masonry."[26]

Traditions

Disciplines

Lineage

Central concepts
Notes

   1. ^ Western Esotericism and the Science of Religion: Selected Papers Presented at the 17th Congress
   2. ^ a b Besant, Annie (2001). Esoteric Christianity or the Lesser Mysteries. City: Adamant Media Corporation. ISBN 9781402100291. 
   3. ^ From the Greek ἐσωτερικός (esôterikos, "inner"). The term esotericism itself was coined in the 17th century. (Oxford English Dictionary Compact Edition, Volume 1,Oxford University Press, 1971, p. 894.)
   4. ^ Wouter J. Hanegraaff, Antoine Faivre, Roelof van den Broek, Jean-Pierre Brach, Dictionary of Gnosis & Western Esotericism, Brill 2005.
   5. ^ Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: esotericism
   6. ^ Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: esoteric
   7. ^ Cf. Matthew 16:16
   8. ^ a b G.G. Stroumsa, Hidden Wisdom: Esoteric Traditions and the Roots of Christian Mysticism, 2005.
   9. ^ The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Published 1911
  10. ^ Tommaso Palamidessi, Introduction to Major and Minor Mysteries, ed. Archeosofica, 1971
  11. ^ Frommann, De Disciplina Arcani in vetere Ecclesia christiana obticuisse fertur, Jena 1833.
  12. ^ E. Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church, London, 1890, Chapter 10.
  13. ^ Jean Danielou, Origen, translated by Walter Mitchell, 1955.
  14. ^ Haer., lxiv.63
  15. ^ Catholic Answers, Quotes by Church Fathers Against Reincarnation, 2004.
  16. ^ John S. Uebersax, Early Christianity and Reincarnation: Modern Misrepresentation of Quotes by Origen, 2006.
  17. ^ See Reincarnation and Christianity
  18. ^ Archeosofica, Articles on Esoteric Christianity (classical authors)
  19. ^ Antoine Faivre, L'ésotérisme, Paris, PUF (« Que sais-je?»), 1992.
  20. ^ Weber, Charles, Rosicrucianism and Christianity in Rays from the Rose Cross, 1995
  21. ^ Rudolf Steiner, Christianity As Mystical Fact, Steinerbooks.
  22. ^ Tommaso Palamidessi, The Guardians of the Thresholds and the Evolutionary Way, Archeosofica, 1978.
  23. ^ Max Heindel, The Mystical Interpretation of Easter, Rosicrucian Fellowship.
  24. ^ Secrets of the Magical Grimoires by Aaron Leitch, www.northernway.org
  25. ^ Phoenix Masonry Scottish Rite Rose Croix 18th Degree Jewel, 2000s
  26. ^ Heindel, Max, Freemasonry and Catholicism, ISBN 0-911274-04-9, 1910s

External links

§

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IMPORTANT NOTE: Most educators and professionals do not consider it appropriate to use tertiary sources such as encyclopedias as a sole source for any information—citing an encyclopedia as an important reference in footnotes or bibliographies may result in censure or a failing grade. Wikipedia articles should be used for background information, as a reference for correct terminology and search terms, and as a starting point for further research.

As with any community-built reference, there is a possibility for error in Wikipedia's content—please check your facts against multiple sources and read our disclaimers for more information.
Bibliographic details for "Esoteric Christianity"

Please remember to check your manual of style, standards guide or instructor's guidelines for the exact syntax to suit your needs. For more detailed advice, see Citing Wikipedia.
Citation styles for "Esoteric Christianity"
APA style

Esoteric Christianity. (2010, December 16). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 21:09, February 22, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889
MLA style

Wikipedia contributors. "Esoteric Christianity." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 16 Dec. 2010. Web. 22 Feb. 2011.
MHRA style

Wikipedia contributors, 'Esoteric Christianity', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 16 December 2010, 10:46 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889> [accessed 22 February 2011]
Chicago style

Wikipedia contributors, "Esoteric Christianity," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889 (accessed February 22, 2011).
CBE/CSE style

Wikipedia contributors. Esoteric Christianity [Internet]. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia; 2010 Dec 16, 10:46 UTC [cited 2011 Feb 22]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889.
Bluebook style

Esoteric Christianity, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889 (last visited Feb. 22, 2011).
Bluebook: Harvard JOLT style

Wikipedia, Esoteric Christianity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_Christianity (optional description here) (as of Feb. 22, 2011, 21:09 GMT).
AMA style

Wikipedia contributors. Esoteric Christianity. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. December 16, 2010, 10:46 UTC. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889. Accessed February 22, 2011.
BibTeX entry

 @misc{ wiki:xxx,
   author = "Wikipedia",
   title = "Esoteric Christianity --- Wikipedia{,} The Free Encyclopedia",
   year = "2010",
   url = "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889",
   note = "[Online; accessed 22-February-2011]"
 }

When using the LaTeX package url (\usepackage{url} somewhere in the preamble), which tends to give much more nicely formatted web addresses, the following may be preferred:

 @misc{ wiki:xxx,
   author = "Wikipedia",
   title = "Esoteric Christianity --- Wikipedia{,} The Free Encyclopedia",
   year = "2010",
   url = "\url{http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889}",
   note = "[Online; accessed 22-February-2011]"
 }

Wikipedia talk pages

Markup
    [[Esoteric Christianity]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esoteric_Christianity&oldid=402673889 this version]) 

Result
    Esoteric Christianity (this version)

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/copeland/emp.pdf

“Between Faith and the Un-forgiven Feeling”
Rev. Greg Ward
Unitarian Universalist Metro Atlanta North
October 9th, 2005

Meditation:
On New Year’s eve, 1995 Everett Worthington Jr.’s elderly mother was murdered in her home by two young burglars.

“Something terrible has happened,” was how the conversation with his brother began. Then the details. The ransacked house. The strewn body. The blood on the carpet and walls. It all seemed too much to face.

As Everett began preparing for the trip from Richmond to Knoxville with his sister and her husband, he hustled to and fro, throwing things in a suitcase, numbing his feelings with the narcotic of action. It wasn’t until he sat down, and listened to his wife read to his two daughters from a book that ‘nana’ read to them when they were just girls. He struggled, but maintained his composure. Until he caught sight of his preteen daughter awash in tears, and then he broke down and wept.

On the drive down to Knoxville, Everett and his sister reflected on the good and bad times they’d had with their mother. Everett recalled a few months prior when he was a guest on a radio talk show. As the show was winding down, the interviewer cut in saying, “I think we have time for one more caller – but this is a special one.” Everett recalled the voice that came on – the slow, soft, East Tennessee drawl of his mother. “Sonny,” came the familiar sound of his childhood nickname – “I’ve been listening to you,” she said. “I just wanted you to know, you’re a good boy, Sonny.”

Everett returned from the nostalgia of the story to the car they were riding in, to the sound of his sister crying … to the inescapable reality they were both driving toward.

He had his body pointing in the right direction. He even managed to get his head and hands to steer. But his heart was still breaking. At least his heart was hitting the breaks – trying to hold him back - for the same reason ours does when we’ve been hurt. When he knew the next thing we would have to do is to accept what we can’t imagine. Let go of what we can’t lose. So we hold on to whatever we can. Sometimes a figment of the real thing. And we don’t let go. We don’t let go of the person. Or the love. But we also don’t let go of the hurt. The resentment. Even the rage. Some of what we don’t let go of are the very things that allow us to move on. And we don’t let go because we don’t know if we can.

Later, as he listened to the investigating officers speculate about the circumstances, Everett Worthington, Jr. convinced himself it was okay to rage. He listened to them say that their mother had been struck with a crowbar. “Probably burglars who she surprised,” the officers guessed. Again, he struggled, but maintained composure. Until a barely audible whisper escaped his lips. “I’d like to have him alone for 30 minutes with a baseball bat…” He was a quite rational man and reticent about letting himself rage. “I’d beat his brains out,” he continued, not even aware he could be heard. Until his brother chimed in that he would only need 10 minutes. His sister said she’d take two hours – to make it last longer. It takes a different amount of time for all of us.

That night – and for many nights which followed – the rage continued. It came with questions of revenge – and whether that would bring satisfaction. A deep alienation with youth, with the city, with trust in general began to creep in. And with it came questions of the world he lived in – his relationship to it. Questions of acceptance, forgiveness and whether he could he really ever find peace – or sleep – again. Images continued to flood his brain that made him wonder. What if they found the killers? Would he ask for the death penalty? Could he even listen to their explanation? Try to understand them? Let go of the resentment. The anger. The pain. Could he forgive?

Could you? Could we? What would it take?

Sermon:

Let me cut to the chase and tell you how this sermon ends. Everett Worthington, Jr. forgave the young boys who murdered his mother. He never let go of the love he had for her. Or his memories of her. But he did let go of the rage. The callousness. The distrust. He found peace without having to close his heart. He found solace without having to stop reminiscing about what his mother meant to him or protect himself by suspecting all similar looking young people of ill intent. He isn’t kept awake by questions of ‘why?’ or ‘what if?’ or by images of that evening. Everett Worthington, Jr., despite being deeply hurt by a horrible crime, turned out just fine.

I can’t tell you how Everett Worthington, Jr. did it exactly – how he managed to get through the hurt and pain of his life without becoming bitter or resentful. If you’d like to know the details, he has written a number of books which describe what went on for him that night and the weeks and months that followed. He has many more books about the ideals and the process he followed on his way to healing and forgiveness. I didn’t read a lot about his approach or his experience. You’d think I would have. Since today I’m talking about forgiveness. But this sermon isn’t about Everett Worthington, Jr. and how he got past his hurts. It’s about us - and how we get past ours.

I don’t think it’s essential to learn exactly how Everett Worthington, Jr. got through his ordeal. It could simply be character. Or it could be the years of training and clinical experience that Dr. Everett Worthington, Jr. had as a psychologist. Or perhaps it was his years of study in reconciliation counseling as a couple’s therapist. Or it might just be the half dozen articles and books he had written on forgiveness even before that fateful night. But I thought that if we knew all this about him, we might conclude that his ability to heal and forgive was more understandable. Or less relevant. All his training might let us off the hook. Give us permission to stop feeling inadequate – for him only taking a year to forgive two young boys for murdering his mother while we still spend most of Thanksgiving Dinner each year harping on resentments with our siblings about who granddad said should cut the turkey next year – and granddad’s been dead for twenty-eight years!

But it might do us well to know that, even with all his background and training, Dr. Everett Worthington Jr. still struggled with forgiveness in the days that followed. It may help to know that he still questioned every study, every anecdote, every bit of wisdom he’d learned when it came down to his own time of testing. Nothing was automatic. Nothing routine. He still had to push himself to do what he didn’t want to do. He still, in the end, had a hard time sticking to his principles and living them out.

During his struggle, he knew that no one could see in his room tossing and turning in his sleep. He knew no one would know what he was thinking in his head as long as he kept saying what he’d taught himself to say. He knew that no one was looking at what he was writing on his heart, only what he was writing in his books. But as someone famous once said, “Character is forged from what we do when no one is looking.”

So maybe it was simply character. Or maybe it was the principles that character forces us to stick to. It’s hard to say exactly what it is. But it’s easy to see that no matter what it is it’s hard to do.

I became aware of just how hard during my recent sabbatical. It had been more than a year – almost two – since the breaking off of my engagement. And the hurt – and resentment – was still there. I realized I had spent that time since it happened numbing myself with the narcotic of action – keeping busy. And when the reason for all that busy-ness stood aside, the pain I had tried to ignore was still there.

All of us have been hurt. Had our heart broken, our dreams stepped on. Had our image of ourselves sullied – sometimes by a careless passerby who wasn’t even aware of doing it. Sometimes where the intent contributes to the pain. Creates betrayal beyond embarrassment. Anyone who has lived long enough experiences it.

We are all asked to ‘get over it.’ Find a way to return to a belief that it is all worth it. A place where we are ready to start reaching out again. Being vulnerable. Take a chance with the same circumstances, the same world – sometimes even with the same people – that had once hurt us. We all – no matter where we come from or from where we forge our values – are familiar with some principle that calls us toward forgiveness. And we all have the character to listen to those principles. But just like Everett Worthington, Jr., we all spend a little time holding that imaginary baseball bat. And just like his siblings, the time we feel we need to hold on to that bat may vary.

The time it takes varies for different reasons. Sometimes it’s a matter of not knowing how. We don’t know how to let go of the big hurts because we never took the time to practice very much with the little ones. So the big ones seem too much to face. It’s like C.S. Lewis said, “If you want to learn about forgiveness, it’s usually better to start with something easier than the Gestapo.”

But most of us usually know what it takes. Some of what forgiveness requires. We know that it involves listening. It requires understanding. It means we cultivate a certain level of compassion that can only be born out of extending ourselves to imagine – even experience – someone else’s circumstances. Face their choices the way they would face them. We know that it’s really about making time, making room for empathy. We know it’s ultimately about love.

And because all of us in the room are smart, we usually come to this realization very early on. We know it’s ultimately about love very early on. Even when we pick up that imaginary bat. And most of us knowing we are ultimately being called to empathy and understanding often say, ‘To hell with that! I’m going to swing this bat a few times and see if that works!” It doesn’t. But we feel better. For a little while, anyway.

And then eventually the bat starts to feel heavy. And we get tired of swinging. So we set the bat down. And yet we still feel tired. And thinking its from all that swinging, we figure that we’ll just wait awhile. Give it some time.

But it doesn’t seem to go away. We then begin to rationalize, saying to ourselves that getting hurt is just the price of life. We have to live with it. That can prompt many of us to go back over to the bat rack, return to step one and take a few more swings. “Dirty, no good, rotten… if it hadn’t been for her I wouldn’t be…” And we return to the resentment all over again.

For some people it can take lifetimes before we realize that we’re tired not because the person who hurt us is still hanging on to us. But that we’re still hanging on to them. In all likelihood, they let go a long time ago – if they ever held on in the first place. It’s us who continue to carry them around like little invisible baggage we carry them around in our lives. And all the swinging and fighting and cursing with them doesn’t get us anywhere because the problem is not ‘out there’ at all. But we play games with ourselves to help us think it is.

One of the best ones is a game described by Jack Handy. We imagine the person who hurt us and as we do we light a stick of dynamite. Then we call them on the phone and hold the burning fuse to the receiver and say, ‘Here that?... That’s dynamite, baby!’” We find this strangely satisfying. Usually for much longer than it would seem necessary, until it becomes clear that we are the ones who are taking the brunt of the malice. It’s like they say, ‘Holding on to resentment is like drinking rat poison and then waiting for the rat to die.

And the price we pay for this is time. Time of living with hurt. Time that could spent in better ways. We often think we’re managing just fine – with all this invisible baggage strapped to us. We don’t even seem to realize that it’s getting in the way. But we also can’t quite explain why we can’t seem to ever get as close to people as we want to. Why when we reach out to people, when we want to pull them close to us, there is something in the way. Sometimes, for some of us, it can last a lifetime. All on account of one hurt we allowed to go unresolved years ago.

It’s like composer William Walton once said, “Refusing to let go of our unresolved hurts is like getting stung to death by one bee.”

I know some of us have experienced this in a religious sense. Some of us feel like we were stung by our religious upbringing. We were hurt by what we feel was guilt or shame that was imposed upon us at a very young age. And we’ve carried it around for years since - even to the point where we work it in to our new religion. I’ve even heard, over the years, a few people who think that part of what it means to be Unitarian Universalist is to nurture and carry a healthy disdain for other religions. It’s sometimes possible to identify them at general assemblies because they are the ones with the buttons on their shirt saying, “I’m a recovering Catholic… or recovering Baptist or other religion.

But Suzanne Meyer, one of our prominent UU ministers points out that “when you ask them how old they were when they left the Catholic or Baptist church they will say something like, ’16.’ And when you ask them how old they are now they will tell you, ’54.’” At some point we have to admit that we’ve given up on recovery and just learned to live with dis-ease. But we don’t always realize the price that we pay.

“When we [continue to resent our] enemies,” Dale Carnegie reminds us, “we are giving them power over us: power over our sleep, our appetites, our blood pressure, our health and our happiness. Our enemies would dance with joy if only they knew how they were worrying us, lacerating us, and getting even with us! Our resentment is not hurting them at al, but it is turning our days and nights into a hellish turmoil.”

Most of us came to Unitarian Universalism from other religious denominations were very happy to find us. Most were grateful for the freedom to choose from a number of faith stances instead of the single stance offered by their previous tradition. But the drawback is that in coming to UU it is sometimes easy to drop the discipline of faith for the benefit of freedom. The drawback is that we sometimes forget is that it is not the freedom which we ultimate use to make sense of our hurts and choose to love again – it’s the faith. We get lost in the freedom of exploring so many different faiths, instead of going very deep into any one. As critics of our movement sometimes say, ‘we are a mile wide and an inch deep.’

But when it comes to forgiveness, the problem is that our hurts often run very deep. And even the smaller hurts, when left unaddressed for years, sink down into hidden parts of our hearts. We need a faith that will go deep enough to reach our hurts. Not the freedom to run here and there trying to escape them. We need a faith that will turn our heads and get our lives moving in a different direction. A direction that seeks not protection. But love. That calls us to seek not revenge, but forgiveness. That requires not avoidance but a new commitment.

During sabbatical, while I wrestled with letting go of the hurt around my broken relationship, I discovered that the key for me was not freedom, but faith. Not time, but focus. Not breadth, but depth. It didn’t mean learning something I didn’t know. It meant summoning the character to wrestle with the principles that were quite familiar to me. But wrestle with them on a much deeper level than I had been willing to do before.

And I didn’t have to look far. It was in our very first principle. Affirming and promoting the inherent worth and dignity of every person. Something I’d said a million times. Something I taught and preached. But something that I discovered required great character to live out when wrestling with a hurts that go to the core of our being. In wrestling with our first principle, I discovered that two things were hard for me.

The first was not in the affirming and promoting part. Not in the inherent worth and dignity part. It was in the ‘every person’ part. I kept looking for the asterisk or the disclaimer. The fine print that would remind me that the principle was really talking about ‘every person except that no good, low-down, back-stabbing, promise-breaking person who broke my heart.’ But I looked and looked and it was no where to be found. The more I searched – the more I studied – the more I realized that it really said, ‘every person.’

But that’s when it got even harder. That’s where I discovered I had to go much deeper. Because ‘every person’ also meant me.

And I realized part of my struggle – a good part – had a hard time letting go of the hurt that I had incurred because part of me wondered if the slight, if the betrayal, if the hurt, was somehow deserved. Part of me still struggled to have faith in my own inherent worth and dignity. Part of me had a hard time offering forgiveness because I didn’t feel forgiven.

And I began to realize a new way of looking at Yom Kippur. Yom Kippur is the holiest day of the Jewish calendar which asks us to find atonement – or achieve at-one-ment with God by first seeking atonement with others. And with ourselves. For UUs, we could say that our ability to be in right relationship with community we have to find right relationship with everyone in it – starting with ourselves.

For me I realized that it is forgiveness that allows us to be forgiving. Because we are, inherently, forgiving – meaning that our lives, our love, our hearts and our hands are for giving – giving to others and giving to the world. Even when it can be cruel. It means seeing the world as worthy of our love despite what we sometimes have seen. It means understanding that we are worthy of giving love despite what sometimes have felt.

That first principle is part of a covenant we are all part of. And as our President Kirk Bogue reminded me yesterday, a covenant is different than a contract. The difference being that when one party of a contract fails to live up to the agreement, what binds the parties together is dissolved and the punitive part of the contract comes into play. But when one party of a covenant fails to live up to the agreement, the other part of the covenant continues to offer what was agreed to in faith that the other party will come back into relationship. The key part is the faith.

I am sorry for the times, in the last several years – and even before – where I failed in faith. Where I stopped giving of myself because of what some had stopped giving me. Where I might have acted hurtfully, for the hurts I was carrying inside. For the moments I withheld my affection, trying to protect myself from rejection, further hurt or misunderstanding. For the times I failed to have faith in the love that is in you and failed to see your need to give it. For the times I failed to see the love that is in me that is for-giving.

Because I am better than that. And so are you. Because we each have all the character and principles we need to rise up out of the hurts that come our way. If we have faith. And if we realize that we belong to a faith that is much deeper then what we often give it credit for. A faith that does have the power to heal us from our own resentment and save us from squandering our time in careless ways. A faith that, like our love, is forgiving.

To the Glory of Life.

/***
|Name:|ExtentTagButtonPlugin|
|Description:|Adds a New tiddler button in the tag drop down|
|Version:|3.2 ($Rev: 3861 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-03-08 10:53:09 +1000 (Sat, 08 Mar 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#ExtendTagButtonPlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
***/
//{{{

window.onClickTag_mptw_orig = window.onClickTag;
window.onClickTag = function(e) {
	window.onClickTag_mptw_orig.apply(this,arguments);
	var tag = this.getAttribute("tag");
	var title = this.getAttribute("tiddler");
	// Thanks Saq, you're a genius :)
	var popup = Popup.stack[Popup.stack.length-1].popup;
	createTiddlyElement(createTiddlyElement(popup,"li",null,"listBreak"),"div");
	wikify("<<newTiddler label:'New tiddler' tag:'"+tag+"'>>",createTiddlyElement(popup,"li"));
	return false;
}

//}}}

 

Faith should not seek after answers because answers,  being final, only give rise to arrogance and bigotry.  Faith rather should be ready to accept God's gifts of light and understanding that are always open to further growth and greater understanding in the future.

 

                                                   -- The Pilgrim

[[The Pilgrim's Progress|http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pilgrim's_Progress]]


[img[http://library.ucf.edu/SpecialCollections/Exhibits/LoveFaithMyth/images/FaithSymbolColor1.jpg]]


[[Bible Literacy Quiz|http://www.bobcardwell.com/bibleliteracyquiz.htm]]

[[Located here|http://books.allathisfeet.com/true_church_life.cfm?id=34743]]

Part 1: Faith That Rings Out!

Triumphant Faith!! Cover Books.AllAtHisFeet.com

[[Download entire PDF of this Book Commentary on Romans|http://books.allathisfeet.com/Christian_Life/books/pdf/Triumphant_Faith.pdf]]

What Is It?

“I live by Faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.”

“The righteous will live by Faith.”

“According to your Faith will it be done…”

“If you have Faith as small as a mustard seed…”

“Have Faith in God…”

“We live by Faith and not by sight…”

“Will he find FAITH on the earth?”

To “live by Faith in the Son of God”—THAT is the Christian life! So what is Faith? Faith is what we BELIEVE! Faith is active. It is to live with every fiber of your being turned fully toward God in every issue of life. It has nothing to do with what we know in the intellectual sense and everything to do with what we BELIEVE in an ACTIVE sense. Faith is to turn to Jesus of Nazareth in everything—every accomplishment, every failure, every disappointment, and every sin and emptiness that you would ever see in your life. Faith has to do with what we BELIEVE from the heart in the midst of stress and strain and difficulty.

Beholding Him, turning to Him, and resting your case in Jesus as the Answer to the Father’s every question and the satisfaction of the Father’s every demand of you—that is Faith. Holding up Jesus in every circumstance of life as the Answer and the Solution and the Anchor that holds within the veil.

Faith in Christ is the Power unto Salvation! It’s us believing from the heart the Good News of what God has done to redeem a fallen humanity. It’s what God has done to restore everything that Adam lost—and so much more! But, we’ve got to believe it in order to access it.

Call on the Name of the Lord and turn your face toward Him. He will hear your heart cry and come swiftly, healing your wounds and changing your life. He will make you a man or woman after His own Heart, and you’ll see Him and trust Him and worship Him all your days. That kind of trust and adoration is God’s heart for you and is your inheritance in Christ Jesus. Take hold of all that God has in store for you, by this glorious Faith in the Risen Son. Let the work of Jesus Christ and Faith in Him as a Redeemer of men’s souls well up within you as a ray of Hope in spite of anything else that would ever happen in your life.

Watch for that word “faith” as we go. It’s Faith that makes us whole—an unwavering trust and dependence on the Father because of the work of His Son on Calvary.
What Is Your Attitude?

Reading through Romans is not some attempt to be a bunch of doctrine heads who have a perfect grasp of Pauline theology. Our desire really and truly is to find God’s Heart for our lives and to understand what it has to do with us personally. How do His Heart and Word affect how I live at home and what comes out of my mouth? How does it affect my work ethic? How does it affect my ability to look at someone else, whether Jew or Gentile, in a market or in a mall and understand how to view them? What effect does His Word have on me? Can I let it touch my heart to change who I am, that God could be further glorified in my short stay here?

All my days I want to be a worshipper! I want to reflect the Glory of God and the vast depth of the riches of the Wisdom of God. I want to reflect His Life and Glory in my daily life, and not just be able to spout things off because I’ve memorized and processed certain truths. I want to be a changed person so that God’s Glory can shine through me.

The key that Paul speaks of again and again to the Romans is that all of this Wisdom and Glory and Life and depth of God are, from first to last…by faith. Both our justification and our sanctification are by faith. Our ability to find God and reflect His Glory in the inner man comes not by striving but by “seeing Him who is invisible.” It comes by being able to live a life from first to last that is focused on Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s requirements of us, and focused on Him as the potential for all of the Power and Glory of God to be manifest in us.

So, how does that affect my daily life? If I’m a complainer or a whiner…if I slump back in times of difficulty and trial…if I sever relationships rather than pour into them…if I pull away from God and shrink back and forget Him rather than turn my face fully towards Him—then I’m walking by sight and not by faith. I’m walking in a way that invites demonic presence into my life, rather than God’s Presence and Glory into my life.

If you had to describe what faith is, there are many ways you could do that because faith is a diamond with many facets. But one thing that faith will always be is an attitude. Certainly faith has to do with the knowledge of God—no question about that. So now, in view of your knowledge of God, what is your attitude? That will be the indicator of whether you really believe God or not. If you really believe God, it will affect your point of view. How you view other people will totally depend on whether your faith for them and for yourself is in Christ, or whether your faith instead is in works—theirs or yours.

Everything in life comes back to this issue of where we place our faith. Where do we place our confidence and trust? How do we decide how we’re going to feel about things and how we’re going to view other people? It’s either “faith from first to last” or there’s a curse on your life, as Paul said to the Galatians. As you perceive the world around you—the heavens and earth, the circumstances at work and home, your health, your business dealings and relationships—if you live by anything other than faith, then there’s a curse on your life. If we won’t perceive things through the eyes of faith, other attitudes begin to creep in…bitterness, frustration, anxiety, fear, judgment, criticalness, and laziness. Nothing but corruption begins to fill our lives and hearts.

“Faith from first to last,” isn’t some generic, “Yes, I believe in God,” and “Yes, I know the proper doctrines.” Forget that junk—we’re talking about…do you really trust Him from the heart? Do you look at life through the eyes of what happened on Calvary? If so, your faith in Him will affect your attitude. It will change how you view and respond to others. It will determine the kinds of things you whisper in the inner chambers—the remarks you make to your spouse, children or roommate and the behind-the-scenes thoughts you hold in your heart. How you view people and what you say comes either from faith in Christ, or from worldly, carnal attitudes where you see both men and God after the flesh.

Set Apart Ones

“Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the good news of God–the good news he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 1:1-4). If those words alone don’t make you just want to sing…“Jesus Christ our LORD!!” If that doesn’t make your heart just want to burst with…“YES!” Confidence, Strength and Power from on high! That’s the same power that raised Jesus from the dead, dwelling mightily in your heart! If those words don’t make your heart just well up, then there’s an element of unbelief in your heart. If it’s just, “Oh, that’s a neat way to say that,” or “I’m not sure I followed the train of thought there,” then there’s a lack of awe in you, and you need to face God and ask Him to help you.

“Through him and for his name’s sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith” (Romans 1:5).

There is an obedience that comes from faith. It’s not simply knowing about something and saying you believe it. There’s an obedience. In other words, if we really believe God, it changes what we do. That doesn’t mean we’re justified by obedience. No, we’re justified only by our faith in Him. We really believe He is God. Faith is believing that God is, and that He’s a Rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. And without faith, it’s impossible to please Him. It’s a faith that declares, “You are who You say You are, the I AM. You are Jehovah God, the Provider, and the King of the Galaxies. You are who You are, and You’ve called me and chosen me.” We believe that God is, and if we diligently seek Him (not being lazy or sloppy), He will be a Rewarder because He’s a loving Father. An obedience comes from faith simply because we believe that He is who He is. We’re not gods! We’re not meant to be little gods who make our own decisions, like whether we’re going to believe in God or “go to church.” That is not it. It must be a total abandonment of the heart and life and will. “Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners of whom I am the worst…” I humble myself before God, and an obedience wells up out of truly believing that He is who He is.

And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus Christ (come to be the possession of—to belong to Jesus Christ). To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 1:6,7).

“Called to be saints”—set apart ones. Get the religious jargon out of your mind. We’re called by God to be set apart, holy, separate. “Come out from among them and be separate,” says the Lord. But some say, “Well, I don’t think we need to take that so seriously. It got a bunch of people martyred in the first century, and we wouldn’t want that to happen again. Let’s just eat, drink and be merry. Let’s mix it up a little—after all, Jesus was ‘a friend of tax collectors and sinners.’”

The words “saint” or “chosen” or “elect” all find their root in the expression of God’s heart and mind: “set apart for God’s purposes.” Set apart, pulled away. Come out from among them and be separate. If you’ll do that then God says, “I’ll be a Father to you. I’ll show you My love and you’ll be My very children. If you will come out from among them and be separate, rather than clinging to a love of the world and the things of the world, trying to then just add Me on the side... If you’ll truly lay your heart and your life down... If you’ll do what John did with My Son Jesus by laying your head in My lap... If you’ll trust me implicitly at the moment of trial and crisis... If you will come out from among them and not cling to the world, not demand your rights, not push your weight around… If you’ll let ME be God instead of you… If you’ll belong to My Son by your own free will… Then I will be your God, and you can be My people.”
An Implicit Trust

“First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world” (Romans 1:8).

When people have faith, it rings out!

We once knew a man from India and the one quality that stood out about him was his faith. He was a man who could see through any circumstance that came upon him, including his own terminal cancer. In spite of a lot of pain and difficulty and personal rejection, he let faith ring out from him, and it expressed itself in every area of his life. There was still joy in his heart, and there was a peace in him. His faith affected his attitude.

You can have a lot of other things besides faith. You can have great doctrine or some really cool worship or super talent in some area or another. You can be a real pioneer in some doctrine, or thought process or cultural lifestyle adjustment. But you know what? That’s all chaff. What rings out to the heavens and the earth, and what God commends, and what Gabriel accompanies with a trumpet blast, are people who have faith during times of crisis and stress. They let God’s hope and God’s promise answer all their questions in Jesus Christ. To people with Faith, He is the “Yes” and “Amen” to every question that could ever be asked and any difficulty that could ever arise. When people have faith, it will be reported throughout the world. It will “ring out throughout Macedonia and Achaia.” When we, like the Thessalonians, turn from idols to serve the living God, it becomes an expression of the obedience of the faith. But it won’t be our obedience that rings out. It will be our faith!

“…Your faith is being reported all over the world.” That’s pretty impressive considering they didn’t have telephones and jet planes and e-mail at their fingertips. “Hey, did you hear about so-and-so’s faith?” That report went from person to person to person all over the world: “Did you hear about so-and-so’s FAITH?” That ought to be reported about us! It ought to be reported about you and me. We can do a lot of great things in life, but I somehow feel that if the report around the world was, “Did you hear about their faith?” it would be quite a compliment in the heavenly courts.

That doesn’t mean you’ll always be laughing, “Oh, I’m just so filled with joy!” That’s not the issue. *The old stereotype of a Christian bubbling over with joy all the time simply isn’t true. Jesus was a “man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.” Bopping around with some sort of flippant, “joyous” attitude is not what Jesus was about; that’s not Christianity. But I’ll tell you what Jesus was about—an implicit trust of the Father! Everything was filtered through the knowledge that the Father’s Hand is sovereign over all things. Jesus’ attitude was always held in check by His Faith and Trust in the Father. His complete devotion to the Father, and His complete trust of the Father’s devotion to Him, defined His attitude. That’s why Jesus could say, speaking of Himself, “The Father loves the Son.” That’s faith!!

Nothing can interfere with a person’s walk with God or his relationships with brothers and sisters or his sanctification before God if he knows in his heart…“the Father loves the Son.” He’s resolved all the open issues within himself and the open issues between he and God by the work of Calvary. Faith is not some impotent doctrine where we uphold a certain “belief system” about who God is. If you don’t remember anything else, remember this: faith affects your attitude in everything you do in every circumstance of life. Otherwise, you’re walking in unbelief—NOT FAITH!

“Oh, sure, I believe in God.” Do you really?

Let’s see your attitudes when you’re under stress. Let’s see what you do when you’ve been treated unfairly (or so you think), or something isn’t going right on the job. What do you do then? What will you do when a relationship isn’t turning out as you thought it should, or someone treats you in a way you don’t think is proper or right or just or kind? How do you respond? What will you do? Faith is not measured by how many doctrines you can spew off. Your faith is measured by what you do under stress. What do you do when life isn’t adding up and it isn’t meeting your expectations? What do you do when your circumstances take you out of your comfort zone and out of your element of understanding? Is your face towards God with implicit trust?

Everything will be affected by your faith. Do you have faith? In your work ethic, in every relationship you have—do you have faith? Show me how you get along with your spouse, or your roommate, or your children. Let me see how you function in a work environment when difficulties and injustices arise. Those are the places where the statements of faith in Christ happen.

If nothing else comes from this, let me remind you again that true faith has to do with what you actively believe from the heart in times of stress, strain, confusion and difficulty. That’s true faith according to the Biblical definition of the word—the way that word was used historically as Jesus taught it, and the way Peter, John and Paul again and again elaborated on it and demonstrated the workings of that word. Faith is an active word that has nothing to do with what we believe with our minds. It has to do with what we BELIEVE in an ACTIVE sense from the heart in the midst of difficulty.

So please, watch God carefully and totally throw your heart out to Him in every kind of trial and confusion. Let your faith in Him mend every relationship with those who also trust in the Name of the Lord. Let your faith bring a glimmer of Hope at the moment of your darkest failure. Let the Work of Jesus Christ and Faith in Him as a Redeemer of men’s souls well up within you as a ray of Hope in spite of anything else that would ever happen in your life. Faith in Christ—that’s the Power unto Salvation. It’s the Good News we BELIEVE of what God has done to redeem us. We’ve got to believe it if we want to access it.

Very few people have ever believed God and let it affect their lives and attitudes. Very few people. Yet, that’s the kind of Faith God desires from us. Joshua and Caleb were the only ones out of two million peole who were willing to believe God and take the Land He promised them. We’re talking about a rare quality. The Israelites did not combine what they knew with faith and they lost their inheritance because of their attitudes. They grumbled and were cut off. The destroying angel wiped them out because of their attitudes—because of unbelief in their hearts (1Cor 10). Joshua and Caleb were the only exceptions to that. When it was time to take the Promised Land, they said, “The battle is the Lord’s. This is God’s deal here. We’re His servants, and with His help He’ll give us the land.” The rest of the Israelites, millions of people, thought otherwise.

Let’s do something that very few people throughout history have done—BELIEVE GOD! Let’s be like Joshua and Caleb and exhibit that rare quality of FAITH! Few people have ever walked that way, but it IS our inheritance in Christ. And I encourage you to take a hold of it.

Even if you feel like a total failure and you do everything wrong, let it always be said, “But he sure has faith in God. He trusts implicitly in the Blood of Christ and the Power of God to work miracles. Even though many, many times he’s failed, this person turns his face towards God every time.” Now that will be reported throughout the earth, I assure you. Simple trust in God is just such a rare thing. But that is God’s heart for each of us—for anyone who calls on His name.

Everything Traced Back to Faith

“God, whom I serve with my whole heart in proclaiming the good news of his Son, is my witness how constantly I remember you in my prayers at all times; and I pray that now at last by God’s will the way may be opened for me to come to you. I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong—that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith” (Romans 1:9-12).

Even spiritual gifts are somehow related to faith. “I want to impart a gift to you…that is, that we could be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith.” Remember how Paul himself, “Looking out, saw the man had faith to be healed”? Somehow, believing God has everything to do with spiritual gifts. Receiving an impartation from God or from someone with a spiritual gift is very related to our ability to walk in faith.

I know of three people who have been prayed for about their health in the last two or three days. Two of those people were utterly, ridiculously healed very quickly from ailments that had them flat on their backs. The other person had to grapple just a little with this issue of having faith to be healed. They wanted to be healed in order to find God somehow. So there was a wrestling over that issue of faith as it related to God’s spiritual healing.

I don’t think there’s anything in life that is not in one way or another traced back to our faith to see God and to find God. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the voice of God—the utterance of God. That’s what Christianity is all about—finding God, finding faith and then forging ahead without doubting. Abraham is known as the Father of our Faith, and we will read again and again that faith is the issue that’s at stake. I can’t possibly encourage you enough to resolve in your own heart to believe that God is and that He’s a Rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. Resolve in your heart that Jesus Christ is the “Yes” and the “Amen” to all the promises of God. You’ve got to resolve that God is able, that He hears you and knows you, and that He will meet you on the ground of believing Him. He is who He said He is, so don’t let any unbelief linger in your heart.

Paul could impart no spiritual gift, just as Jesus could bring no healing in his hometown, because of the unbelief of the people. If you are skeptical, and you’re going to doubt…if you roll your eyes or withdraw your heart and pull back even just a little bit, you will not find the healing of God in your life or the power of God welling up from within you. You will never find your inheritance. If you shrink back, you’ll be amongst those who are destroyed, the Hebrews writer said. If you shrink back, you will reap destruction and devastation in your heart in one form or another.

I don’t know how to best say this, but I do know that it has to be our faith that rings out, and it has to be your faith that apprehends the Heart and the Mind and the Voice of God and stands firm on that in spite of any circumstances or heartache that life will bring you. The storms will come. Have it fixed in your heart and mind exactly who Jesus is and that His promises are your Anchor and Hope. You will not be among those who “grumble and are destroyed by the destroying angel” as Paul wrote. You’ll not be “of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.”

[img[http://www.truthortradition.com/images/banners/art_of_forgiveness_promo.jpg]]

Have you ever been sinned against, wronged, cheated, lied to, deceived, scammed, conned, ripped off, or shafted? Do you think it may happen again? If so, developing the art of forgiveness will be beneficial to you. Forgiveness is a prerequisite for spiritual growth, mental health, emotional stability, physical wellbeing, and rewarding relationships. It is a key ingredient to true love, for without forgiveness, “love” is not love, it is little more than reciprocal back-scratching (or stabbing).

The sheer magnitude of sin in this fallen world today is overwhelming. Many people are creeps, and the rest of us too often act like creeps. Sinners leave “sinnees” in their wake. In fact, even those we love the most will wrong us, and, in reality, they have the most power to hurt us. All of us are fallen children of Adam, and the art of forgiveness is very handy, as in indispensable, if one wants anything close to real life as God intended it to be. Hurt people hurt people. Life is so full of wounded people who wound others that forgiveness must be at the heart of every relationship, and relationships are what both Christianity and life are all about. The key is not being for getting, but for giving.

A powerful teaching tape by the same title, The Art of Forgiveness, which elaborates on the points made briefly in this article, is available from us by [[clicking here.|http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=21]]

Given that both secular and Christian research has shown that forgiving is absolutely required for mental and emotional health, we will consider the following: Why do we need to learn about forgiveness? What is forgiveness (first from God to me, and then me to others)? What are the benefits of forgiveness? What are some keys to forgiving? How do you know when you have forgiven someone?

To gain the greatest benefit from this article, as you read be thinking specifically of whom you need to forgive or who you need to ask to forgive you. How many unreconciled relationships are there in your life today, and how many of them are unreconciled due to your fear of being rejected when you speak to the other person? But that is exactly what you are supposed to do, whether you are the sinner or the sinnee.

Why learn about forgiveness?

Because forgiveness is a big key to radiant Christian living. When we do not forgive, we get hurt over and over again as the result of the sin once committed against us. It is like what the person did to you happens again every time you think about it with the attitude of unforgiveness. Thus, forgiveness is the only way to end the domination of another person’s sin over you. More good news—it is your choice whether or not to forgive.

Forgiveness is an integral part of self-government. Forgiving persons refuse to be mere victims of others’ mistreatment. Instead, they become masters of the situation. Far from a display of weakness, forgiveness is a sign of enormous personal strength. As we truly forgive those who have hurt us, we begin to manifest wholeness in many ways. We release ourselves, and others, from the penalties of sin. We are freed from paying interest on a debt that other people owe us. And they may not even know they owe us; they may not even know they hurt us, or they may have forgotten about it. When we don’t forgive, we keep paying interest on the debt that they owe us. We are the loser. So we forgive.

Another thing forgiveness does is uproot the seeds of bitterness and resentment, not allowing them to germinate. We might define bitterness as unfulfilled revenge. Sometimes I think that by not forgiving someone, I’m getting back at him, but even if that is true, it can’t hurt him as much as it hurts me. Forgiveness shuts the door on yesterday’s wounds. This is so vital, because when my past becomes my present, it robs me not only of my present but also of my future! Forgiveness might not change the other person, but it changes me. It allows God to begin the healing process. Forgiveness breaks the cycle of hurting people hurting others. If I can put that in my heart, the next time I’m hurt by someone, instead of reacting or lashing out in kind, I could stop and think, “This person must really be hurting to be treating me the way he is.” That enables me to look at him with the compassion of Christ, and perhaps even stand for him by prayer, a kind word, or a soft answer.

Many things in this study apply not only if you are the one who needs to forgive, but also if you are the one who needs to ask for forgiveness. If you have sinned against someone, you are to go and ask for forgiveness, and this entails more than just saying, “I’m sorry.” Think about it—when I say, “I’m sorry,” I’m not risking anything, I’m still in control. What I should say is, “Will you forgive me?” Now I’m risking your saying, “Nope.” I am also giving you the opportunity to make a biblical response, that is, to forgive me.

After the sinner says, “I’m sorry,” the sinnee often says, “That’s OK.” Actually, it’s not OK, and that’s why both confession and forgiveness are necessary for true reconciliation, that is, bridging the gap between two human hearts caused by the offense. Forgiveness is not merely the action of accepting another person’s apology.

It’s fairly easy to see that if I have wronged someone, I should be the one to ask forgiveness, but what if I am the one wronged? Wouldn’t it be too dangerous for me to make the first move? Shouldn’t I wait for the other person to have a change of heart and come to me? Not according to Jesus Christ, and he is surely our supreme example of one forgiving others. Here’s what he said:

Matthew 18:15 (NIV)
If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.

To “show him his fault” means to tell him how he hurt you and to hold him accountable for doing so, and that doesn’t mean at a towering decibel level. You are reaching for his heart, and giving him the best opportunity to do what is right before God, and you have the right to expect a godly response from a brother in Christ. Yes, it is often scary, but God will help you have wisdom and compassion in reaching out like this to another brother, for his sake.

What is forgiveness?

Four key elements are recognition, repentance, restitution, and reconciliation. First, there must be recognition of sin, our own or others, and when we recognize our own sin, we must also recognize God’s corresponding grace to us. Next comes repentance, that is, a measurable change in behavior (see 2 Cor. 7:10 and 11). Depending upon the nature of the offense, that may lead to restitution, which is a biblical principle. In the Old Testament, if someone stole one sheep, he had to give back four. This is not always possible today, but when it is, it is the right thing to do. And the ultimate goal of all of the above is reconciliation. It is a fabulous truth that when we forgive, we are extending to another person the heart of Christ, as per the following verses:

2 Corinthians 2:10 and 11 (NIV)
(10) If you forgive anyone, I [Paul] also forgive him. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake,
(11) in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.

2 Corinthians 5:19 and 20 (NIV)
(19) That God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.
(20) We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: be reconciled to God.

Understanding God’s forgiveness to you through Christ is paramount to your forgiving others, so let us explore that first. The key to appreciating God’s forgiveness and embracing it as the basis of selfless service to Him (i.e., serving our neighbor) is understanding the depth of depravity of our inherent sin nature and its offense to God. Romans 5:20 (KJV) says that where sin abounded, grace super abounded. The more clearly I see my own sin, and see it in the light of God’s grace, the more I have a soft heart toward others (see Matt. 18:23-30, where Jesus illustrated this in a parable).

If I don’t see my sinfulness, I don’t see what I’ve been delivered from. If I give only lip service to the fact that I’m a sinner and do not let this truth grieve my heart, then I can give only lip service to God’s grace and His forgiveness. How bad is my sin? Bad enough to make the Cross the only way God could forgive me. Think about what happened on the Cross. Think about watching your only child tortured and killed. Think also about how much more deeply God loved Jesus than you love your child. Then remember that the more you love, the more you hurt.

In regard to the cross and the depth of our sin God had to forgive, here are a few insights from Oswald Chambers in My Utmost for His Highest:

“The great miracle of the grace of God is that He forgives sin, and it is the death of Jesus Christ alone that enables the divine nature to forgive and to remain true to itself in doing so…Forgiveness is the divine miracle of grace. It cost God the Cross of Jesus Christ before He could forgive sin and remain a holy God…Sanctification [living out our redemption] is simply the marvelous expression of the forgiveness of sins in a human life, but the thing that awakens the deepest well of gratitude in a human being is that God has forgiven his sin…Once you realize all that it cost God to forgive you, you will be held as in a vice, constrained by the love of God…The marvels of conviction of sin, forgiveness, and holiness are so interwoven that it is only the forgiven man who is the holy man, he proves he is forgiven by being the opposite to what he was, by God’s grace.”

In Bold Love, Dan Allender quotes Frederich Buchner from his book, The Magnificent Defeat, regarding the wonder of our salvation:

“There is little that we can point to in our lives as deserving anything but God’s wrath. Our best moments have been mostly grotesque parodies. Our best loves have been almost always blurred with selfishness and deceit. But there is something to which we can point. Not anything that we ever did or were, but something that was done for us by another. Not our own lives, but the life of one who died in our behalf and yet is still alive. This is our only glory and our only hope. And the sound that it makes is the sound of excitement and gladness and laughter that floats through the night air from a great banquet.”

Of Buchner’s words, Allender says:

“This is the framework for offering forgiveness and reconciliation to others. God in Christ models for us a wild, reckless, passionate pursuit of the offender by the offended for the sake of the most shame-free party known to man. If one has been forgiven much, then one will learn to boldly pursue through every possible means the one who has done him harm. The path will not be like any other journey. It is a path marked by quiet repentance, stunned joy [stunned by the wonder that our huge debt has been cancelled], and passionate celebration. It is a path that leads both forgiver and forgiven into the heart of God.”

And in That Man Is You, Louis Evely writes:

“Forgiving kindly entails humiliating oneself. The prodigal son’s father didn’t want to hear another word about the whole episode (Luke 15). He gives a banquet! That’s how God does it too. He alone can make forgiveness something glorious to remember. He is so glad to absolve us that those who have afforded him that joy feel not like disagreeable troublesome pests, but like pampered children, understood and heartened, pleasing and useful to him, and infinitely better than they thought. “Oh happy fault,” they could cry. If we weren’t sinners and didn’t need pardon more than bread, we’d have no way of knowing how deep God’s love is. Each time we come back to God through his forgiveness and rejoice in it, we can be reminded of our ultimate return to Him.”

God’s Old Testament instructions to Israel regarding sacrifice, the Law, the Tabernacle, and the Temple all pointed to Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, whose blood would be shed to pay the penalty for sin and make available forgiveness (Hebrews 7-10 has much that capsulizes these truths). In the New Testament, two primary Greek words are translated “forgive,” and each expresses an element of true forgiveness. The first is aphiemi, which means “to send away or to dismiss,” and has regard to a legal issue. Forgiveness is a legal issue, especially that from God to me. Regarding a person, this word expresses discharge or acquittal of a defendant even if he is guilty. It results in the guilty party being dealt with as if he were innocent.

The second word is charizomai, from the Greek word charis, often translated “grace.” It means “to do someone a favor; to be gracious.” In regard to remitting sin, it would be like giving someone a break. The heart of forgiving is being for giving rather than for getting. We give to someone when we forgive him. God modeled that, because His forgiveness of man was made possible only by the gift of His Son, and Jesus Christ followed suit by giving his life.

At our new birth, when we took our position “in Christ,” God forgave us for all of our sin nature. That’s what the book of Romans is about: by who he is and what he did, Jesus Christ is our Savior from sin (our fallen nature) and sins (our resulting behavior)—the root and the fruit. His sinless life, death, resurrection, ascension, and giving of the gift of holy spirit has forever set us free from the penalty of sin, and given us the potential to overcome the power of sin, which still plagues us via our inherent sin nature. We really can be like Jesus, but no one gets it perfect, so God’s forgiveness to us now is readily available on a moment-by-moment basis.

1 John 1:9 (NIV)
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

God now forgives us each time we repent of our sins. Before the Day of Pentecost, when the Church of the Body of Christ began, God’s forgiveness of a person was contingent upon that person’s forgiveness of others, as in the Lord’s prayer (“forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors”). What happened at Pentecost raised the standard, so to speak, and Ephesians shows this transition.

Ephesians 4:31 and 32 (NIV)
(31) Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.
(32) Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving (charizomai) each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

We must understand what we have in His forgiveness of us if we are to do what the next verses say:

Ephesians 5:1 and 2 (NIV)
(1) Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children
(2) and live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.

As Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do,” so he has equipped us to project this same kind of heart to other people. By way of the gift of holy spirit, Jesus Christ has given us the ability to forgive as he did. We simply have no excuse for bitterness, resentment, or an attitude of unforgiveness.

As we forgive, we are extending the heart of the Lord Jesus to others. Wasn’t that one of the most astounding things about Jesus? He remitted sins! He walked around and said, “Hello, and by the way, your sins are forgiven you.” Some people said thanks, but the enemies of Christ said, “Who are you to forgive sin?” That’s the Devil’s attitude. He wants to keep people bound by sin, guilt, and the accompanying trauma. But you and I can now go forth in Christ’s stead and share the good news that anyone who believes in the Lord Jesus is righteous in God’s sight.

Another aspect of forgiveness is that it is canceling a debt, as the following verses show:

Colossians 2:13 and 14 (NIV)
(13) When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins,
(14) having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.

Debt is a horrible thing, isn’t it? The bigger the debt, the greater the related stress. If we can see how huge our debt to God was, then we will so appreciate Him canceling it that we will extend that same kind of mercy to other people. When we don’t forgive, it is as if we forever sentence the offender to be what he was. In that vein, forgiving someone gives him a new beginning, like the record of Joseph with his brothers in Genesis 37-50. Because Joseph forgave them, God turned that situation around for good, and that is exactly what He can do in relationships in our lives if we have that same kind of heart.

I like the definition of forgiveness that my friend Franklin Smith once wrote:

“Forgiveness means that I will freely restore the one asking forgiveness to his former state from before the wrongdoing occurred, and I will not dwell on the error, or bring it up in any future situations. It is a promise that I make to the one seeking forgiveness. The importance of this promise is in knowing that once a wound has been cleaned out, it must be allowed time to heal. To re-open it only endangers that healing and presents the possibility of a new infection. As time passes in God’s love, the memory of any hurt that is indeed forgiven fades to insignificance.”

I don’t know if it is possible to completely forget something terrible that happened to you, but I like what he says about the memory of it fading to insignificance. In other words, you still have it in your past, but it no longer has you.

In When Bad Things Happen to God’s People, Richard Rice says:

“Even though it overlooks wrongs done to us, forgiveness does not simply allow things to return to what they were before. Instead, it reaches out to create a new situation. It goes on the offensive, so to speak, to build a stronger relationship than existed before. Forgiveness is not being a wimp. Forgiveness is a sign of a solid sense of one’s identity in Christ, and a burning desire to show others Christ’s heart. Forgiving someone is a firsthand experience in living in partnership with the Lord Jesus Christ.”

What are the benefits of forgiveness?

We have already seen quite a few, but let’s start with what they are not, or “the false benefits of unforgiveness,” the payoff I think I get for not forgiving. If we can identify some of these things, then see the greater payoff in forgiveness, it will help us choose forgiveness.

Unforgiveness allows me to stay prideful (the middle letter in pride is “I”). It allows me to focus on me, to be self-centered and arrogant. It allows me to do what I want to do rather than “Thy will be done.” It also gives me a sense of power over someone, which, when you think about it, is ridiculous. The one who hurt me may be long gone on his merry way without ever giving it another thought. Unforgiveness makes me feel important, knowing the other person was “wrong” and I am “right.” It let’s me hang on to something. But is it really worth it? Sometime we think that if we forgive, we’ll lose something, but, ironically, unforgiveness defrauds me. I don’t have more, I have less. Jesus Christ said that he who loses his life (his old self) will find it (his true heart in Christ).

So what are the genuine payoffs for forgiveness? How about personal freedom, as opposed to the slavery of unforgiveness? You get to choose life, and stand in the liberty wherewith Christ has set you free! Another benefit is peace, something everyone wants. And, forgiveness is a great key to spiritual growth.

Perhaps the greatest benefit is heart-to-heart relationships, first of all with God and the Lord Jesus. If I have not forgiven someone, it’s going to hinder my relationship with God (Mark 11:25). Then, heart-to-heart relationships with my brothers are one of the payoffs in forgiveness. There’s nothing that makes life worth living like relationships and true love.

What are some keys to forgiving?

In his book, Forgive and be Free, Richard P. Walters offers an acronym for “sorry”: Soon Offer Regret & Restitution Yourself. We should forgive freely, quickly, and frequently. Studies have shown that the best relationships have the most frequent conflict resolution. That is because such people do not allow little things to become big things. They speak up, in love, in the moment.

One key to forgiving is entrusting yourself to God. I must put my heart in His hands on a daily basis so I am secure in His love and willing to reach out and forgive another person. Here are some other keys:

* Acknowledge the depth of your hurt and hold the person accountable. Extending “cheap forgiveness” may dilute the person’s motivation to repent.
* Realize that it’s okay to feel wronged, disappointed, or hurt. It’s our response that makes the difference.
* Make a conscious decision to look on the one who hurt you as Jesus Christ would, with compassion for his hurt. Don’t assume that he knew better. There are evil people, but most people are not trying to hurt us.
* Pray for the one who wronged you, and ask God to help you forgive. Forgiveness is not an event, but a process, and prayer definitely helps.
* Really think through what you’re going to say and how to say it. You could even rehearse it out loud.
* Keep it simple, don’t exaggerate or diminish the offense.
* Affirm the other person as your brother in Christ.

How do you know when you have forgiven someone?

We must first understand that forgiving someone is not the same thing as trusting him again. Repentance is a prerequisite for true reconciliation, which costs both the offended and the offender. The one sinned against withholds judgment, cancels the debt owed him.

Trust must be earned. As the offended party, you must get your heart to the place that you are willing to forgive, even though you may not have the firsthand opportunity. The person may be dead or completely out of your life. Even so, forgiveness is letting go of the debt he owes you.

Allender writes in Bold Love:

“Forgiveness involves a heart that cancels the debt but does not lend new money until repentance occurs. A forgiving heart opens the door to any who knock, but entry into the home, that is the heart, does not occur until the muddy shoes and dirty coat have been taken off. The offender must repent if true intimacy and reconciliation are ever to take place. That means that cheap forgiveness, peace at any cost that sacrifices honesty, integrity and passion, is not true forgiveness.”

Regarding the cost to the offended, Allender says:

“When you are wronged by someone, it might cost you the loss of some of your friends, money, your reputation, etc. Sometimes that restitution cannot or will not be made to you. Like Jesus Christ, we pay the price for others’ sins. We’re supposed to be willing to do that. We just bear the pain and the loss like Jesus did and we trust God to restore to us what we need. God raised Jesus from the dead—that was restoration!”

If the offender asks for forgiveness, and you do have the opportunity to extend it, I think you can know when you have truly done so by whether you are willing to reach out to him and risk the same kind of pain. It’s probably easier to recognize when you have not forgiven someone:

* You still get angry when you think of the person’s offense.
* You are hesitant to risk getting involved with him or reaching out to him.
* You find yourself hesitant to get involved with someone else who reminds you of the one who hurt you. This could be the way he looks, certain personality traits, or occupation (ministers, for example). This is one way that unforgiveness extends beyond the realm of the initial offense and dings up our lives.

When true repentance does occur, we are bound by God’s Word to forgive and to act accordingly: “So watch yourselves. If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, ‘I repent,’ forgive him” (Luke 17:3 and 4—NIV).

Again, Dan Allender waxes eloquent:

“A day does not go by in which we escape being murderously attacked or adulterously absorbed. The assaults may not even be noticed, but their accumulative wounds produce exhaustion and discouragement. The assaults that are denied or ignored do not seem to require forgiveness. On the other hand, the events of tragic overwhelming assault (sexual abuse, rape, divorce, betrayal, gossip, etc.) seem too great a wound to forgive. And yet, a life of love, joy, and purpose will not occur without forgiveness that permeates every fiber of our relationships.”

Let us close with the following passage in Colossians from The Message, the New Testament in contemporary English, by Eugene H. Peterson, a scholarly attempt to recapture the earthy flavor of the original Greek of the New Testament with its idioms that were familiar to the common people.

Colossians 3:12-14 (The Message)
So, chosen by God for this new life of love, dress in the wardrobe God picked out for you: compassion, kindness, humility, quiet strength, discipline. Be even-tempered, content with second place, quick to forgive an offense. Forgive as quickly and completely as the Master forgave you. And regardless of what else you put on, wear love. It’s your basic, all-purpose garment. Never be without it.

from: http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=546

“Between Faith and the Un-forgiven Feeling”
Rev. Greg Ward
Unitarian Universalist Metro Atlanta North
October 9th, 2005

Meditation:
On New Year’s eve, 1995 [[Everett Worthington Jr.]]’s elderly mother was murdered in her home by two young burglars.

Everett returned from the nostalgia of the story to the car they were riding in, to the sound of his sister crying … to the inescapable reality they were both driving toward.

Could you? Could we? What would it take?

Sermon:

It’s like composer William Walton once said, “Refusing to let go of our unresolved hurts is like getting stung to death by one bee.”

But that’s when it got even harder. That’s where I discovered I had to go much deeper. Because ‘every person’ also meant me.

To the Glory of Life.

Matthew 18: The Greatest in the Kingdom

WHO IS GREATEST in the kingdom of God? How can a subject of the kingdom earn true wealth? When should we forgive? These questions dominate the thoughts of the disciples as they approach Jerusalem. They are also important questions for us. How we answer them will directly affect the quality of our discipleship.
Warming Up to God

When has someone sinned against you? How did it affect you?
Read Matthew 18. »
Discovering the Word

* The disciples want to know who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven (v. 1). How does Jesus' appeal to little children answer their question (vv. 2-5)?
* Spiritually speaking, the "little ones" are those who humble themselves ("become like little children") and believe in Jesus. What is Jesus' attitude toward those who cause the little ones to sin (vv. 6-7)?
* How do verses 10-14 further emphasize the value Jesus places on his "little ones"?
* Greatness in the kingdom is also dependent on living a life of forgiveness and mercy. What guidelines does Jesus give for dealing with those who sin against us (vv. 15-20)?
* Forgiving someone once does not always guarantee he or she will not offend us again. How can the parable of the unmerciful servant help us to keep on forgiving (vv. 21-35)?

Applying the Word

* Children have little status in the eyes of adults. How can we assume the status of children in our circle of friends and coworkers?
* How should the value Jesus places on his "little ones" affect the way we view ourselves and other believers?
* How does this chapter challenge your ideas of value and greatness?

Responding in Prayer

Ask God to help you forgive those who have hurt you.
For Further Study

Forgiving and Reconciling by [[Everett Worthington Jr.]]

http://freecourses.org/


http://trinitytheology.org/

http://apologeticscourses.com/

Free Christian Counseling Course

[I am studying this]

Go to the individual lessons below:

The Basic Model of Dr. Crabb

[[Lesson 1|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn01s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 2|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn02s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 3|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn03s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 4|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn04s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 5|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn05s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 6|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn06s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 7|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn07s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 8|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn08s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 9|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn09s.pdf]]
[[Lesson 10|http://rbc.christiancourses.com/file.php/1/pdfs/sc/sc101_lssn10s.pdf]]

http://rbc.christiancourses.com/

http://onlinebiblecollege.com/site/courses/

G12 Vision
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The G12 vision, also referred to as Groups of 12 or Government of 12, is a controversial strategy for church cell groups and church growth. It is based on the idea that each person should mentor and raise up twelve disciples in the Christian faith, and subsequently each disciple is to mentor 12 other disciples.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 History
* 2 G12 philosophy
* 3 G12 methodology
o 3.1 Ladder of success
o 3.2 Prayer of 3
o 3.3 Nets
o 3.4 Encounters
+ 3.4.1 The process
o 3.5 School of leaders
o 3.6 Homogeneous groups
* 4 International Success
* 5 Concerns
* 6 References
* 7 External links
o 7.1 Discussions

[edit] History

César Castellanos developed the G12 strategy after visiting the Yoido Full Gospel Church pastored by David Yonggi Cho, who had successfully implemented a cell structure in his church in South Korea. Cesar returned to his church, the Misión Carismática Internacional in Bogotá, Colombia with the revelation that God had spoken to him while he was in South Korea, and that God had given him a vision which would increase the size of his church. He subsequently formed his church into groups of 12, while his brother-in-law, César Fajardo, did the same with the youth. From 1991 to 1994 his church grew from 70 to 1,200 members.[1] Between 1994 and 1999 the church grew to 20,000 cells with a regular weekly church celebration of 45,000 people. Soon they lost track of numbers and began to count in cell groups.

In the year 2000 church leaders around the world, seeking to increase the size of their churches, travelled to the Misión Carismática Internacional to learn about the G12 vision. In the year 2001, Castellanos formed an international group of 12, with leaders from various countries (including the controversial Brazilian evangelist Valnice Milhomens). However, by 2005 some of these leaders, including César Farjardo, left the G12 vision under the accusation of financial misbehavior; the vision had by this time become a movement centrally controlled from Bogotá, and those who were banned from MCI formed their own adaptations. Many of the original leaders, however, have continued branches of the G12 movement following in the footsteps of Castellanos.

Currently MCI has 55,000 cell groups and approximately 550,000 members.

[edit] G12 philosophy

The idea of the G12 is to reach out and disciple every member and to hold every member accountable to Christ's teachings. The main leader would disciple 12 people, they would instate Christian values, teachings, prayer and ministry on a weekly basis until their disciples were ready to lead their own groups. Each disciple would find 12 new disciples and repeat the same process until there were 144. In both theory and example this process leads the church to grow exponentially, without losing accountability of Christian values due to the eventual size of the church.

It is based on the methodology used by Jesus to begin his ministry. Following his 40 day temptation in the desert, the first act of Jesus in his ministry was to form a group of 12 disciples (Mark 3:14). Additionally, in the book of Acts the first action taken by the 11 remaining disciples (considering Judas Iscariot's betrayal) was to re-establish a group of 12. Seeing fit not to leave it at 11, or allow 13, but rather to cast lots, which fell on Matthias, to fulfill the 12 (Acts 1:26). It was only after they re-established the group/government of 12 for the church that the day of Pentecost came (the moment when the disciples were all filled with the Holy Spirit)

This number 12 is considered significant as representing Government. See Numerology in the Bible.

[edit] G12 methodology

The G12 structure is found in some evangelical, predominantly charismatic churches.

[edit] Ladder of success

This is broken up into 4 parts with the sole aim of leading people to follow Christ.[2]

* Win:- new believers are added to the open cell through friendships and by utilising the prayer of 3.
* Consolidate:- after joining the cell, new believers are consolidated in the Christian faith and sent on an encounter.
* Disciple:- once the new believer has experienced an encounter, they are sent to the school of leaders.
* Send:- During the school of leaders the believer begins to reach out through friendships and prayer of 3 to start their own open cell. Once they've opened their own open cell, one of two things happen.
o a) The new cell leader stays in their own leader's open cell. This cell gradually changes into a closed leadership cell.
o b) Or, more commonly, will join a separate leadership cell under their cell leader.

[edit] Prayer of 3

This is when three disciples meet once a week and pray for three non-Christians each, nine in total for a period of a month, before inviting the people prayed for to evangelistic events called nets, with the hope that they will follow Christ. The prayer and invitations are continued until those people eventually make a decision for Christ.

The number 3 is considered symbolic of "completeness". See Numerology in the Bible.

[edit] Nets

Nets are revival/evangelistic meetings run monthly, where non Christians are invited to attend with the hope that Christ's message will touch them, and they will follow Christ, and hopefully the leaders of the G12.[3]

[edit] Encounters

These are weekend retreats, usually set away from the city in a conference centre.[4] Encounters generally last three days where there is basic Christian teaching on holiness, prayer, fellowship with God, forgiving, tithing, speaking life, walking in the Spirit, demonic liberation (which is also called casting out the enemy or deliverance), healing the sick, winning souls for Christ, having patience and bearing fruit. One of the main points for these "encounters" is for the believer to have a genuine repentance and revelation of what the cross is all about. Also in these encounters there is extensive prayer and use of common symbolic acts to define the end of the old and beginning of the new.

[edit] The process

Laying aside the old self-rejecting old ways of thinking, acting, feeling,. Renewing believer's mind with God's truth-understanding the truth of what Christ has accomplished for them and that that gives them a new capacity to live for Him. Putting on the new self-in thought, words, actions, values, and relationships. The main purpose of these encounters is for the believer to have an actual encounter with God face to face. For him or her to give themselves completely to God, the result: to have a Christ-centered self-confidence, Joy, Courage, Peace, and a desire to know Christ.

[edit] School of leaders

This is a nine month course split into three ten week sections, where all the fundamentals of the Christian faith are taught, as well as the principles of the G12 vision.[5] It is usually co-ordinated and run by church members who have attended the school of teachers.

[edit] Homogeneous groups

Men, women, and children are allocated to homogeneous cells.[6] This has been found to be effective as ministry in cell groups can be more focussed, relevant, and also some issues are unlikely to be discussed and dealt with when people of the opposite sex are not present.

[edit] International Success
This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (October 2008)

One of the countries with a big success with regards to the G12 vision is the Philippines. Being named as the one and only Christian Country in Asia, it was easily adapted by so many churches with the help of another controversial G12 pastor in the Philippines, Sr. Pastor Oriel Ballano and his model fast growing church the Doulos For Christ World Harvest Ministry [7]. Pastor Ballano is currently teaching pastors in the Philippines and South Korea about the G12 adaptation. The Philippines also held its 1st Philippines G12 Conference last October, 2007 which was attended by the father of the G12 vision Pastor Castellanos and Apostle Lawrence Khong. Another G12 Conference will held in the Philippines this coming December. Lawrence Khong has recently been on a tour of the USA as a performing magician.[8]

[edit] Concerns

Some people have raised concerns about the G12 vision, the way it has been enforced, the division it is causing and its legitimacy.[9][10]

To be part of the G12 vision, church leaders have been forced to submit to the head church in Bogotá. Since 2005, many churches still use the same basic strategy as the G12 Vision, but have severed themselves from the Bogotá leadership, changing the name and terminology.

The G12 vision has been challenged for other reasons, such as spiritualization of number 12, pragmatism and creating a Catholic-style hierarchy among Protestants. Cesar Castellano's book "La Revelación de la Cruz" (The cross revelation) has often been compared with writings by Saint Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Society of Jesus. G12 principles are similar to the Shepherding Movement, and have similar problems. They have often been criticized for their "cult-like" tactics in recruiting and securing new members. Most of the leading G12 churches in the UK have now left the movement.

Apart from the theological concerns, the Castellanos' have also faced some questionings from the Colombian's authorities regarding the way they have increased their finances. In January 4th 2007, one of the most prestigious journals in Colombia, Revista Cambio, published an article titled "Merchants in the Temple?" which made public that the Supreme Court, under the advice of the Attorney's Office, was to investigate the Castellanos' for an unjustified increment in their income. Cambio also pointed out the fact that the Attorney's investigation was conducted by a Anti-Drug (money laundering) division.[11]

[edit] References

1. ^ Revival Times
2. ^ Revival Times
3. ^ Revival Times
4. ^ Revival Times
5. ^ Revival Times
6. ^ Revival Times
7. ^ Doulos For Christ World Harvest Ministry
8. ^ Stevens magic website - featured story
9. ^ Concerns about the G12 Movement
10. ^ Cell Church Solutions - concerns about G12
11. ^ http://www.eltiempo.com/archivo/documento/CMS-3387284

* "Encountering G12: Analyzing the 'cellular vision' of César Castellanos" by Ricardo Becerra in Midwest Christian Outreach Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Spring 2007), pp. 9-13

[edit] External links

* G12 Vision, Official Site
* YouTube G12 Network
* MCI Bogota
* MCI Canada - Official French speaking website
* G12 Information from Faith Community Baptist Church in Singapore
* MCI Aragua - Venezuela
* G12 Venezuela - Official G12 Site in Venezuela, with church adresses, news and preachings (spanish only)

[edit] Discussions

* Encountering G12: Analyzing the "Cellular Vision" of César Castellanos
* Concerns About the G12 Movement
* Coaching Concerns
* A Look at the G12 by Reachout Trust (UK)
* One man's opinion on G12
* The G12 Vision explained
* An Outsider's Opinion about the G12 Movement
* Discussion on the g12 movement
* Description of a G12 church - is it a cult?
* Revealing the reality of the G12
* G12: Control, in Order to Better Reign By an Ex-member of a G12 Cell Group
* Las Mentiras del G12 (The Deceit of the G12) - Spanish Only
* G12 experiences by Reachout Trust (UK)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G12_Vision"
Categories: Conversion to Christianity | New religious movements

[[Go here for reading on history|http://www.chinstitute.org/DAILYF/daily.php]]

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/Trinity1ph.jpg]]


The Glory Be prayer is most familiar from the Rosary where it is recited at the end of each decade of the Hail Mary. It goes back many centuries and is known also by its Latin name and version as the Gloria Patri (Glory Be to the Father). It is also referred to in some older prayer books and scholarly writings as a doxology (which is a fancy name for a short expression of praise for God).

The tradition for the doxology comes from the Jewish synagogues. St. Paul often used doxologies similar to the Glory Be in his letters. For example: he referred to “the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be honor forever and ever. Amen.” in the conclusion of his letter to the Romans (Rom 16:27).

Centuries later, in 1608, the famous bishop St. Francis de Sales ended his classic book Introduction to the Devout Life in a similar fashion: “Glory be to Jesus, to Whom, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, be honour and glory, now and ever, and to all Eternity. Amen.” Notice how this
sentiment resounds in the Glory Be itself:

Glory be to the Father,
And to the Son,
And to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now,
And ever shall be,
World without end. Amen.

Many people make the sign of the cross when reciting this prayer or one of its variants which the priest says at the start of Mass: “In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.”

The Glory Be prayer reaffirms the eternal glory of our “God in Three Persons, Blessed Trinity,” as our Triune God is called in the well known hymn Holy Holy Holy. Let us try each day, in reciting this prayer and others, to be open to God’s graces, so that we may live our lives as hymns of praise to Our Creator.

Gnosticism (Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge) is a set of diverse, syncretistic religious movements in Late Antiquity consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that the material cosmos was created by an imperfect god, the demiurge, with some of the pneuma of the supreme God, which is referred to by several terms including Pleroma and Godhead.[1] The demiurge is frequently identified with Yahweh the God of the Judea-Christian-Muslim faiths (for example see On the Origin of the World (Nag Hammadi)[2]).

Depictions of the demiurge—the term originates with Plato's Timaeus[3]—vary from being as an embodiment of evil, to being merely imperfect and as benevolent as its inadequacy permits. Gnosticism was a dualistic religion, influenced by and influencing Hellenic philosophy, Judaism (see Notzrim), and Christianity;[4] however, by contrast, later strands of the movement, such as the Valentinians, held a monistic world-view.[5] This, along with the varying treatments of the demiurge, may be seen as indicative of the variety of positions held within the category.

The gnōsis referred to in the term is a form of mystic, revealed, esoteric knowledge through which the spiritual elements of humanity are reminded of their true origins within the superior Godhead, being thus permitted to escape materiality.[6] Consequently, within the sects of gnosticism only the pneumatics or psychics obtain gnōsis; the hylic or Somatics, though human, being incapable of perceiving the higher reality, are unlikely to attain the gnōsis deemed by gnostic movements as necessary for salvation.[7][8] Jesus of Nazareth is identified by some Gnostic sects as an embodiment of the supreme being who became incarnate to bring gnōsis to the earth.[9] In others (e.g. the Notzrim and Mandaeans) he is considered a mšiha kdaba or "false messiah" who perverted the teachings entrusted to him by John the Baptist.[10] Still other traditions identify Mani and Seth, third son of Adam and Eve, as salvific figures.[11]

Whereas Gnosticism has been considered by scholars to originate as a branch of Christianity, alternate theories have proposed traces of Gnostic systems existed some centuries before the Christian Era, thus predating the birth of Jesus.[12] The movement spread in areas controlled by the Roman Empire and Arian Goths,[13] and the Persian Empire; it continued to develop in the Mediterranean and Middle East before and during the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Conversion to Islam and the Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229) greatly reduced the remaining number of Gnostics throughout the Middle Ages, though a few Mandaean communities still exist. Gnostic ideas became influential in the philosophies of various esoteric mystical movements of the late 19th and 20th centuries in Europe and North America, including some that explicitly identify themselves as revivals or even continuations of earlier gnostic groups.

Gnostic systems (particularly the Syrian-Egyptian schools) are typically marked out by:

"And the Sophia of the Epinoia [...] brought forth. And [...] something came out of her which was imperfect and different from her appearance, because she had created it without her consort. And it was dissimilar to the likeness of its mother, for it has another form.

"And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance."
From The Secret Book of John (long version), Nag Hammadi Library, Codex II, trans. Frederik Wisse.[14]

   1. The notion of a remote, supreme monadic divinity, source - this figure is known under a variety of names, including 'Pleroma' (fullness, totality) and 'Bythos' (depth, profundity);
   2. The introduction by emanation of further divine beings known as Aeons, which are nevertheless identifiable as aspects of the God from which they proceeded; the progressive emanations are often conceived metaphorically as a gradual and progressive distancing from the ultimate source, which brings about an instability in the fabric of the divine nature;
   3. The introduction of a distinct creator God or demiurge. Which is an illusion and as a later emanation from the single monad or source, this second God is a lesser and inferior or false God. This creator god is commonly referred to as the demiourgós (a technical term literally denoting a public worker the Latinized form of Greek dēmiourgos, δημιουργός, hence "ergon or energy", "public God or skilled worker" "false God" or "God of the masses"), used in the Platonist tradition.[15]
      The gnostic demiurge bears resemblance to figures in Plato's Timaeus and Republic. In the former the demiourgós is a central figure, as benevolent creator of the universe who works to make the universe as benevolent as the limitations of matter will allow; in the latter, the description of the leontomorphic 'desire' in Socrates' model of the psyche bears a resemblance to descriptions of the demiurge as being in the shape of the lion; the relevant passage of The Republic was found within a major gnostic library discovered at Nag Hammadi,[16] wherein a text existed describing the demiurge as a 'lion-faced serpent'.[14]
      Elsewhere this figure is called 'Ialdabaoth',[14] 'Samael' (Aramaic: sæmʻa-ʼel, 'blind god') or 'Saklas' (Syriac: sækla, 'the foolish one'), who is sometimes ignorant of the superior God, and sometimes opposed to it; thus in the latter case he is correspondingly malevolent.
      The demiurge as a tyrannical God having caused the imperfect material world and all of its suffering, is as the creator God of the pagan philosophers (Zeus) and the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic creator God not real but a construct or illusion of the human mind (as nous). Since no secondary creator God is necessary or of high importance as everything is eternal or emanated and can not be created or destroyed. The demiurge typically creates a group of co-actors named 'Archons', who preside over the material realm and, in some cases, present obstacles to the soul seeking ascent from it;[14]

      [The demiurge] is blind; because of his power and his ignorance and his arrogance he said, with his power, "It is I who am God; there is none apart from me." When he said this, he sinned against the entirety. And this speech got up to incorruptibility; then there was a voice that came forth from incorruptibility, saying, "You are mistaken, Samael" - which is, "god of the blind."
      From The Hypostasis of the Archons or The Reality of the Rulers, Nag Hammadi Library, Codex II, trans. Bentley Layton.[17]
   4. The estimation of the world, owing to the above, as flawed or a production of 'error' but possibly good as its constituent material might allow.[5] This world is typically an inferior simulacrum of a higher-level reality or consciousness. The inferiority may be compared to the technical inferiority of a painting, sculpture, or other handicraft to the thing(s) of which those crafts are supposed to be a representation. In certain other cases it takes on a more ascetic tendency to view material existence, negatively. Which then becomes more extreme when materiality, and the human body, is perceived as evil and constrictive, a deliberate prison for its inhabitants;
   5. The explanation of this state through the use of a complex mythological-cosmological drama in which a divine element 'falls' into the material realm and lodges itself within certain human beings; from here, it may be returned to the divine realm through a process of awakening (leading towards salvation). The salvation of the individual thus mirrors a concurrent restoration of the divine nature; a central Gnostic innovation was to elevate individual redemption to the level of a cosmically significant event;

The model limits itself to describing characteristics of the Syrian-Egyptian school of Gnosticism. This is for the reason that the greatest expressions of the Persian gnostic school - Manicheanism and Mandaeanism - are typically conceived of as religious traditions in their own right; indeed, the typical usage of 'Gnosticism' is to refer to the Syrian-Egyptian schools alone, while 'Manichean' describes the movements of the Persia school.

This conception of Gnosticism has in recent times come to be challenged (see below). Despite this, the understanding presented above remains the most common and is useful in aiding meaningful discussion of the phenomena that compose Gnosticism. Above all, the central idea of gnōsis, a knowledge superior to and independent of faith made it welcome to many who were half-converted from paganism to Christianity. The Valentinians, for example, considered pistis (Greek: "faith") as consisting of accepting a body of teaching as true, being principally intellectual or emotional in character.[18] The age of the Gnostics was highly diverse, they seem to have originated in Alexandria and coexisted with the early Christians until the 4th century AD and due to there being no fixed church authority, syncretism with pre-existing belief systems as well as new religions were often embraced. According to Clement of Alexandria, "...In the times of the Emperor Hadrian appeared those who devised heresies, and they continued until the age of the elder Antoninus."[19]

The relationship between Gnosticism and Orthodox Christianity during the late 1st and the whole of the 2nd century is vital in helping us to further understand the main doctrines of Gnosticism; due in part to the fact that, prior to the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library, much of what we know today about gnosticism has only been preserved in the summaries and assessments of early church fathers. Irenaeus declares in his treatise "Against Heresies"[20] that Gnostic movements subjected all morality to the caprice of the individual, and made any fixed rule of faith impossible. The whim of the individual being a subject that is of concern when discussing heresy and orthodoxy in relation to spiritual mysticism, such as the mysticism of Henry Corbin,[21] Thelema, and even in fiction such as The Theologians by Jorge Luis Borges in Labyrinths.[22] According to Irenaeus, a certain sect known as the "Cainites" professed to impart a knowledge "greater and more sublime" than the ordinary doctrine of Christians, and believed that Cain derived his power from the superior Godhead.[23] Although a Christian who valued gnosis, Clement of Alexandria, a 2nd century church father and the first notable member of the Church of Alexandria, raised a criticism against the followers of Basilides and Valentinus in his Stromata: in his view it annulled the efficacy of baptism, in that it held no value faith, the gift conferred in that sacrament.[24]
[edit] Dualism and monism

Typically, Gnostic systems are loosely described as being 'dualistic' in nature, meaning they had the view the world consists of or is explicable as two fundamental entities. Hans Jonas writes: "The cardinal feature of gnostic thought is the radical dualism that governs the relation of God and world, and correspondingly that of man and world."[25] Within this definition, they run the gamut from the 'radical dualist' systems of Manicheanism to the 'mitigated dualism' of classic gnostic movements; Valentinian developments arguably approach a form of monism, expressed in terms previously used in a dualistic manner.

    * Radical Dualism - or absolute Dualism which posits two co-equal divine forces. Manichaeism conceives of two previously coexistent realms of light and darkness which become embroiled in conflict, owing to the chaotic actions of the latter. Subsequently, certain elements of the light became entrapped within darkness; the purpose of material creation is to enact the slow process of extraction of these individual elements, at the end of which the kingdom of light will prevail over darkness. Manicheanism inherits[26][27] this dualistic mythology from Zurvanist Zoroastrianism,[28] in which the eternal spirit Ahura Mazda is opposed by his antithesis, Angra Mainyu; the two are engaged in a cosmic struggle, the conclusion of which will likewise see Ahura Mazda triumphant.
      The Mandaean creation myth witnesses the progressive emanations of Supreme Being of Light, with each emanation bringing about a progressive corruption resulting in the eventual emergence of Ptahil, a demiurge who had a hand in creating and henceforward rules the material realm.
      Additionally, general Gnostic thought (specifically to be found in Iranian sects; for instance, see 'The Hymn of the Pearl') commonly included the belief that the material world corresponds to some sort of malevolent intoxication brought about by the powers of darkness to keep elements of the light trapped inside it, or literally to keep them 'in the dark', or ignorant; in a state of drunken distraction.
    * Mitigated Dualism - where one of the two principles is in some way inferior to the other. Such classical Gnostic movements as the Sethians conceived of the material world as being created by a lesser divinity than the true God that was the object of their devotion. The spiritual world is conceived of as being radically different from the material world, co-extensive with the true God, and the true home of certain enlightened members of humanity; thus, these systems were expressive of a feeling of acute alienation within the world, and their resultant aim was to allow the soul to escape the constraints presented by the physical realm.
    * Qualified Monism - where it is arguable whether or not the second entity is divine or semi-divine. Elements of Valentinian versions of Gnostic myth suggest to some that its understanding of the universe may have been monistic rather than a dualistic one. Elaine Pagels states that 'Valentinian gnosticism [...] differs essentially from dualism';[29] while, according to Schoedel 'a standard element in the interpretation of Valentinianism and similar forms of Gnosticism is the recognition that they are fundamentally monistic'.[30] In these myths, the malevolence of the demiurge is mitigated; his creation of a flawed materiality is not due to any moral failing on his part, but due to his imperfection by contrast to the superior entities of which he is unaware.[5] As such, Valentinians already have less cause to treat physical reality with contempt than might a Sethian Gnostic
      The Valentinian tradition conceives of materiality, rather than as being a separate substance from the divine, as attributable to an error of perception, which become symbolized mythopoetically as the act of material creation.[5]

[edit] Moral and ritual practice

Numerous early Christian Fathers accused some Gnostic teachers of claiming to eschew the physical realm, while simultaneously freely indulging their physical appetites; however there is reason to question the accuracy of these claims.

Evidence in the source texts indicates Gnostic moral behaviour as being generally ascetic in basis, expressed most fluently in their sexual and dietary practice.[31] Many monks would deprive themselves of food, water, or necessary needs for living. This presented a problem for the heresiologists writing on gnostic movements: this mode of behavior was one which they themselves favoured and supported, so the Church Fathers, some modern-day Gnostic apologist presume, would be required perforce to offer support to the practices of their theological opponents. In order to avoid this, a common heresiological approach was to avoid the issue completely by resorting to slanderous (and, in some cases, excessive) allegations of libertinism (see the Cainites), or to explain Gnostic asceticism as being based on incorrect interpretations of scripture, or simply duplicitous in nature. Epiphanius provides an example when he writes of the 'Archontics' 'Some of them ruin their bodies by dissipation, but others feign ostensible fasts and deceive simple people while they pride themselves with a sort of abstinence, under the disguise of monks' (Panarion, 40.1.4).

In other areas of morality, Gnostics were less rigorously ascetic, and took a more moderate approach to correct behaviour. Ptolemy's Epistle to Flora lays out a project of general asceticism in which the basis of action is the moral inclination of the individual:

    External physical fasting is observed even among our followers, for it can be of some benefit to the soul if it is engaged on with reason (logos), whenever it is done neither by way of limiting others, nor out of habit, nor because of the day, as if it had been specially appointed for that purpose.

    – Ptolemy, Letter to Flora

This extract marks a definite shift away from the position of Catholic orthodoxy, that the correct behaviour for Christians is best administered and prescribed by the central authority of the Catholic Church, as transmitted through the Apostles to the Church's bishops. Instead, the internalised inclination of the individual assumes paramount importance; there is the recognition that ritualistic behaviour, though well-intentioned, possesses no significance or effectiveness unless its external prescription is matched by a personal, internal motivation. This line of Gnostic thought is echoed in Protestantism's emphasis on private interpretation of Scripture, and on its individualist emphasis.

Charges of Gnostic libertinism find their source in the works of Irenaeus. According to this writer, Simon Magus (whom he has identified as the prototypical source of Gnosticism, and who had previously tried to buy sacramental authority of ordination from St. Peter the Apostle) founded the school of moral freedom ('amoralism'). Irenaeus reports that Simon's argument was that those who put their trust in him and his consort Helen need trouble themselves no further with the biblical prophets or their moral exhortations and are free 'to do what they wish', as men are saved by his (Simon's) grace and not by their 'righteous works' (Adversus Haereses[32]).

Simon is not known for any libertinistic practice, save for his curious attachment to Helen, typically reputed to be a prostitute. There is, however, clear evidence in the Testimony of Truth that followers of Simon did, in fact, get married and beget children, so a general tendency to asceticism can likewise be ruled out.

Irenaeus reports of the Valentinians, whom he characterizes as eventual inheritors of Simon, that they are lax in their dietary habits (eating food that has been 'offered to idols'), sexually promiscuous ('immoderately given over to the desires of the flesh') and guilty of taking wives under the pretence of living with them as adopted 'sisters'. In the latter case, Michael Allen Williams has argued plausibly that Irenaeus was here broadly correct in the behaviour described, but not in his apprehension of its causes. Williams argues that members of a cult might live together as 'brother' and 'sister': intimate, yet not sexually active. Over time, however, the self-denial required of such an endeavour becomes harder and harder to maintain, leading to the state of affairs Irenaeus criticizes.

Irenaeus also makes reference to the Valentinian practise of the Bridal Chamber, a ritualistic sacrament in which sexual union is seen as analogous to the activities of the paired syzygies that constitute the Valentinian Pleroma. Though it is known that Valentinus had a more relaxed approach to sexuality than much of the Catholic Church (he allowed women to hold positions of ordination in his community), it is not known whether the Bridal Chamber was a ritual involving actual intercourse, or whether human sexuality is here simply being used in a metaphorical sense.

Of the Carpocratians Irenaeus makes much the same report: they 'are so abandoned in their recklessness that they claim to have in their power and be able to practise anything whatsoever that is ungodly (irreligious) and impious ... they say that conduct is only good or evil in the eyes of man'.[33] Once again a differentiation might be detected between a man's actions and the grace he has received through his adherence to a system of gnosis; whether this is due to a common sharing of such an attitude amongst Gnostic circles, or whether this is simply a blanket-charge used by Irenaeus is open to conjecture.

On the whole, it would seem that Gnostic behavior tended towards the ascetic. This said, the heresiological accusation of duplicity in such practises should not be taken at face value; nor should similar accusations of amoral libertinism. The Nag Hammadi library itself is full of passages which appear to encourage abstinence over indulgence. Fundamentally, however, gnostic movements appear to take the 'ancient schema of the two ways, which leaves the decision to do what is right to human endeavour and promises a reward for those who make the effort, and punishment for those who are negligent' (Kurt Rudolph, Gnosis:The Nature and History of Gnosticism, 262).
[edit] Major Gnostic movements and their texts

As noted above, schools of Gnosticism can be defined according to one classification system as being a member of two broad categories. These are the 'Eastern'/'Persian' school, and a 'Syrian-Egyptic' school. The former possesses more demonstrably dualist tendencies, reflecting a strong influence from the beliefs of the Persian Zurvanist Zoroastrians. Among the Syrian-Egyptian schools and the movements they spawned are a typically more Monist view. Notable exceptions include relatively modern movements which seem to include elements of both categories, namely: the Cathars, Bogomils, and Carpocratians which are included in their own section.
[edit] Persian Gnosticism

The Persian Schools, which appeared in the western Persian province of Babylon, and whose writings were originally produced in the Aramaic dialects spoken in Babylon at the time, are representative of what is believed to be among the oldest of the Gnostic thought forms. These movements are considered by most to be religions in their own right, and are not emanations from Christianity or Judaism.

    * Mandaeanism is still practiced in small numbers, in parts of southern Iraq and the Iranian province of Khuzestan. The name of the group derives from the term Mandā d-Heyyi, which roughly means "Knowledge of Life." Although the exact chronological origins of this movement are not known, John the Baptist eventually would come to be a key figure in the religion, as an emphasis on baptism is part of their core beliefs. As with Manichaeism, despite certain ties with Christianity, Mandaeans do not believe in Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed. Their beliefs and practices likewise have little overlap with the religions that manifested from those religious figures and the two should not be confused. Significant amounts of original Mandaean Scripture, written in Mandaean Aramaic, survive in the modern era. The primary source text is known as the Genzā Rabbā and has portions identified by some scholars as being copied as early as the 2nd century CE. There is also the Qolastā, or Canonical Book of Prayer and The Book of John the Baptist (sidra ḏ-iahia).

    * Manichaeism which represented an entire independent religious heritage, but is now mostly extinct, was founded by the Prophet Mani (216-276 CE). The original writings were written in Syriac Aramaic, in a unique Manichaean script. Although most of the literature/scripture of the Manichaeans was believed lost, the discovery of an original series of documents have helped to shed new light on the subject. Now housed in Cologne Germany, a Manichaean religious work written in Greek, the Codex Manichaicus Coloniensis, contains mainly biographical information on the prophet and details on his claims and teachings. Before the discovery of these authentic Manichaean texts, scholars had to rely on anti-Manichaean polemical works, such as the Christian anti-Manichaean Acta Archelai (also written in Greek), which has Mani saying, for example, "The true God has nothing to do with the material world or cosmos", and, "It is the Prince of Darkness who spoke with Moses, the Jews and their priests. Thus the Christians, the Jews, and the Pagans are involved in the same error when they worship this God. For he leads them astray in the lusts he taught them." [34][35]

[edit] Syrian-Egyptian Gnosticism

The Syrian-Egyptian school derives much of its outlook from Platonist influences. Typically, it depicts creation in a series of emanations from a primal monadic source, finally resulting in the creation of the material universe. As a result, there is a tendency in these schools to view evil in terms of matter which is markedly inferior to goodness, evil as lacking spiritual insight and goodness, rather than to emphasize portrayals of evil as an equal force. These schools of gnosticism may be said to use the terms 'evil' and 'good' as being relative descriptive terms, as they refer to the relative plight of human existence caught between such realities and confused in its orientation, with 'evil' indicating the extremes of distance from the principle and source of goodness, without necessarily emphasizing an inherent negativity. As can be seen below, many of these movements included source material related to Christianity, with some identifying themselves as specifically Christian (albeit quite different from the so-called Orthodox or Roman Catholic forms).
[edit] Syrian-Egyptic scripture

Most of the literature from this category is known/confirmed to us in the modern age through the Library discovered at Nag Hammadi.

    * Sethian works are named after the third son of Adam and Eve, believed to be a possessor and disseminator of gnosis. These typically include:
          o The Apocryphon of John
          o The Apocalypse of Adam
          o The Reality of the Rulers, Also known as The hypostasis of the Archons
          o The Thunder-Perfect Mind
          o The Three-fold First Thought (Trimorphic Protennoia)
          o The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit (also known as the (Coptic) Gospel of the Egyptians)
          o Zostrianos
          o Allogenes
          o The Three Steles of Seth

    * Thomasine works are so-named[by whom?] after the School of St. Thomas the Apostle[citation needed]. The texts commonly attributed to this school are:
          o The Hymn of the Pearl, or, the Hymn of Jude Thomas the Apostle in the Country of Indians
          o The Gospel of Thomas
          o The Book of Thomas: The Contender Writing to the Perfect

    * Valentinian works are named in reference to the Bishop and teacher Valentinius, also spelled Valentinus. ca. 153 AD/CE, Valentinius developed a complex Cosmology outside of the Sethian tradition. At one point he was close to being appointed the Bishop of Rome of what is now the Roman Catholic Church. Works attributed to his school are listed below, and fragmentary pieces directly linked to him are noted with an asterisk:
          o The Divine Word Present in the Infant (Fragment A) *
          o On the Three Natures (Fragment B) *
          o Adam's Faculty of Speech (Fragment C) *
          o To Agathopous: Jesus' Digestive System (Fragment D) *
          o Annihilation of the Realm of Death (Fragment F) *
          o On Friends: The Source of Common Wisdom (Fragment G) *
          o Epistle on Attachments (Fragment H) *
          o Summer Harvest*
          o The Gospel of Truth*
          o Ptolemy's Version of the Gnostic Myth
          o The Prayer of the Apostle Paul
          o Ptolemy's Epistle to Flora
          o Treatise on Resurrection (Epistle to Rheginus)
          o Gospel of Philip

    * Basilidian works are named for the founder of their school, Basilides (132–? CE/AD). These works are mainly known to us through the criticisms of one of his opponents, Irenaeus in his work Adversus Haereses. The other pieces are known through the work of Clement of Alexandria:
          o The Octet of Subsistent Entities (Fragment A)
          o The Uniqueness of the World (Fragment B)
          o Election Naturally Entails Faith and Virtue (Fragment C)
          o The State of Virtue (Fragment D)
          o The Elect Transcend the World (Fragment E)
          o Reincarnation (Fragment F)
          o Human Suffering and the Goodness of Providence (Fragment G)
          o Forgivable Sins (Fragment H)

    * The Gospel of Judas is the most recently discovered Gnostic text. National Geographic has published an English translation of it, bringing it into mainstream awareness. It portrays Judas Iscariot as the most enlightened disciple, who acted at Jesus' request when he handed Jesus over to the authorities. Its reference to Barbelo and inclusion of material similar to the Apocryphon of John and other such texts, connects the text to Barbeloite and/or Sethian Gnosticism.

[edit] Later Gnosticism and Gnostic-influenced groups

    * Other schools and related movements; these are presented in chronological order:
      The circular, harmonic cross was an emblem used most notably by the Cathars,[verification needed] a medieval group that related to Gnosticism.
          o Simon Magus and Marcion of Sinope both had Gnostic tendencies, but such familiar ideas as they presented were as-yet unformed; they might thus be described as pseudo- or proto-Gnostics. Both developed a sizable following. Simon Magus' pupil Menander of Antioch could potentially be included within this grouping. Marcion is popularly labeled a gnostic, however most scholars do not consider him a gnostic at all, for example, the Encyclopædia Britannica article on Marcion clearly states: "In Marcion's own view, therefore, the founding of his church — to which he was first driven by opposition — amounts to a reformation of Christendom through a return to the gospel of Christ and to Paul; nothing was to be accepted beyond that. This of itself shows that it is a mistake to reckon Marcion among the Gnostics. A dualist he certainly was, but he was not a Gnostic - Depending of course on one's definition of 'Gnostic'."
          o Cerinthus (c. 100 AD), the founder of a heretical school with gnostic elements. Like a Gnostic, Cerinthus depicted Christ as a heavenly spirit separate from the man Jesus, and he cited the demiurge as creating the material world. Unlike the Gnostics, Cerinthus taught Christians to observe the Jewish law; his demiurge was holy, not lowly; and he taught the Second Coming. His gnosis was a secret teaching attributed to an apostle. Some scholars believe that the First Epistle of John was written as a response to Cerinthus.[36]
          o The Ophites, so-named because they worshiped the serpent of Genesis as the bestower of knowledge.
          o The Cainites, as the term implies, worshiped Cain, as well as Esau, Korah, and the Sodomites. There is little evidence concerning the nature of this group; however, it is surmisable that they believed that indulgence in sin was the key to salvation because since the body is evil, one must defile it through immoral activity (see libertinism). The name Cainite is used as the name of a religious movement, and not in the usual Biblical sense of people descended from Cain. According to Biblical text, which is our only source of knowledge about the man Cain, all descendants of Cain perished in Noah's Flood, as only Noah's family survived, deriving from the line of Seth.
          o The Carpocratians, a libertine sect following only the Gospel according to the Hebrews
          o The Borborites, a libertine Gnostic sect, said to be descended from the Nicolaitans
          o The Paulicans, an Adoptionist group, also accused by medieval sources as Gnostic and quasi Manichaean Christian. They flourished between 650 and 872 in Armenia and the Eastern Themes of the Byzantine Empire
          o The Bogomils, , the synthesis of Armenian Paulicianism and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church reform movement, which emerged in Bulgaria between 927 and 970 and spread throughout Europe
          o The Cathars (Cathari, Albigenses or Albigensians) are typically seen as being imitative of Gnosticism; whether or not the Cathari possessed direct historical influence from ancient Gnosticism is disputed. Though the basic conceptions of Gnostic cosmology are to be found in Cathar beliefs (most distinctly in their notion of a lesser, Satanic, creator god), they did not apparently place any special relevance upon knowledge (gnosis) as an effective salvific force[verification needed]. For the relationship between these medieval heresies and earlier Gnostic forms, see historical discussion above.

[edit] Kabbalah

Gnostic ideas found a Jewish variation in the mystical study of Kabbalah. The Kabbalists took many core Gnostic ideas and used them to dramatically reinterpret earlier Jewish sources according to this new system. See Gershom Scholem's Origins of the Kabbalah for further discussion. The Kabbalists originated in 13th century Provence which was at that time also the center of the Gnostic Cathars. While some scholars in the middle of the 20th century tried to assume an influence between the Cathar "gnostics" and the origins of the Kabbalah, this assumption has proved to be an incorrect generalization which is not substantiated by any original texts.[37] On the other hand, other scholars, such as Scholem, postulated that there was originally a "Jewish gnosticism", which influenced the early origins of gnosticism.[38]

Kabbalah, does not employ the terminology or labels of non-Jewish Gnosticism, but grounds the same or similar concepts in the language of the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible). The central work of Kabbalah, which appeared in 13th century Spain, the Book of Zohar ("Splendor"), is written in the style of a Jewish Aramaic Midrash, clarifying the five books of the Torah with a new Kabbalistic system which uses completely Jewish terms. Nevertheless, during time periods when Gnostic movements were drawing large numbers of followers from various religions, creating Gnostic versions of those religions, many Jews also developed a mystical version of Judaism remarkably similar to Gnostic beliefs.

While Kabbalah shares several themes with Gnosticism, such as a multiplicity of heavenly levels and archetypes and the importance of mystical knowledge of these, it does not reflect the distinctive Gnostic belief that the material world and the Hebrew Bible are the work of an inferior and malevolent deity. Rather than describing Kabbalah as a form of Gnosticism, it would be more accurate to describe both Kabbalah and Gnosticism as members of a family of Neoplatonic/Neopythagorean Oriental mystical traditions. Gershom Scholem once described Gnosticism as "the Greatest case of metaphysical anti-Semitism."[39]
[edit] Important terms and concepts
Main article: List of gnostic terms

Please note that the following are only summaries of various Gnostic interpretations that exist. The roles of familiar beings such as Jesus Christ, Sophia, and the Demiurge usually share the same general themes between systems but may have somewhat different functions or identities ascribed to them.
[edit] Æon
Main article: Æon

In many Gnostic systems, the æons are the various emanations of the superior God, who is also known by such names as the One, the Monad, Aion teleos (Greek: "The Complete Æon"),[citation needed] Bythos (Greek: Βυθος, 'Depth' or 'profundity'), Proarkhe (Greek: προαρχη, "Before the Beginning'), E Arkhe (Greek: ἡ ἀρχή, 'The Beginning'), Ennoia (Greek: "Thought") of the Light[40] or Sige (Greek: Σιγη, "Silence").[41] From this first being, also an æon, a series of different emanations occur, beginning in certain Gnostic texts with the hermaphroditic Barbelo,[14][42][43] from which successive pairs of aeons emanate, often in male-female pairings called syzygies;[44] the numbers of these pairings varied from text to text, though some identify their number as being thirty.[45] The aeons as a totality constitute the pleroma, the "region of light". The lowest regions of the pleroma are closest to the darkness; that is, the physical world.[citation needed]

Two of the most commonly paired æons were Jesus and Sophia (Greek: "Wisdom"); the latter refers to Jesus as her 'consort' in A Valentinian Exposition.[46] Sophia, emanating without her partner, resulting in the production of the Demiurge (Greek: lit. "public builder"),[47] who is also referred to as Yaldabaoth and variations thereof in some Gnostic texts.[14] This creature is concealed outside the Pleroma;[14] in isolation, and thinking itself alone, it creates materiality and a host of co-actors, referred to as archons. The demiurge is responsible for the creation of mankind, by create he traps elements of the Pleroma stolen from Sophia in human bodies.[14][17] In response, the Godhead emanates two savior æons, Christ and the Holy Spirit; Christ then embodies itself in the form of Jesus, in order to be able to teach man how to achieve gnosis, by which they may return to the Pleroma.[9]
[edit] Archon
Main article: Archon#Gnostic archons

In late antiquity some variants of Gnosticism used the term Archon to refer to several servants of the Demiurge.[17] In this context they may be seen as having the roles of the angels and demons of the Old Testament.

According to Origen's Contra Celsum, a sect called the Ophites posited the existence of seven archons, beginning with Iadabaoth or Ialdabaoth, who created the six that follow: Iao, Sabaoth, Adonaios, Elaios, Astaphanos and Horaios.[48] Similarly to the Mithraic Kronos and Vedic Narasimha, a form of Vishnu, Ialdabaoth had a head of a lion.[14][49][50]
[edit] Abraxas/Abrasax
Main article: Abraxas
Engraving from an Abraxas stone.

The Egyptian Gnostic Basilideans referred to a figure called Abraxas who was at the head of 365 spiritual beings (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, I.24); it is unclear what to make of Irenaeus' use of the term 'Archon', which may simply mean 'ruler' in this context. The role and function of Abraxas for Basilideans is not clear.

The word Abraxas was engraved on certain antique gemstones, called on that account Abraxas stones, which may have been used as amulets or charms by Gnostic sects. In popular culture, Abraxas is sometimes considered the name of a god who incorporated both Good and Evil (God and Demiurge) in one entity, and therefore representing the monotheistic God, singular, but (unlike, for example, the Christian God) not omni-benevolent (See Hesse's Demian, and Jung's Seven Sermons to the Dead). Opinions abound on Abraxas, who in recent centuries has been claimed to be both an Egyptian god and a demon, sometimes even being associated with the dual nature of Satan/Lucifer. The word abracadabra may be related to Abraxas.

The above information relates to interpretations of ancient amulets and to reports of Christian heresy hunters which are not always clear.

Actual ancient Gnostic texts from the Nag Hammadi Library, such as the Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians, refer to Abrasax as an Aeon dwelling with Sophia and other Aeons of the Spiritual Fullness in the light of the luminary Eleleth. In several texts, the luminary Eleleth is the last of the luminaries (Spiritual Lights) that come forward, and it is the Aeon Sophia, associated with Eleleth, who encounters darkness and becomes involved in the chain of events that leads to the Demiurge and Archon's rule of this world, and the salvage effort that ensues. As such, the role of Aeons of Eleleth, including Abrasax, Sophia, and others, pertains to this outer border of the Divine Fullness that encounters the ignorance of the world of Lack and interacts to rectify the error of ignorance in the world of materiality.

Words like or similar to Abraxas or Abrasax also appear in the Greek Magical Papyri. There are similarities and differences between such figures in reports about Basiledes' teaching, in the larger magical traditions of the Graeco-Roman world, in the classic ancient Gnostic texts such as the Gospel of the Egyptians, and in later magical and esoteric writings.

The Swiss Psychologist Carl Jung wrote a short Gnostic treatise in 1916 called The Seven Sermons to the Dead, which called Abraxas a God higher than the Christian God and Devil, that combines all opposites into one Being.
[edit] Demiurge
Main article: Demiurge
A lion-faced deity found on a Gnostic gem in Bernard de Montfaucon's L'antiquité expliquée et représentée en figures may be a depiction of the Demiurge; however, cf. Mithraic Zervan Akarana [51]

The term Demiurge derives from the Latinized form of the Greek term dēmiourgos, δημιουργός, (literally "public or skilled worker") and refers to an entity responsible for the creation of the physical universe and the physical aspect of humanity. The term dēmiourgos occurs in a number of other religious and philosophical systems, most notably Platonism. Moral judgements of the demiurge vary from group to group within the broad category of gnosticism - such judgements usually correspond to each group's judgement of the status of materiality as being inherently evil, or else merely flawed and as good as its passive constituent matter will allow.

Like Plato does, Gnosticism presents a distinction between a supranatural, unknowable reality and the sensible materiality of which the demiurge is creator. However, in contrast to Plato, several systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the Supreme God: his act of creation either in unconscious and fundamentally flawed imitation of the divine model, or else formed with the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. Thus, in such systems, the Demiurge acts as a solution to the problem of evil. In the Apocryphon of John (several versions of which are found in the Nag Hammadi library), the Demiurge has the name "Yaltabaoth", and proclaims himself as God:

    "Now the archon who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas, and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, 'I am God and there is no other God beside me,' for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come."

"Samael", in the Judeo-Christian tradition, refers to the evil angel of death, and corresponds to the Christian demon of that name, one second only to Satan[citation needed]. Literally, it can mean "blind god" or "god of the blind" in Aramaic (Syriac sæmʻa-ʼel); another alternative title is "Saklas", Aramaic for "fool" (Syriac sækla "the foolish one").

Gnostic myth recounts that Sophia (Greek, literally meaning "wisdom"), the Demiurge's mother and a partial aspect of the divine Pleroma or "Fullness", desired to create something apart from the divine totality, and without the receipt of divine assent. In this abortive act of separate creation, she gave birth to the monstrous Demiurge and, being ashamed of her deed, she wrapped him in a cloud and created a throne for him within it. The Demiurge, isolated, did not behold his mother, nor anyone else, and thus concluded that only he himself existed, being ignorant of the superior levels of reality that were his birth-place.

The Gnostic myths describing these events are full of intricate nuances portraying the declination of aspects of the divine into human form; this process occurs through the agency of the Demiurge who, having stolen a portion of power from his mother, sets about a work of creation in unconscious imitation of the superior Pleromatic realm. Thus Sophia's power becomes enclosed within the material forms of humanity, themselves entrapped within the material universe: the goal of Gnostic movements was typically the awakening of this spark, which permitted a return by the subject to the superior, non-material realities which were its primal source. (See Sethian Gnosticism.)
[edit] Gnosis
Main article: Gnosis

The word 'Gnosticism' is a modern construction, though based on an antiquated linguistic expression: it comes from the Greek word meaning 'knowledge', gnosis (γνῶσις). However, gnosis itself refers to a very specialised form of knowledge, deriving both from the exact meaning of the original Greek term and its usage in Platonist philosophy.

Unlike modern English[citation needed], ancient Greek was capable of discerning between several different forms of knowing. These different forms may be described in English as being propositional knowledge, indicative of knowledge acquired indirectly through the reports of others or otherwise by inference (such as "I know of George Bush" or "I know Berlin is in Germany"), and empirical knowledge acquired by direct participation or acquaintance (such as "I know George Bush personally" or "I know Berlin, having visited").

Gnosis (γνῶσις) refers to knowledge of the second kind. Therefore, in a religious context, to be 'Gnostic' should be understood as being reliant not on knowledge in a general sense, but as being specially receptive to mystical or esoteric experiences of direct participation with the divine. Indeed, in most Gnostic systems the sufficient cause of salvation is this 'knowledge of' ('acquaintance with') the divine. This is commonly identified with a process of inward 'knowing' or self-exploration, comparable to that encouraged by Plotinus (ca. 205–270 AD). However, as may be seen, the term 'gnostic' also had precedent usage in several ancient philosophical traditions, which must also be weighed in considering the very subtle implications of its appellation to a set of ancient religious groups.
[edit] Monad (apophatic theology)
Main article: Monad (Gnosticism)

In many Gnostic systems (and heresiologies), God is known as the Monad, the One, The Absolute, Aion teleos (The Perfect Æon), Bythos (Depth or Profundity, Βυθος), Proarkhe (Before the Beginning, προαρχη), and E Arkhe (The Beginning, η αρχη). God is the high source of the pleroma, the region of light. The various emanations of God are called æons.

Within certain variations of Gnosticism, especially those inspired by Monoimus, the Monad was the highest God which created lesser gods, or elements (similar to æons).

According to Hippolytus, this view was inspired by the Pythagoreans, who called the first thing that came into existence the Monad, which begat the dyad, which begat the numbers, which begat the point, begetting lines, etc. This was also clarified in the writings of Plato, Aristotle and Plotinus. This teaching being largely Neopythagorean via Numenius as well.

This Monad is the spiritual source of everything which emanates the pleroma, and could be contrasted to the dark Demiurge (Yaldabaoth) that controls matter.

The Sethian cosmogony as most famously contained in the Apocryphon ('Secret book') of John describes an unknown God, very similar to the orthodox apophatic theology, although very different from the orthodox credal teachings that there is one such god who is identified also as creator of heaven and earth. In describing the nature of a creator god associated with Biblical texts, orthodox theologians often attempt to define God through a series of explicit positive statements, themselves universal but in the divine taken to their superlative degrees: he is omniscient, omnipotent and truly benevolent. The Sethian conception of the most hidden transcendent God is, by contrast, defined through negative theology: he is immovable, invisible, intangible, ineffable; commonly, 'he' is seen as being hermaphroditic, a potent symbol for being, as it were, 'all-containing'. In the Apocryphon of John, this god is good in that it bestows goodness. After the apophatic statements, the process of the Divine in action are used to describe the effect of such a god.

An apophatic approach to discussing the Divine is found throughout gnosticism, Vedanta, and Platonic and Aristotelian theology as well. It is also found in some Judaic sources.
[edit] Pleroma
Main article: Pleroma

Pleroma (Greek πληρωμα) generally refers to the totality of God's powers. The term means fullness, and is used in Christian theological contexts: both in Gnosticism generally, and in Colossians 2.9.

Gnosticism holds that the world is controlled by evil archons, one of whom is the demiurge, the deity of the Old Testament who holds the human spirit captive.

The heavenly pleroma is the center of divine life, a region of light "above" (the term is not to be understood spatially) our world, occupied by spiritual beings such as aeons (eternal beings) and sometimes archons. Jesus is interpreted as an intermediary aeon who was sent from the pleroma, with whose aid humanity can recover the lost knowledge of the divine origins of humanity. The term is thus a central element of Gnostic cosmology.

Pleroma is also used in the general Greek language and is used by the Greek Orthodox church in this general form since the word appears under the book of Colossians. Proponents of the view that Paul was actually a gnostic, such as Elaine Pagels of Princeton University, view the reference in Colossians as something that was to be interpreted in the gnostic sense.
[edit] Sophia
Main article: Sophia (wisdom)

In Gnostic tradition, the term Sophia (Σoφíα, Greek for "wisdom") refers to the final and lowest emanation of God.

In most if not all versions of the gnostic myth, Sophia births the demiurge, who in turn brings about the creation of materiality. The positive or negative depiction of materiality thus resides a great deal on mythic depictions of Sophia's actions. She is occasionally referred to by the Hebrew equivalent of Achamoth (this is a feature of Ptolemy's version of the Valentinian gnostic myth). Jewish Gnosticism with a focus on Sophia was active by 90.[citation needed]

Almost all gnostic systems of the Syrian or Egyptian type taught that the universe began with an original, unknowable God, referred to as the Parent or Bythos, as the Monad by Monoimus, or the first Aeon by still other traditions. From this initial unitary beginning, the One spontaneously emanated further Aeons, pairs of progressively 'lesser' beings in sequence. The lowest of these pairs were Sophia and Christ. The Aeons together made up the Pleroma, or fullness, of God, and thus should not be seen as distinct from the divine, but symbolic abstractions of the divine nature.
[edit] History
Main article: History of Gnosticism
[edit] The development of the Syrian-Egyptian school

Bentley Layton has sketched out a relationship between the various gnostic movements in his introduction to The Gnostic Scriptures (SCM Press, London, 1987). In this model, 'Classical Gnosticism' and 'The School of Thomas' antedated and influenced the development of Valentinus, who was to found his own school of Gnosticism in both Alexandria and Rome, whom Layton called 'the great [Gnostic] reformer' and 'the focal point' of Gnostic development. While in Alexandria, where he was born, Valentinus probably would have had contact with the Gnostic teacher Basilides, and may have been influenced by him.

Valentinianism flourished throughout the early centuries of the common era: while Valentinus himself lived from ca. 100–180 AD/CE, a list of sectarians or heretics, composed in 388 AD/CE, against whom Emperor Constantine intended legislation includes Valentinus (and, presumably, his inheritors).[citation needed] The school is also known to have been extremely popular: several varieties of their central myth are known, and we know of 'reports from outsiders from which the intellectual liveliness of the group is evident' (Markschies, Gnosis: An Introduction, 94). It is known that Valentinus' students, in further evidence of their intellectual activity, elaborated upon the teachings and materials they received from him (though the exact extent of their changes remains unknown), for example, in the version of the Valentinian myth brought to us through Ptolemy.

Valentinianism might be described as the most elaborate and philosophically 'dense' form of the Syrian-Egyptian schools of Gnosticism, though it should be acknowledged that this in no way debarred other schools from attracting followers: Basilides' own school was popular also, and survived in Egypt until the 4th century.

Simone Petrement, in A Separate God, in arguing for a Christian origin of Gnosticism, places Valentinus after Basilides, but before the Sethians. It is her assertion that Valentinus represented a moderation of the anti-Judaism of the earlier Hellenized teachers; the demiurge, widely regarded to be a mythological depiction of the Old Testament God of the Hebrews, is depicted as more ignorant than evil. (See below.)
Manichean priests writing at their desks, with panel inscription in Sogdian. Manuscript from Khocho, Tarim Basin.
[edit] The development of the Persian school

An alternate heritage is offered by Kurt Rudolph in his book Gnosis: The Nature & Structure of Gnosticism (Koehler and Amelang, Leipzig, 1977), to explain the lineage of Persian Gnostic schools. The decline of Manicheism that occurred in Persia in the 5th century was too late to prevent the spread of the movement into the east and the west. In the west, the teachings of the school moved into Syria, Northern Arabia, Egypt and North Africa (where Augustine was a member of the school from 373-382); from Syria it progressed still farther, into Palestine, Asia Minor and Armenia. There is evidence for Manicheans in Rome and Dalmatia in the 4th century, and also in Gaul and Spain. The influence of Manicheanism was attacked by imperial elects and polemical writings, but the religion remained prevalent until the 6th century, and still exerted influence in the emergence of the Paulicians, Bogomils and Cathari in the Middle Ages, until it was ultimately stamped out as a heresy by the Catholic Church.

In the east, Rudolph relates, Manicheanism was able to bloom, given that the religious monopoly position previously held by Christianity and Zoroastrianism had been broken by nascent Islam. In the early years of the Arab conquest, Manicheanism again found followers in Persia (mostly amongst educated circles), but flourished most in Central Asia, to which it had spread through Iran. Here, in 762, Manicheanism became the state religion of the Uyghur Empire.
[edit] Neoplatonism and Gnosticism
See also: Neoplatonism and Gnosticism and Neoplatonism and Christianity
[edit] Historical relations between antique Greek Philosophy and Gnosticism
See also: Platonic Academy

The earliest origins of Gnosticism are still obscure and disputed, but they probably include influence from Plato, Middle Platonism and Neo-Pythagoreanism academies or schools of thought, and this seems to be true both of the more Sethian Gnostics, and of the Valentinian Gnostics.[52] Further, if we compare different Sethian texts to each other in an attempted chronology of the development of Sethianism during the first few centuries, it seems that later texts are continuing to interact with Platonism. Earlier texts such as Apocalypse of Adam show signs of being pre-Christian and focus on the Seth, third son of Adam and Eve. These early Sethians may be identical to or related to the Notzrim, Ophites or to the sectarian group called the Minuth by Philo.[53][54] Later Sethian texts such as Zostrianos and Allogenes draw on the imagery of older Sethian texts, but utilize "a large fund of philosophical conceptuality derived from contemporary Platonism, (that is late middle Platonism) with no traces of Christian content."[55] Indeed the doctrine of the "triple-powered one" found in the text Allogenes, as discovered in the Nag Hammadi Library, is "the same doctrine as found in the anonymous Parmenides commentary (Fragment XIV) ascribed by Hadot to Porphyry [...] and is also found in Plotinus' Ennead6.7, 17, 13-26."[52]
[edit] Rejection by antique Greek Philosophy

However, by the 3rd century Neoplatonists, such as Plotinus, Porphyry and Amelius are all attacking the Sethians. It looks as if Sethianism began as a pre-Christian tradition, possibly a syncretic[56] that incorporated elements of Christianity and Platonism as it grew, only to have both Christianity and Platonism reject and turn against it. Professor John D Turner believes that this double attack led to Sethianism fragmentation into numerous smaller groups (Audians, Borborites, Archontics and perhaps Phibionites, Stratiotici, and Secundians).[55] Scholarship on Gnosticism has been greatly advanced by the discovery and translation of the Nag Hammadi texts, which shed light on some of the more puzzling comments by Plotinus and Porphyry regarding the Gnostics. More importantly, the texts help to distinguish different kinds of early Gnostics. It now seems clear that "Sethian" and "Valentinian"[57] gnostics attempted "an effort towards conciliation, even affiliation" with late antique philosophy,[58] and were rebuffed by some Neoplatonists, including Plotinus.
[edit] Philosophical relations between Neoplatonism and Gnosticism

Gnostics borrow a lot of ideas and terms from Platonism. They exhibit a keen understanding of Greek philosophical terms and the Greek Koine language in general, and use Greek philosophical concepts throughout their text, including such concepts as hypostasis (reality, existence), ousia (essence, substance, being), and demiurge (creator God). Good examples include texts such as the Hypostasis of the Archons (Reality of the Rulers) or Trimorphic Protennoia (The first thought in three forms).
[edit] Criticism of gnosticism by antique Greek Philosophy

As a pagan mystic Plotinus considered his opponents heretics[59] and elitist blasphemers,[60] arriving at misotheism as the solution to the problem of evil, being not traditional or genuine Hellenism (in philosophy or mysticism), but rather one invented taking all their truths over from Plato,[61] coupled with the idea expressed by Plotinus that the approach to the infinite force which is the One or Monad cannot be through knowing or not knowing (i.e., dualist, which is of the dyad or demiurge).[62][63] Although there has been dispute as to which Gnostics Plotinus was referring to it appears they were indeed Sethian.[64] Plotinus' main objection to the Gnostics he was familiar with, however, was their rejection of the goodness of the demiurge and the material world. He attacks the Gnostics as vilifying Plato's ontology of the universe as contained in the Timaeus. He accused Gnosticism of vilifying the Demiurge, or craftsman that crafted the material world, and even of thinking that the material world is evil, or a prison. As Plotinus explains, the demiurge is the nous (as the first emanation of the One), the ordering principle or mind, and also reason. Plotinus was also critical of the Gnostic origin of the demiurge as the offspring of wisdom, represented as a deity called Sophia. She was anthropomorphically expressed as a feminine spirit deity not unlike the goddess Athena or the Christian Holy Spirit. Plotinus even went so far as to state at one point that if the Gnostics did believe this world was a prison then they could at any moment free themselves by committing suicide. To some degree the texts discovered in Nag Hammadi support his allegations, but others such as the Valentinians and the Tripartite Tractate insist on the goodness of the world and the Demiurge.
[edit] Buddhism and Gnosticism

Early 3rd century–4th century Christian writers such as Hippolytus and Epiphanius write about a Scythianus, who visited India around 50 AD from where he brought "the doctrine of the Two Principles". According to Cyril of Jerusalem, Scythianus' pupil Terebinthus presented himself as a "Buddha" ("He called himself Buddas").[65] Terebinthus went to Palestine and Judaea ("becoming known and condemned"), and ultimately settled in Babylon, where he transmitted his teachings to Mani, thereby creating the foundation of Manichaeism:

    "But Terebinthus, his disciple in this wicked error, inherited his money and books and heresy, and came to Palestine, and becoming known and condemned in Judæa he resolved to pass into Persia: but lest he should be recognised there also by his name he changed it and called himself Buddas."
    —Cyril of Jerusalem, "Catechetical lecture 6"

In the 3rd century, the Syrian writer and Christian Gnostic theologian Bar Daisan described his exchanges with the religious missions of holy men from India (Greek: Σαρμαναίοι, Sramanas), passing through Syria on their way to Elagabalus or another Severan dynasty Roman Emperor. His accounts were quoted by Porphyry (De abstin., iv, 17 ) and Stobaeus (Eccles., iii, 56, 141).

Finally, from the 3rd century to the 12th century, some Gnostic religions such as Manichaeism, which combined Christian, Hebrew and Buddhist influences (Mani, the founder of the religion, resided for some time in Kushan lands), spread throughout the Old World, to Gaul and Great Britain in the West, and to China in the East. Some leading Christian theologians such as Augustine of Hippo were Manichaeans before converting to orthodox Christianity.

Such exchanges, many more of which may have gone unrecorded, suggest that Buddhism may have had some influence on early Christianity: "Scholars have often considered the possibility that Buddhism influenced the early development of Christianity. They have drawn attention to many parallels concerning the births, lives, doctrines, and deaths of the Buddha and Jesus" (Bentley, "Old World Encounters").
[edit] Christianity and Gnosticism
	This article is written like a personal reflection or essay and may require cleanup. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (March 2010)

The ascetic notion of immediate revelation through divine knowledge sought to find an absolute transcendence in a Supreme Deity. This concept is very important in identifying what evidence there is pertaining to Gnosticism[66] in the NT, which would influence orthodox teaching.[67] Main Gnostic beliefs that differ from Biblical teachings include: the creator as a lower being [‘Demiurge’] and not a Supreme Deity; scripture having a deep, hidden meaning whose true message could only be understood through “secret wisdom”;[68] and Jesus as a spirit that “seemed”[69] to be human, leading to a belief in the incarnation (Docetism).[70] The traditional “formula which enshrines the Incarnation…is that in some sense God, without ceasing to be God, was made man…which is a prima facie [‘at first sight’ a] contradiction in theological terms…the [NT] nowhere reflects on the virgin birth of Jesus as witnessing to the conjunction of deity and manhood in His person…the deity of Jesus was not…clearly stated in words and [the book of] Acts gives no hint that it was”.[71] This philosophy[72] was known by the so-called “Church Fathers” such as Origen, Irenaeus, and Tertullian.[73]

At its core, Gnosticism formed a speculative interest in the relationship of the oneness of God to the ‘triplicity’ of his manifestations. It seems to have taken Neoplatonic metaphysics of substance and hypostases [“being”][74] as a departure point for interpreting the relationship of the “Father” to the “Son”[75] in its attempt to define a new theology.[76] This would point to the infamous theological controversies by Arius[77] against followers of the Greek Alexandrian school,[78] headed by Athanasius.[79]

The ancient Nag Hammadi Library, discovered in Egypt in the 1940s, revealed how varied this movement was. The writers of these manuscripts considered themselves ‘Christians’, but owing to their syncretistic beliefs, borrowed heavily from the Greek philosopher Plato. The find included the hotly debated Gospel of Thomas, which parallels some of Jesus’ sayings in the Synoptic Gospels. This may point to the existence of a postulated lost textual source for the Gospels of Luke and Matthew, known as the Q document.[80] Thus, modern debate is split between those who see Gnosticism as a pre-Christian form of ‘theosophy’[81] and those who see it as a post-Christian counter-movement.

NT scripture was largely unwritten, at least in the form of canon, existing in the practices, customs and teachings of the early Christian community. What largely was communicated generation to generation was an oral tradition passed from the apostles to the Bishops and from Bishops and priests to the faithful through their preaching and way of life.[82] Constantine’s call for unity in the building of the new Roman Church led to his request for Eusebius to produce some 50 copies of manuscripts. These were approved and accepted by the emperor, which later influenced the final stages of canonization.[83]

The best known origin story in the NT comes in the person of Simon Magus [Acts 8:9-24]. Although little is known historically about him, his first disciple is said to have been Basilides.[84] Paul’s epistles to Timothy contain refutations of “false doctrine [and] myths” [1 Tim 1:3-5]. The importance placed here, as in most NT scripture, is to uphold the truth since through such knowledge God hopes for “all men” to be saved [1 Tim 2:4]. Paul’s letters to the Corinthians have much to say regarding false teachers (2 Co 11:4), “spiritualists” [pneumatikos—1 Co 2:14-15; 15:44-46] and their gnosis. They warn against the “wisdom of the wise” and their “hollow and deceptive philosophy” (1 Co 1:19; 2:5—NIV; cp. Col 2:1-10; 2:8). The book of Jude also contains scripture exhorting believers to seek the true faith (Jude 3).

The writings attributed to the Apostle John contain the most significant amount of content directed at combating the progenitors of heresies.[85] Most Bible scholars agree that these were some of the last parts of the NT written and as such, can offer the most insights into a 1st century perspective.[86] The writer’s repeated adherence to true knowledge (“hereby we know”—inherent in Jesus’ ministry) and nature[87] seem to challenge other speculative and opposing beliefs.

It is hard to sift through what actual evidence there is regarding Gnosticism in the NT due to their historical synchronicity. The Hammadi library find contains Pagan, Jewish, Greek and early Gnostic influences,[88] further reinforcing the need to tread lightly. The antiquity of the find being of utmost importance since it shows primary evidence of texts that may also have influenced the process of NT canonization.[89][90]
[edit] 'Gnosticism' as a potentially flawed category

In 1966 in Messina, Italy, a conference was held concerning systems of gnosis. Among its several aims were the need to establish a program to translate the recently acquired Nag Hammadi library (discussed above) and the need to arrive at an agreement concerning an accurate definition of 'Gnosticism'. This was in answer to the tendency, prevalent since the 18th century, to use the term 'gnostic' less as its origins implied, but rather as an interpretive category for contemporary philosophical and religious movements. For example, in 1835, New Testament scholar Ferdinand Christian Baur constructed a developmental model of Gnosticism that culminated in the religious philosophy of Hegel; one might compare literary critic Harold Bloom's recent attempts to identify Gnostic elements in contemporary American religion, or Eric Voegelin's analysis of totalitarian impulses through the interpretive lens of Gnosticism.

The 'cautious proposal' reached by the conference concerning Gnosticism is described by Markschies:

    In the concluding document of Messina the proposal was 'by the simultaneous application of historical and typological methods' to designate 'a particular group of systems of the second century after Christ' as 'gnosticism', and to use 'gnosis' to define a conception of knowledge transcending the times which was described as 'knowledge of divine mysteries for an élite'.

    – Markschies, Gnosis: An Introduction, p. 13

In essence, it had been decided that 'Gnosticism' would become a historically specific term, restricted to mean the Gnostic movements prevalent in the 3rd century, while 'gnosis' would be a universal term, denoting a system of knowledge retained 'for a privileged élite.' However, this effort towards providing clarity in fact created more conceptual confusion, as the historical term 'Gnosticism' was an entirely modern construction, while the new universal term 'gnosis' was a historical term: 'something was being called "gnosticism" that the ancient theologians had called "gnosis" ... [A] concept of gnosis had been created by Messina that was almost unusable in a historical sense'.[91] In antiquity, all agreed that knowledge was centrally important to life, but few were agreed as to what exactly constituted knowledge; the unitary conception that the Messina proposal presupposed did not exist.[91]

These flaws have meant that the problems concerning an exact definition of Gnosticism persist. It remains current convention to use 'Gnosticism' in a historical sense, and 'gnosis' universally. Leaving aside the issues with the latter noted above, the usage of 'Gnosticism' to designate a category of 3rd century religions has recently been questioned as well. Of note is Michael Allen Williams' Rethinking Gnosticism: An Argument for the Dismantling of a Dubious Category, in which the author examines the terms by which Gnosticism as a category is defined, and then closely compares these suppositions with the contents of actual Gnostic texts (the newly recovered Nag Hammadi library was of central importance to his argument).[92]

Williams argues that the conceptual foundations on which the category of Gnosticism rests are the remains of the agenda of the heresiologists. Too much emphasis has been laid on perceptions of dualism, body- and matter-hatred, and anticosmism[93] without these suppositions being properly tested. In essence, the interpretive definition of Gnosticism that was created by the antagonistic efforts of the early church heresiologists has been taken up by modern scholarship and reflected in a categorical definition, even though the means now existed to verify its accuracy. Attempting to do so, Williams contests, reveals the dubious nature of categorical 'Gnosticism', and he concludes that the term needs replacing in order to more accurately reflect those movements it comprises.[92] Williams' observations have provoked debate; however, to date his suggested replacement term 'the Biblical demiurgical tradition' has not become widely used.
[edit] Gnosticism in modern times
Main article: Gnosticism in modern times

A number of 19th century thinkers such as William Blake, Arthur Schopenhauer,[94] Albert Pike and Madame Blavatsky studied Gnostic thought extensively and were influenced by it, and even figures like Herman Melville and W. B. Yeats were more tangentially influenced.[95] Jules Doinel "re-established" a Gnostic church in France in 1890 which altered its form as it passed through various direct successors (Fabre des Essarts as Tau Synésius and Joanny Bricaud as Tau Jean II most notably), and which, although small, is still active today.[96]

Early 20th century thinkers who heavily studied and were influenced by Gnosticism include Carl Jung (who supported Gnosticism), Eric Voegelin (who opposed it), Jorge Luis Borges (who included it in many of his short stories), and Aleister Crowley, with figures such as Hermann Hesse being more moderatedly influenced. Rene Guenon founded the gnostic review, Le Gnose in 1909 (before moving to a more "Perennialist" position). Gnostic Thelemite organizations, such as Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica and Ordo Templi Orientis, trace themselves to Crowley's thought.

The discovery and translation of the Nag Hammadi library after 1945 had a huge impact on Gnosticism since World War II. Thinkers who were heavily influenced by Gnosticism in this period include Hans Jonas, Philip K. Dick and Harold Bloom, with Albert Camus and Allen Ginsberg being more moderately influenced.[95] A number of ecclesiastical bodies which think of themselves as Gnostic have been set up or re-founded since World War II as well, including the Society of Novus Spiritus, Ecclesia Gnostica, the Thomasine Church, the Apostolic Johannite Church, the Alexandrian Gnostic Church, the North American College of Gnostic Bishops. Celia Green has written on Gnostic Christianity in relation to her own philosophy.[97]
[edit] See also

    * Apocrypha
    * Buddhism
    * Christian mysticism
    * Criticism of Christianity
    * First Council of Nicaea
    * John D. Turner

	

    * Gnosiology
    * Gnosis
    * Hermeticism
    * Hinduism
    * Orpheus
    * Theodicy

http://www.gotquestions.org

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

26 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars A Refreshingly Practical Book on Discipleship for Churches, April 30, 2003
By
Ken Archer (Washington, DC United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Growing True Disciples: New Strategies for Producing Genuine Followers of Christ (Hardcover)
The case for discipleship is made clearly by Dallas Willard and Robert Coleman, among others. The day-to-day implications of discipleship's importance for churches is not so obvious. George Barna provides an invaluable service by, first, establishing via a survey of spiritual maturity that there is little spiritual growth happening in American churches and, second, profiling many churches that have been effective at discipleship.

Did you know that the majority of Christians believe that the Bible says, "God helps those who help themselves."? It's true. And did you know that, according to Barna's survey results, the only issues on which Christians hold a statistically significant difference of opinion from non-Christians are alcohol, profanity and homosexuality. Therefore, we (Christians) are rightly perceived by others as gay-bashing prudes who can't have a good time.

Discipleship, Barna makes clear at the beginning, is focussed on having only one goal in life: to become more like Jesus, to grow into Christlikeness. And churches that are effective at discipleship produce Christians that are light and salt in the world, not mean-spirited critics.

Barna then assesses the programs used by those churches that are intentional about discipleship, and are effective at it. Pantego Bible Church is a very interesting example. Their pastor, Randy Frazee, wrote The Connecting Church, which lays out their philosophy of ministry in more detail.

This book is essential reading for those on church staffs and boards.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comment

15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars A key study on discipleship for church leadership, December 2, 2006
By
David C. Leaumont "Dave" (Bossier City, LA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Growing True Disciples: New Strategies for Producing Genuine Followers of Christ (Hardcover)
This is the first George Barna book I have read, although I have heard of his writings in discussions within the church I attend. I look forward to reading more of his work. This was one of two texts used in my Discipleship Ministries course in my master's seminary study.

Barna begins the book with the need for this writing, and the need to focus on disciple making within the church. He notes how the word "disciple" has lost its meaning and that today anyone who semi-regularly attends church without any outside study or work can be called a disciple by today's definition. He describes what Scriptural discipleship is and how it is much more than doing a few things for God. Instead, discipleship is devoting one's whole self to God, and the teachings of His Son, Jesus Christ.

He then discusses the importance of discipleship and gives a brief look at discipleship exemplified in Scripture. He lists the marks of discipleship according to the Bible, and in the next chapter gives the results of his individual surveys of Christians. He asks basic questions of the central dogmas of Christians to determine what the goals and knowledge level of people in the church. He surveys the discipleship activities of people, and their belief in what constitutes success spiritually. Some of his more surprising findings are that more than half surveyed have no specific goal in spiritual growth, and almost half believe that anyone can get to Heaven regardless of spiritual belief, despite most having a very high view of Scripture as the Word of God. He looks at different aspects of discipleship including service, study and evangelism. (Evangelism is a key aspect because many churches equate evangelism and discipleship, when Barna states from Scripture that it is only an aspect of discipleship.)

Then Barna describes how we as a church got to this point of discipleship (i.e. from Scriptural discipleship to the variations of concentration and different levels of commitment). His conclusion is that this is a leadership issue. He goes about describing the changes without being harsh or singling out any individuals or denominations. He describes the need for holistic discipleship rather than the partial discipleship views many churches have.

In chapter 6, George Barna switches from discussing his research of individuals to that of churches. He discusses the keys that effective discipling churches have and the methods that they employ. With Barna, the key is not a single method, but principles that underlie a given method. The method should be tailored to a congregation, and not something generic. In the methods, he focuses on 5 highly effective churches and their programs that have caused discipleship growth. He finishes with his "best of" model that takes the best attributes from each model, and creates a generic, principle-driven model for churches to use. This model is not a how-to, as each church has different needs, but is the framework in which to build a model that can best work in a given church. The onus is on the pastor to build it based on his knowledge of the community and congregation.

We see many books on effective church growth and effective evangelism, but this book on effective discipleship is the best way to cause a church to grow and to evangelize to the lost.

This is an important book. It is grounded on the Bible and utilizes observations of the church and of society to draw conclusions on the state of Christian discipleship in America. The underlying principles are designed for church leaders, but the book is supremely beneficial to people who are not in leadership roles, yet, as it discusses the needs of individuals in seeking true discipleship as well as giving guidelines for pastoral leaders in designing church-wide discipleship ministries.

Usually, I provide any negative things I note in the writing or organization, but with this book I had no such impressions. The book is logically organized, and is a highly edifying book, despite the controversial topics discussed. Never did I get a hint that Barna was being negative in his writing, but simply points out the needs of individuals and of churches.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comment

15 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars Reference and then some., March 19, 2002
By
A. Reum (Montana, USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Growing True Disciples: New Strategies for Producing Genuine Followers of Christ (Hardcover)
George Barna continues to put out meaningful books that meet the need to cram statistical knowledge with christian insight. His personal desire to see the church mature and become healthy is evident and refreshing. This book is no exception.

Mr. Barna has provided the data and included his personal insight for our evaluation of meaningful ways to help the Body become more like Christ. Do you want a successful church? The information compiled in this book will make you think. I believe that is the number one goal here. What you did last year to disciple the Body will most likely not be good enough for this year.

Whether you adopt one of the models in the book or simply enhance your current system because of them your church will benefit. Try it on a small scale and see if it brings meaningful growth. If not, tweak it again and keep praying. I know that the Father want's us to grow in the likeness of His Son and we need to be leading thers in that same growth.

Enjoy Growing True Disciples, it offers much and may be the catalyst your church needs.

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/Holy-Queen-Blessed-Motherph.jpg]]

HAIL HOLY QUEEN

Picture of the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary courtesy of Wikipedia

The Hail Holy Queen prayer, originally known by its Latin name, Salve Regina, is recited at the end of the Rosary and is also used in night prayers. It dates back to around the 11th century and is still sung today as a hymn in various forms, among them a beautiful chant.

St. Alphonus Liguori thought so highly of the Hail Holy Queen that he analyzed it in great detail in his well-known 18th century book The Glories of Mary. In this prayer we pay homage to the Blessed Virgin Mary, our “Mother of Mercy,” and humbly ask for her assistance. Many religious over the centuries (including quite a few saints!) have considered her help to be essential for our salvation.

Hail Holy Queen,
Mother of mercy,
Our life, our sweetness, and our hope.
To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve.
To thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping
In this valley of tears.
Turn then, most gracious advocate,
Thine eyes of mercy towards us.
And after this, our exile,
Show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
O clement O loving O sweet Virgin Mary.

V. Pray for us oh holy mother of God.
(This line is read by one person when the Hail Holy Queen
is being recited in a group setting.)
R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
(This line is the response given by the group.)

Although crowned Queen of Heaven (as shown above) Mary is by no means haughty, given such a title! She’s a queen who wonderfully blends her majesty with her humility in her desire to be of service to us. She wants to dispense God’s graces through prayers such the Hail Holy Queen, the Memorare, and the Rosary.

She wants to help us in asking for God’s forgiveness for our sins. And, contrary to a sad misconception, Mary was never meant to replace her Divine Son as the focus of our worship. She herself acknowledged, in Luke’s Gospel (Lk 1:46), that her soul magnifies the Lord. She’s always ready to point us in His direction on our path towards Eternal Life.

God has given her all His graces for us. They come from God through Mary. All we need to do is ask for them with a humble, loving, and contrite heart. And, speaking of hearts, as Thomas à Kempis, author of the spiritual classic The Imitation of Christ once said, “What safer refuge can we ever find than the compassionate heart of Mary?”

A well-known hymn calls the Blessed Mother “the Queen who decks her subjects with the light of God’s own grace.” As mentioned earlier, many saints and other religious have stated through the centuries that since
God gave Mary all of His graces to give us as needed, she plays a
key part in our salvation. As St. Antonius put it “Whoever asks and expects to obtain graces without the intercession of Mary endeavors to fly without wings.”

One can relate to the lines about our exile in the Hail Holy Queen fairly easily: When our first parents, Adam and Eve, were banished from the Garden of Eden, from Paradise in one with God (because of Original Sin), we were as well. And how many times do we find ourselves, one way or another thinking of our lives with “sighs, mourning and weeping”?

I once had a co-worker who would say when leaving her job for the day, “time to leave this valley of tears.” As Gilda Radner used to say on a famous comic sketch on Saturday Night Live “There’s always something!”

We are indeed exiles from Paradise! Yet in Mary, we have a new Eve to help guide us on our earthly journey towards Heaven. St. Irenaeus once remarked that as Eve was seduced by a fallen angel (Lucifer) to flee from God, so Mary was led to receive God into her womb, obeying a good angel (Gabriel). She thus “repaired Eve’s disobedience” as St. Alphonsus Liguori once wrote.

Courtesy of Chant Art In doing so she also became, as we say in the Hail Holy Queen, our “most gracious advocate,” with God’s advocate, His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ!

Saint Louis De Montfort once noted that while Jesus is our Mediator and redeemer with His Father, Mary is our mediatrix and intercessor with her Divine Son.

Note again, however, that she by no means supercedes or replaces Him. As St. Bernard said “whatever we say in praise of the Mother is equally in praise of the Son.” He also urged us to “offer anything to God …through the most agreeable and worthy hands of Mary.”

When we read of Mary’s “eyes of mercy” (as “the mother of mercy”) this point comes to mind: Mary once told St. Bridget that she was the mother not only of the just and the innocent but also of sinners provided they were willing to repent. If they come to her with the intent of making amends she is indeed, as St. Catherine of Siena once referred to her, the dispenser of Divine Mercy!

We can take comfort in knowing that if we pray to her with a sincere and contrite heart she in turn will pray to her Son for us. And her prayers are especially dear to Him. As St. Bernard said “Her requests can never be refused.”

Ultimately the Blessed Mother wants to help us fill a void in our lives through finding the peace that only Jesus, the fruit of her womb, (as Mary’s cousin Elizabeth referred to Him in Luke 1:42) can give us. This can go a long way in bringing us back from “our exile” into a deeper
union with our Creator.

Nonetheless, she cannot force God’s graces on us. We must be receptive to them through prayer and through our sincere efforts to live according to His will for us. If we pray the Hail Holy Queen in the Rosary daily, and other such prayers of devotion to our Blessed Mother, she will give us the graces we need to live our lives to be “worthy of the promises of Christ!”

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/Coronation3.jpg]]

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/Hailmaryrevised.jpg]]

The Hail Mary, sometimes called the “angelic salutation,” is the foundation for such famous prayers such as the Rosary and the Angelus. It has inspired much fervent devotion to Jesus and His Blessed Mother.

This wonderful prayer has helped give people the graces, strength, and spiritual protection they’ve needed for hundreds of years.

The Hail Mary has also been the inspiration for some great musical settings of its text in Latin, most famously in the Ave Maria by Franz Schubert. It is as simple as it is elegant, in any language:

Hail Mary, full of grace,
The Lord is with Thee;
Blessed art thou among 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.

Blessed Alan de la Roche, a great champion of the Rosary in the 15th century, once said that “When I say Hail Mary, hope is made strong in my breast and the dew of consolation falls on my soul….the angelic salutation is a rainbow in the heavens, a sign of the mercy and grace God has given to the world.”

He also noted that “as all heaven rejoices when the ‘Hail Mary’ is said, so also do the devils tremble and take flight.”

The first part of the Hail Mary (lines 1-4) comes from passages in Luke’s gospel relating to the first two Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary, the Annunication and the Visitation. Lines 1-3 (from Luke 1:28) recall the Archangel Gabriel’s greeting to Mary before he told her that God had chosen her to be the Mother of His Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ!

Her famous response was “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done
to me according to thy word,” (Luke 1:28) in joyful agreement with the Divine request. Because of that, as we read in John’s Gospel (John 1:14), “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.”

Mary was the perfect choice to be the Mother of God in that, although
she was human just like the rest of us, she was nonetheless conceived
without the stain of original sin (in what we refer to as the dogma of the Immaculate Conception). (She had that in common only with her Son!) She was, in the words of the Baltimore Catechism “without any sin and gifted with every virtue.”

Mary was totally devoted to doing God’s will with great love and humility. Let us remember she was always there for her Divine Son, from the blessed beginning of His life on earth to its bitter end when she stood at the foot of His cross at the Crucifixion, when he gave up His life for us.

We do not worship Mary but we honor her in praying the Hail Mary for her crucial role in making our salvation possible. Mary, as St. Irenaeus expressed it, “became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race” in becoming the mother of our Redeemer.

As St. Paul once noted, Jesus is the “one mediator of God and men” (1 Tim 2:5). Still, we can, and should, turn to Mary in prayer, for the graces she gives us come from God. St. Louis De Montfort once referred to the Blessed Mother (as she is also known) as the “treasurer and dispenser of God’s graces.” Thus, it doesn’t hurt for us to get to know her better through prayer!

Again, praying the Hail Mary or showing our devotion to her doesn’t mean we are putting her ahead of Jesus, as some might fear. When we pray to Mary we are also praying through Mary, asking her to intercede with God for us on our behalf.
Painting of the Visitation by Mariotto Albertinelli, courtesy of Wikipedia The words in Line 3 of the Hail Mary, “Blessed art thou among women,” come up again a little later in Luke’s Gospel (1:42) as her cousin Elizabeth’s greeting to her in the Rosary mystery of the Visitation, depicted in the famous painting by the Italian Renaissance painter Mariotto Albertinelli at right.

Mary, always willing to be of service, went to visit and help her cousin Elizabeth, who was then pregnant with John the Baptist.

We can admire Mary’s devotion
(as well as her stamina!) in setting out on what must have been an arduous journey to go from Nazareth, where she lived, to a town in Judah where her cousin lived, about 70 miles away.

(Remember, this was in an era when she couldn’t just hop in a car or a bus to get there!)

Luke tells us that when Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting she cried out joyfully (inspired by the Holy Spirit) “Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb!” Mary was indeed blessed because she was born without sin, and was chosen by God to be the Mother of His Son. As she herself put it, showing her gratitude, “He who is mighty has done great things for me” (Luke 1:49).

The tone of the second part of the Hail Mary (see lines 5-7 above) shifts from one of praise for her to one of petition for us. As a side note, Mary was first referred to as the “Mother of God” as early as the third century AD. This title for her was formally adopted at the Church’s Council of Ephesus in 431 AD.

The phrase “pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, Amen” was proclaimed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century to have come from the Church itself. The reference to “us sinners” essentially reminds us of our need to be humble and contrite before God.

“The hour of our death” refers to that most delicate moment for our souls. We must persevere in prayer and obedience to God for our salvation as much as possible right up until then. We welcome Mary’s help here to
“light our path through the valley of the shadow of death,” as St. Louis
De Montfort put it.

As De Montfort continues most poetically in his famous 18th century book The Secret of the Rosary,“Please Mother, lead us to thy Son’s Judgment Seat and do not forsake us there. Intercede for us and ask thy son to forgive us and let us into the ranks of the blessed.” The Hail Mary is indeed a prayer to help us on our path to Eternal Life with God both “now and at the Hour of our death.” Amen!

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/The_Visitation_Albertinell.jpg]]

Hecataeus of Miletus (c. 550–c. 476 BC), named after the Greek goddess Hecate, was a Greek philosopher of a wealthy family. He flourished during the time of the Persian invasion. After having travelled extensively, he settled in his native city, where he occupied a high position, and devoted his time to the composition of geographical and historical works. When Aristagoras held a council of the leading Ionians at Miletus to organize a revolt against the Persian rule, Hecataeus in vain tried to dissuade his countrymen from the undertaking (Herodotus 5.36, 125). In 494 BC, when the defeated Ionians were obliged to sue for terms, he was one of the ambassadors to the Persian satrap Artaphernes, whom he persuaded to restore the constitution of the Ionic cities (Diodorus Siculus. 10.25). Hecataeus is the first known Greek historian,[1] and was one of the first classical writers to mention the Celtic people.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Works
* 2 Skepticism
* 3 Notes
* 4 External links
* 5 References

[edit] Works
Reconstruction of Hecataeus' map

Some have credited Hecataeus with a work entitled Ges Periodos ("Travels round the Earth" or "World Survey'), written in two books. Each book is organized in the manner of a periplus, a point-to-point coastal survey. One, on Europe, is essentially a periplus of the Mediterranean, describing each region in turn, reaching as far north as Scythia. The other book, on Asia, is arranged similarly to the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea of which a version of the 1st century CE survives. Hecataeus described the countries and inhabitants of the known world, the account of Egypt being particularly comprehensive; the descriptive matter was accompanied by a map, based upon Anaximander’s map of the earth, which he corrected and enlarged. The work only survives in some 374 fragments, by far the majority being quoted in the geographical lexicon Ethnika compiled by Stephanus of Byzantium.

The other known work of Hecataeus was the Genealogiai, a rationally systematized account of the traditions and the myths of the Greeks, a break with the epic myth-making tradition, which survives in a few fragments, just enough to show what we are missing.

[edit] Skepticism

Hecataeus' work, especially the Genealogiai, shows a marked scepticism, opening with "Hecataeus of Miletus thus speaks: I write what I deem true; for the stories of the Greeks are manifold and seem to me ridiculous."[2] Unlike his contemporary Xenophanes, he did not criticize the myths on their own terms; his disbelief rather stems from his broad exposure to the many contradictory mythologies he encountered in his travels.

An anecdote from Herodotus (II, 143), of a visit to an Egyptian temple at Thebes, is illustrative. It recounts how the priests showed Herodotus a series of statues in the temple's inner sanctum, each one supposedly set up by the high priest of each generation. Hecataeus, says Herodotus, had seen the same spectacle, after mentioning that he traced his descent, through sixteen generations, from a god. The Egyptians compared his genealogy to their own, as recorded by the statues; since the generations of their high priests had numbered three hundred and forty-five, all entirely mortal, they refused to believe Hecataeus's claim of descent from a mythological figure. This encounter with the immemorial antiquity of Egypt has been identified as a crucial influence on Hecataeus's scepticism: the mythologized past of the Hellenes shrank into insignificant fancy next to the history of a civilization that was already ancient before Mycenae was built.[3]

He was probably the first of the logographers to attempt a serious prose history and to employ critical method to distinguish myth from historical fact, though he accepts Homer and other poets as trustworthy authorities. Herodotus, though he once at least controverts his statements, is indebted to Hecataeus for the concept of a prose history.

[edit] Notes

* 1 Works
* 2 Skepticism
* 3 Notes
* 4 External links
* 5 References

[edit] Works
Reconstruction of Hecataeus' map

[edit] Skepticism

[edit] Notes

Herodotus of Halicarnassus (Greek: Ἡρόδοτος Ἁλικαρνᾱσσεύς Hēródotos Halikarnāsseús) was a Greek historian who lived in the 5th century BC (c. 484 BC–c. 425 BC) and is regarded as the "Father of History" in Western culture. He was the first historian to collect his materials systematically, test their accuracy to a certain extent and arrange them in a well-constructed and vivid narrative.[1] He is almost exclusively known for writing The Histories, a record of his "inquiries" (or ἱστορίαι, a word that passed into Latin and took on its modern meaning of history) into the origins of the Greco-Persian Wars which occurred in 490 and 480-479 BC—especially since he includes a narrative account of that period, which would otherwise be poorly documented, and many long digressions concerning the various places and peoples he encountered during wide-ranging travels around the lands of the Mediterranean and Black Sea. Although some of his stories are not completely accurate, he states that he is only reporting what has been told to him.
Contents
[hide]

    * 1 Biography
    * 2 Historian
    * 3 Opinions
          o 3.1 Criticisms of Herodotus
          o 3.2 Gold-digging ants
    * 4 See also
    * 5 Notes
    * 6 Translations
    * 7 Bibliography
    * 8 External links
          o 8.1 Online translations

[edit] Biography

Much of what is known of Herodotus's life is gathered from his own work. Additional details have been garnered from the Suda, an 11th-century encyclopaedia of Byzantium, which likely took its information from traditional accounts. It holds that he was born in Halicarnassus (Bodrum in present-day Turkey), the son of Lyxes and Dryo, and the brother of Theodorus, and that he was also related to Panyassis, an epic poet of the time. According to this account, after being exiled from Halicarnassus by the tyrant Lygdamis, Herodotus went to live on Samos. Later returning to the land of his birth, Herodotus took part in the ousting of Lygdamis. The traditional biography includes some time spent in Athens, where he is said to have given public readings from his oeuvre and befriended the dramatist Sophocles. It also has Herodotus joining and founding the Athenian colony of Thurii in Southern Italy in 443 BC. His death and burial are placed either at Thurii or at Pella, in Macedon, between 425 and 420 BC.


How much of this is correct we do not know. It was common practice in antiquity for the biographies of poets to be pieced together out of inferences drawn from their works. Something similar may have happened in Herodotus' case. His casting as a tyrannicide may simply reflect the pro-freedom attitude that he expresses in the Histories, whereas the stays at Samos and Athens may have been invented to explain the pro-Samian and pro-Athenian bias that has often been thought to pervade his work. His exile from Halicarnassus may also be fictional: later historians, such as Thucydides and Xenophon, underwent periods of exile, and their fate may have been retrospectively imposed on Herodotus by later writers.

[edit] Historian
“ 	Circumstances rule men; men do not rule circumstances. 	”
Reconstruction of the Oikumene (inhabited world) Ancient Map from Herodotus circa 450 BC.

Herodotus provides much information concerning the nature of the world and the status of the sciences during his lifetime. He was arguably the first historian, and certainly the first to travel methodically around the known world in a bid to write more accurately, although this still involved second-hand and third-hand accounts relating to his primary subject, the Persian wars.
Croesus Receiving Tribute from a Lydian Peasant, by Claude Vignon.

He reports, for example, that the annual flooding of the Nile was said to be the result of melting snows far to the south, and he comments that he cannot understand how there can be snow in Africa, the hottest part of the known world, offering an elaborate explanation based on the way that desert winds affect the passage of the Sun over this part of the world (2:18ff). He also passes on dismissive reports from Phoenician sailors that, while circumnavigating Africa, they "saw the sun on the right side while sailing westwards". Owing to this brief mention, which is put in almost as an afterthought, it has been argued that Africa was indeed circumnavigated by ancient seafarers, for this is precisely where the sun ought to have been.

Herodotus is one of the sources on Croesus and his fabulous treasures of gold and silver, and many stories about his riches.

Written between 431 and 425 BC, The Histories were divided by later editors into nine books, named after the nine Muses (the "Muse of History", Clio, represented the first book).[2] His accounts of India are among the oldest records of Indian civilzation by an outsider.[3]

[edit] Opinions

Herodotus's invention earned him the twin titles "The Father of History", first conferred by Cicero, and "The Father of Lies".[4] As these epithets imply, there has long been a debate—at least from the time of Cicero's On the Laws (Book 1, paragraph 5)—concerning the veracity of his tales and, more importantly, the extent to which he knew himself to be creating fabrications.

[edit] Criticisms of Herodotus

There are many cases in which Herodotus, not certain of the truth of a certain event or unimpressed by the dull "facts" that he received, reported the several most famous accounts of a given subject or process and then wrote what he believed was the most probable. Although The Histories were often criticized in antiquity for bias, inaccuracy and plagiarism—Claudius Aelianus attacked Herodotus as a liar in Verae Historiae and went as far as to deny him a place among the famous on the Island of the Blessed—this methodology has been seen in a more-positive light by many modern historians and philosophers, especially those searching for a paradigm of objective historical writing. Of course, given the sensitivity surrounding the issue—the very foundation of the discipline of history—this has not become a common view; attacks have been made by various scholars in modern times, a few even arguing that Herodotus exaggerated the extent of his travels and invented his sources.[5]

Discoveries made since the end of the 19th century have helped greatly to restore Herodotus's reputation. The archaeological study of the now-submerged ancient Egyptian city of Heracleion and the recovery of the so-called "Naucratis stela" give extensive credibility to Herodotus's previously unsupported claim that Heracleion was founded under the Egyptian New Kingdom. Because of this recent increase in respect for his accuracy, as well as the quality and content of his observations, Herodotus is now recognized as a pioneer not only in history but in ethnography[6] and anthropology.

[edit] Gold-digging ants
Gold dust and nuggets.

One of the most recent developments in Herodotus scholarship was made by the French ethnologist Michel Peissel. On his journeys to India and Pakistan, Peissel claims to have discovered an animal species that may finally illuminate one of the most "bizarre" passages in Herodotus's Histories. In Book 3, passages 102 to 105, Herodotus reports that a species of fox-sized, furry "ants" lives in one of the far eastern, Indian provinces of the Persian Empire. This region, he reports, is a sandy desert, and the sand there contains a wealth of fine gold dust. These giant ants, according to Herodotus, would often unearth the gold dust when digging their mounds and tunnels, and the people living in this province would then collect the precious dust. Now, Peissel says that in an isolated region of Pakistan, in the Pakistani-controlled part of Kashmir that is known as the Federally Administered Northern Areas (FANA), on the Deosai Plateau there exists a species of marmot (a type of burrowing squirrel) that may solve the mystery of Herodotus' giant "ants". Much like the province that Herodotus describes, the ground of the Deosai Plateau is rich in gold dust. According to Peissel, he interviewed the Minaro tribal people who live in the Deosai Plateau, and they have confirmed that they have, for generations, been collecting the gold dust that the marmots bring to the surface when they are digging their underground burrows. The story seems to have been widespread in the ancient world, later authors like Pliny the Elder mentioning it in his gold mining section of the Naturalis Historia.
Bobak marmot in central Asia.

Even more tantalizing, in his book, "The Ants' Gold: The Discovery of the Greek El Dorado in the Himalayas", Peissel offers the theory that Herodotus may have become confused because the old Persian word for "marmot" was quite similar to that for "mountain ant". Because research suggests that Herodotus probably did not know any Persian (or any other language except his native Greek), he was forced to rely on a multitude of local translators when travelling in the vast polylingual Persian Empire. Therefore, he may have been the unwitting victim of a simple misunderstanding in translation. (It is also important to realize that Herodotus never claims to have himself seen these "ants/marmot" creatures—he may have been dutifully reporting what other travellers were telling him, no matter how bizarre or unlikely he personally may have found it to be. In an age when most of the world was still mysterious and unknown and before the modern science of biology, the existence of a "giant ant" may not have seemed so far-fetched.) The suggestion that he completely made up the tale may continue to be thrown into doubt as more research is conducted.[7][8]

However, it must be noted that this theory of the marmots fails to take into consideration Herodotus's own follow-up in passage 105 of Book 3, wherein the "ants/marmots" are said to chase and devour full-grown camels; nevertheless, this could also be explained as an example of a tall tale or legend told by the local tribes to frighten foreigners from seeking this relatively easy access to gold dust. On the other hand, the details of the "ants" seem somewhat similar to the description of the camel spider (Solifugae), which strictly speaking is not a spider and is even sometimes called a "wind scorpion". Camel spiders are said to chase camels (they can run up to 10mph), they have lots of hair bristles, and they could quite easily be mistaken for ants given their rather bizarre appearance. And as has been noted by some, on account of the fear factor of encountering one, there have been "many myths and exaggerations about their size".[9] Images of camel spiders[10][11] could give the impression that this could be mistaken for a giant ant, but certainly not the size of a fox.

[edit] See also

/***
|Name:|HideWhenPlugin|
|Description:|Allows conditional inclusion/exclusion in templates|
|Version:|3.1 ($Rev: 3919 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-03-13 02:03:12 +1000 (Thu, 13 Mar 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#HideWhenPlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
For use in ViewTemplate and EditTemplate. Example usage:
{{{<div macro="showWhenTagged Task">[[TaskToolbar]]</div>}}}
{{{<div macro="showWhen tiddler.modifier == 'BartSimpson'"><img src="bart.gif"/></div>}}}
***/
//{{{

window.hideWhenLastTest = false;

window.removeElementWhen = function(test,place) {
	window.hideWhenLastTest = test;
	if (test) {
		removeChildren(place);
		place.parentNode.removeChild(place);
	}
};


merge(config.macros,{

	hideWhen: { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( eval(paramString), place);
	}},

	showWhen: { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( !eval(paramString), place);
	}},

	hideWhenTagged: { handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( tiddler.tags.containsAll(params), place);
	}},

	showWhenTagged: { handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( !tiddler.tags.containsAll(params), place);
	}},

	hideWhenTaggedAny: { handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( tiddler.tags.containsAny(params), place);
	}},

	showWhenTaggedAny: { handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( !tiddler.tags.containsAny(params), place);
	}},

	hideWhenTaggedAll: { handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( tiddler.tags.containsAll(params), place);
	}},

	showWhenTaggedAll: { handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( !tiddler.tags.containsAll(params), place);
	}},

	hideWhenExists: { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( store.tiddlerExists(params[0]) || store.isShadowTiddler(params[0]), place);
	}},

	showWhenExists: { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( !(store.tiddlerExists(params[0]) || store.isShadowTiddler(params[0])), place);
	}},

	hideWhenTitleIs: { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( tiddler.title == params[0], place);
	}},

	showWhenTitleIs: { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( tiddler.title != params[0], place);
	}},

	'else': { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
		removeElementWhen( !window.hideWhenLastTest, place);
	}}

});

//}}}

http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1720691/k.B5CB/History_Our_Story.htm

Holiness is a synonym for sanctity, the state of being holy or sacred. Holiness means to be set apart.

Holiness, or sanctity, is the state of being holy or sacred, that is, set apart for the worship or service of gods. It could also mean being set apart to pursue (or to already have achieved) a sacred state or goal, such as Nirvana. It is often ascribed to people, objects, times, or places.

Humanist Manifesto I

The Manifesto is a product of many minds. It was designed to represent a developing point of view, not a new creed. The individuals whose signatures appear would, had they been writing individual statements, have stated the propositions in differing terms. The importance of the document is that more than thirty men have come to general agreement on matters of final concern and that these men are undoubtedly representative of a large number who are forging a new philosophy out of the materials of the modern world.

- Raymond B. Bragg (1933)

The time has come for widespread recognition of the radical changes in religious beliefs throughout the modern world. The time is past for mere revision of traditional attitudes. Science and economic change have disrupted the old beliefs. Religions the world over are under the necessity of coming to terms with new conditions created by a vastly increased knowledge and experience. In every field of human activity, the vital movement is now in the direction of a candid and explicit humanism. In order that religious humanism may be better understood we, the undersigned, desire to make certain affirmations which we believe the facts of our contemporary life demonstrate.

There is great danger of a final, and we believe fatal, identification of the word religion with doctrines and methods which have lost their significance and which are powerless to solve the problem of human living in the Twentieth Century. Religions have always been means for realizing the highest values of life. Their end has been accomplished through the interpretation of the total environing situation (theology or world view), the sense of values resulting therefrom (goal or ideal), and the technique (cult), established for realizing the satisfactory life. A change in any of these factors results in alteration of the outward forms of religion. This fact explains the changefulness of religions through the centuries. But through all changes religion itself remains constant in its quest for abiding values, an inseparable feature of human life.

Today man's larger understanding of the universe, his scientific achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion. Such a vital, fearless, and frank religion capable of furnishing adequate social goals and personal satisfactions may appear to many people as a complete break with the past. While this age does owe a vast debt to the traditional religions, it is none the less obvious that any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force for today must be shaped for the needs of this age. To establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present. It is a responsibility which rests upon this generation. We therefore affirm the following:

FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.

SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.

THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.

FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man's religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.

FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.

SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of "new thought".

SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation...all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.

EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man's life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist's social passion.

NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social wellbeing.

TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.

ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.

TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.

THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.

FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.

FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.

So stand the theses of religious humanism. Though we consider the religious forms and ideas of our fathers no longer adequate, the quest for the good life is still the central task for mankind. Man is at last becoming aware that he alone is responsible for the realization of the world of his dreams, that he has within himself the power for its achievement. He must set intelligence and will to the task.

Humanist Manifesto II
Preface

It is forty years since Humanist Manifesto I (1933) appeared. Events since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic. Nazism has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable. Other totalitarian regimes have suppressed human rights without ending poverty. Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good. Recent decades have shown that inhuman wars can be made in the name of peace. The beginnings of police states, even in democratic societies, widespread government espionage, and other abuses of power by military, political, and industrial elites, and the continuance of unyielding racism, all present a different and difficult social outlook. In various societies, the demands of women and minority groups for equal rights effectively challenge our generation.

As we approach the twenty-first century, however, an affirmative and hopeful vision is needed. Faith, commensurate with advancing knowledge, is also necessary. In the choice between despair and hope, humanists respond in this Humanist Manifesto II with a positive declaration for times of uncertainty.

As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to live and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Reasonable minds look to other means for survival.

Those who sign Humanist Manifesto II disclaim that they are setting forth a binding credo; their individual views would be stated in widely varying ways. This statement is, however, reaching for vision in a time that needs direction. It is social analysis in an effort at consensus. New statements should be developed to supersede this, but for today it is our conviction that humanism offers an alternative that can serve present-day needs and guide humankind toward the future.

- Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson (1973)

The next century can be and should be the humanistic century. Dramatic scientific, technological, and ever-accelerating social and political changes crowd our awareness. We have virtually conquered the planet, explored the moon, overcome the natural limits of travel and communication; we stand at the dawn of a new age, ready to move farther into space and perhaps inhabit other planets. Using technology wisely, we can control our environment, conquer poverty, markedly reduce disease, extend our life-span, significantly modify our behavior, alter the course of human evolution and cultural development, unlock vast new powers, and provide humankind with unparalleled opportunity for achieving an abundant and meaningful life.

The future is, however, filled with dangers. In learning to apply the scientific method to nature and human life, we have opened the door to ecological damage, over-population, dehumanizing institutions, totalitarian repression, and nuclear and bio-chemical disaster. Faced with apocalyptic prophesies and doomsday scenarios, many flee in despair from reason and embrace irrational cults and theologies of withdrawal and retreat.

Traditional moral codes and newer irrational cults both fail to meet the pressing needs of today and tomorrow. False "theologies of hope" and messianic ideologies, substituting new dogmas for old, cannot cope with existing world realities. They separate rather than unite peoples.

Humanity, to survive, requires bold and daring measures. We need to extend the uses of scientific method, not renounce them, to fuse reason with compassion in order to build constructive social and moral values. Confronted by many possible futures, we must decide which to pursue. The ultimate goal should be the fulfillment of the potential for growth in each human personality - not for the favored few, but for all of humankind. Only a shared world and global measures will suffice.

A humanist outlook will tap the creativity of each human being and provide the vision and courage for us to work together. This outlook emphasizes the role human beings can play in their own spheres of action. The decades ahead call for dedicated, clear-minded men and women able to marshal the will, intelligence, and cooperative skills for shaping a desirable future. Humanism can provide the purpose and inspiration that so many seek; it can give personal meaning and significance to human life.

Many kinds of humanism exist in the contemporary world. The varieties and emphases of naturalistic humanism include "scientific," "ethical," "democratic," "religious," and "Marxist" humanism. Free thought, atheism, agnosticism, skepticism, deism, rationalism, ethical culture, and liberal religion all claim to be heir to the humanist tradition. Humanism traces its roots from ancient China, classical Greece and Rome, through the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, to the scientific revolution of the modern world. But views that merely reject theism are not equivalent to humanism. They lack commitment to the positive belief in the possibilities of human progress and to the values central to it. Many within religious groups, believing in the future of humanism, now claim humanist credentials. Humanism is an ethical process through which we all can move, above and beyond the divisive particulars, heroic personalities, dogmatic creeds, and ritual customs of past religions or their mere negation.

We affirm a set of common principles that can serve as a basis for united action - positive principles relevant to the present human condition. They are a design for a secular society on a planetary scale.

For these reasons, we submit this new Humanist Manifesto for the future of humankind; for us, it is a vision of hope, a direction for satisfying survival.
Religion

FIRST: In the best sense, religion may inspire dedication to the highest ethical ideals. The cultivation of moral devotion and creative imagination is an expression of genuine "spiritual" experience and aspiration.

We believe, however, that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species. Any account of nature should pass the tests of scientific evidence; in our judgment, the dogmas and myths of traditional religions do not do so. Even at this late date in human history, certain elementary facts based upon the critical use of scientific reason have to be restated. We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant to the question of survival and fulfillment of the human race. As nontheists, we begin with humans not God, nature not deity. Nature may indeed be broader and deeper than we now know; any new discoveries, however, will but enlarge our knowledge of the natural.

Some humanists believe we should reinterpret traditional religions and reinvest them with meanings appropriate to the current situation. Such redefinitions, however, often perpetuate old dependencies and escapisms; they easily become obscurantist, impeding the free use of the intellect. We need, instead, radically new human purposes and goals.

We appreciate the need to preserve the best ethical teachings in the religious traditions of humankind, many of which we share in common. But we reject those features of traditional religious morality that deny humans a full appreciation of their own potentialities and responsibilities. Traditional religions often offer solace to humans, but, as often, they inhibit humans from helping themselves or experiencing their full potentialities. Such institutions, creeds, and rituals often impede the will to serve others. Too often traditional faiths encourage dependence rather than independence, obedience rather than affirmation, fear rather than courage. More recently they have generated concerned social action, with many signs of relevance appearing in the wake of the "God Is Dead" theologies. But we can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.

SECOND: Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present concerns, from self-actualization, and from rectifying social injustices. Modern science discredits such historic concepts as the "ghost in the machine" and the "separable soul." Rather, science affirms that the human species is an emergence from natural evolutionary forces. As far as we know, the total personality is a function of the biological organism transacting in a social and cultural context. There is no credible evidence that life survives the death of the body. We continue to exist in our progeny and in the way that our lives have influenced others in our culture.

Traditional religions are surely not the only obstacles to human progress. Other ideologies also impede human advance. Some forms of political doctrine, for instance, function religiously, reflecting the worst features of orthodoxy and authoritarianism, especially when they sacrifice individuals on the altar of Utopian promises. Purely economic and political viewpoints, whether capitalist or communist, often function as religious and ideological dogma. Although humans undoubtedly need economic and political goals, they also need creative values by which to live.

Ethics

THIRD: We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life. Human life has meaning because we create and develop our futures. Happiness and the creative realization of human needs and desires, individually and in shared enjoyment, are continuous themes of humanism. We strive for the good life, here and now. The goal is to pursue life's enrichment despite debasing forces of vulgarization, commercialization, and dehumanization.

FOURTH: Reason and intelligence are the most effective instruments that humankind possesses. There is no substitute: neither faith nor passion suffices in itself. The controlled use of scientific methods, which have transformed the natural and social sciences since the Renaissance, must be extended further in the solution of human problems. But reason must be tempered by humility, since no group has a monopoly of wisdom or virtue. Nor is there any guarantee that all problems can be solved or all questions answered. Yet critical intelligence, infused by a sense of human caring, is the best method that humanity has for resolving problems. Reason should be balanced with compassion and empathy and the whole person fulfilled. Thus, we are not advocating the use of scientific intelligence independent of or in opposition to emotion, for we believe in the cultivation of feeling and love. As science pushes back the boundary of the known, humankind's sense of wonder is continually renewed, and art, poetry, and music find their places, along with religion and ethics.

The Individual

FIFTH: The preciousness and dignity of the individual person is a central humanist value. Individuals should be encouraged to realize their own creative talents and desires. We reject all religious, ideological, or moral codes that denigrate the individual, suppress freedom, dull intellect, dehumanize personality. We believe in maximum individual autonomy consonant with social responsibility. Although science can account for the causes of behavior, the possibilities of individual freedom of choice exist in human life and should be increased.

SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil." Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire. We wish to cultivate the development of a responsible attitude toward sexuality, in which humans are not exploited as sexual objects, and in which intimacy, sensitivity, respect, and honesty in interpersonal relations are encouraged. Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity.

Democratic Society

SEVENTH: To enhance freedom and dignity the individual must experience a full range of civil liberties in all societies. This includes freedom of speech and the press, political democracy, the legal right of opposition to governmental policies, fair judicial process, religious liberty, freedom of association, and artistic, scientific, and cultural freedom. It also includes a recognition of an individual's right to die with dignity, euthanasia, and the right to suicide. We oppose the increasing invasion of privacy, by whatever means, in both totalitarian and democratic societies. We would safeguard, extend, and implement the principles of human freedom evolved from the Magna Carta to the Bill of Rights, the Rights of Man, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

EIGHTH: We are committed to an open and democratic society. We must extend participatory democracy in its true sense to the economy, the school, the family, the workplace, and voluntary associations. Decision-making must be decentralized to include widespread involvement of people at all levels - social, political, and economic. All persons should have a voice in developing the values and goals that determine their lives. Institutions should be responsive to expressed desires and needs. The conditions of work, education, devotion, and play should be humanized. Alienating forces should be modified or eradicated and bureaucratic structures should be held to a minimum. People are more important than decalogues, rules, proscriptions, or regulations.

NINTH: The separation of church and state and the separation of ideology and state are imperatives. The state should encourage maximum freedom for different moral, political, religious, and social values in society. It should not favor any particular religious bodies through the use of public monies, nor espouse a single ideology and function thereby as an instrument of propaganda or oppression, particularly against dissenters.

TENTH: Humane societies should evaluate economic systems not by rhetoric or ideology, but by whether or not they increase economic well-being for all individuals and groups, minimize poverty and hardship, increase the sum of human satisfaction, and enhance the quality of life. Hence the door is open to alternative economic systems. We need to democratize the economy and judge it by its responsiveness to human needs, testing results in terms of the common good.

ELEVENTH: The principle of moral equality must be furthered through elimination of all discrimination based upon race, religion, sex, age, or national origin. This means equality of opportunity and recognition of talent and merit. Individuals should be encouraged to contribute to their own betterment. If unable, then society should provide means to satisfy their basic economic, health, and cultural needs, including, wherever resources make possible, a minimum guaranteed annual income. We are concerned for the welfare of the aged, the infirm, the disadvantaged, and also for the outcasts - the mentally retarded, abandoned, or abused children, the handicapped, prisoners, and addicts - for all who are neglected or ignored by society. Practicing humanists should make it their vocation to humanize personal relations.

We believe in the right to universal education. Everyone has a right to the cultural opportunity to fulfill his or her unique capacities and talents. The schools should foster satisfying and productive living. They should be open at all levels to any and all; the achievement of excellence should be encouraged. Innovative and experimental forms of education are to be welcomed. The energy and idealism of the young deserve to be appreciated and channeled to constructive purposes.

We deplore racial, religious, ethnic, or class antagonisms. Although we believe in cultural diversity and encourage racial and ethnic pride, we reject separations which promote alienation and set people and groups against each other; we envision an integrated community where people have a maximum opportunity for free and voluntary association.

We are critical of sexism or sexual chauvinism - male or female. We believe in equal rights for both women and men to fulfill their unique careers and potentialities as they see fit, free of invidious discrimination.

World Community

TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and to move toward the building of a world community in which all sectors of the human family can participate. Thus we look to the development of a system of world law and a world order based upon transnational federal government. This would appreciate cultural pluralism and diversity. It would not exclude pride in national origins and accomplishments nor the handling of regional problems on a regional basis. Human progress, however, can no longer be achieved by focusing on one section of the world, Western or Eastern, developed or underdeveloped. For the first time in human history, no part of humankind can be isolated from any other. Each person's future is in some way linked to all. We thus reaffirm a commitment to the building of world community, at the same time recognizing that this commits us to some hard choices.

THIRTEENTH: This world community must renounce the resort to violence and force as a method of solving international disputes. We believe in the peaceful adjudication of differences by international courts and by the development of the arts of negotiation and compromise. War is obsolete. So is the use of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. It is a planetary imperative to reduce the level of military expenditures and turn these savings to peaceful and people-oriented uses.

FOURTEENTH: The world community must engage in cooperative planning concerning the use of rapidly depleting resources. The planet earth must be considered a single ecosystem. Ecological damage, resource depletion, and excessive population growth must be checked by international concord. The cultivation and conservation of nature is a moral value; we should perceive ourselves as integral to the sources of our being in nature. We must free our world from needless pollution and waste, responsibly guarding and creating wealth, both natural and human. Exploitation of natural resources, uncurbed by social conscience, must end.

FIFTEENTH: The problems of economic growth and development can no longer be resolved by one nation alone; they are worldwide in scope. It is the moral obligation of the developed nations to provide - through an international authority that safeguards human rights - massive technical, agricultural, medical, and economic assistance, including birth control techniques, to the developing portions of the globe. World poverty must cease. Hence extreme disproportions in wealth, income, and economic growth should be reduced on a worldwide basis.

SIXTEENTH: Technology is a vital key to human progress and development. We deplore any neo-romantic efforts to condemn indiscriminately all technology and science or to counsel retreat from its further extension and use for the good of humankind. We would resist any moves to censor basic scientific research on moral, political, or social grounds. Technology must, however, be carefully judged by the consequences of its use; harmful and destructive changes should be avoided. We are particularly disturbed when technology and bureaucracy control, manipulate, or modify human beings without their consent. Technological feasibility does not imply social or cultural desirability.

SEVENTEENTH: We must expand communication and transportation across frontiers. Travel restrictions must cease. The world must be open to diverse political, ideological, and moral viewpoints and evolve a worldwide system of television and radio for information and education. We thus call for full international cooperation in culture, science, the arts, and technology across ideological borders. We must learn to live openly together or we shall perish together.

Humanity As a Whole

IN CLOSING: The world cannot wait for a reconciliation of competing political or economic systems to solve its problems. These are the times for men and women of goodwill to further the building of a peaceful and prosperous world. We urge that parochial loyalties and inflexible moral and religious ideologies be transcended. We urge recognition of the common humanity of all people. We further urge the use of reason and compassion to produce the kind of world we want - a world in which peace, prosperity, freedom, and happiness are widely shared. Let us not abandon that vision in despair or cowardice. We are responsible for what we are or will be. Let us work together for a humane world by means commensurate with humane ends. Destructive ideological differences among communism, capitalism, socialism, conservatism, liberalism, and radicalism should be overcome. Let us call for an end to terror and hatred. We will survive and prosper only in a world of shared humane values. We can initiate new directions for humankind; ancient rivalries can be superseded by broad-based cooperative efforts. The commitment to tolerance, understanding, and peaceful negotiation does not necessitate acquiescence to the status quo nor the damming up of dynamic and revolutionary forces. The true revolution is occurring and can continue in countless nonviolent adjustments. But this entails the willingness to step forward onto new and expanding plateaus. At the present juncture of history, commitment to all humankind is the highest commitment of which we are capable; it transcends the narrow allegiances of church, state, party, class, or race in moving toward a wider vision of human potentiality. What more daring a goal for humankind than for each person to become, in ideal as well as practice, a citizen of a world community. It is a classical vision; we can now give it new vitality. Humanism thus interpreted is a moral force that has time on its side. We believe that humankind has the potential, intelligence, goodwill, and cooperative skill to implement this commitment in the decades ahead.

We, the undersigned, while not necessarily endorsing every detail of the above, pledge our general support to Humanist Manifesto II for the future of humankind. These affirmations are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith. We invite others in all lands to join us in further developing and working for these goals.

HUMANISM AND ITS ASPIRATIONS
Humanist Manifesto III, a successor to the Humanist Manifesto of 1933*

Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.

The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our knowledge and understandings advance.

This document is part of an ongoing effort to manifest in clear and positive terms the conceptual boundaries of Humanism, not what we must believe but a consensus of what we do believe. It is in this sense that we affirm the following:

Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis. Humanists find that science is the best method for determining this knowledge as well as for solving problems and developing beneficial technologies. We also recognize the value of new departures in thought, the arts, and inner experience—each subject to analysis by critical intelligence.

Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided evolutionary change. Humanists recognize nature as self-existing. We accept our life as all and enough, distinguishing things as they are from things as we might wish or imagine them to be. We welcome the challenges of the future, and are drawn to and undaunted by the yet to be known.

Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by experience. Humanists ground values in human welfare shaped by human circumstances, interests, and concerns and extended to the global ecosystem and beyond. We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.

Life's fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals. We aim for our fullest possible development and animate our lives with a deep sense of purpose, finding wonder and awe in the joys and beauties of human existence, its challenges and tragedies, and even in the inevitability and finality of death. Humanists rely on the rich heritage of human culture and the lifestance of Humanism to provide comfort in times of want and encouragement in times of plenty.

Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships. Humanists long for and strive toward a world of mutual care and concern, free of cruelty and its consequences, where differences are resolved cooperatively without resorting to violence. The joining of individuality with interdependence enriches our lives, encourages us to enrich the lives of others, and inspires hope of attaining peace, justice, and opportunity for all.

Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness. Progressive cultures have worked to free humanity from the brutalities of mere survival and to reduce suffering, improve society, and develop global community. We seek to minimize the inequities of circumstance and ability, and we support a just distribution of nature's resources and the fruits of human effort so that as many as possible can enjoy a good life.

Humanists are concerned for the well being of all, are committed to diversity, and respect those of differing yet humane views. We work to uphold the equal enjoyment of human rights and civil liberties in an open, secular society and maintain it is a civic duty to participate in the democratic process and a planetary duty to protect nature's integrity, diversity, and beauty in a secure, sustainable manner.

Thus engaged in the flow of life, we aspire to this vision with the informed conviction that humanity has the ability to progress toward its highest ideals. The responsibility for our lives and the kind of world in which we live is ours and ours alone.

For historical purposes, see preceding Humanist Manifestos: I and II.

/***
|Name:|InstantTimestampPlugin|
|Description:|A handy way to insert timestamps in your tiddler content|
|Version:|1.0.10 ($Rev: 3646 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-02-27 02:34:38 +1000 (Wed, 27 Feb 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#InstantTimestampPlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
!!Usage
If you enter {ts} in your tiddler content (without the spaces) it will be replaced with a timestamp when you save the tiddler. Full list of formats:
* {ts} or {t} -> timestamp
* {ds} or {d} -> datestamp
* !ts or !t at start of line -> !!timestamp
* !ds or !d at start of line -> !!datestamp
(I added the extra ! since that's how I like it. Remove it from translations below if required)
!!Notes
* Change the timeFormat and dateFormat below to suit your preference.
* See also http://mptw2.tiddlyspot.com/#AutoCorrectPlugin
* You could invent other translations and add them to the translations array below.
***/
//{{{

config.InstantTimestamp = {

	// adjust to suit
	timeFormat: 'DD/0MM/YY 0hh:0mm',
	dateFormat: 'DD/0MM/YY',

	translations: [
		[/^!ts?$/img,  "'!!{{ts{'+now.formatString(config.InstantTimestamp.timeFormat)+'}}}'"],
		[/^!ds?$/img,  "'!!{{ds{'+now.formatString(config.InstantTimestamp.dateFormat)+'}}}'"],

		// thanks Adapted Cat
		[/\{ts?\}(?!\}\})/ig,"'{{ts{'+now.formatString(config.InstantTimestamp.timeFormat)+'}}}'"],
		[/\{ds?\}(?!\}\})/ig,"'{{ds{'+now.formatString(config.InstantTimestamp.dateFormat)+'}}}'"]
		
	],

	excludeTags: [
		"noAutoCorrect",
		"noTimestamp",
		"html",
		"CSS",
		"css",
		"systemConfig",
		"systemConfigDisabled",
		"zsystemConfig",
		"Plugins",
		"Plugin",
		"plugins",
		"plugin",
		"javascript",
		"code",
		"systemTheme",
		"systemPalette"
	],

	excludeTiddlers: [
		"StyleSheet",
		"StyleSheetLayout",
		"StyleSheetColors",
		"StyleSheetPrint"
		// more?
	]

}; 

TiddlyWiki.prototype.saveTiddler_mptw_instanttimestamp = TiddlyWiki.prototype.saveTiddler;
TiddlyWiki.prototype.saveTiddler = function(title,newTitle,newBody,modifier,modified,tags,fields,clearChangeCount,created) {

	tags = tags ? tags : []; // just in case tags is null
	tags = (typeof(tags) == "string") ? tags.readBracketedList() : tags;
	var conf = config.InstantTimestamp;

	if ( !tags.containsAny(conf.excludeTags) && !conf.excludeTiddlers.contains(newTitle) ) {

		var now = new Date();
		var trans = conf.translations;
		for (var i=0;i<trans.length;i++) {
			newBody = newBody.replace(trans[i][0], eval(trans[i][1]));
		}
	}

	// TODO: use apply() instead of naming all args?
	return this.saveTiddler_mptw_instanttimestamp(title,newTitle,newBody,modifier,modified,tags,fields,clearChangeCount,created);
}

// you can override these in StyleSheet 
setStylesheet(".ts,.ds { font-style:italic; }","instantTimestampStyles");

//}}}

!Intelligent design

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intelligent design is the proposition that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."[1][2] It is neo-creationism, a form of creationism restated in non-religious terms.[3] It is also a contemporary adaptation of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, but one that deliberately avoids specifying the nature or identity of the intelligent designer.[4] Its leading proponents—all of whom are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank[n 1][5]—believe the designer to be the Christian God.[n 2][n 3]

It seeks to redefine science in a fundamental way that would invoke supernatural explanations, a viewpoint known as theistic science. It puts forward a number of arguments, the most prominent of which are irreducible complexity and specified complexity, in support of the existence of a designer.[6] The scientific community rejects the extension of science to include supernatural explanations in favor of continued acceptance of methodological naturalism,[n 4][n 5][7][8] and has rejected both irreducible complexity and specified complexity for a wide range of conceptual and factual flaws.[9][10][11][12][13][14]

Intelligent design was developed by a group of American creationists who revised their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings such as the United States Supreme Court Edwards v. Aguillard ruling, which barred the teaching of "creation science" in public schools as breaching the separation of church and state.[15][n 6][16] The first significant published use of intelligent design was in Of Pandas and People, a 1989 textbook intended for high-school biology classes.[17] From the mid-1990s, intelligent design proponents were supported by the Discovery Institute, which, together with its Center for Science and Culture, planned and funded the "intelligent design movement".[18][n 1] They advocated inclusion of intelligent design in public school curricula, leading to the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, where U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents", and that the school district's promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[19]
History
Origin of the concept

The concept of intelligent design, the teleological argument, is one of three basic religious arguments for the existence of God which have been advanced for centuries (the others being the ontological argument and the cosmological argument). In the 13th century Thomas Aquinas argued that natural things act to achieve the best result, and as they cannot do this without intelligence, an intelligent being must exist, setting the goal and providing direction, and this being is God. The version formulated in 1802 by William Paley used the watchmaker analogy to argue that complexity and adaptation in nature demonstrated God's benevolent and perfect design, for the good of humans. Paley's natural theology strongly influenced scientists of the time, who took for granted the assumption that God had designed nature and were open to a deistic interpretation that this design was implemented by laws. Charles Darwin struggled with the problem of evil and poor design in nature, and though his natural selection explained adaptation without the need for a designer, he was still inclined to think that everything resulted from designed laws. The theistic evolution of Asa Gray contributed to wide acceptance of evolution,[20] and by 1910 it was not a topic of major religious controversy in America.[21]

In the 1920s Fundamentalist Christianity took up opposition to evolution, and effectively suspended teaching of evolution in U.S. public schools. In the 1960s, after evolution was reintroduced into the curriculum, Young Earth creationists promoted Creation Science as "an alternative scientific explanation of the world in which we live", which frequently invoked the design argument to explain complexity in nature. These explanations prefigured the intelligent arguments of irreducible complexity, even featuring the bacterial flagellum. Attempts to introduce this in schools led to court rulings that creation science is religious in nature, and thus cannot be taught in public school science classrooms.[22]

Intelligent design also has Paley's argument from design at its centre, and shares other arguments with creation science but differs in avoiding overt literal Biblical references such as the age of the Earth and Noah's Flood.[22] Unlike Paley's openness to deistic design through laws, the point of intelligent design is to establish repeated miraculous interventions in the history of life. This raises theological difficulties; for those who believe that God's design must be perfect and should not need such changes, the claim to be scientific implies that science can test religion, and the problem of evil of a lack of miraculous intervention to reduce suffering.[21]

Philosopher Barbara Forrest writes that the intelligent design movement began in 1984 with the publication by Jon A. Buell's the Foundation for Thought and Ethics of The Mystery of Life's Origin by Charles B. Thaxton, a chemist and creationist. Thaxton held a conference in 1988, "Sources of Information Content in DNA," which attracted creationists such as Stephen C. Meyer.[23]

In March 1986, a review by Meyer used information theory to suggest that messages transmitted by DNA in the cell show "specified complexity" specified by intelligence, and must have originated with an intelligent agent.[24] In November of that year Thaxton described his reasoning as a more sophisticated form of Paley's argument from design.[25] At the Sources of Information Content in DNA conference in 1988 he said that his intelligent cause view was compatible with both metaphysical naturalism and supernaturalism,[26]

Intelligent design avoids identifying or naming the intelligent designer—it merely states that one (or more) must exist—but leaders of the movement have said the designer is the Christian God.[n 2][n 3][27][n 7][n 8] Whether this lack of specificity about the designer's identity in public discussions is a genuine feature of the concept, or just a posture taken to avoid alienating those who would separate religion from the teaching of science, has been a matter of great debate between supporters and critics of intelligent design. The Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District court ruling held the latter to be the case.
Origin of the term
Of Pandas and People

was the first modern intelligent design book.
Rethinking Schools

magazine characterizes it as "pseudo-science," rejected by most scientists.
[28]

The phrase "intelligent design" can be found in an 1847 issue of Scientific American,[29] in an 1850 book by Patrick Edward Dove,[30] and in an 1861 letter from Charles Darwin.[31] The Paleyite botanist George James Allman used the phrase in an address to the 1873 annual meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science:

"No physical hypothesis founded on any indisputable fact has yet explained the origin of the primordial protoplasm, and, above all, of its marvellous properties, which render evolution possible—in heredity and in adaptability, for these properties are the cause and not the effect of evolution. For the cause of this cause we have sought in vain among the physical forces which surround us, until we are at last compelled to rest upon an independent volition, a far-seeing intelligent design."[32]

The phrase can be found again in Humanism, a 1903 book by one of the founders of classical pragmatism, F.C.S. Schiller: "It will not be possible to rule out the supposition that the process of evolution may be guided by an intelligent design". A derivative of the phrase appears in the Macmillan Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1967) in the article titled, "Teleological argument for the existence of God": "Stated most succinctly, the argument runs: The world exhibits teleological order (design, adaptation). Therefore, it was produced by an intelligent designer".[33] Robert Nozick (1974) wrote: "Consider now complicated patterns which one would have thought would arise only through intelligent design".[34] The phrases "intelligent design" and "intelligently designed" were used in a 1979 philosophy book Chance or Design? by James Horigan[35] and the phrase "intelligent design" was used in a 1982 speech by Sir Fred Hoyle in his promotion of panspermia.[36]

Use of the terms "creationism" versus "intelligent design" in sequential drafts of the book
Of Pandas and People[37]

The modern use of the words "intelligent design", as a term intended to describe a field of inquiry, began after the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Edwards v. Aguillard (1987), ruled that creationism is unconstitutional in public school science curricula. A Discovery Institute report says that Charles Thaxton, editor of Of Pandas and People, had picked the phrase up from a NASA scientist, and thought "That's just what I need, it's a good engineering term".[38] In drafts of the book over one hundred uses of the root word "creation", such as "creationism" and "creation science", were changed, almost without exception, to "intelligent design",[17] while "creationists" was changed to "design proponents" or, in one instance, "cdesign proponentsists". [sic][37] In June 1988 Thaxton held a conference titled "Sources of Information Content in DNA" in Tacoma, Washington,[26] and in December decided to use the label "intelligent design" for his new creationist movement.[39] Stephen C. Meyer was at the conference, and later recalled that "the term came up".[40]
Of Pandas and People

Of Pandas and People was published in 1989, and was the first book to make frequent use of the phrases "intelligent design," "design proponents," and "design theory", thus representing the beginning of the modern "intelligent design" movement.[41] "Intelligent design" was the most prominent of around fifteen new terms it introduced as a new lexicon of creationist terminology to oppose evolution without using religious language.[42] It was the first place where the phrase "intelligent design" appeared in its present use, as stated both by its publisher Jon Buell,[22][43] and by William A. Dembski in his expert witness report.[44]

The National Center for Science Education has criticized the book for presenting all of the basic arguments of intelligent design proponents and being actively promoted for use in public schools before any research had been done to support these arguments.[41] Although presented as a scientific textbook, Philosopher of science Michael Ruse considers the contents "worthless and dishonest". An ACLU lawyer described it as a political tool aimed at students who did not "know science or understand the controversy over evolution and creationism." One of the authors of the science framework used by California Schools, Kevin Padian, scathingly condemned it for its "sub-text," "Intolerance for honest science" and "incompetence".[28]
Concepts
Irreducible complexity

The term "irreducible complexity" was introduced by biochemist Michael Behe in his 1996 book Darwin's Black Box, though he had already described the concept in his contributions to the 1993 revised edition of Of Pandas and People.[41] Behe defines it as "a single system which is composed of several well-matched interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning".[45]

Behe uses the analogy of a mousetrap to illustrate this concept. A mousetrap consists of several interacting pieces—the base, the catch, the spring and the hammer—all of which must be in place for the mousetrap to work. Removal of any one piece destroys the function of the mousetrap. Intelligent design advocates assert that natural selection could not create irreducibly complex systems, because the selectable function is present only when all parts are assembled. Behe argued that irreducibly complex biological mechanisms include the bacterial flagellum of E. coli, the blood clotting cascade, cilia, and the adaptive immune system.[46][47]

Critics point out that the irreducible complexity argument assumes that the necessary parts of a system have always been necessary and therefore could not have been added sequentially.[48][49] They argue that something that is at first merely advantageous can later become necessary as other components change. Furthermore, they argue, evolution often proceeds by altering preexisting parts or by removing them from a system, rather than by adding them. This is sometimes called the "scaffolding objection" by an analogy with scaffolding, which can support an "irreducibly complex" building until it is complete and able to stand on its own.[n 9] Behe has acknowledged using "sloppy prose", and that his "argument against Darwinism does not add up to a logical proof".[n 10] Irreducible complexity has remained a popular argument among advocates of intelligent design; in the Dover trial, the court held that "Professor Behe's claim for irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large".[50]
Specified complexity

In 1986 the creationist chemist Charles Thaxton used the term "specified complexity" from information theory when claiming that messages transmitted by DNA in the cell were specified by intelligence, and must have originated with an intelligent agent.[24] The intelligent design concept of "specified complexity" was developed in the 1990s by mathematician, philosopher, and theologian William Dembski. Dembski states that when something exhibits specified complexity (i.e., is both complex and "specified", simultaneously), one can infer that it was produced by an intelligent cause (i.e., that it was designed) rather than being the result of natural processes. He provides the following examples: "A single letter of the alphabet is specified without being complex. A long sentence of random letters is complex without being specified. A Shakespearean sonnet is both complex and specified".[51] He states that details of living things can be similarly characterized, especially the "patterns" of molecular sequences in functional biological molecules such as DNA.

Dembski defines complex specified information (CSI) as anything with a less than 1 in 10150 chance of occurring by (natural) chance. Critics say that this renders the argument a tautology: complex specified information cannot occur naturally because Dembski has defined it thus, so the real question becomes whether or not CSI actually exists in nature.[53][n 11][54]

The conceptual soundness of Dembski's specified complexity/CSI argument has been widely discredited by the scientific and mathematical communities.[55][56][57] Specified complexity has yet to be shown to have wide applications in other fields as Dembski asserts. John Wilkins and Wesley Elsberry characterize Dembski's "explanatory filter" as eliminative, because it eliminates explanations sequentially: first regularity, then chance, finally defaulting to design. They argue that this procedure is flawed as a model for scientific inference because the asymmetric way it treats the different possible explanations renders it prone to making false conclusions.[58]

Richard Dawkins, another critic of intelligent design, argues in The God Delusion that allowing for an intelligent designer to account for unlikely complexity only postpones the problem, as such a designer would need to be at least as complex.[59] Other scientists have argued that evolution through selection is better able to explain the observed complexity, as is evident from the use of selective evolution to design certain electronic, aeronautic and automotive systems that are considered problems too complex for human "intelligent designers".[60]
Fine-tuned Universe

Intelligent design proponents have also occasionally appealed to broader teleological arguments outside of biology, most notably an argument based on the fine-tuning of universal constants that make matter and life possible and which are argued not to be solely attributable to chance. These include the values of fundamental physical constants, the relative strength of nuclear forces, electromagnetism, and gravity between fundamental particles, as well as the ratios of masses of such particles. Intelligent design proponent and Center for Science and Culture fellow Guillermo Gonzalez argues that if any of these values were even slightly different, the universe would be dramatically different, making it impossible for many chemical elements and features of the Universe, such as galaxies, to form.[61] Thus, proponents argue, an intelligent designer of life was needed to ensure that the requisite features were present to achieve that particular outcome.

Scientists have generally responded that this argument cannot be tested and is therefore not science but metaphysics. Some scientists argue that even when taken as mere speculation, these arguments are poorly supported by existing evidence.[62] Victor J. Stenger and other critics say both intelligent design and the weak form of the anthropic principle are essentially a tautology; in his view, these arguments amount to the claim that life is able to exist because the Universe is able to support life.[63][64][65] The claim of the improbability of a life-supporting universe has also been criticized as an argument by lack of imagination for assuming no other forms of life are possible. Life as we know it might not exist if things were different, but a different sort of life might exist in its place. A number of critics also suggest that many of the stated variables appear to be interconnected and that calculations made by mathematicians and physicists suggest that the emergence of a universe similar to ours is quite probable.[66]
Thermodynamic argument

ID Proponent Granville Sewell argues that the evolution of complex forms of life represents a decrease of entropy, and that it thus violates the second law of thermodynamics and so supports intelligent design.[67] This, however, is a misapplication of thermodynamic principles.[68] The second law applies to closed systems only. If Granville's argument were valid, living things could not be born and grow, as this also would be a decrease in entropy. Neither evolution nor the growth of living things violates the second law of thermodynamics because living things are not closed systems—they have external energy sources (e.g. food, oxygen, sunlight) whose production requires an offsetting net increase in entropy.
Intelligent designer

Intelligent design arguments are formulated in secular terms and intentionally avoid identifying the intelligent agent (or agents) they posit. Although they do not state that God is the designer, the designer is often implicitly hypothesized to have intervened in a way that only a god could intervene. Dembski, in The Design Inference, speculates that an alien culture could fulfill these requirements. Of Pandas and People proposes that SETI illustrates an appeal to intelligent design in science. In 2000, philosopher of science Robert T. Pennock suggested the Raëlian UFO religion as a real-life example of an extraterrestrial intelligent designer view that "make[s] many of the same bad arguments against evolutionary theory as creationists".[69] The authoritative description of intelligent design,[n 12] however, explicitly states that the Universe displays features of having been designed. Acknowledging the paradox, Dembski concludes that "no intelligent agent who is strictly physical could have presided over the origin of the universe or the origin of life".[70] The leading proponents have made statements to their supporters that they believe the designer to be the Christian God, to the exclusion of all other religions.[n 2][n 3][27]

Beyond the debate over whether intelligent design is scientific, a number of critics argue that existing evidence makes the design hypothesis appear unlikely, irrespective of its status in the world of science. For example, Jerry Coyne asks why a designer would "give us a pathway for making vitamin C, but then destroy it by disabling one of its enzymes" (see pseudogene) and why he or she would not "stock oceanic islands with reptiles, mammals, amphibians, and freshwater fish, despite the suitability of such islands for these species". Coyne also points to the fact that "the flora and fauna on those islands resemble that of the nearest mainland, even when the environments are very different" as evidence that species were not placed there by a designer.[71] Previously, in Darwin's Black Box, Behe had argued that we are simply incapable of understanding the designer's motives, so such questions cannot be answered definitively. Odd designs could, for example, "have been placed there by the designer ... for artistic reasons, to show off, for some as-yet undetectable practical purpose, or for some unguessable reason". Coyne responds that in light of the evidence, "either life resulted not from intelligent design, but from evolution; or the intelligent designer is a cosmic prankster who designed everything to make it look as though it had evolved".[71]

Asserting the need for a designer of complexity also raises the question "What designed the designer?"[72] Intelligent design proponents say that the question is irrelevant to or outside the scope of intelligent design.[n 13] Richard Wein counters that the unanswered questions an explanation creates "must be balanced against the improvements in our understanding which the explanation provides. Invoking an unexplained being to explain the origin of other beings (ourselves) is little more than question-begging. The new question raised by the explanation is as problematic as the question which the explanation purports to answer".[54] Richard Dawkins sees the assertion that the designer does not need to be explained, not as a contribution to knowledge, but as a thought-terminating cliché.[73][74] In the absence of observable, measurable evidence, the very question "What designed the designer?" leads to an infinite regression from which intelligent design proponents can only escape by resorting to religious creationism or logical contradiction.[75]
Haldane's dilemma

Haldane's Dilemma refers to a limit on the speed of beneficial evolution, first calculated by J. B. S. Haldane and published in The Cost of Natural Selection in 1957, and clarified further by later commentators. Haldane states that the same problem afflicting animal breeding arises with respect to natural selection: characters that are positively correlated at one time may be negatively correlated at a later time, and thus simultaneous optimization of more than one character is a problem also in nature.[76]

Former Discovery Institute fellow Walter ReMine has written in his book The Biotic Message that Haldane's dilemma remains unresolved and a source of controversy in the evolutionary genetics literature.[77] Haldane, however, had stated at the time of publication "I am quite aware that my conclusions will probably need drastic revision," and subsequent corrected calculations found this cost disappears. He had assumed a constant population size, for simplification purposes, and a linear growth of fixation time for multiple mutations, but these assumptions proved invalid. Because sexual recombination, the process by which a molecule of nucleic acid is broken and then joined to a different one, can select two chromosomally-independent alleles simultaneously, a population can reach fixation more quickly than Haldane had originally calculated.[78][79][80]
Movement

The intelligent design movement is a direct outgrowth of the creationism of the 1980s.[16] The scientific and academic communities, along with a U.S. federal court, view intelligent design as either a form of creationism or as a direct descendant that is closely intertwined with traditional creationism;[82] [n 14][83][84][85][86] and several authors explicitly refer to it as "intelligent design creationism".[16][87][n 15][88]

The movement is headquartered in the Center for Science and Culture (CSC), established in 1996 as the creationist wing of the Discovery Institute to promote a religious agenda[n 16] calling for broad social, academic and political changes. The Discovery Institute's intelligent design campaigns have been staged primarily in the United States, although efforts have been made in other countries to promote intelligent design. Leaders of the movement say intelligent design exposes the limitations of scientific orthodoxy and of the secular philosophy of naturalism. Intelligent design proponents allege that science should not be limited to naturalism and should not demand the adoption of a naturalistic philosophy that dismisses out-of-hand any explanation that includes a supernatural cause. The overall goal of the movement is to "defeat [the] materialist world view" represented by the theory of evolution in favor of "a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions".[n 16]

Phillip E. Johnson stated that the goal of intelligent design is to cast creationism as a scientific concept.[n 7][n 17] All leading intelligent design proponents are fellows or staff of the Discovery Institute and its Center for Science and Culture.[89] Nearly all intelligent design concepts and the associated movement are the products of the Discovery Institute, which guides the movement and follows its wedge strategy while conducting its Teach the Controversy campaign and their other related programs.

Leading intelligent design proponents have made conflicting statements regarding intelligent design. In statements directed at the general public, they say intelligent design is not religious; when addressing conservative Christian supporters, they state that intelligent design has its foundation in the Bible.[n 17] Recognizing the need for support, the institute affirms its Christian, evangelistic orientation: "Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Christians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidences that support the faith, as well as to 'popularize' our ideas in the broader culture."[n 16]

Barbara Forrest, an expert who has written extensively on the movement, describes this as being due to the Discovery Institute's obfuscating its agenda as a matter of policy. She has written that the movement's "activities betray an aggressive, systematic agenda for promoting not only intelligent design creationism, but the religious world-view that undergirds it".[90]
Religion and leading proponents

Although arguments for intelligent design are formulated in secular terms and intentionally avoid positing the identity of the designer,[n 18] the majority of principal intelligent design advocates are publicly religious Christians who have stated that in their view the designer proposed in intelligent design is the Christian conception of God. Stuart Burgess, Phillip E. Johnson, William Dembski, and Stephen C. Meyer are evangelical Protestants, and Michael Behe is a Roman Catholic, while Jonathan Wells is a member of the Unification Church. Phillip E. Johnson has stated that cultivating ambiguity by employing secular language in arguments that are carefully crafted to avoid overtones of theistic creationism is a necessary first step for ultimately reintroducing the Christian concept of God as the designer. Johnson explicitly calls for intelligent design proponents to obfuscate their religious motivations so as to avoid having intelligent design identified "as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message".[n 19] Johnson emphasizes that "the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion"; "after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact [...] only then can 'biblical issues' be discussed".[n 20]

The strategy of deliberately disguising the religious intent of intelligent design has been described by William Dembski in The Design Inference.[91] In this work Dembski lists a god or an "alien life force" as two possible options for the identity of the designer; however, in his book Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology, Dembski states that "Christ is indispensable to any scientific theory, even if its practitioners don't have a clue about him. The pragmatics of a scientific theory can, to be sure, be pursued without recourse to Christ. But the conceptual soundness of the theory can in the end only be located in Christ."[92] Dembski also stated, "ID is part of God's general revelation [...] Not only does intelligent design rid us of this ideology (materialism), which suffocates the human spirit, but, in my personal experience, I've found that it opens the path for people to come to Christ".[93] Both Johnson and Dembski cite the Bible's Gospel of John as the foundation of intelligent design.[27][n 17]

Barbara Forrest contends such statements reveal that leading proponents see intelligent design as essentially religious in nature, not merely a scientific concept that has implications with which their personal religious beliefs happen to coincide.[n 21] She writes that the leading proponents of intelligent design are closely allied with the ultra-conservative Christian Reconstructionism movement. She lists connections of (current and former) Discovery Institute Fellows Phillip Johnson, Charles Thaxton, Michael Behe, Richard Weikart, Jonathan Wells and Francis Beckwith to leading Christian Reconstructionist organizations, and the extent of the funding provided the Institute by Howard Ahmanson Jr., a leading figure in the Reconstructionist movement.[94]
Reaction from other creationist groups

Not all creationist organizations have embraced the intelligent design movement. Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe, a proponent of Old Earth creationism, believes that the efforts of intelligent design proponents to divorce the concept from Biblical Christianity make its hypothesis too vague. In 2002 he wrote: "Winning the argument for design without identifying the designer yields, at best, a sketchy origins model. Such a model makes little if any positive impact on the community of scientists and other scholars… The time is right for a direct approach, a single leap into the origins fray. Introducing a biblically based, scientifically verifiable creation model represents such a leap."[95]

Likewise, two of the most prominent Young Earth creationism organizations in the world have attempted to distinguish their views from intelligent design. Henry M. Morris of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) wrote, in 1999, that ID, "even if well-meaning and effectively articulated, will not work! It has often been tried in the past and has failed, and it will fail today. The reason it won't work is because it is not the Biblical method." According to Morris: "The evidence of intelligent design… must be either followed by or accompanied by a sound presentation of true Biblical creationism if it is to be meaningful and lasting."[96] In 2002, Carl Wieland of Answers in Genesis (AiG) criticized design advocates who, though well-intentioned, "left the Bible out of it" and thereby unwittingly aided and abetted the modern rejection of the Bible. Wieland explained that "AiG's major 'strategy' is to boldly, but humbly, call the church back to its Biblical foundations… [so] we neither count ourselves a part of this movement nor campaign against it."[97]
Polls

Several surveys were conducted prior to the December 2005 decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover, which sought to determine the level of support for intelligent design among certain groups. According to a 2005 Harris poll, 10% of adults in the United States viewed human beings as "so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them".[98] Although Zogby polls commissioned by the Discovery Institute show more support, these polls suffer from considerable flaws, such as having a very low response rate (248 out of 16,000), being conducted on behalf of an organization with an expressed interest in the outcome of the poll, and containing leading questions.[99][100][101]

A May 2005 survey of nearly 1500 physicians in the United States conducted by the Louis Finkelstein Institute and HCD Research showed that 63% of the physicians agreed more with evolution than with intelligent design.[n 22]

A series of Gallup polls in the United States from 1982 through 2008 on "Evolution, Creationism, Intelligent Design" found support for "human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced formed of life, but God guided the process" of between 35% and 40%, support for "God created human beings in pretty much their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so" varied from 43% to 47%, and support for "human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced formed of life, but God had no part in the process" varied from 9% to 14%. The polls also noted answers to a series of more detailed questions.[102]
Film

The film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed sparked further controversy in 2008. This documentary, hosted by Ben Stein, focuses on professors who have been asked to leave or have left numerous institutions because, the film insinuates, of their beliefs in Intelligent Design. One of the film's first screenings resulted in Paul "PZ" Myers, an interviewee in the film, being asked to leave the theater. There have also been allegations from some interviewees that interviews were recorded many times in order to get the exact phrasing required by the producer. The production company, Premise Media, also has helped finance some religious films such as The Passion of the Christ.[103][104]
Creating and teaching the controversy

The intelligent design movement states that there is a debate among scientists about whether life evolved. The movement stresses the importance of recognizing the existence of this supposed debate, seeking to convince the public, politicians, and cultural leaders that schools should "Teach the Controversy".[105] In fact, there is no such controversy in the scientific community; the scientific consensus is that life evolved.[106][107][108] Intelligent design is widely viewed as a stalking horse for its proponents' campaign against what they say is the materialist foundation of science, which they argue leaves no room for the possibility of God.[109][110]

Advocates of intelligent design seek to keep God and the Bible out of the discussion, and present intelligent design in the language of science as though it were a scientific hypothesis.[n 18][n 20] However, among a significant proportion of the general public in the United States the major concern is whether conventional evolutionary biology is compatible with belief in God and in the Bible, and how this issue is taught in schools.[111] The public controversy was given widespread media coverage in the United States, particularly during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in late 2005 and after President George W. Bush expressed support for the idea of teaching intelligent design alongside evolution in August 2005. In response to Bush's statement and the pending federal trial, Time magazine ran an eight-page cover story on the Evolution Wars in which they examined the issue of teaching intelligent design in the classroom.[112][113] The cover of the magazine featured a parody of The Creation of Adam from the Sistine Chapel. Rather than pointing at Adam, Michelangelo's God points at the image of a chimpanzee contemplating the caption reading "The push to teach "intelligent design" raises a question: Does God have a place in science class?".[114] In the Kitzmiller v. Dover case, the court ruled that intelligent design was a religious and creationist position, finding that God and intelligent design were both distinct from the material that should be covered in a science class.[n 6]

Empirical science uses the scientific method to create a posteriori knowledge based on observation and repeated testing of hypotheses and theories. Intelligent design proponents seek to change this fundamental basis of science[115] by eliminating "methodological naturalism" from science[116] and replacing it with what the leader of the intelligent design movement, Phillip E. Johnson, calls "theistic realism".[n 23] Some have called this approach "methodological supernaturalism", which means belief in a transcendent, nonnatural dimension of reality inhabited by a transcendent, nonnatural deity.[117] Intelligent design proponents argue that naturalistic explanations fail to explain certain phenomena and that supernatural explanations provide a very simple and intuitive explanation for the origins of life and the universe.[n 24] Proponents say evidence exists in the forms of irreducible complexity and specified complexity that cannot be explained by natural processes.[1] They also hold that religious neutrality requires the teaching of both evolution and intelligent design in schools, saying that teaching only evolution unfairly discriminates against those holding creationist beliefs. Teaching both, they argue, allows for the possibility of religious belief, without causing the state to actually promote such beliefs. Many intelligent design followers believe that "Scientism" is itself a religion that promotes secularism and materialism in an attempt to erase theism from public life, and they view their work in the promotion of intelligent design as a way to return religion to a central role in education and other public spheres. Some allege that this larger debate is often the subtext for arguments made over intelligent design, though others note that intelligent design serves as an effective proxy for the religious beliefs of prominent intelligent design proponents in their efforts to advance their religious point of view within society.[118][n 25][119]

Intelligent design has not presented a credible scientific case and is an attempt to teach religion in public schools, substituting public support for scientific research.[120] If the argument to give "equal time for all theories" were actually practiced, there would be no logical limit to the number of mutually incompatible supernatural "theories" regarding the origins and diversity of life to be taught in the public school system, including intelligent design parodies such as the Flying Spaghetti Monster "theory"; intelligent design does not provide a mechanism for discriminating among them. Philosopher of biology Elliott Sober, for example, states that intelligent design is not falsifiable because "[d]efenders of ID always have a way out".[121][122] Intelligent design proponent Michael Behe concedes "You can't prove intelligent design by experiment".[111]

The inference that an intelligent designer created life on Earth, which advocate William Dembski has said could alternately be an "alien" life force,[91] has been compared to the a priori claim that aliens helped the ancient Egyptians build the pyramids.[123][124] In both cases, the effect of this outside intelligence is not repeatable, observable or falsifiable, and it violates the principle of parsimony. From a strictly empirical standpoint, one may list what is known about Egyptian construction techniques, but one must admit ignorance about exactly how the Egyptians built the pyramids.

Supporters of intelligent design have also reached out to other faith groups with similar accounts of creation with the hope that the broader coalition will have greater influence in supporting science education that does not contradict their religious views.[n 24] Many religious bodies have responded by expressing support for evolution. The Roman Catholic church has stated that religious faith is fully compatible with science, which is limited to dealing only with the natural world[125]—a position described by the term theistic evolution.[126] While some in the Roman Catholic Church reject Intelligent design for various philosophical and theological reasons,[127][128] others, such as Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, have shown support for it.[129][130][131] The arguments of intelligent design have been directly challenged by the over 10,000 clergy who signed the Clergy Letter Project. Prominent scientists who strongly express religious faith, such as the astronomer George Coyne and the biologist Ken Miller, have been at the forefront of opposition to intelligent design. While creationist organizations have welcomed intelligent design's support against naturalism, they have also been critical of its refusal to identify the designer,[132][133][134] and have pointed to previous failures of the same argument.[135]

Rabbi Natan Slifkin directly criticized the advocates of intelligent design as presenting a perspective of God that is dangerous to religion.[136] Those who promote it as parallel to religion, he asserts, do not truly understand it. Slifkin criticizes intelligent design's advocacy of teaching their perspective in biology classes, wondering why no one claims that God's hand should be taught in other secular classes, such as history, physics or geology. Slifkin also asserts that the intelligent design movement is inordinately concerned with portraying God as "in control" when it comes to things that cannot be easily explained by science, but not in control in respect to things which can be explained by scientific theory.[136] Kenneth Miller expressed a view similar to Slifkin's: "[T]he struggles of the Intelligent Design movement are best understood as clamorous and disappointing double failures—rejected by science because they do not fit the facts, and having failed religion because they think too little of God.[137]
Defining science

The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena and acquiring new knowledge of the natural world without assuming the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural, an approach sometimes called methodological naturalism. Intelligent design proponents believe that this can be equated to materialist metaphysical naturalism, and have often said that not only is their own position scientific, but it is even more scientific than evolution, and that they want a redefinition of science as a revived natural theology or natural philosophy to allow "non-naturalistic theories such as intelligent design".[138] This presents a demarcation problem, which in the philosophy of science is about how and where to draw the lines around science.[139] For a theory to qualify as scientific,[n 26][140][n 27] it is expected to be:

* Consistent
* Parsimonious (sparing in its proposed entities or explanations, see Occam's Razor)
* Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena, and can be used predictively)
* Empirically testable and falsifiable (see Falsifiability)
* Based on multiple observations, often in the form of controlled, repeated experiments
* Correctable and dynamic (modified in the light of observations that do not support it)
* Progressive (refines previous theories)
* Provisional or tentative (is open to experimental checking, and does not assert certainty)

For any theory, hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must meet most, and ideally all, of these criteria. The fewer criteria are met, the less scientific it is; and if it meets only a few or none at all, then it cannot be treated as scientific in any meaningful sense of the word. Typical objections to defining intelligent design as science are that it lacks consistency,[141] violates the principle of parsimony,[n 28] is not scientifically useful,[n 29] is not falsifiable,[n 30] is not empirically testable,[n 31] and is not correctable, dynamic, provisional or progressive.[n 32][n 33][n 34]

Critics also say that the intelligent design doctrine does not meet the Daubert Standard,[142] the criteria for scientific evidence mandated by the US Supreme Court. The Daubert Standard governs which evidence can be considered scientific in United States federal courts and most state courts. Its four criteria are:

* The theoretical underpinnings of the methods must yield testable predictions by means of which the theory could be falsified.
* The methods should preferably be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
* There should be a known rate of error that can be used in evaluating the results.
* The methods should be generally accepted within the relevant scientific community.

In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, using these criteria and others mentioned above, Judge Jones ruled that "... we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents".

Against this, the philosopher Thomas Nagel argues that intelligent design is very different from creation science, in that it does not depend on distortion of evidence, or on the assumption that it is immune to empirical evidence. It depends only on the idea that the hypothesis of a designer makes sense. Whatever the merits of the positions, he argues that it is a scientific disagreement, not a disagreement between science and something else.[143]

The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science."[144] The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience.[n 35][82][n 14] Others in the scientific community have concurred,[n 36] and some have called it junk science.[n 37][145]
Peer review

The failure to follow the procedures of scientific discourse and the failure to submit work to the scientific community that withstands scrutiny have weighed against intelligent design being accepted as valid science.[146] The intelligent design movement has not published a properly peer-reviewed article in a scientific journal.[146]

Intelligent design, by appealing to a supernatural agent, directly conflicts with the principles of science, which limit its inquiries to empirical, observable and ultimately testable data and which require explanations to be based on empirical evidence. Dembski, Behe and other intelligent design proponents say bias by the scientific community is to blame for the failure of their research to be published.[147] Intelligent design proponents believe that their writings are rejected for not conforming to purely naturalistic, non-supernatural mechanisms rather than because their research is not up to "journal standards", and that the merit of their articles is overlooked. Some scientists describe this claim as a conspiracy theory.[148] Michael Shermer has rebutted the claim, noting "Anyone who thinks that scientists do not question Darwinism has never been to an evolutionary conference." He noted that scientists such as Joan Roughgarden and Lynn Margulis have challenged certain Darwinist theories and offered explanations of their own and despite this they "have not been persecuted, shunned, fired or even expelled. Why? Because they are doing science, not religion."[149] The issue that supernatural explanations do not conform to the scientific method became a sticking point for intelligent design proponents in the 1990s, and is addressed in the wedge strategy as an aspect of science that must be challenged before intelligent design can be accepted by the broader scientific community.

Critics and advocates debate over whether intelligent design produces new research and has legitimately attempted to publish this research. For instance, the Templeton Foundation, a former funder of the Discovery Institute and a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion, says that it asked intelligent design proponents to submit proposals for actual research, but none were ever submitted. Charles L. Harper Jr., foundation vice-president, said: "From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review".[150]

The only article published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that made a case for intelligent design was quickly withdrawn by the publisher for having circumvented the journal's peer-review standards.[151] Written by the Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture Director Stephen C. Meyer, it appeared in the peer-reviewed journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington in August 2004.[152] The article was a literature review, which means that it did not present any new research, but rather culled quotations and claims from other papers to argue that the Cambrian explosion could not have happened by natural processes. The choice of venue for this article was also considered problematic, because it was so outside the normal subject matter (see Sternberg peer review controversy[n 38]). Dembski has written that "perhaps the best reason [to be skeptical of his ideas] is that intelligent design has yet to establish itself as a thriving scientific research program."[153] In a 2001 interview, Dembski said that he stopped submitting to peer-reviewed journals because of their slow time-to-print and that he makes more money from publishing books.[154]

In the Dover trial, the judge found that intelligent design features no scientific research or testing.[155] There, intelligent design proponents cited just one paper, on simulation modeling of evolution by Behe and Snoke,[156] which mentioned neither irreducible complexity nor intelligent design and which Behe admitted did not rule out known evolutionary mechanisms.[157] Michael Lynch called the conclusions of the article "an artifact of unwarranted biological assumptions, inappropriate mathematical modeling, and faulty logic".[158] In sworn testimony, however, Behe said: "There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred".[159] As summarized by the judge, Behe conceded that there are no peer-reviewed articles supporting his claims of intelligent design or irreducible complexity. In his ruling, the judge wrote: "A final indicator of how ID has failed to demonstrate scientific warrant is the complete absence of peer-reviewed publications supporting the theory".[146]

The Discovery Institute insists that a number of intelligent design articles have been published in peer-reviewed journals,[160] including in its list the two articles mentioned above. Critics, largely members of the scientific community, reject this claim, stating that no established scientific journal has yet published an intelligent design article. Rather, intelligent design proponents have set up their own journals with peer review that lacks impartiality and rigor,[n 39] consisting entirely of intelligent design supporters.[n 40]
Intelligence as an observable quality

The phrase intelligent design makes use of an assumption of the quality of an observable intelligence, a concept that has no scientific consensus definition. William Dembski, for example, has written that "Intelligence leaves behind a characteristic signature". The characteristics of intelligence are assumed by intelligent design proponents to be observable without specifying what the criteria for the measurement of intelligence should be. Dembski, instead, asserts that "in special sciences ranging from forensics to archaeology to SETI (the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence), appeal to a designing intelligence is indispensable".[161] How this appeal is made and what this implies as to the definition of intelligence are topics left largely unaddressed. Seth Shostak, a researcher with the SETI Institute, disputed Dembski's comparison of SETI and intelligent design, saying that intelligent design advocates base their inference of design on complexity—the argument being that some biological systems are too complex to have been made by natural processes—while SETI researchers are looking primarily for artificiality.[162]

Critics say that the design detection methods proposed by intelligent design proponents are radically different from conventional design detection, undermining the key elements that make it possible as legitimate science. Intelligent design proponents, they say, are proposing both searching for a designer without knowing anything about that designer's abilities, parameters, or intentions (which scientists do know when searching for the results of human intelligence), as well as denying the very distinction between natural/artificial design that allows scientists to compare complex designed artifacts against the background of the sorts of complexity found in nature.[n 41]

As a means of criticism, certain skeptics have pointed to a challenge of intelligent design derived from the study of artificial intelligence. The criticism is a counter to intelligent design claims about what makes a design intelligent, specifically that "no preprogrammed device can be truly intelligent, that intelligence is irreducible to natural processes".[163] This claim is similar in type to an assumption of Cartesian dualism that posits a strict separation between "mind" and the material Universe. However, in studies of artificial intelligence, while there is an implicit assumption that supposed "intelligence" or creativity of a computer program is determined by the capabilities given to it by the computer programmer, artificial intelligence need not be bound to an inflexible system of rules. Rather, if a computer program can access randomness as a function, this effectively allows for a flexible, creative, and adaptive intelligence. Evolutionary algorithms, a subfield of machine learning (itself a subfield of artificial intelligence), have been used to mathematically demonstrate that randomness and selection can be used to "evolve" complex, highly adapted structures that are not explicitly designed by a programmer. Evolutionary algorithms use the Darwinian metaphor of random mutation, selection and the survival of the fittest to solve diverse mathematical and scientific problems that are usually not solvable using conventional methods. Intelligence derived from randomness is essentially indistinguishable from the "innate" intelligence associated with biological organisms, and poses a challenge to the intelligent design conception that intelligence itself necessarily requires a designer. Cognitive science continues to investigate the nature of intelligence along these lines of inquiry. The intelligent design community, for the most part, relies on the assumption that intelligence is readily apparent as a fundamental and basic property of complex systems.[164]
Arguments from ignorance

Eugenie Scott, along with Glenn Branch and other critics, has argued that many points raised by intelligent design proponents are arguments from ignorance.[165] In the argument from ignorance, a lack of evidence for one view is erroneously argued to constitute proof of the correctness of another view. Scott and Branch say that intelligent design is an argument from ignorance because it relies on a lack of knowledge for its conclusion: lacking a natural explanation for certain specific aspects of evolution, we assume intelligent cause. They contend most scientists would reply that the unexplained is not unexplainable, and that "we don't know yet" is a more appropriate response than invoking a cause outside science.[165] Particularly, Michael Behe's demands for ever more detailed explanations of the historical evolution of molecular systems seem to assume a false dichotomy, where either evolution or design is the proper explanation, and any perceived failure of evolution becomes a victory for design. Scott and Branch also contend that the supposedly novel contributions proposed by intelligent design proponents have not served as the basis for any productive scientific research. Philosopher of science Bradley Monton defends Behe on this point, noting that Behe does not view every complex biological system whose evolution is currently unknown as irreducibly complex.[166] This shows, Monton continues, that Behe is not appealing to ignorance, but is "giving a positive argument that it's unlikely for such systems to evolve without an intelligent designer."[166]
God of the gaps

Intelligent design has also been characterized as a God-of-the-gaps argument,[167] which has the following form:

* There is a gap in scientific knowledge.
* The gap is filled with acts of God (or intelligent designer) and therefore proves the existence of God (or intelligent designer).[167]

A God-of-the-gaps argument is the theological version of an argument from ignorance. A key feature of this type of argument is that it merely answers outstanding questions with explanations (often supernatural) that are unverifiable and ultimately themselves subject to unanswerable questions.[168] Philosopher of science Bradley Monton states that Behe's claim of irreducible complexity is a positive claim rather than an argument from ignorance, and therefore not a God-of-the-gaps argument.[166]

Historians of science observe that the astronomy of the earliest civilizations, although astonishing and incorporating mathematical constructions far in excess of any practical value, proved to be misdirected and of little importance to the development of science, because they failed to inquire more carefully into the mechanisms that drove the heavenly bodies across the sky.[169] It was the Greek civilization that first practised science, although not yet a mathematically-oriented experimental science, but nevertheless an attempt to rationalize the world of natural experience without recourse to divine intervention.[170] In this historically motivated definition of science any appeal to an intelligent creator is explicitly excluded for the paralysing effect it may have on the scientific progress.
Kitzmiller trial

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts against a public school district that required the presentation of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution. The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy thus violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.[171]

Eleven parents of students in Dover, Pennsylvania, sued the Dover Area School District over a statement that the school board required be read aloud in ninth-grade science classes when evolution was taught. The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) and Pepper Hamilton LLP. The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) acted as consultants for the plaintiffs. The defendants were represented by the Thomas More Law Center.[172] The suit was tried in a bench trial from September 26 to November 4, 2005, before Judge John E. Jones III. Ken Miller, Kevin Padian, Brian Alters, Robert Pennock, Barbara Forrest and John Haught served as expert witnesses for the prosecution. Michael Behe, Steve Fuller and Scott Minnich served as expert witnesses for the defense.

On December 20, 2005, Judge Jones issued his 139-page findings of fact and decision, ruling that the Dover mandate was unconstitutional, and barring intelligent design from being taught in Pennsylvania's Middle District public school science classrooms. The eight Dover school board members who voted for the intelligent design requirement were all defeated in a November 8, 2005, election by challengers who opposed the teaching of intelligent design in a science class, and the current school board president stated that the board does not intend to appeal the ruling.[173]

In his finding of facts, Judge Jones made the following condemnation of the Teach the Controversy strategy:

"Moreover, ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard."

Reaction

Judge Jones himself anticipated that his ruling would be criticized, saying in his decision that:

"Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."[174]

As Jones had predicted, John G. West, Associate Director of the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute, said:

"The Dover decision is an attempt by an activist federal judge to stop the spread of a scientific idea and even to prevent criticism of Darwinian evolution through government-imposed censorship rather than open debate, and it won't work. He has conflated Discovery Institute's position with that of the Dover school board, and he totally misrepresents intelligent design and the motivations of the scientists who research it."[175]

Newspapers have noted with interest that the judge is "a Republican and a churchgoer".[176][177][178][179]

Subsequently, the decision has been examined in a search for flaws and conclusions, partly by intelligent design supporters aiming to avoid future defeats in court. In the Spring of 2007 the University of Montana Law review published three articles.[180] In the first, David K. DeWolf, John G. West and Casey Luskin, all of the Discovery Institute, argued that intelligent design is a valid scientific theory, the Jones court should not have addressed the question of whether it was a scientific theory, and that the Kitzmiller decision will have no effect at all on the development and adoption of intelligent design as an alternative to standard evolutionary theory.[113] In the second Peter Irons responded, arguing that the decision was extremely well reasoned and spells the death knell for the intelligent design efforts to introduce creationism in public schools,[181] while in the third, DeWolf et al. answer the points made by Irons.[182] However, fear of a similar lawsuit has resulted in other school boards abandoning intelligent design "teach the controversy" proposals.[16]

In April 2010, the American Academy of Religion issued Guidelines for Teaching About Religion in K-12 Public Schools in the United States, which included guidance that creation science or intelligent design should not be taught in science classes, as "Creation science and intelligent design represent worldviews that fall outside of the realm of science that is defined as (and limited to) a method of inquiry based on gathering observable and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning." However, they, as well as other "worldviews that focus on speculation regarding the origins of life represent another important and relevant form of human inquiry that is appropriately studied in literature or social sciences courses. Such study, however, must include a diversity of worldviews representing a variety of religious and philosophical perspectives and must avoid privileging one view as more legitimate than others."[183]
Status outside the United States
Europe

In June 2007 the Council of Europe's "Committee on Culture, Science and Education" issued a report, The dangers of creationism in education, which states "Creationism in any of its forms, such as 'intelligent design', is not based on facts, does not use any scientific reasoning and its contents are pathetically inadequate for science classes."[184] In describing the dangers posed to education by teaching creationism, it described intelligent design as "anti-science" and involving "blatant scientific fraud" and "intellectual deception" that "blurs the nature, objectives and limits of science" and links it and other forms of creationism to denialism. On October 4, 2007, the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly approved a resolution stating that schools should "resist presentation of creationist ideas in any discipline other than religion", including "intelligent design", which it described as "the latest, more refined version of creationism", "presented in a more subtle way". The resolution emphasises that the aim of the report is not to question or to fight a belief, but to "warn against certain tendencies to pass off a belief as science".[185]

In the United Kingdom, public education includes Religious Education as a compulsory subject, and many "faith schools" that teach the ethos of particular denominations. When it was revealed that a group called Truth in Science had distributed DVDs produced by the Discovery Institute affiliate Illustra Media[n 42] featuring Discovery Institute fellows making the case for design in nature,[186] and claimed they were being used by 59 schools,[187] the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) stated that "Neither creationism nor intelligent design are taught as a subject in schools, and are not specified in the science curriculum" (part of the National Curriculum, which does not apply to independent schools or to Education in Scotland).[188][189] The DfES subsequently stated that "Intelligent design is not a recognised scientific theory; therefore, it is not included in the science curriculum", but left the way open for it to be explored in religious education in relation to different beliefs, as part of a syllabus set by a local Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education.[190] In 2006 the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority produced a Religious Education model unit in which pupils can learn about religious and nonreligious views about creationism, intelligent design and evolution by natural selection.[191][192]

On June 25, 2007, the UK Government responded to an e-Petition by saying that creationism and intelligent design should not be taught as science, though teachers would be expected to answer pupils' questions within the standard framework of established scientific theories.[193] Detailed government "Creationism teaching guidance" for schools in England was published on September 18, 2007. It states that "Intelligent design lies wholly outside of science", has no underpinning scientific principles, or explanations, and is not accepted by the science community as a whole. Though it should not be taught as science, "questions about creationism and intelligent design which arise in science lessons, for example, as a result of media coverage, could provide the opportunity to explain or explore why they are not considered to be scientific theories and, in the right context, why evolution is considered to be a scientific theory". However, "Teachers of subjects such as RE, history or citizenship may deal with creationism and intelligent design in their lessons".[n 5]

The British Centre for Science Education lobbying group has the goal of "countering creationism within the UK" and has been involved in government lobbying in the UK in this regard.[194] However, in Northern Ireland the Democratic Unionist Party claims that the revised curriculum provides an opportunity for alternative theories to be taught, and has sought assurances that pupils will not lose marks if they give creationist or intelligent design answers to science questions.[195] In Lisburn the DUP has arranged that the City Council will write to post primary schools asking what their plans are to develop teaching material in relation to "creation, intelligent design and other theories of origin".[196]

Plans by Dutch Education Minister Maria van der Hoeven to "stimulate an academic debate" on the subject in 2005 caused a severe public backlash.[197] After the 2007 elections she was succeeded by Ronald Plasterk, described as a "molecular geneticist, staunch atheist and opponent of intelligent design".[198] As a reaction on this situation in the Netherlands, in Belgium the President of the Flemish Catholic Educational Board (VSKO) Mieke Van Hecke declared that: "Catholic scientists already accepted the theory of evolution for a long time and that intelligent design and creationism doesn't belong in Flemish Catholic schools. It's not the tasks of the politics to introduce new ideas, that's task and goal of science."[199]
Relation to Islam

Muzaffar Iqbal, a notable Muslim in Canada, signed the Scientific Dissent list of the Discovery Institute.[200] Ideas similar to intelligent design have been considered respected intellectual options among Muslims, and in Turkey many intelligent design books have been translated. In Istanbul in 2007, public meetings promoting intelligent design were sponsored by the local government,[201] and David Berlinski of the Discovery Institute was the keynote speaker at a meeting in May 2007.[202]
Australia

The status of intelligent design in Australia is somewhat similar to that in the UK (see: Education in Australia). When the former Australian Federal Education Minister, Brendan Nelson, raised the notion of intelligent design being taught in science classes, the public outcry caused the minister to quickly concede that the correct forum for intelligent design, if it were to be taught, is in religious or philosophy classes.[203]
See also
Notes

1. ^ a b "Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes." Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. TalkOrigins Archive. Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 1.; 2005 [cited 2007-07-19].
* "The Discovery Institute is the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country". In: Jody Wilgoren. Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive. The New York Times. August 21, 2005 [cited 2011-04-20].
* American Civil Liberties Union. Who is behind the ID movement?; September 16, 2005 [cited 2007-07-20].
* Kahn, JP. The Evolution of George Gilder. The Author And Tech-Sector Guru Has A New Cause To Create Controversy With: Intelligent Design. The Boston Globe. July 27, 2005 [cited 2007-07-19].
* "Who's Who of Intelligent Design Proponents" (PDF). Science & Theology News. November 2005. http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=602. Retrieved 2007-07-20.
* "The engine behind the ID movement is the Discovery Institute". Attie, Alan D.; Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox4, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell and Michael M. Cox (2006). "Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action". Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138. A publication of the American Society for Clinical Investigation.. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. http://www.jci.org/articles/view/28449. Retrieved 2007-07-20.
2. ^ a b c "the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity". Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Ruling p. 26. A selection of writings and quotations of intelligent design supporters demonstrating this identification of the Christian God with the intelligent designer are found in the pdf Horse's MouthArchived June 27, 2008 at the Wayback Machine. (PDF) by Brian Poindexter, dated 2003.
3. ^ a b c William A. Dembski, when asked in an interview whether his research concluded that God is the Intelligent Designer, stated "I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God". Devon Williams (December 14, 2007). "CitizenLink: Friday Five: William A. Dembski". Focus on the Family. http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000006139.cfm. Retrieved 2007-12-15.
4. ^ See: 1) List of scientific societies explicitly rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. 3) The Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of August 20, 2006. A four day A Scientific Support for Darwinism petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes List of statements from scientific professional organizations on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to The New York Times "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth". Dean, Cordelia (September 27, 2007). "Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin. Retrieved 2007-09-28.
5. ^ a b "Teachernet, Document bank". Creationism teaching guidance. UK Department for Children, Schools and Families. September 18, 2007. http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index.cfm?id=11890. Retrieved 2007-10-01. "The intelligent design movement claims there are aspects of the natural world that are so intricate and fit for purpose that they cannot have evolved but must have been created by an 'intelligent designer'. Furthermore they assert that this claim is scientifically testable and should therefore be taught in science lessons. Intelligent design lies wholly outside of science. Sometimes examples are quoted that are said to require an 'intelligent designer'. However, many of these have subsequently been shown to have a scientific explanation, for example, the immune system and blood clotting mechanisms. Attempts to establish an idea of the 'specified complexity' needed for intelligent design are surrounded by complex mathematics. Despite this, the idea seems to be essentially a modern version of the old idea of the "God-of-the-gaps". Lack of a satisfactory scientific explanation of some phenomena (a 'gap' in scientific knowledge) is claimed to be evidence of an intelligent designer."
6. ^ a b "ID is not a new scientific argument, but is rather an old religious argument for the existence of God. He traced this argument back to at least Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century, who framed the argument as a syllogism: Wherever complex design exists, there must have been a designer; nature is complex; therefore nature must have had an intelligent designer." "This argument for the existence of God was advanced early in the 19th century by Reverend Paley" (the teleological argument) "The only apparent difference between the argument made by Paley and the argument for ID, as expressed by defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich, is that ID's 'official position' does not acknowledge that the designer is God." Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Ruling, p. 24.
7. ^ a b Phillip Johnson: "Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." Johnson 2004. Christianity.ca. Let's Be Intelligent About DarwinArchived June 8, 2007 at the Wayback Machine.. "This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. It's about religion and philosophy." Johnson 1996. World magazine. Witnesses For The Prosecution. "So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." Johnson 2000. Touchstone magazine. Berkeley's Radical An Interview with Phillip E. Johnson at the Wayback Machine (archived June 9, 2007).
8. ^ Stephen C. Meyer: "I think the designer is God ..." (Darwin, the marketing of Intelligent Design. Nightline, ABC News, with Ted Koppel, August 10, 2005); Nancy Pearcey: "By contrast, design theory demonstrates that Christians can sit in the supernaturalist's "chair" even in their professional lives, seeing the cosmos through the lens of a comprehensive biblical worldview. Intelligent Design steps boldly into the scientific arena to build a case based on empirical data. It takes Christianity out of the ineffectual realm of value and stakes out a cognitive claim in the realm of objective truth. It restores Christianity to its status as genuine knowledge, equipping us to defend it in the public arena". (Total Truth, Crossway Books, June 29, 2004, ISBN 1-58134-458-9, pp. 204–205)
9. ^ For example, Bridgham et al. showed that gradual evolutionary mechanisms can produce complex protein-protein interaction systems from simpler precursors. Bridgham et al.. Evolution of Hormone-Receptor Complexity by Molecular Exploitation. Science. 2006;312(5770):97–101. doi:10.1126/science.1123348. PMID 16601189.
10. ^ Devolution. The New Yorker. May 30, 2005. This article draws from the following exchange of letters in which Behe admits to sloppy prose and non-logical proof: Discovery Institute. Has Darwin met his match? Letters—An exchange over ID; March 26, 2003 [cited 2006-11-30].
11. ^ Some of Dembski's responses to assertions of specified complexity being a tautology can be found at William A. Dembski. "Another way to detect design". ARN. http://www.arn.org/docs/dembski/wd_anotherwaytodetectdesign.htm.
12. ^ Dembski. Discovery Institute. Questions About Intelligent Design. "The theory of Intelligent Design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."
13. ^ IDEA "One need not fully understand the origin or identity of the designer to determine that an object was designed. Thus, this question is essentially irrelevant to intelligent design theory, which merely seeks to detect if an object was designed ... Intelligent design theory cannot address the identity or origin of the designer—it is a philosophical / religious question that lies outside the domain of scientific inquiry. Christianity postulates the religious answer to this question that the designer is God who by definition is eternally existent and has no origin. There is no logical philosophical impossibility with this being the case (akin to Aristotle's 'unmoved mover') as a religious answer to the origin of the designer..." FAQ: Who designed the designer? FAQ: Who designed the designer?
14. ^ a b American Association for the Advancement of Science. Professional Ethics Report [PDF]; 2001. "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory."
15. ^ Robert T. Pennock. Wizards of ID: Reply to Dembski. In: Robert T. Pennock. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press; 2001. ISBN 0-262-66124-1. "Dembski chides me for never using the term "intelligent design" without conjoining it to "creationism". He implies (though never explicitly asserts) that he and others in his movement are not creationists and that it is incorrect to discuss them in such terms, suggesting that doing so is merely a rhetorical ploy to "rally the troops". (2) Am I (and the many others who see Dembski's movement in the same way) misrepresenting their position? The basic notion of creationism is the rejection of biological evolution in favor of special creation, where the latter is understood to be supernatural. Beyond this there is considerable variability..." p. 645–667.; Pennock, Robert T.. Tower of Babel: Evidence Against the New Creationism. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press; 1999.
16. ^ a b c "The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a 'wedge' that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points. The very beginning of this strategy, the 'thin edge of the wedge,' was Phillip Johnson's critique of Darwinism begun in 1991 in Darwinism on Trial, and continued in Reason in the Balance and Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds. Michael Behe's highly successful Darwin's Black Box followed Johnson's work. We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions". Wedge Document Discovery Institute, 1999. (PDF file)
17. ^ a b c "I have built an intellectual movement in the universities and churches that we call The Wedge, which is devoted to scholarship and writing that furthers this program of questioning the materialistic basis of science. [...] Now the way that I see the logic of our movement going is like this. The first thing you understand is that the Darwinian theory isn't true. It's falsified by all of the evidence and the logic is terrible. When you realize that, the next question that occurs to you is, well, where might you get the truth? [...] I start with John 1:1. In the beginning was the word. In the beginning was intelligence, purpose, and wisdom. The Bible had that right. And the materialist scientists are deluding themselves." Johnson 1999. Reclaiming America for Christ Conference. How the Evolution Debate Can Be Won
18. ^ a b "...intelligent design does not address metaphysical and religious questions such as the nature or identity of the designer," and "...the nature, moral character and purposes of this intelligence lie beyond the competence of science and must be left to religion and philosophy". In: Discovery Institute. Truth Sheet # 09-05 Does intelligent design postulate a "supernatural creator? [cited 2007-07-19].
19. ^ Phillip Johnson. 'Keeping the Darwinists Honest' an interview with Phillip Johnson. 1999. "Intelligent Design is an intellectual movement, and the Wedge strategy stops working when we are seen as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message. [...] The evangelists do what they do very well, and I hope our work opens up for them some doors that have been closed".
20. ^ a b Phillip Johnson. Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity. 1999. "...the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion.... This is not to say that the biblical issues are unimportant; the point is rather that the time to address them will be after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact". The Wedge
21. ^ Barbara Forrest. Expert Testimony. Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial transcript, Day 6 (October 5) "What I am talking about is the essence of intelligent design, and the essence of it is theistic realism as defined by Professor Johnson. Now that stands on its own quite apart from what their motives are. I'm also talking about the definition of intelligent design by Dr. Dembski as the Logos theology of John's Gospel. That stands on its own. [...] Intelligent design, as it is understood by the proponents that we are discussing today, does involve a supernatural creator, and that is my objection. And I am objecting to it as they have defined it, as Professor Johnson has defined intelligent design, and as Dr. Dembski has defined intelligent design. And both of those are basically religious. They involve the supernatural".
22. ^ According to the poll, 18% of the physicians believed that God created humans exactly as they appear today. Another 42% believed that God initiated and guided an evolutionary process that has led to current human beings. The poll also found that "an overwhelming majority of Jewish doctors (83%) and half of Catholic doctors (51%) believe that intelligent design is simply "a religiously inspired pseudo-science rather than a legitimate scientific speculation". The poll also found that "more than half of Protestant doctors (63%) believe that intelligent design is a "legitimate scientific speculation".
"Majority of Physicians Give the Nod to Evolution Over Intelligent Design". Press release. http://www.hcdi.net/News/PressRelease.cfm?ID=93. Retrieved 2007-10-08.
23. ^ Phillip E. Johnson. Access Research Network. Starting a Conversation about Evolution: Johnson, Phillip; August 31, 1996 [cited 2008-10-18]. "My colleagues and I speak of 'theistic realism'—or sometimes, 'mere creation'—as the defining concept of our [the ID] movement. This means that we affirm that God is objectively real as Creator, and that the reality of God is tangibly recorded in evidence accessible to science, particularly in biology."
24. ^ a b Enlisting Science to Find the Fingerprints of a Creator; March 25, 2001 [cited 2007-07-22]. "[Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: We are taking an intuition most people have and making it a scientific and academic enterprise.... We are removing the most important cultural roadblock to accepting the role of God as creator."
25. ^ The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. Let's Be Intelligent About Darwin; January 10, 2003 [archived 2007-06-08; cited 2007-07-23]. "[Phillip E. Johnson quoted]: Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools."
26. ^ Scientific Method in Practice. Cambridge UP; 2003. ISBN 0-521-01708-4. Chapters 5–8. Discusses principles of induction, deduction and probability related to the expectation of consistency, testability, and multiple observations. Chapter 8 discusses parsimony (Occam's razor)
27. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , 4: whether ID is science. The ruling discusses central aspects of expectations in the scientific community that a scientific theory be testable, dynamic, correctible, progressive, based upon multiple observations, and provisional,
28. ^ Intelligent design fails to pass Occam's razor. Adding entities (an intelligent agent, a designer) to the equation is not strictly necessary to explain events. See, e.g., Branden Fitelson, et al.. How Not to Detect Design–Critical Notice: William A. Dembski The Design Inference. In: Robert T. Pennock. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives. MIT Press; 2001. p. 597–616.
29. ^ See, e.g., Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University. Thoughts on Evolution and Intelligent Design; 2005. "Q: Why couldn't intelligent design also be a scientific theory? A: The idea of intelligent design might or might not be true, but when presented as a scientific hypothesis, it is not useful because it is based on weak assumptions, lacks supporting data and terminates further thought."
30. ^ The designer is not falsifiable, since its existence is typically asserted without sufficient conditions to allow a falsifying observation. The designer being beyond the realm of the observable, claims about its existence can be neither supported nor undermined by observation, making intelligent design and the argument from design analytic a posteriori arguments. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Ruling, p. 22 and p. 77.
31. ^ That intelligent design is not empirically testable stems from the fact that it violates a basic premise of science, naturalism. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). Ruling, p. 22 and p. 66.
32. ^ Intelligent design professes to offer an answer that does not need to be defined or explained, the intelligent agent, designer. By asserting a conclusion that cannot be accounted for scientifically, the designer, intelligent design cannot be sustained by any further explanation, and objections raised to those who accept intelligent design make little headway. Thus intelligent design is not a provisional assessment of data, which can change when new information is discovered. Once it is claimed that a conclusion that need not be accounted for has been established, there is simply no possibility of future correction. The idea of the progressive growth of scientific ideas is required to explain previous data and any previously unexplainable data. See, e.g., the brief explanation in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). p. 66.
33. ^ "Nobel Laureates Initiative" (PDF). The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity. September 9, 2005. http://media.ljworld.com/pdf/2005/09/15/nobel_letter.pdf. Retrieved 2007-07-19. The September 2005 statement by 38 Nobel laureates stated that: "Intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent".
34. ^ Intelligent Design is not Science: Scientists and teachers speak out. 2005 October [cited 2009-01-09]. University of New South Wales. The October 2005 statement, by a coalition representing more than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers said: "intelligent design is not science" and called on "all schools not to teach Intelligent Design (ID) as science, because it fails to qualify on every count as a scientific theory".
35. ^ National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators National Science Teachers Association (August 3, 2005). "National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush". Press release. http://www.nsta.org/about/pressroom.aspx?id=50794. "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science....It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom."
36. ^ Evolution critics seek role for unseen hand in education. Nature. 2002;416(6878):250. doi:10.1038/416250a. PMID 11907537. "But many scientists regard 'intelligent design' as pseudoscience, and say that it is being used as a Trojan Horse to introduce the teaching of creationism into schools"
37. ^ Attie, A. D.. Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2006;116(5):1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. PMID 16670753. PMC 1451210.
* H. Allen Orr. Devolution—Why intelligent design isn't; 2005 May. "Biologists aren't alarmed by intelligent design's arrival in Dover and elsewhere because they have all sworn allegiance to atheistic materialism; they're alarmed because intelligent design is junk science."
* Robert T. Pennock Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism.
* Mark Bergin. Junk science; February 25, 2006.
38. ^ The Sternberg peer review controversy and several similar academic disputes are the subject of the 2008 documentary "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed".
39. ^ Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution [PDF]. Washington University Law Quarterly. 2005 [cited 2007-07-18];83(1). "ID leaders know the benefits of submitting their work to independent review and have established at least two purportedly "peer-reviewed" journals for ID articles. However, one has languished for want of material and quietly ceased publication, while the other has a more overtly philosophical orientation. Both journals employ a weak standard of "peer review" that amounts to no more than vetting by the editorial board or society fellows."
40. ^ TalkOrigins Archive. Index to Creationist Claims; 2006. "With some of the claims for peer review, notably Campbell and Meyer (2003) and the e-journal PCID, the reviewers are themselves ardent supporters of intelligent design. The purpose of peer review is to expose errors, weaknesses, and significant omissions in fact and argument. That purpose is not served if the reviewers are uncritical"
41. ^ "For human artifacts, we know the designer's identity, human, and the mechanism of design, as we have experience based upon empirical evidence that humans can make such things, as well as many other attributes including the designer's abilities, needs, and desires. With ID, proponents assert that they refuse to propose hypotheses on the designer's identity, do not propose a mechanism, and the designer, he/she/it/they, has never been seen. In that vein, defense expert Professor Minnich agreed that in the case of human artifacts and objects, we know the identity and capacities of the human designer, but we do not know any of those attributes for the designer of biological life. In addition, Professor Behe agreed that for the design of human artifacts, we know the designer and its attributes and we have a baseline for human design that does not exist for design of biological systems. Professor Behe's only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies".—Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , p. 81
42. ^ Illustra Media. WIRED Magazine response [cited 2007-07-13]. "It's also important that you read a well developed rebuttal to Wired's misleading accusations. Links to both the article and a response by the Discovery Institute (our partners in the production of Unlocking the Mystery of Life and The Privileged Planet)"

References

1. ^ a b Discovery Institute. Top Questions-1.What is the theory of intelligent design? [cited 2007-05-13].
2. ^ Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell [PDF]; 2004 [cited 2007-05-13].
3. ^ Neocreationism Henry M. Morris, Institute for Creation Research
4. ^ The Creationists, Expanded Edition. Harvard University Press; 2006. ISBN 0-674-02339-0. p. 373, 379–380.
5. ^ "Science and Policy: Intelligent Design and Peer Review". American Association for the Advancement of Science. 2007. http://www.aaas.org/spp/dser/03_Areas/evolution/issues/peerreview.shtml. Retrieved 2007-07-19.
6. ^ Stephen C. Meyer and Paul A. Nelson (May 1, 1996). "CSC – Getting Rid of the Unfair Rules, A book review, Origins & Design"]. http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1685. Retrieved 2007-05-20.
* Phillip E. Johnson (August 31, 1996). "Starting a Conversation about Evolution". Phillip Johnson Files. Access Research Network. http://www.arn.org/docs/johnson/ratzsch.htm. Retrieved 2007-05-20.
* Stephen C. Meyer (December 1, 2002). "The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories". Ignatius Press. http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1780.
* Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Whether ID Is Science
* Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also include astrology.
* See also "Evolution of Kansas science standards continues as Darwin's theories regain prominence". International Herald Tribune. February 13, 2007. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/02/13/america/NA-GEN-US-Kansas-Evolution-History.php. Retrieved 2007-05-20.
7. ^ Nature Methods Editorial. An intelligently designed response. Nat. Methods. 2007;4(12):983. doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983.
8. ^ Mark Greener. Taking on creationism. Which arguments and evidence counter pseudoscience?. EMBO Reports. 2007;8(12):1107–1109. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7401131. PMID 18059309.
9. ^ John H. McDonald's "reducibly complex mousetrap"
10. ^ David Ussery, "A Biochemist's Response to 'The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution'"
11. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , p. 64.
12. ^ Rich Baldwin. Information Theory and Creationism; 2005.
13. ^ Mark Perakh. Dembski 'displaces Darwinism' mathematically -- or does he?; 2005.
14. ^ Jason Rosenhouse. How Anti-Evolutionists Abuse Mathematics [PDF]. The Mathematical Intelligencer. Fall 2001;23(4):3–8.
15. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Context pg. 32 ff, citing Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987). Text
16. ^ a b c d Washington, D.C.: Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy. Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. [PDF]; 2007 May [cited 2007-08-06].
17. ^ a b Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , pp. 31–33.
18. ^ Discovery Institute. Media Backgrounder: Intelligent Design Article Sparks Controversy; September 7, 2004.
19. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Conclusion of Ruling.
20. ^ R.T., Pennock, (2000). Tower of Babel: the evidence against the new creationism. City: MIT Press. pp. 60, 68–70, 242–245. ISBN 0-262-66165-9.
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , Ruling pp. 24–25.
21. ^ a b Padian, K.; Matzke, N. (2009). "Darwin, Dover, ‘Intelligent Design’ and textbooks". Biochemical Journal 417 (1): 29. doi:10.1042/bj20081534. PMID 19061485. edit .pdf
22. ^ a b c Eugenie C. Scott. Biological design in science classrooms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. May 15, 2007 [cited 2009-06-02];104(Suppl 1):8669–8676. doi:10.1073/pnas.0701505104. PMID 17494747. PMC 1876445.
23. ^ Forrest, Barbara. Know Your Creationists: Know Your Allies
24. ^ a b Stephen C. Meyer. Access Research Network. We Are Not Alone; 1986 March [cited 2007-10-10].
25. ^ Charles B. Thaxton, Ph.D.. Christian Leadership Ministries. DNA, Design and the Origin of Life; November 13–16, 1986 [cited 2007-10-10].
26. ^ a b Charles B. Thaxton. In Pursuit of Intelligent Causes: Some Historical Background; June 23–26, 1988, revised July 1988 and May 1991 [cited 2007-10-06].
27. ^ a b c Dembski: "Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory," Touchstone Magazine. Volume 12, Issue 4: July–August, 1999
28. ^ a b Leon Lynn. Rethinking Schools Online; Winter 1997/98 [cited 2009-02-08].
29. ^ Nick Matzke. The Panda's Thumb. The true origin of "intelligent design"; August 14, 2007 [cited 2010-01-21].
Journals: Scientific American (1846–1869) [cited 2010-01-21].
30. ^ Dove, Patrick Edward, The theory of human progression, and natural probability of a reign of justice. London, Johnstone & Hunter, 1850. LC 08031381 "Intelligence-Intelligent Design".
31. ^ Charles Darwin. Letter 3154—Darwin, C. R. to Herschel, J. F. W., 23 May 1861; May 23, 1861.
32. ^ The British Association. The Times. September 20, 1873:10; col A..
33. ^ William P. Alston. In: Paul Edwards. Encyclopedia of Philosophy. New York City, London: Macmillan Publishing Company, The Free Press, Collier Macmillan Publishers; 1967. ISBN 0-02-894990-0.
34. ^ Robert Nozick. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. USA: Basic Books; 1974. ISBN 0-465-09720-0. p. 19.
35. ^ James E. Horigan. Chance or Design?. Philosophical Library; 1979.
36. ^ Nicholas Timmins. Evolution according to Hoyle: Survivors of disaster in an earlier world. January 13, 1982:22. "F. Hoyle stated in a 1982 speech: '...one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure or order must be the outcome of intelligent design.'"
37. ^ a b Nick Matzke. National Center for Science Education. NCSE Resource -- 9.0. Matzke (2006): The Story of the Pandas Drafts; 2006 [cited 2009-11-18]. *Nick Matzke. National Center for Science Education. Missing Link discovered!; 2006 [archived 2007-01-14; cited 2009-11-18].
38. ^ Jonathan Witt. Discovery Institute. Evolution News & Views: Dover Judge Regurgitates Mythological History of Intelligent Design; December 20, 2005 [cited 2007-10-05].
39. ^ DarkSyde. Daily Kos: Know Your Creationists: Know Your Allies; March 11, 2006 [cited 2007-10-05].
40. ^ William Safire. On Language: Neo-Creo. The New York Times. August 21, 2005 [cited 2009-12-20].
41. ^ a b c Nick Matzke. National Center for Science Education. NCSE Resource; 2004 [cited 2007-09-24].
42. ^ Richard P. Aulie. National Association of Biology Teachers. A Reader's Guide to Of Pandas and People; 1998 [cited 2007-10-05].
43. ^ Nick Matzke; Jon Buell (October 13, 2005). "I guess ID really was "Creationism's Trojan Horse" after all". The Panda's Thumb. http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/10/i_guess_id_real.html. Retrieved 2009-06-02.
44. ^ William A. Dembski. Expert Witness Report: The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design [PDF]. March 29, 2005 [cited 2009-06-02].
45. ^ Behe, Michael (1997): Molecular Machines: Experimental Support for the Design Inference [1]
46. ^ Irreducible complexity of these examples is disputed; see Kitzmiller, pp. 76–78, and Ken Miller Webcast
47. ^ The Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity" Kenneth R. Miller Brown University [2]
48. ^ John H. McDonald's "reducibly complex mousetrap"
49. ^ David Ussery, "A Biochemist's Response to 'The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution'"
50. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , p. 64.
51. ^ Dembski. Intelligent Design, p. 47
52. ^ William Dembski, Photo by Wesley R. Elsberry, taken at lecture given at University of California at Berkeley, 2006/03/17.
53. ^ Branden Fitelson, Christopher Stephens, Elliott Sober. How Not to Detect Design: A review of William A. Dembski's The Design Inference—Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities [PDF]. Cambridge University Press; 1998.
54. ^ a b Richard Wein. Not a Free Lunch But a Box of Chocolates: A critique of William Dembski's book No Free Lunch; 2002.
55. ^ Rich Baldwin. Information Theory and Creationism; 2005.
56. ^ Mark Perakh. Dembski 'displaces Darwinism' mathematically – or does he?; 2005.
57. ^ Jason Rosenhouse. How Anti-Evolutionists Abuse Mathematics [PDF]. The Mathematical Intelligencer. Fall 2001;23(4):3–8.
58. ^ John S. Wilkins, Wesley R. Elsberry. The Advantages of Theft over Toil: The Design Inference and Arguing from Ignorance. Biology and Philosophy. 2001;16:711–724.
59. ^ Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 2006. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
60. ^ Evolutionary algorithms now surpass human designers. New Scientist. July 28, 2007.
61. ^ Guillermo Gonzalez. The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing; 2004. ISBN 0-89526-065-4.
62. ^ The Panda's Thumb. review of The Privileged Planet
63. ^ Is The Universe Fine-Tuned For Us? Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. (PDF file)
64. ^ Victor J. Stenger. University of Colorado. The Anthropic Principle [PDF].
65. ^ Joseph Silk. Our place in the Multiverse. Nature. September 14, 2006;443(7108):145–146. doi:10.1038/443145a.
66. ^ See, e.g., Gerald Feinberg and Robert Shapiro. A Puddlian Fable. In: Huchingson. Religion and the Natural Sciences. 1993. p. 220–221.
67. ^ Evolution's Thermodynamic Failure. The American Spectator. December 28, 2005 [cited 2007-02-16]. (Also available from the Discovery Institute)
68. ^ TalkOrigins Archive. Entropy, Disorder and Life [cited 2007-07-17].
69. ^ R.T., Pennock, (2000). Tower of Babel: the evidence against the new creationism. City: MIT Press. pp. 229–229, 233–242. ISBN 0-262-66165-9.
70. ^ LeaderU. The Act of Creation: Bridging Transcendence and Immanence.
71. ^ a b The Case Against Intelligent Design [PDF]. The New Republic. August 22–29, 2005 [archived 2006-06-18];233(8/9):21–33.
72. ^ Donald E. Simanek. Intelligent Design: The Glass is Empty.
73. ^ Jason Rosenhouse. Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. Who Designed the Designer?.
74. ^ Richard Dawkins. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design. p. 141.
75. ^ See, e.g., Joseph Manson. Intelligent design is pseudoscience; September 27, 2005.; Rev Max (July–August 2006). "The Incredibly Strange Story of Intelligent Design". New Dawn Magazine (97).
76. ^ Haldane, J. B. S. (1957). "The Cost of Natural Selection". Journal of Genetics (55). http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/classictexts/haldane2.pdf.
77. ^ ReMine, Walter (1993). The Biotic Message. Saint Paul Science. ISBN 0-9637999-0-8. http://saintpaulscience.com/contents.htm.
78. ^ "CB121: Haldane's Dilemma". TalkOrigins Archive. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB121.html. Retrieved 2008-11-03.
79. ^ Robert Williams. "Haldane's Dilemma". http://www.gate.net/~rwms/haldane1.html. Retrieved 2008-11-03.
80. ^ Ian Musgrave. "The Talk.Origins Archive Post of the Month: September 1999". http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/sep99.html. Retrieved 2008-11-03.
81. ^ NCSE Resource; August 29, 2002 [cited 2007-10-07].
82. ^ a b David Mu. Trojan Horse or Legitimate Science: Deconstructing the Debate over Intelligent Design [PDF]. Harvard Science Review. Fall 2005;19(1). "For most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience"."
83. ^ Conclusion of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Ruling
84. ^ Wise, D.U., 2001, Creationism's Propaganda Assault on Deep Time and Evolution, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, n. 1, p. 30–35.
85. ^ Marcus R. Ross. Who Believes What? Clearing up Confusion over Intelligent Design and Young-Earth Creationism [PDF]. Journal of Geoscience Education. May, 2005;53(3):319–323.
86. ^ Ronald L. Numbers. The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, Expanded Edition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; November 30, 2006. ISBN 0-674-02339-0.
87. ^ Forrest, B.C. and Gross, P.R.. Evolution and the Wedge of Intelligent Design: The Trojan Horse Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003. ISBN 0-19-515742-7.
88. ^ Eugenie Scott. The Creation/Evolution Continuum. NCSE Reports. 1999;19(4):16–17, 23–25.; Scott, Eugenie C.. Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press; 2004. ISBN 0-520-24650-0.
89. ^ Discovery Institute fellows and staff. "Center for Science and Culture fellows and staff". http://www.discovery.org/csc/fellows.php.
90. ^ Barbara Forrest. The Wedge at Work: Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics; 2001.
91. ^ a b William Dembski, 1998. The Design Inference.
92. ^ Dembski, 1999. Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology, p. 210.
93. ^ William Dembski. Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris; 2005.
94. ^ Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy. Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper [PDF]; 2007 May.
95. ^ H. Ross. Pasadena, California: Reasons to Believe. More than intelligent design; 2002 [cited April 25, 2007].
96. ^ Henry M. Morris. Santee, California: Institute for Creation Research. Design is not enough!; 1999 [cited April 25, 2007].
97. ^ Carl Wieland. Answers in Genesis. AiG's views on the Intelligent Design movement; 2002 [cited April 25, 2007].
98. ^ Harris Interactive. Nearly Two-thirds of U.S. Adults Believe Human Beings Were Created by God; July 6, 2005 [cited 2007-07-13].
99. ^ New Mexicans for Science and Reason. Sandia National Laboratories says that the Intelligent Design Network (IDNet-NM/Zogby) "Lab Poll" is BOGUS! [cited 2007-07-13].
100. ^ Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. [www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/polling/ Polling for ID]; September 11, 2003 [archived 2008-03-27; cited 2007-02-16].
101. ^ David Harris. Salon.com. [blogs.salon.com/0001092/2003/07/30.html 'Intelligent Design'-ers launch new assault on curriculum using lies and deception] [archived 2003-08-16; cited 2007-07-13].
102. ^ Gallup, "Evolution, creationism, intelligent design,". Retrieved 24 August 2010.
103. ^ Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed (2008).
104. ^ New Anti-Evolution Film Stirs Controversy.
105. ^ Shaw, Linda. Does Seattle group "teach controversy" or contribute to it?. Seattle Times. March 31, 2005.
106. ^ National Association of Biology Teachers. NABT's Statement on Teaching Evolution [archived 2006-09-27].
107. ^ The Interacademy Panel on International Issues. IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution [PDF]; June 21, 2006 [cited 2008-10-17]. Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society.
108. ^ From the world's largest general scientific society:
109. ^ Intelligent design a Trojan horse, says creationist. Sydney Morning Herald. November 27, 2005 [cited 2007-07-29].
110. ^ Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. Intelligent Design: Creationism's Trojan Horse; 2005 February [cited 2007-07-29].[dead link]
111. ^ a b The Evolution Wars. Time. August 7, 2005 [cited 2007-07-23].
112. ^
113. ^ a b DeWolf, David K. Intelligent Design Will Survive Kitzmiller v. Dover [PDF]. University of Montana Law Review. May 4, 2007;68(1).
114. ^
115. ^ Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection. Philo. 2000 [cited 2007-07-27];3(2):7–29.
116. ^ Reason in the Balance: The Case Against Naturalism in Science, Law and Education. InterVarsity Press; 1995. ISBN 0-8308-1929-0.[Johnson positions himself as a "theistic realist" against "methodological naturalism".]
117. ^ See, for instance: University of Texas, Austin. Methodological Naturalism and the Supernatural; 1997 February [archived 2008-01-14; cited 2007-07-27].
118. ^ Witnesses For The Prosecution [Reprint by Leadership U.]. World (magazine). November 30, 1996 [cited 2007-07-23];11(28):18.
119. ^ The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, Dallas Christian Leadership, and the C. S. Lewis Fellowship. Darwinism: Science or Philosophy [PDF]; 1992 March [cited 2007-07-23].
120. ^ Intelligent design's long march to nowhere. Templeton Foundation, Science & Theology News; December 5, 2005 [cited 2007-07-23].
121. ^ What is wrong with intelligent design? [PDF]. Quarterly Review of Biology. 2007 [cited 2007-07-23];82(1):3–6. doi:10.1086/511656.
122. ^ Science Daily. What Is Wrong With Intelligent Design?; February 23, 2007 [cited 2007-07-23].
123. ^ Franklin & Marshall College. Natural Providence (or Design Trouble) [PDF]; Forthcoming [cited 2007-07-23].
124. ^ Creighton University. What is the position of the NRCSE on the teaching of intelligent design [ID] as an alternative to neo-Darwinian evolution in Nebraska schools? [cited 2007-07-23].
125. ^ Bring You To. Catechetical Lecture at St. Stephan's Cathedral, Vienna [Reprint]; October 2, 2005 [cited 2007-07-22]. "Purpose and design in the natural world, [has] no difficulty [...] with the theory of evolution [within] the borders of scientific theory."
126. ^ National Center for Science Education. The Creation/Evolution Continuum; December 7, 2000 [cited 2009-11-18].
127. ^ National Council of Churches. Science, Religion, and the Teaching of Evolution in Public School Science Classes [PDF]; 2006 March [cited 2007-07-17].
128. ^ Creighton University. Intelligent Design as a Theological Problem [Reprint]; 2002 [cited 2007-07-21].
129. ^ Matt Young, Taner Edis (2006–2003). Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. Rutgers, The State University. ISBN 978-0-8135-3872-3. http://books.google.com/?id=hYLKdtlVeQgC&pg=PR7&dq=archbishop+of+Vienna+intelligent+design#v=onepage&q=archbishop%20of%20Vienna%20intelligent%20design&f=false. Retrieved 2010-12-02. "An influential Roman Catholic cardinal, Cristoph Schonborn, the archbishop of Vienna, appeared to retreat from John Paul II's support for evolution and wrote in The New York Times that descent with modification is a fact, but evolution in the sense of "an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection" is false. Many of Schonborn's complaints about Darwinian evolution echoed pronouncements originiating from the Discovery Institute, the right-wing American think tank that plays a central role in the ID movement (and whose public relations firm submitted Schonborn's article to the Times)."
130. ^ Ronald L. Numbers (2006). The creationists: from scientific creationism to intelligent design. Random House. ISBN 978-0-674-02339-0. http://books.google.com/?id=GQ3TI5njXfIC&pg=PA395&dq=archbishop+of+Vienna+intelligent+design#v=onepage&q=archbishop%20of%20Vienna%20intelligent%20design&f=false. Retrieved 2010-12-02. "Miffed by Krauss's comments, officers at the Discovery Institute arranged for the cardinal archbishop of Vienna, Cristoph Sconborn (b. 1945), to write an op-ed piece for the Times dismissing the late pope's statement as "rather vague and unimportant" and denying the truth of "evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense-an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection." The cardinal, it seems, had received the backing of the new pope, Benedict XVI, the former Joseph Ratzinger (b. 1927), who in the mid-1980s, while serving as prefect of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, successor to the notorious Inquisition, had written a defense of the doctrine of creation agasint Catholics who stressed the sufficiency of "selection and mutation." Humans, he insisted, are "not the products of chance and error," and "the universe is not the product of darkness and unreason. It comes from intelligence, freedom, and from the beauty that is identical with love." Recent discoveries in microbiology and biochemistry, he was happy to say, had revealed "reasonable design.""
131. ^ Parliamentary Assembly, Working Papers: 2007 Ordinary Session. Council of Europe Publishing. 2008-04-25. ISBN 978-92-871-6368-4. http://books.google.com/?id=imUrkSP_5sUC&pg=PA66&dq=archbishop+of+Vienna+intelligent+design#v=onepage&q=archbishop%20of%20Vienna%20intelligent%20design&f=false. Retrieved 2010-12-02. "Christoph Schonborn, the Archbishop of Vienna, published an article in The New York Times stating that the declarations made by Pope John Paul II could not be interpreted as recognising evolution. At the same time, he repeated arguments put forward by the supporters of the intelligent design ideas."
132. ^ Answers in Genesis. Intelligent design: is it intelligent; is it Christian?; February 4, 2006 [cited 2007-07-21].
133. ^ Reasons to Believe. More Than Intelligent Design [cited 2007-07-21].
134. ^ Harun Yahya International (2007). "The "Intelligent Design" Distraction". Press release. http://www.harunyahya.com/new_releases/news/intelligent_design.php. Retrieved 2007-07-20.
135. ^ Answers in Genesis. AiG's views on the Intelligent Design Movement; August 30, 2002 [cited 2007-07-20].
136. ^ a b Natan Slifkin (2006). The Challenge of Creation (New York: Yashar Books) 288 ff.
137. ^ Miller, Kenneth. Debating Design. Cambridge University Press; 2004. The Flagellum Unspun. p. 95.
138. ^ Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute. The Scientific Status of Intelligent Design: The Methodological Equivalence of Naturalistic and Non-Naturalistic Origins Theories; December 1, 2002 [cited 2007-07-19].
139. ^ University of California at San Diego. Demarcating science vis-à-vis pseudoscience [PDF]; January 11, 2007 [archived 2007-07-24; cited 2007-07-19].
140. ^ Research Methods in Psychology. 8th ed. Wadsworth Publishing; 2005. ISBN 0-534-60976-7. Chapter 2. Discusses the scientific method, including the principles of falsifiability, testability, progressive development of theory, dynamic self-correcting of hypotheses, and parsimony, or "Occam's razor".
141. ^ See, e.g., Mark Perakh. Talk.reason. The Dream World of William Dembski's Creationism; 2005; p. 54–65.
142. ^ PZ Myers, Pharyngula.org. Creationism and the Daubert test?; May 21, 2005.
143. ^ Nagel, Thomas. "Public Education and Intelligent Design", Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 36, no. 2, 2008, pp. 196–197.
144. ^ National Academy of Sciences. Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences; 1999.
145. ^ Junk Science. Macmillan; 2006. ISBN 978-0-312-35241-7. p. 210 ff.
146. ^ a b c Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , 4. Whether ID is Science, p. 87
147. ^ Free Speech on Evolution Campaign Main Page Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture.
148. ^ John Hawks Weblog. The President and the teaching of evolution; 2005 August [cited 2007-07-19].
149. ^ Skeptic: eSkeptic: Thursday, April 17, 2008
150. ^ Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker. The New York Times. December 4, 2005 [cited 2007-07-19].
151. ^ Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington at the Wayback Machine (archived September 26, 2007).
152. ^ Meyer, S.C.. The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. 2004 [cited 2007-05-10];117(2):213–239.
153. ^ Design Inference Website. Is Intelligent Design a Form of Natural Theology?; 2001 [cited 2007-07-19].
154. ^ Darwinism Under Attack; December 21, 2001 [cited 2008-12-10].
155. ^ Ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District 4: whether ID is science
156. ^ Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues. Protein Science. October 2004 [cited 16 March 2009];13(10):2651–2664. doi:10.1110/ps.04802904. PMID 15340163. PMC 2286568.
157. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). 4: whether ID is science
158. ^ Simple evolutionary pathways to complex proteins. Protein Science. September 2005 [cited 16 March 2009];14(9):2217–2225. doi:10.1110/ps.041171805. PMID 16131652.
159. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, October 19, 2005, AM session Kitzmiller Testimony, Behe
160. ^ Discovery Institute. Peer-Reviewed, Peer-Edited, and other Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated); 2007 July [cited 2007-07-17].
161. ^ Detecting Design in the Natural Sciences; 2002 April [cited 2007-07-18].
162. ^ Space.com. SETI and Intelligent Design; 2005 December [cited 2007-07-18]. "In fact, the signals actually sought by today's SETI searches are not complex, as the ID advocates assume. [...] If SETI were to announce that we're not alone because it had detected a signal, it would be on the basis of artificiality"
163. ^ Darwin in Mind: Intelligent Design Meets Artificial Intelligence; 2001 March/April [archived 2001-10-18; cited 2007-07-17].
164. ^ Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell; 2007 [cited 2007-07-14].
165. ^ a b National Center for Science Education. "Intelligent Design" Not Accepted by Most Scientists; 2002 September [cited 2009-11-18].
166. ^ a b c Monton, Bradley (2009). Seeking God in Science. Broadview Press. p. 114. ISBN 978-1-55111-863-5.
167. ^ a b Del Ratzsch (2005) "Teleological Arguments for God's Existence", Section 4.3, The "Intelligent Design" (ID) Movement, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
168. ^ See, for instance: Man Come Of Age: Bonhoeffer's Response To The God-Of-The-Gaps. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 1971;14:203–220.
169. ^ Colin A. Ronan. The Cambridge Illustrated History of the World's Science. p. 61.
170. ^ Colin A. Ronan. The Cambridge Illustrated History of the World's Science. p. 123.
171. ^ Intelligent Design on Trial: Kitzmiller v. Dover. National Center for Science Education. October 17, 2008
172. ^ Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.', (United States District Court for the middle district of Pennsylvania 2005). Text
173. ^ Judge Rules Against 'Intelligent Design'. The Washington Post. December 21, 2005 [archived 2007-09-28; cited 2007-09-03].
174. ^ Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005). , pp. 137–138.
175. ^ Discovery Institute. Dover Intelligent Design Decision Criticized as a Futile Attempt to Censor Science Education; December 20, 2005 [cited 2007-09-03].
176. ^ Judge rules against 'intelligent design'. December 20, 2005 [cited 2008-10-17]. Associated Press. MSNBC.
177. ^ Godless: The Church of Liberalism; September 21, 2006 [cited 2007-09-03].
178. ^ National Center for Science Education. Discovery Institute tries to "swift-boat" Judge Jones; January 4, 2006 [cited 2009-11-18].
179. ^ Intelligent design policy struck down. Dallas Morning News. December 20, 2005 [cited 2007-09-03].
180. ^ Articles: Editor's Note: Intelligent Design Articles [PDF]. University of Montana Law Review. April 10, 2007 [cited 2008-10-16];68(1).
181. ^ Irons, Peter. Disaster In Dover: The Trials (And Tribulations) Of Intelligent Design [PDF]. University of Montana Law Review. April 27, 2007 [cited 2008-10-16];68(1).
182. ^ DeWolf, David K; West, John G; Luskin, Casey. Rebuttal to Irons [PDF]. University of Montana Law Review. April 27, 2007 [cited 2008-10-16];68(1).
183. ^ National Center for Science Education. American Academy of Religion on teaching creationism; July 23, 2010 [cited 2010-08-09].
184. ^ Council of Europe. The dangers of creationism in education [cited 2007-08-03].
185. ^ National Center for Science Education. NCSE Resource—Council of Europe approves resolution against creationism; October 4, 2007 [cited 2009-11-18].
186. ^ Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute. Unlocking the Mystery of Life; July 15, 2004 [cited 2007-07-13].
187. ^ Revealed: rise of creationism in UK schools. Guardian (London). November 27, 2006 [cited 2008-10-17].
188. ^ 'Design' attack on school science. September 29, 2006 [cited 2007-07-13]. BBC News.
189. ^ Parliament of the United Kingdom. Written Answers; November 1, 2006 [cited 2007-07-13].
190. ^ Parliament of the United Kingdom. Schools: Intelligent Design; December 18, 2006 [cited 2007-07-13].
191. ^ NCSE. NCSE Resource—Guidance on creationism for British teachers; September 25, 2007 [cited 2009-11-18].
192. ^ Qualifications and Curriculum Authority for England. How can we answer questions about creation and origins? [PDF]; 2006 [cited 2007-10-01].
193. ^ Prime Minister's Office. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. NoCreSciEd - epetition reply; 21 June 2007 [cited 2007-07-13].
194. ^ Lengagne, Guy. Council of Europe, Doc. 11297. The dangers of creationism in education; June 8, 2007 [cited 2008-10-17].
195. ^ Henry, Lesley-Anne. Tussle of Biblical proportions over creationism in Ulster classrooms. Belfast Telegraph. September 26, 2007 [cited 2007-10-01].
* Viewpoint: The world, according to Lisburn folk. Belfast Telegraph. September 27, 2007 [cited 2007-10-01].
196. ^ Dup Call For Schools To Teach Creation Passed By Council—Lisburn Today. Ulster Star. September 26, 2007 [cited 2008-10-17].
197. ^ Enserink, Martin. Evolution Politics: Is Holland Becoming the Kansas of Europe?. Science. June 3, 2005;308(5727):1394b. doi:10.1126/science.308.5727.1394b. PMID 15933170.
198. ^ Cabinet ministers announced (update 2). February 13, 2007 [cited 2008-05-31]. DutchNews.nl.
199. ^ De Morgen, May 23, 2005
200. ^ National Center for Science Education. Cloning Creationism in Turkey [cited 2009-11-18].
201. ^ Edis, Taner. History of Science Society. Islamic Creationism: A Short History; 2008 January [cited 2011-04-20].
202. ^ Jones, Dorian L. ISN Security Watch. Turkey's survival of the fittest; March 12, 2008 [cited 2008-03-13].
203. ^ Intelligent design not science: experts. Sydney Morning Herald. October 21, 2005 [cited 2007-07-13].

Other Topics

Mary Magdalene
Did other followers of Jesus try to ostracize her?
Why Was Jesus Crucified?
What was the real reason he was put on the cross?
The Ending of Mark
Was the original ending of this gospel accidentally lost? Was a new ending added later?
The Nazarenes
What finally happened to the original believers in the resurrection?
The Devil
Does he really exist?
The Resurrection of the Dead Saints
How can we explain this mysterious passage in the Gospel of Matthew ?
The Family of Jesus
Did other members of his family initially disapprove of his activities?
Stigmata
What causes these mysterious wounds?
The Virgin Birth
Is there a natural explanation?
Judas Iscariot
Why did he betray Jesus?
Eyewitnesses to the Resurrection
Who saw Jesus after he left the tomb?
Barabbas
Why was he released instead of Jesus?
The Second Coming
Did Christ promise to come again?
Demon Possession
Can people be possessed by evil spirits?
Theories about the Resurrection
Are there other possible explanations for the belief in the resurrection?
Teachings of Jesus
Why are some of his teachings so hard to follow?
James the Brother of Jesus
Why do the gospels say so little about this very important early church leader?
Golgotha
Jesus was crucified near Jerusalem, probably on a small hill. But can the exact location be determined?
Speaking in Tongues
Can some people speak in a divine language?
Son of Man
Why did Christ give himself this unusual title?
Atonement Theories
Why did Jesus have to suffer and die?
Who Was at the Cross?
Which followers of Jesus actually saw him die?
The Gospel of John
Why is it so different from the other gospels?
Beloved Disciple
Can he (or she) be identified?
The Real Pontius Pilate
Did the Roman governor really try to save Jesus?
The Eucharist
What is the meaning of this sacrament?
How Did Jesus Die
Jesus died much sooner than normal after he was put on the cross, but the medical cause of his death is uncertain.
Missing Gospels
Many early gospels were left out of the Bible. Some of these eventually vanished and may be lost forever. But several have been re-discovered during the last two centuries.
Where Is Hell?
Is it deep underground? Or is it in another dimension or reality?
The Last Words on the Cross
What did Jesus say before he died?
The True Cross
Does wood from the original cross have miraculous healing powers?
Other Mysteries
The Antichrist ... The Harrowing of Hell ... The Wandering Jew ... Incorruptible Bodies
Article List
Links
Website Glossary
Gospel Mysteries Blog
Gospel Mysteries eBook - Free Copy
Bible Mysteries

Note: For more information about one important secret gospel, go to this secret gospels article.

/***
|Name:|SelectThemePlugin|
|Description:|Lets you easily switch theme and palette|
|Version:|1.0.1 ($Rev: 3646 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-02-27 02:34:38 +1000 (Wed, 27 Feb 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#SelectThemePlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
!Notes
* Borrows largely from ThemeSwitcherPlugin by Martin Budden http://www.martinswiki.com/#ThemeSwitcherPlugin
* Theme is cookie based. But set a default by setting config.options.txtTheme in MptwConfigPlugin (for example)
* Palette is not cookie based. It actually overwrites your ColorPalette tiddler when you select a palette, so beware. 
!Usage
* {{{<<selectTheme>>}}} makes a dropdown selector
* {{{<<selectPalette>>}}} makes a dropdown selector
* {{{<<applyTheme>>}}} applies the current tiddler as a theme
* {{{<<applyPalette>>}}} applies the current tiddler as a palette
* {{{<<applyTheme TiddlerName>>}}} applies TiddlerName as a theme
* {{{<<applyPalette TiddlerName>>}}} applies TiddlerName as a palette
***/
//{{{

config.macros.selectTheme = {
	label: {
      		selectTheme:"select theme",
      		selectPalette:"select palette"
	},
	prompt: {
		selectTheme:"Select the current theme",
		selectPalette:"Select the current palette"
	},
	tags: {
		selectTheme:'systemTheme',
		selectPalette:'systemPalette'
	}
};

config.macros.selectTheme.handler = function(place,macroName)
{
	var btn = createTiddlyButton(place,this.label[macroName],this.prompt[macroName],this.onClick);
	// want to handle palettes and themes with same code. use mode attribute to distinguish
	btn.setAttribute('mode',macroName);
};

config.macros.selectTheme.onClick = function(ev)
{
	var e = ev ? ev : window.event;
	var popup = Popup.create(this);
	var mode = this.getAttribute('mode');
	var tiddlers = store.getTaggedTiddlers(config.macros.selectTheme.tags[mode]);
	// for default
	if (mode == "selectPalette") {
		var btn = createTiddlyButton(createTiddlyElement(popup,'li'),"(default)","default color palette",config.macros.selectTheme.onClickTheme);
		btn.setAttribute('theme',"(default)");
		btn.setAttribute('mode',mode);
	}
	for(var i=0; i<tiddlers.length; i++) {
		var t = tiddlers[i].title;
		var name = store.getTiddlerSlice(t,'Name');
		var desc = store.getTiddlerSlice(t,'Description');
		var btn = createTiddlyButton(createTiddlyElement(popup,'li'), name?name:t, desc?desc:config.macros.selectTheme.label['mode'], config.macros.selectTheme.onClickTheme);
		btn.setAttribute('theme',t);
		btn.setAttribute('mode',mode);
	}
	Popup.show();
	return stopEvent(e);
};

config.macros.selectTheme.onClickTheme = function(ev)
{
	var mode = this.getAttribute('mode');
	var theme = this.getAttribute('theme');
	if (mode == 'selectTheme')
		story.switchTheme(theme);
	else // selectPalette
		config.macros.selectTheme.updatePalette(theme);
	return false;
};

config.macros.selectTheme.updatePalette = function(title)
{
	if (title != "") {
		store.deleteTiddler("ColorPalette");
		if (title != "(default)")
			store.saveTiddler("ColorPalette","ColorPalette",store.getTiddlerText(title),
					config.options.txtUserName,undefined,"");
		refreshAll();
		if(config.options.chkAutoSave)
			saveChanges(true);
	}
};

config.macros.applyTheme = {
	label: "apply",
	prompt: "apply this theme or palette" // i'm lazy
};

config.macros.applyTheme.handler = function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
	var useTiddler = params[0] ? params[0] : tiddler.title;
	var btn = createTiddlyButton(place,this.label,this.prompt,config.macros.selectTheme.onClickTheme);
	btn.setAttribute('theme',useTiddler);
	btn.setAttribute('mode',macroName=="applyTheme"?"selectTheme":"selectPalette"); // a bit untidy here
}

config.macros.selectPalette = config.macros.selectTheme;
config.macros.applyPalette = config.macros.applyTheme;

config.macros.refreshAll = { handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
	createTiddlyButton(place,"refresh","refresh layout and styles",function() { refreshAll(); });
}};

//}}}

Delivered on November 17, 2002
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Harford County

Reflection: Navigating Creeds

The most common question asked of any faith community is "What do you believe?" Most expect a formulaic answer, one that is easily recognizable and repeatable, one that would be the answer if you asked anyone of that faith anywhere. A creed. That is not, however, the kind of answer a Unitarian Universalist can give, nor one, I might add, that a Buddhist or Hindu or Taoist can give, so we're not alone, really, in this communication gap.

One could give any number of answers, based on our seven principles. A Unitarian Universalist could reply: "God Is One," which is the phrase chiseled on the walls of Transylvania Unitarian churches that remain standing from the sixteenth century. Or one could say "There is unity within infinite diversity," as a transcendentalist might say, observing nature as the key toward understanding. Another Unitarian Universalist might say "We must all work together for a fair and free world," much like our Unitarian and Universalist forebears might have said as they helped draft the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights in this country. Or one might say, "Love your neighbor as yourself." honoring our Judeo-Christian heritage, and add, "You are the light of the world."

All these and a multitude of other beliefs abide in Unitarian Universalism. How, then, can we communicate our faith to each other? How can we even claim a faith? The answer is in our lives, for we practice a living faith and agree that a religion should be fully lived, not simply believed. This is, of course, what early Christians believed, oh so many years ago.

Some 2002 years ago, or thereabouts, a child named Jesus was born to Mary and Joseph in Palestine. From age 30 to 33, this Jewish man taught a new way of approaching the Torah, seeing the Eternal One not as a jealous vengeful God but as a Loving, Beneficent Parent God summoning us to our own divinity. He was killed because he threatened the status quo and commanded such compelling personal power that those who would otherwise rule over the masses became afraid. The followers who survived Jesus witnessed to his extraordinary ministry and carried on his message as best as they could, by word of mouth, written testimony and letters, calling themselves various names until the label "Christian" stuck.

For three hundred years theological debates could be heard in small circles at any time, in the field, in the house, in the marketplace, outside the temple. Sometimes it was dangerous to wonder aloud and other times the gathered had secured a safe place. Who was this Jesus some name the Christ? Was he the Messiah of the Jews? Is he God? Who killed him and why? What does his gospel mean? How shall we carry out his mission?

There were no set rituals, no statement of belief, no standard of meeting. Christians endeavored to live their faith through service and study of Jesus' ministry as they received it. They made their priority love of neighbor and of creation and believed this was the way to enter into the Peaceable Realm which they thought would happen in their lifetime. As politics would have it, when Christianity became more popular and compelling to the masses, the Holy Roman Emperors saw opportunities for government. Enter Constantine, who believed in ruling by absolutism. By the time he became emperor, the debates about Jesus were heated, causing much strife and confusion amongst church leaders. So the Council of Nicea was called to order staging a debate of two main points of view:

1. Jesus, though different than humans, was made by God to walk amongst us and teach by the living of his life how we could all walk the way of the Peaceable Kingdom, and
2. Jesus was not made but actually a parcel of God, begotten from the Original Essence, not made.

For those of you familiar with the Nicene creed, "Begotten not made" won out. Christianity became the accepted religion of the Holy Roman Empire and all those believing other than the Nicene creed were deemed heretics.

Now the root of the word "heretic" means "to choose." So, either you professed to the Nicene creed or you were a heretic, choosing to believe differently. And with the power of government behind this way of thinking, you could be killed, tortured, imprisoned, exiled or excommunicated for your choosing to believe differently. This marked a significant point in Christian history, because from this point forward, mainstream Christianity changed from a religion that valued first how you lived and treated one another to valuing first what you believed. Because of the mixing of church and state, it became far more important to know what to say rather than live what you believe.

Ironically, this change of emphasis weakened the Christian ministry, because people could profess a creed out of fear or expedience and yet not follow through on the precepts of the faith. Blurt out what you have to say to get into the door. Remember, Christianity was compelled to change, not because of a new prophet, but because of an Emperor trying to control his Empire. The authority that could be wielded by religious mandate was and remains powerful. Political leaders the world over, given that opportunity, could not resist it. We can witness its temptation in our government today with all the evil speak that's rolling off tongues. This is the work of trying to win and control the soul of a nation toward a certain mandate -- but that's another sermon.

This is why the crusades and the Spanish Inquisition came to be. It was discovered that Jews and Moslems and some Christians would say one thing in public and practice a different faith in private. Paranoia set in, and, depending on the stability of a province's leader, people were maimed, killed, homes burned, livelihoods destroyed because one could no longer believe what someone said and be in complete control.

As you've probably figured by now, our Unitarian and Universalist forebears were primarily Christians who were deemed heretics, ones who would argue the meanings of Jesus' life and of creeds and practices. Some found pockets of civilization where there was relative freedom of speech, others spent much of their lives fleeing one inquisition or another, and some were killed, imprisoned, exiled or excommunicated.

The excesses of power caught up to the Catholic church -- deemed the official Christian church -- and by the sixteenth century there was enough fiscal and political corruption that Martin Luther's protest of the excesses launched the Protestant Reformation, an explosion of ideas and ways to reform the Catholic church. Once that can of worms was open, scores of approaches to Christian life emerged. The push was to give religious authority back to the scriptures, not a ruler or priest, to see for oneself what the good news is. Our forebears were amongst the most liberal of reformers, including amongst other things, finding no evidence of the Trinity in the Bible. Instead they argued there is a Unity of God whose grace was available to everyone.

As you know, the word "liberal" comes from the root that means "freedom" (liberty). Liberal religious thinkers promote freedom of inquiry, the use of reason and intuition in garnering truth, and tolerance of differing beliefs, knowing that no one person or system has all the answers. Our forebears would end up in places where many cultures dwelled: the outskirts of the empire, places of international trade or places where protection of freedoms was part of the governing priority.

One such place was Transylvania; for a short period of time Unitarianism was one of the accepted religions. John Sigismund issued this edict of tolerance:

Toleration Edict
Act of Religious Tolerance and Freedom of Conscience - Transylvania - John Sigismund, 1568 "His Majesty . . . reaffirms that in every place the preachers shall preach and explain the Gospel each according to his understanding of it, and if the congregation like it, well, if not, no one shall compel them for their souls would not be satisfied, but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve. Therefore none of the superintendents or others shall abuse the preachers, no one shall be reviled for his religion by anyone, according to the previous statutes, and it is not permitted that anyone should threaten anyone else by imprisonment or by removal from his post for his teaching, for faith is the gift of God, this comes from hearing, which hearing is by the word of God." [The Epic of Unitarianism, David Parke, pp. 19-20]

Reflection: Coming Home to Covenant

It became clear to our forebears that ascribing to a creed can lead to a kind of dogmatism that stops one's religious growth and journey toward understanding. They realized that giving authority to a proscribed way of claiming belief took the authority, and often responsibility, away from the individual. There was the need, though, to create a system that would honor the seeker, a system that could be found where ever one traveled.

Unitarian Universalism merged in 1961, soon to proclaim, through a democratic process that took several years, a covenant, an agreement to abide by a list of principles and to behave in a way that fosters a certain sensibility. It is an agreement on a way of regarding one another and on how to endeavor in religious community. It is based more on trust than control, inspired by the authority of respect and honor rather than rules and punishment.

A covenant is not a definition of a relationship; it is the framework for our relating. A covenant leaves room for chance and change, it is humble toward evolution. It claims: "I will abide with you in this common endeavor, be present as best as I can in our becoming." This calls for a level of trust, courage and sacrifice that needs to be nurtured, renewed and affirmed on a regular basis.

The overall trust within this covenant is in the Truth (Capital "T"): something which no one person can fully see and something which each and every person can come to know -- in glimpses, in another's story, in epiphanies. Truth is ever changing in our seeking to understand because of our limited perspectives -- we grow into a deeper sense of the meaning of all things when we take our journeys seriously, with full heart and mind. The courage within this covenant is in the acceptance and celebration of life, with all of its challenges, pain, ironies and joys. And the sacrifice within this covenant is in the letting go of dogma, of assumptions, of control and giving over to a greater wisdom which comes to us in bits and pieces. The task of this covenant is to take responsibility for the freedom we espouse. We know that we are interconnected and that what we do creates ripple effects of hope or despair, of affirmation or negation. What we do with and for one another is powerful and beyond our imagining.

We believe that new light is ever waiting to break through individual hearts and minds, a sacred knowing within that can inspire the ways of humankind. There have been extraordinary spiritual teachers throughout the ages and in many lands who can help us find our way if we but welcome their wisdom into our lives. We honor the religious questions people have struggled with in all times and places. We trust in the Source of All Life, known in many ways and given many names. We maintain that there is mutual strength in willing cooperation and that the bonds of love keep open the gates of freedom.

The common thread amongst Unitarian and Universalist pioneers was the transformation of a message of fear to a message of hope. "Faith, hope and love abide . . . let our hearts prepare them place." In short, Universalism and Unitarianism reaffirmed a theology of blessing to bring out the healing and transformative power of love, rather than curse, which causes division, exclusivity and denial.

Unitarians and Universalists believed that the Kingdom of God described in the Bible could be realized on earth and that men and women were co-creators of that vision, given the gifts of reason, awareness, and fullness of heart and soul to achieve such harmony. It was the sacred work of humans to work responsibly toward that dream. "All that keeps the universe from nothingness," wrote Rev. John Morgan, contemporary UU preacher, "is the heart of God and our own hands."

Both Unitarians and Universalists believed in Christianity as the religion of Jesus, shared by Jesus, not a religion about Jesus, not idolatry of his life but continuation of his works. So, when when embracing the spiritual discipline of the Sermon on the Mount, our forebears found the wisdom that all peoples were worthy of the love of the Creator and that this life had value. The next logical step was to see societal inequities as barriers to the sacred work of humanity.

Universalist Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence and principle author of the first organized Universalist faith statement in 1790, became a forerunner of the abolitionist movement sixty years before the civil war: "We believe it to be inconsistent with the union of the human race in a common savior," he said, "and the obligations to mutual and universal love, which flow from that union, to hold any part of our fellow creatures in bondage."

Although even Universalists were divided about the issue of slavery, as the influences of a racist society continue to infect us all, there was consensus enough in 1846, for 8,000 Universalists to pass an official anti-slavery memorial to go on public record in Akron, Ohio. They were the first denomination to be on record as abolitionist. Unitarians, as well, joined the fight, more individually than as a denomination, with such pioneers as Theodore Parker, famed for keeping a revolver on his desk as he wrote to protect the freed slaves he was housing. Unitarians and Universalists were powerful forerunners, as well, for the women's movement, many of the suffragists were Unitarians. Other concerns remain constant amongst Unitarian Universalists: prison reform, public health, public schooling, labor relations, and concern for the aged.

Moral behavior will stick when we experience it to be the way to live our lives together -- not when we are told that we are unworthy and must follow someone else's rules. We will be ethical, compassionate and loving when we realize we are worthy of it, not when we are tyrannized by negativity, name calling, or coercion. That simply leads to lives that are less than our potentials and communities that function not out of their strength but to fend off fear -- communities that work merely to survive and not to thrive. This all simply comes from honoring the spark of the divine in each of us. And this simple discipline is the most profound challenge we can face in our lives.

"Dare to love God without mediator or veil," Unitarian preacher Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote in his famous Divinity Address, "Yourself a newborn bard of the Holy Ghost -- cast behind you all conformity, and acquaint men at first hand with deity . . . live with the privilege of the immeasurable mind."

Abiding in covenant is an art form. A mutual creation. It must be given and received. Offered, noticed and responded to. It is a leap of faith into the unknown, welcoming what may become of the encounter. It means moving beyond securing our own space into securing space enough for others. It means entering the relationship with the understanding of a mutual capacity to learn and to teach. It means an openness to what we do not know. To practice listening and teaching. To allow for awkward, even contentious moments of exploration and experimentation. It means regarding your neighbor as a gift and a challenge to your world, but knowing he or she is equally a part of it. It means, as well, protecting the shared vision by defying inappropriate behavior, taking action when violation has occurred and protecting the vulnerability of those striving to reach the common endeavor. Being open and trusting is rarely easy -- it is impossible if there are no boundaries. We honor each other by reminding ourselves of our best potential. This includes cautioning, defying, even at times protesting certain behaviors, especially when they -- the behaviors -- are destructive to the very fragile work of building and deepening covenant.

Do let your light shine -- each of you. Believe in it, it's there. Only you can douse the flame -- you have it in you to bring it to its fullest life. And the glow that will occur when you do will encourage others to find theirs. Give yourself voice, you may be surprised by its wisdom. Hear another into speech, you may be surprised by that wisdom. And person by person, justice driven community by community, we will create a better world.
Amen.
Copyright © 2002 Lisa G. Ward. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.robertsparkumc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8&Itemid=10

[[Read Many Rosary Prayers Here|http://www.giftsofaith.com/prayers.htm]]

Religious Studies of Bob Cardwell

here are presently five uses of the term Solidarism:

* Solidarism is applied to the sociopolitical thought advanced by Emile Durkheim which is loosely applied to a leading social philosophy operative during and within the French Third Republic prior to the First World War. [1]
* A related but distinct usage of the term is offered by Heinrich Pesch (1854-1926) in his Teaching Guide to Economics and wherein it is synonymous with Social Catholicism or the application of the Catholic social teaching as outlined in the papal social encyclicals. [2]
* The third usage of the term has been applied to the Swedish system of labor arrangement in which labor unions and capitalists jointly set wages below market clearing levels. From this arrangement, labor receives full employment and wage leveling, while capitalists pay less for labor, and do not have to worry about their employees being "poached" by firms who can offer more. This arrangement is traditionally enforced through employer organizations. The arrangement is destabilized during economic booms, when firms cheat on the system and surreptitiously raise "compensation", rather than pay, in the form of increased benefits, safety, or other forms of indirect payment.
* Among the French far-right, solidarism refers to a tendency which was headed by Jean-Pierre Stirbois and Michel Collinot (French Solidarist Movement). It was recently an influence of the Radical Network. National Front member Roger Holeindre claims to follow this tendency.
* An element within the White Movement within Russia opposed to Communism and seeking a Christian alternative to collectivism was called the National Alliance of Russian Solidarists.

http://www.cqod.com/cqoddevs.htm

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/94/Helen_of_Troy.jpg/286px-Helen_of_Troy.jpg]]



Sophia (Σοφíα, Greek for "wisdom") is a central term in Hellenistic philosophy and religion, Platonism, Gnosticism, Orthodox Christianity, Esoteric Christianity, as well as Christian mysticism. Sophiology is a philosophical concept regarding wisdom, as well as a theological concept regarding the wisdom of God.

In Gnostic tradition, Sophia is a feminine figure, analogous to the human soul but also simultaneously one of the feminine aspects of God. Gnostics held that she was the syzygy of Jesus Christ (i.e. the Bride of Christ), and Holy Spirit of the Trinity. She is occasionally referred to by the Hebrew equivalent of Achamōth (Ἀχαμώθ) and as Prunikos (Προύνικος). In the Nag Hammadi texts, Sophia is the lowest Aeon, or anthropic expression of the emanation of the light of God. She is considered to have fallen from grace in some way, in so doing creating or helping to create the material world.

Almost all Gnostic systems of the Syrian or Egyptian type taught that the universe began with an original, unknowable God, referred to as the Parent or Bythos, or as the Monad by Monoimus. It can also be equated to the concept of Logos in stoic, esoteric, or theosophical terms (The 'Unknown Root') as well as the Ein Sof of the Kabbalah and Brahman in Hinduism. From this initial unitary beginning, the One spontaneously emanated further Aeons, being pairs of progressively 'lesser' beings in sequence. Together with the source from which they emanate they form the Pleroma, or fullness, of God, and thus should not be seen as distinct from the divine, but symbolic abstractions of the divine nature. The transition from the immaterial to the material, from the noumenal to the sensible, is brought about by a flaw, or a passion, or a sin, in one of the Aeons.

In most versions of the Gnostic Mythos, it is Sophia who brings about this instability in the Pleroma, in turn bringing about the creation of materiality. Thus a positive or negative view of the world depends a great deal on the interpretations of Sophia's actions in the Mythos. According to some Gnostic texts, the crisis occurs as a result of Sophia trying to emanate without her syzygy or, in another tradition, because she tries to breach the barrier between herself and the unknowable Bythos. After cataclysmically falling from the Pleroma, Sophia's fear and anguish of losing her life (just as she lost the light of the One) causes confusion and longing to return to it. Because of these longings, matter (Greek: hylē, ὕλη) and soul (Greek: psychē, ψυχή) accidentally come into existence. The creation of the Demiurge (also known as Yaldabaoth, "Son of Chaos") is also a mistake made during this exile. The Demiurge proceeds to create the physical world in which we live, ignorant of Sophia, who nevertheless manages to infuse some spiritual spark or pneuma into his creation.

In the Pistis Sophia, Christ is sent from the Godhead in order to bring Sophia back into the fullness (Pleroma). Christ enables her to again see the light, bringing her knowledge of the spirit (Greek: pneuma, πνευμα). Christ is then sent to earth in the form of the man Jesus to give men the Gnosis needed to rescue themselves from the physical world and return to the spiritual world. In Gnosticism, the Gospel story of Jesus is itself allegorical: it is the Outer Mystery, used as an introduction to Gnosis, rather than being literally true in a historical context. For the Gnostics, the drama of the redemption of the Sophia through Christ or the Logos is the central drama of the universe. The Sophia resides in all of us as the Divine Spark.
[edit] Book of Proverbs

Jewish Alexandrine religious philosophy was much occupied with the concept of the Divine Sophia, as the revelation of God's inward thought, and assigned to her not only the formation and ordering of the natural universe,[12] but also the communication of all insight and knowledge to mankind. In Proverbs 8 Wisdom (the noun is feminine) is described as God's Counsellor and Workmistress (Master-workman, R.V.), who dwelt beside Him before the Creation of the world and sported continually before Him.

In accordance with the description given in the Book of Proverbs, a dwelling-place was assigned by the Gnostics to the Sophia, and her relation to the upper world defined as well as to the seven planetary powers which were placed under her. The seven planetary spheres or heavens were for the ancients the highest regions of the created universe. They were thought of as seven circles rising one above another, and dominated by the seven Archons. These constituted the (Gnostic) Hebdomad. Above the highest of them, and over-vaulting it, was the Ogdoad, the sphere of immutability, which was nigh to the spiritual world.[13] Now we read in Proverbs 9:1:

    Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:

These seven pillars being interpreted of the planetary heavens, the habitation of the Sophia herself was placed above the Hebdomad in the Ogdoad.[14] It is said further of the same divine wisdom (Proverbs 8:2):

    She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths.

This meant, according to the Gnostic interpretation, that the Sophia has her dwelling-place "on the heights" above the created universe, in the place of the midst, between the upper and lower world, between the Pleroma and the ektismena. She sits at "the gates of the mighty," i.e. at the approaches to the realms of the seven Archons, and at the "entrances" to the upper realm of light her praise is sung. The Sophia is therefore the highest ruler over the visible universe, and at the same time the mediatrix between the upper and the lower realms. She shapes this mundane universe after the heavenly prototypes, and forms the seven star-circles with their Archons under whose dominion are placed, according to the astrological conceptions of antiquity, the fates of all earthly things, and more especially of man. She is "the mother" or "the mother of the living."[15] As coming from above, she is herself of pneumatic essence, the mētēr phōteinē[16] or the anō dynamis,[17] from which all pneumatic souls draw their origin.
[edit] Descent

In reconciling the doctrine of the pneumatic nature of the Sophia with the dwelling-place assigned her, according to the Proverbs, in the kingdom of the midst, and so outside the upper realm of light, there was envisioned a descent of Sophia from her heavenly home, the Pleroma, into the void (kenōma) beneath it. The concept was that of a seizure or robbery of light, or of an outburst and diffusion of light-dew into the kenōma, occasioned by a vivifying movement in the upper world. But inasmuch as the light brought down into the darkness of this lower world was thought of and described as involved in suffering, this suffering must be regarded as a punishment. This inference was further aided by the Platonic notion of a spiritual fall.
[edit] Mythos of the soul

Alienated through their own fault from their heavenly home, souls have sunk down into this lower world without utterly losing the remembrance of their former state, and filled with longing for their lost inheritance, these fallen souls are still striving upwards. In this way the Mythos of the fall of Sophia can be regarded as having a typical significance. The fate of the "mother" was regarded as the prototype of what is repeated in the history of all individual souls, which, being of a heavenly pneumatic origin, have fallen from the upper world of light their home, and come under the sway of evil powers, from whom they must endure a long series of sufferings till a return into the upper world be once more vouchsafed them.

But whereas, according to the Platonic philosophy, fallen souls still retain a remembrance of their lost home, this notion was preserved in another form in Gnostic circles. It was taught that the souls of the Pneumatici, having lost the remembrance of their heavenly derivation, required to become once more partakers of Gnosis, or knowledge of their own pneumatic essence, in order to make a return to the realm of light. In the impartation of this Gnosis consists the redemption brought and vouchsafed by Christ to pneumatic souls. But the various fortunes of such souls were wont to be contemplated in those of Sophia, and so it was taught that the Sophia also needed the redemption wrought by Christ, by whom she is delivered from her agnoia and her pathe, and will, at the end of the world's development, be again brought back to her long lost home, the Upper Pleroma, into which this mother will find an entrance along with all pneumatic souls her children, and there, in the heavenly bridal chamber, celebrate the marriage feast of eternity.
[edit] Syrian Gnosis

The Sophia-Mythos has in the various Gnostic systems undergone great variety of treatment. The oldest, the Syrian Gnosis, referred to the Sophia the formation of the lower world and the production of its rulers the Archons; and along with this they also ascribed to her the preservation and propagation of the spiritual seed.
A mystical depiction of Sophia from Geheime Figuren der Rosenkreuzer, Altona, 1785.

As described by Irenaeus, the great Mother-principle of the universe appears as the first woman, the Holy Spirit (rūha d'qudshā) moving over the waters, and is also called the mother of all living. Under her are the four material elements—water, darkness, abyss, and chaos. With her, combine themselves the two supreme masculine lights, the first and the second man, the Father and the Son, the latter being also designated as the Father's ennoia. From their union proceeds the third imperishable light, the third man, Christ. But unable to support the abounding fulness of this light, the mother in giving birth to Christ, suffers a portion of this light to overflow on the left side. While, then, Christ as dexios (He of the right hand) mounts upward with his mother into the imperishable Aeon, that other light which has overflowed on the left hand, sinks down into the lower world, and there produces matter. And this is the Sophia, called also Aristera (she of the left hand), Prouneikos and the male-female.

There is here, as yet, no thought of a fall, properly so called, as in the Valentinian system. The power which has thus overflowed leftwards, makes a voluntary descent into the lower waters, confiding in its possession of the spark of true light. It is, moreover, evident that though mythologically distinguished from the humectatio luminis (Greek: ikmas phōtos, ἰκμὰς φωτός), the Sophia is yet, really nothing else but the light-spark coming from above, entering this lower material world, and becoming here the source of all formation, and of both the higher and the lower life. She swims over the waters, and sets their hitherto immoveable mass in motion, driving them into the abyss, and taking to herself a bodily form from the hylē. She compasses about, and is laden with material every kind of weight and substance, so that, but for the essential spark of light, she would be sunk and lost in the material. Bound to the body which she has assumed and weighed down thereby, she seeks in vain to make her escape from the lower waters, and hasten upwards to rejoin her heavenly mother. Not succeeding in this endeavour, she seeks to preserve, at least, her light-spark from being injured by the lower elements, raises herself by its power to the realm of the upper region, and these spreading out herself she forms out of her own bodily part, the dividing wall of the visible firmament, but still retains the aquatilis corporis typus. Finally seized with a longing for the higher light, she finds, at length, in herself, the power to raise herself even above the heaven of her own forming, and to fully lay aside her corporeity. The body thus abandoned is called "Woman from Woman." The narrative proceeds to tell of the formation of the seven Archons by Sophia herself, of the creation of man, which "the mother" (i.e. not the first woman, but the Sophia) uses as a mean to deprive the Archons of their share of light, of the perpetual conflict on his mother's part with the self-exalting efforts of the Archons, and of her continuous striving to recover again and again the light-spark hidden in human nature, till, at length, Christ comes to her assistance and in answer to her prayers, proceeds to draw all the sparks of light to Himself, unites Himself with the Sophia as the bridegroom with the bride, descends on Jesus who has been prepared, as a pure vessel for His reception, by Sophia, and leaves him again before the crucifixion, ascending with Sophia into the world or Aeon which will never pass away.[18]

In this system the original cosmogonic significance of the Sophia still stands in the foreground. The antithesis of Christus and Sophia, as He of the right (ho dexios) and She of the Left (hē aristera), as male and female, is but a repetition of the first Cosmogonic Antithesis in another form. The Sophia herself is but a reflex of the "Mother of all living" and is therefore also called "Mother." She is the formatrix of heaven and earth, for as much as mere matter can only receive form through the light which, coming down from above has interpenetrated the dark waters of the hylē; but she is also at the same time the spiritual principle of life in creation, or, as the world-soul the representative of all that is truly pneumatic in this lower world: her fates and experiences represent typically those of the pneumatic soul which has sunk down into chaos.
[edit] Prunikos

In the Gnostic system described by Irenaeus,[19] the name Prunikos several times takes the place of Sophia in the relation of her story. The name Prunikos is also given to Sophia in the account of the kindred Barbeliot system, given in the preceding chapter of Irenaeus. Celsus, who shows that he had met with some Ophite work, exhibits acquaintance with the name Prunikos,[20] a name which Origen recognizes as Valentinian. That this Ophite name had really been adopted by the Valentinians is evidenced by its occurrence in a Valentinian fragment preserved by Epiphanius.[21] Epiphanius also introduces Prunikos as a technical word in the system of the Simonians,[22] of those whom he describes under the head of Nicolaitans[23] and of the Ophites.[24]

Neither Irenaeus nor Origen indicates that he knew anything as to the meaning of this word; and we have no better information on this subject than a conjecture of Epiphanius.[25] He says that the word means "wanton" or "lascivious," for that the Greeks had a phrase concerning a man who had debauched a girl, Eprounikeuse tautēn. One feels some hesitation in accepting this explanation. Epiphanius was deeply persuaded of the filthiness of Gnostic morals, and habitually put the worst interpretation on their language. If the phrase reported by Epiphanius had been common, it is strange that instances of its use should not have been quoted from the Greek comic writers. It need not be denied that Epiphanius had heard the phrase employed, but innocent words come to be used in an obscene sense, as well by those who think double entendre witty, as by those who modestly avoid the use of plainer language. The primary meaning of the word prouneikos seems to be a porter, or bearer of burdens, the derivation being from enenkein, the only derivation indeed that the word seems to admit of. Then, modifying its meaning like the word agoraios, it came to be used in the sense of a turbulent violent person. The only distinct confirmation of the explanation of Epiphanius is that Hesychius (s. v. Skitaloi) has the words aphrodisiōn kai tēs prounikias tēs nykterinēs. This would be decisive, if we could be sure that these words were earlier in date than Epiphanius.

In favour of the explanation of Epiphanius is the fact, that in the Gnostic cosmogonical myths, the imagery of sexual passion is constantly introduced. It seems on the whole probable that prouneikos is to be understood in the sense of propherēs which has for one of its meanings[26] "precocious in respect of sexual intercourse." The name is possibly meant to indicate her attempts to entice away again from the lower Cosmic Powers the seed of Divine light.[27] In the account given by Epiphanius[28] the allusion to enticements to sexual intercourse which is involved in this name, becomes more prominent.
[edit] Mētra

Nigh related to this is the notion widely diffused among Gnostic sects of the impure mētra (womb) from whence the whole world is supposed to have issued. As according to the Italian Valentinians the Soter opens the mētra of the lower Sophia, (the Enthymēsis), and so occasions the formation of the universe,[29] so on the other hand the mētra itself is personified. So Epiphanius reports[30] the following cosmogony as that of a branch of the Nicolaitans.

    In the beginning were Darkness, Chaos, and Water (skotos, kai bythos, kai hydōr), but the Spirit indwelling in the midst of them, divided them one from another. From the intermingling of Darkness with Spirit proceeds the mētra which again is kindled with fresh desire after the Spirit; she gives birth first to four, and then to other four aeons, and so produces a right and a left, light and darkness. Last of all comes forth an aischros aiōn, who has intercourse with the mētra, the offspring whereof are Gods, Angels, Daemons, and Spirits.

The Sethians[31] teach in like manner that from the first concurrence (syndromē) of the three primeval principles arose heaven and earth as a megalē tis idea sphragidos. These have the form of a mētra with the omphalos in the midst. The pregnant mētra therefore contains within itself all kinds of animal forms in the reflex of heaven and earth and all substances found in the middle region. This mētra also encounters us in the great Apophasis ascribed to Simon where it is also called Paradise and Edem as being the locality of man's formation.

These cosmogonic theories have their precedent in the Thalatth or Tiamat of Syrian mythology, the life-mother of whom Berossus has so much to relate, or in the world-egg out of which when cloven asunder heaven and earth and all things proceed.[32] The name of this Berossian Thalatth meets us again among the Peratae of the Philosophumena,[33] and is sometimes mistakenly identified with that of the sea—thalassa.
[edit] Achamōth

It has been debated whether the name Achamōth (Ἀχαμώθ) is originally derived from the Hebrew Chokhmah (חָכְמָ֑ה), in Aramaic Ḥachmūth or whether it signifies 'She that brings forth'—'Mother.'[34] The Syriac form Ḥachmūth is testified for us as used by Bardesanes,[35] the Greek form Hachamōth is found only among the Valentinians: the name however probably belongs to the oldest Syrian Gnosis.
[edit] Baruch-Gnosis

A similar part to that of the mētra is played by Edem consort of Elohim in the Gnostic book Baruch,[36] who there appears as a two-shaped being formed above as a woman and from the middle downwards as a serpent.

Among the four and twenty Angels which she bears to Elohim, and which form the world out of her members, the second female angelic form is called Achamōs [Achamōth]. Like to this legend of the Philosophumena concerning the Baruch-Gnosis is that which is related by Epiphanius of an Ophite Party that they fabled that a Serpent from the Upper World had had sexual intercourse with the Earth as with a woman.[37]
[edit] Barbeliotae

Very nigh related to the doctrines of the Gnostics in Irenaeus are the views of the so-called Barbeliotae.[38] The name Barbelo, which according to one interpretation is a designation of the upper Tetrad, has originally nothing to do with the Sophia. This latter Being called also Spiritus Sanctus and Prunikos is the offspring of the first angel who stands at the side of the Monogenes. Sophia seeing that all the rest have each its syzygos within the Pleroma, desires also to find such a consort for herself; and not finding one in the upper world she looks down into the lower regions and being still unsatisfied there she descends at length against the will of the Father into the deep. Here she forms the Demiurge (the Proarchōn), a composite of ignorance and self-exaltation. This Being, by virtue of pneumatic powers stolen from his mother, proceeds to form the lower world. The mother, on the other hand, flees away into the upper regions and makes her dwelling there in the Ogdoad.
[edit] Ophites

We meet this Sophia also among the Ophiana whose "Diagram" is described by Celsus and Origen, as well as among various Gnostic (Ophite) parties mentioned by Epiphanius. She is there called Sophia or Prunikos, the upper mother and upper power, and sits enthroned above the Hebdomad (the seven Planetary Heavens) in the Ogdoad.[39] She is also occasionally called Parthenos,[40] and again is elsewhere identified with the Barbelo or Barbero.[41]
[edit] Bardesanes

Cosmogonic myths play their part also in the doctrine of Bardesanes. The locus foedus whereon the gods (or Aeons) measured and founded Paradise[35] is the same as the impure mētra, which Ephraim is ashamed even to name.[42] The creation of the world is brought to pass through the son of the living one and the Rūha d' Qudshā, the Holy Spirit, with whom Ḥachmūth is identical, but in combination with "creatures," i.e. subordinate beings which co-operate with them.[43] It is not expressly so said, and yet at the same time is the most probable assumption, that as was the case with the father and mother so also their offspring the son of the Living One, and the Rūha d' Qudshā or Ḥachmūth, are to be regarded as a Syzygy. This last (the Ḥachmūth) brings forth the two daughters, the "Shame of the Dry Land" i.e. the mētra, and the "Image of the Waters" i.e. the Aquatilis Corporis typus, which is mentioned in connection with the Ophitic Sophia.[35] Beside which, in a passage evidently referring to Bardesanes, air, fire, water, and darkness are mentioned as aeons.[44] These are probably the "Creatures" to which in association with the Son and the Rūha d' Qudshā, Bardesanes is said to have assigned the creation of the world. Though much still remains dark as to the doctrine of Bardesanes we cannot nevertheless have any right to set simply aside the statements of Ephraim, who remains the oldest Syrian source for our knowledge of the doctrine of this Syrian Gnostic, and deserves therefore our chief attentions. Bardesanes, according to Ephraim, is able also to tell of the wife or maiden who having sunk down from the Upper Paradise offers up prayers in her dereliction for help from above, and on being heard returns to the joys of the Upper Paradise.[35]
[edit] Acts of Thomas

These statements of Ephraim are further supplemented by the Acts of Thomas in which various hymns have been preserved which are either compositions of Bardesanes himself, or at any rate are productions of his school.[45] In the Syriac text of the Acts,[46] we find the Hymn of the Soul, which has been sent down from her heavenly home to fetch the pearl guarded by the serpent, but has forgotten here below her heavenly mission till she is reminded of it by a letter from "the father, the mother, and the brother," performs her task, receives back again her glorious dress, and returns to her old home. Of the other hymns which are preserved in the Greek version more faithfully than in the Syriac text which has undergone Catholic revision, the first deserving of notice is the Ode to the Sophia[47] which describes the marriage of the "maiden" with her heavenly bridegroom and her introduction into the Upper Realm of Light. This "maiden," called "daughter of light," is not as the Catholic reviser supposes the Church, but Ḥachmūth (Sophia) over whose head the "king," i.e. the father of the living ones, sits enthroned; her bridegroom is, according to the most probable interpretation, the son of the living one, i.e. Christ. With her the living Ones i.e. pneumatic souls enter into the Pleroma and receive the glorious light of the living Father and praise along with "the living spirit" the "father of truth" and the "mother of wisdom." The Sophia is also invoked in the first prayer of consecration.[48] She is there called the "merciful mother," the "consort of the masculine one," "revelant of the perfect mysteries," "Mother of the Seven Houses," "who finds rest in the eighth house," i.e. in the Ogdoad. In the second Prayer of Consecration[49] she is also designated, the "perfect Mercy" and "Consort of the Masculine One," but is also called "Holy Spirit" (Rūha d' Qudshā) "Revelant of the Mysteries of the whole Magnitude," "hidden Mother," "She who knows the Mysteries of the Elect," and "she who partakes in the conflicts of the noble Agonistes" (i.e. of Christ).[50] There is further a direct reminiscence of the doctrine of Bardesanes when she is invoked as the Holy Dove which has given birth to the two twins (i.e. the two daughters of the Rūha d' Qudshā).[51]
[edit] Simon Magus
Helen of Troy by Evelyn de Morgan (1898, London); an incarnation of the Ennoia the Simonian system.

This Mythos of the Soul and her descent into this lower world, with her various sufferings and changing fortunes until her final deliverance, recurs in the Simonian system under the form of the All-Mother who issues as its first thought from the Hestōs or highest power of God. She generally bears the name Ennoia, but is also called Wisdom (Sophia), Ruler, Holy Spirit, Prunikos, Barbelo. Having sunk down from the highest heavens into the lowest regions, she creates angels and archangels, and these again create and rule the material universe. Restrained and held down by the power of this lower world, she is hindered from returning to the kingdom of the Father. According to one representation she suffers all manner of insult from the angels and archangels bound and forced again and again into fresh earthly bodies, and compelled for centuries to wander in ever new corporeal forms. According to another account she is in herself incapable of suffering, but is sent into this lower world and undergoes perpetual transformation in order to excite by her beauty the angels and powers, to impel them to engage in perpetual strife, and so gradually to deprive them of their store of heavenly light. The Hestōs himself at length comes down from the highest heaven in a phantasmal body in order to deliver the suffering Ennoia, and redeem the souls held in captivity by imparting gnosis to them.

The most frequent designation of the Simonian Ennoia is "the lost" or "the wandering sheep." The Greek divinities Zeus and Athena were interpreted to signify Hestōs and his Ennoia, and in like manner the Tyrian sun-god Herakles-Melkart and the moon-goddess Selene-Astarte. So also the Homeric Helena, as the cause of quarrel between Greeks and Trojans, was regarded as a type of the Ennoia. The story which the fathers of the church handed down of the intercourse of Simon Magus with his consort Helena, had probably its origin in this allegorical interpretation.[52]

In the Simonian Apophasis the great dynamis (also called Nous) and the great epinoia which gives birth to all things form a syzygy, from which proceeds the male-female Being, who is called Hestōs.[53] Elsewhere nous and epinoia are called the upper-most of the three Simonian Syzygies, to which the Hestōs forms the Hebdomad: but on the other hand, nous and epinoia are identified with heaven and earth.[54]
[edit] Valentinus
"Plérome de Valentin," from Histoire critique du Gnosticisme; Jacques Matter, 1826, Vol. II, Plate II.

The most significant development of this Sophia-Mythos is found in the Valentinian system. The descent of the Sophia from the Pleroma is ascribed after Plato's manner to a fall, and as the final cause of this fall a state of suffering is indicated which has penetrated into the Pleroma itself. Sophia or Mētēr is in the doctrine of Valentinus the last, i.e. the thirtieth Aeon in the Pleroma, from which having fallen out, she now in remembrance of the better world which she has thus forsaken, gives birth to the Christus "with a shadow" (meta skias tinos). While Christus returns to the Pleroma, Sophia forms the Demiurge and this whole lower world out of the skia, a right and a left principle.[55] For her redemption comes down to Sophia either Christus himself,[56] or the Soter,[57] as the common product of the Aeons, in order to bring her back to the Pleroma and unite her again with her syzygos. The motive for the Sophia's fall was defined according to the Anatolian school to have lain therein, that by her desire to know what lay beyond the limits of the knowable she had brought herself into a state of ignorance and formlessness. Her suffering extends to the whole Pleroma. But whereas this is confirmed thereby in fresh strength, the Sophia is separated from it and gives birth outside it (by means of her ennoia, her recollections of the higher world), to the Christus who at once ascends into the Pleroma, and after this she produces an ousia amorphos, the image of her suffering, out of which the Demiurge and the lower world come into existence; last of all looking upwards in her helpless condition, and imploring light, she finally gives birth to the spermata tēs ekklēsias, the pneumatic souls. In the work of redemption the Soter comes down accompanied by the masculine angels who are to be the future syzygoi of the (feminine) souls of the Pneumatici, and introduces the Sophia along with these Pneumatici into the heavenly bridal chamber.[58] The same view, essentially meets us in the accounts of Marcus,[59] and in the Epitomators of the Syntagma of Hippolytus.[60]
[edit] Ptolemaeus

The Italic school distinguished on the other hand a two-fold Sophia, the ano Sophia and the katō Sophia or Achamoth. According to the doctrine of Ptolemaeus and that of his disciples, the former of these separates herself from her syzygos, the thelētos through her audacious longing after immediate Communion with the Father of all, falls into a condition of suffering, and would completely melt away in this inordinate desire, unless the Horos had purified her from her suffering and established her again in the Pleroma. Her enthymēsis, on the other hand, the desire which has obtained the mastery over her and the consequent suffering becomes an amorphos kai aneideos ousia, which is also called an ektrōma, is separated from her and is assigned a place beyond the limits of the Pleroma.

From her dwelling-place above the Hebdomad, in the place of the Midst, she is also called Ogdoad (Ὀγδοάς), and further entitled Mētēr, Sophia also, and he Hierousalēm, Pneuma hagion, and (arsenikōs) Kyrios. In these names some partial reminiscences of the old Ophitic Gnosis are retained. The Achamoth first receives (by means of Christus and Pneuma hagion the Pair of Aeons within the Pleroma whose emanation is most recent), the morphōsis kat' ousian. Left alone in her suffering she has become endued with penitent mind (epistrophē). Now descends the son as the common fruit of the Pleroma, gives her the morphōsis kata gnōsin, and forms out of her various affections the Demiurge and the various constituents of this lower world. By his appointment the Achamoth produces the pneumatic seed (the ekklēsia). The end of the world's history is here also (as above) the introduction of the lower Sophia with all her pneumatic offspring into the Pleroma, and this intimately connected with the second descent of the Soter and his transient union with the psychical Christus; then follows the marriage-union of the Achamoth with the Soter and of the pneumatic souls with the angels.[61] The same form of doctrine meets us also in Secundus, who is said to have been the first to have made the distinction of an upper and a lower Sophia,[62] and in the account which the Philosophumena give us of a system which most probably referred to the school of Heracleon, and which also speaks of a double Sophia.[63] The name Hierousalēm also for the exō Sophia meets us here.[64] It finds its interpretation in the fragments of Heracleon.[65] The name Achamoth, on the other hand, is wanting both in Hippolytus and in Heracleon. One school among the Marcosii seems also to have taught a two-fold Sophia.[66]
[edit] Pistis Sophia

A special and richly coloured development is given to the mythical form of the Sophia of the Gnostic Book Pistis Sophia.[67] The two first books of this writing to which the name Pistis Sophia properly belongs, treat for the greater part[68] of the fall, the Repentance, and the Redemption of the Sophia. She has by the ordinance of higher powers obtained an insight into the dwelling-place appropriated to her in the spiritual world, namely, the thēsauros lucis which lies beyond the XIIIth Aeon. By her endeavours to direct thither her upward flight, she draws upon herself the enmity of the Authadēs, Archon of the XIIIth Aeon, and of the Archons of the XII. Aeons under him; by these she is enticed down into the depths of chaos, and is there tormented in the greatest possible variety of ways, in order that so she may incur the loss of her light-nature. In her utmost need she addresses thirteen penitent prayers (metanoiai) to the Upper Light. Step by step she is led upwards by Christus into the higher regions, though she still remains obnoxious to the assaults of the Archons, and is, after offering her XIIIth Metanoia, more vehemently attacked than ever, till at length Christus leads her down into an intermediate place below the XIIIth Aeon, where she remains till the consummation of the world, and sends up grateful hymns of praise and thanksgiving. The earthly work of redemption having been at length accomplished, the Sophia returns to her original celestial home.

The peculiar feature in this representation consists in the further development of the philosophical ideas which find general expression in the Sophia-Mythos. Sophia is here not merely, as with Valentinus, the representative of the longing which the finite spirit feels for the knowledge of the infinite, but at the same time a type or pattern of faith, of repentance, and of hope.[69] After her restoration she announces to her companions the twofold truth that, while every attempt to overstep the divinely ordained limits, has for its consequence suffering and punishment, so, on the other hand, the divine compassion is ever ready to vouchsafe pardon to the penitent.

We have a further reminiscence of the Sophia of the older Gnostic systems in what is said in the book Pistis Sophia of the Light-Maiden (parthenos lucis), who is there clearly distinguished from the Sophia herself, and appears as the archetype of Astraea, the Constellation Virgo.[70] The station which she holds is in the place of the midst, above the habitation assigned to the Sophia in the XIIIth Aeon. She is the judge of (departed) souls, either opening for them or closing against them the portals of the light-realm.[71] Under her stand yet seven other light-maidens with similar functions, who impart to pious souls their final consecrations.[72] From the place of the parthenos lucis comes the sun-dragon, which is daily borne along by four light-powers in the shape of white horses, and so makes his circuit round the earth.[73]
[edit] Nag Hammadi

In On the Origin of the World, Sophia is depicted as the ultimate destroyer of this material universe, Yaldabaoth and all his Heavens:

    She [Sophia] will cast them down into the abyss. They [the Archons] will be obliterated because of their wickedness. For they will come to be like volcanoes and consume one another until they perish at the hand of the prime parent. When he has destroyed them, he will turn against himself and destroy himself until he ceases to exist. And their heavens will fall one upon the next and their forces will be consumed by fire. Their eternal realms, too, will be overturned. And his heaven will fall and break in two. His [...] will fall down upon the [...] support them; they will fall into the abyss, and the abyss will be overturned. The light will [...] the darkness and obliterate it: it will be like something that never was.

[edit] Manichaeism

This light-maiden (parthenos tou phōtos) encounters us also among the Manichaeans as exciting the impure desires of the Daemons, and thereby setting free the light which has hitherto been held down by the power of darkness.[74] On the other hand, the place of the Gnostic Sophia is among Manichaeans taken by the "Mother of Life" (mētēr tēs zōēs), and by the World-Soul (psychē hapantōn), which on occasions is distinguished from the Life-Mother, and is regarded as diffused through all living creatures, whose deliverance from the realm of darkness constitutes the whole of the world's history.[75] Their return to the world of light is described in the famous Canticum Amatorium.[76]
[edit] Mythology

The archetypal fall and recovery of Sophia is additionally linked (to a varying degree) to many different myths and stories (see damsel in distress). Among these are:

    * Isis, who while still in the cosmic womb, brings forth the flawed Elder Horus without a consort[77]
    * The Church as the bride of Christ
    * The abduction and rescue of Helen of Troy
    * Persephone and her descent into Hades, from which she returns to life [but is bound to return to Hades for 3 months every year]
    * The fall of Eve and the birth of Christ through the Virgin Mary
    * The descent of Orpheus into the underworld to rescue his wife, Eurydice
    * The return of Odysseus to his kingdom, Ithaca, to reclaim his wife, Penelope
    * The rescue of Andromeda by Perseus
    * Pandora
    * Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty
    * The slaying of the Dragon by St. George to rescue the Princess
    * The rescue of the kidnapped Sita by her husband, the god-king Rama, with the help of Hanuman in the Ramayana

Note that many of these myths have alternative psychological interpretations. For example Jungian psychologist Marie-Louise von Franz interpreted fairly tales like Sleeping Beauty as symbolizing the 'rescue' or reintegration of the anima, the more 'feminine' part of a man's unconscious, but not wisdom or sophia per se.
[edit] See also

    * Sophia (name)
    * Sophism
    * Sufism
    * Valentinus
    * Wisdom literature

Notre-Dame-des-Champs, Avranches

The Stations themselves are usually a series of 14 pictures or sculptures depicting the following scenes:

1. Jesus is condemned to death
2. Jesus is given his cross
3. Jesus falls the first time
4. Jesus meets His Mother
5. Simon of Cyrene carries the cross
6. Veronica wipes the face of Jesus
7. Jesus falls the second time
8. Jesus meets the daughters of Jerusalem
9. Jesus falls the third time
10. Jesus is stripped of His garments
11. Crucifixion: Jesus is nailed to the cross
12. Jesus dies on the cross
13. Jesus' body is removed from the cross (Deposition or Lamentation)
14. Jesus is laid in the tomb and covered in incense.

Although not traditionally part of the Stations, the Resurrection of Jesus is sometimes included as a fifteenth station.[6][7]
[edit] Scriptural Way of the Cross

Out of the fourteen traditional Stations of the Cross, only eight have clear scriptural foundation. Stations 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9 are not specifically attested to in the gospels (in particular, no evidence exists of station 6 ever being known before medieval times) and Station 13 (representing Jesus's body being taken down off the cross and laid in the arms of his mother Mary) seems to embellish the gospels' record, which states that Joseph of Arimathea took Jesus down from the cross and buried him. To provide a version of this devotion more closely aligned with the biblical accounts, Pope John Paul II introduced a new form of devotion, called the Scriptural Way of the Cross on Good Friday 1991. He celebrated that form many times but not exclusively at the Colosseum in Rome.[8][9] In 2007, Pope Benedict XVI approved this set of stations for meditation and public celebration: They follow this sequence:

1. Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane,
2. Jesus is betrayed by Judas and arrested,
3. Jesus is condemned by the Sanhedrin,
4. Jesus is denied by Peter,
5. Jesus is judged by Pilate,
6. Jesus is scourged and crowned with thorns,
7. Jesus takes up His cross,
8. Jesus is helped by Simon to carry His cross,
9. Jesus meets the women of Jerusalem,
10. Jesus is crucified,
11. Jesus promises His kingdom to the repentant thief,
12. Jesus entrusts Mary and John to each other,
13. Jesus dies on the cross,
14. Jesus is laid in the tomb.

[edit] Modern usage

The devotion may be conducted personally by the faithful, making their way from one station to another and saying the prayers, or by having an officiating celebrant move from cross to cross while the faithful make the responses. The stations themselves must consist of, at the very least, fourteen wooden crosses, pictures alone do not suffice, and they must be blessed by someone with the authority to erect stations.[dubious – discuss]

In the Roman Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II led an annual public prayer of the Stations of the Cross at the Roman Colosseum on Good Friday. Originally, the Pope himself carried the cross from station to station, but in his last years when age and infirmity limited his strength, John Paul presided over the celebration from a stage on the Palatine Hill, while others carried the cross. Just days prior to his death in 2005, Pope John Paul II observed the Stations of the Cross from his private chapel. Each year a different person is invited to write the meditation texts for the Stations. Past composers of the Papal Stations include several non-Catholics. The Pope himself wrote the texts for the Great Jubilee in 2000 and used the traditional Stations.

The celebration of the Stations of the Cross is especially common on the Fridays of Lent, especially Good Friday. Community celebrations are usually accompanied by various songs and prayers. Particularly common as musical accompaniment is the Stabat Mater. At the end of each station the Adoramus Te is sometimes sung. The Alleluia is also sung, except during Lent.

Structurally, Mel Gibson's 2004 film, The Passion of the Christ, follows the Stations of the Cross. The fourteenth and last station, the Burial, is not prominently depicted (compared to the other thirteen) but it is implied since the last shot before credit titles is Jesus resurrected and about to leave the tomb.

Sean Blodgett’s 2010 motion picture, “Walking with the Promise”, uses the resurrection of Jesus to complete the traditional Stations of the Cross.[9] The movie ends with the ascension of Christ.

http://www.ivmdl.org/

Straight edge refers to a subculture of hardcore punk which was a direct reaction to the sexual revolution, hedonism, and excess associated with punk rock.[1][2] In its simplest form, straight edge is a philosophy of staying clean and sober: meaning refraining from using alcohol, tobacco, and recreational drugs. For some, this extends to not engaging in promiscuous sex, following a vegetarian or vegan diet, not using caffeine or prescription drugs.[1] The term was coined by the 1980s hardcore punk band Minor Threat in their song "Straight Edge."[3]

Since the late 1970s, straight edge has been a part of the punk scene. During that time, a wide variety of beliefs and ideas have been incorporated into straight edge including violence,[4] vegetarianism,[5] animal rights,[5] communism[6] and Hare Krishna beliefs.[7] In many parts of the United States, straight edge is treated as a gang;[4] however, recent studies suggest that only a small minority of the people who refer to themselves as straight edge are violent.[8]

[[Read Strength for the Journey here|http://getmorestrength.org/]]

StrengthsFinder 2.0

From the author of the New York Times bestsellers

How Full Is Your Bucket? (Gallup Press, 2004, Strengths Based Leadership (Gallup Press, 2009), and Wellbeing (Gallup Press, 2010) a book that features the new Wellbeing Finder assessment.

STRENGTHSFINDER 2.0

Do you have the opportunity to do what you do best every day?

Chances are, you don't. All too often, our natural talents go untapped. From the cradle to the cubicle, we devote more time to fixing our shortcomings than to developing our strengths.

To help people uncover their talents, Gallup introduced the first version of its online assessment, StrengthsFinder, in 2001 which ignited a global conversation and helped millions to discover their top five talents.

In its latest national bestseller, StrengthsFinder 2.0, Gallup unveils the new and improved version of its popular assessment, language of 34 themes, and much more (see below for details). While you can read this book in one sitting, you'll use it as a reference for decades.

Loaded with hundreds of strategies for applying your strengths, this new book and accompanying website will change the way you look at yourself -- and the world around you -- forever.

AVAILABLE EXCLUSIVELY IN STRENGTHSFINDER 2.0
(using the unique access code included with each book)

* A new and upgraded edition of the StrengthsFinder assessment

* A personalized Strengths Discovery and Action-Planning Guide for applying your strengths in the next week, month, and year

* A more customized version of your top five theme report

* 50 Ideas for Action (10 strategies for building on each of your top five themes)
From the Publisher
STRENGTHS: THE NEXT GENERATION

Q&A with author Tom Rath

(From the Gallup Management Journal; interviewed by Jennifer Robison)

Last month, StrengthsFinder 2.0 hit the bookstores. Book browsers, no doubt, had many questions, and among them was probably "Didn't I already read a book about this?"

Well, actually, yes. But the topic was worth revisiting for two reasons. In the six years since the release of Now, Discover Your Strengths, more than 2 million people have taken the Clifton StrengthsFinder assessment, which means billions of people have not yet had the opportunity. The second reason is that Gallup researchers just haven't been able to let the topic rest. Over the past decade, they've done more surveys, more interviews, and more studies; they've prodded and poked and analyzed. And they realized that there's a lot more to understanding human talent than most people know. Those who are familiar with the StrengthsFinder assessment know that it is designed to uncover certain key talents -- patterns of thought, feeling, and behavior that can be productively applied. These patterns are categorized into 34 broad themes -- such as Achiever, Ideation, and Relator -- and those themes indicate and predict one's innate and unique talents. Those talents, when multiplied by the investment of time spent practicing, developing skills, and building knowledge, can become strengths. Some of this is just common sense; it seems intuitive that your performance will be better if you're doing what you naturally do well. But some of it seems counterintuitive and runs directly against conventional wisdom: No amount of training will help you excel in your areas of weakness. You can't do anything you want to do -- or be anything you want to be -- because you're just not going to be good at everything. But if you work with your talents, you can be extraordinary. StrengthsFinder has resonated with the business community because there's a direct link between talent development and performance. In this interview, Tom Rath, author of StrengthsFinder 2.0, discusses what Gallup scientists have learned since the publication of the first book, what more there is to discover about your talents, and why it's bad to focus on your employees' weaknesses, but simply cruel to ignore them completely. GMJ: Why the new book?

Tom Rath: StrengthsFinder 2.0 is an effort to get the core message and language out to a much broader audience. We had no idea how well received the first strengths book would be by general readers -- it was oriented more toward managers -- or that the energy and excitement would continue to grow. More than two million people have taken the StrengthsFinder assessment, and each month, the number of people learning about their talents goes up. But readers keep asking us: "Now that I know about my strengths, what do I do next?" So we went back and surveyed hundreds of them and asked them how they apply their talents. Then we whittled their suggestions down to the ten best ideas for each theme. We also added more than five thousand Strengths Insights to version 2.0 that allow us to offer more individualized theme descriptions than we could before. So, instead of general descriptions of your top five talent themes, in 2.0, you get a talent profile so unique that you're unlikely to share even a sentence with someone else. And as I said, the first book was really written for a business audience. People have had trouble retrofitting the theme descriptions if they are in non-management roles, but they've tried. This book helps readers apply strengths theory to any type of role and gives them ideas to help them apply their talents in their daily life. GMJ: It's been six years since the first book was published, and Gallup has done hundreds of thousands more interviews. Have you discovered anything new about talents and strengths? Have you altered your original premise?

Rath: No, but we've seen more and more evidence that demonstrates that focusing on your talents is important. We did a survey in 2004 that examined what happens when your manager ignores you, focuses on your strengths, or focuses on your weaknesses. We found that if your manager focuses on your strengths, your chances of being actively disengaged go down to one in one hundred. However, if your manager primarily focuses on your weaknesses, your chances of being actively disengaged are 22%, and if your manager ignores you, that percentage rises to 40%. GMJ: Why such a high rate of disengagement among those who are ignored?

Rath: It basically mirrors the psychology of raising kids -- being completely ignored is the worst possible psychological state. You would actually feel better if your manager went from ignoring you to focusing on what you do wrong all the time, because then at least she's paying attention to you. GMJ: Did your new research turn up anything that surprised you?

Rath: We've talked a lot about how strengths can help you be more of who you are, and you get more out of your best players, and all of that. But in the last ten years, we've also found that it's a good strategy just to wipe out the extreme negativity in the workplace. I get this question almost every time I talk to a group: "What do I do about that one person who just drags everyone down every day?" My glib answer was to get rid of the person. I always thought there were some people who were just destined to be disengaged in their jobs because that was their personality, and no matter how hard managers tried, there wasn't much they could do with some of those people. But the data from the last five years would suggest that much of that epidemic of disengagement is fixable. More than I ever would have guessed, it helps tremendously if a manager starts by focusing on someone's strengths. You may not take someone who's actively disengaged and make him into your most engaged employee, but it will help get him out of that mindset where he's scaring off colleagues and customers. GMJ: So is that the business case to be made for putting people in roles that play to their strengths? Rath: I think it's the secondary business case. The main business case is that people have a lot more fun and get a lot more done if they're able to spend time in areas where they have some natural talent. I think that's a fundamental principle that hasn't changed much at all. The one thing that we were clear about in StrengthsFinder 2.0 is that the American dream ideal that "You can be anything you want if you just try hard enough" is detrimental. This is especially true when people buy into it hook, line, and sinker. You may not be able to be anything you want to be, but you can be a lot more of who you already are. [Taking] StrengthsFinder is just a starting point; it's step one of a hundred in figuring out the areas where you have the most potential for growth. GMJ: What is the most challenging aspect of your ongoing strengths research?

Rath: While hundreds of people in our organization continue to research this topic each year, our greatest challenge might be incorporating the new research while making the message even more succinct and applicable to a wider audience. So while we have hundreds of new case studies and meta-analyses about strengths -- and about employee engagement and business outcomes -- we tried to stay as close as we could to the basics. GMJ: The Clifton StrengthsFinder assessment has always categorized talents into thirty-four themes. Have you ever considered adding or subtracting any, or refining them further?

Rath: Yes, we looked at that extensively as we started to review our plan for the updated version of the assessment. We found that so far, the thirty-four themes have done a good job of describing much of what we've learned since releasing the first version of the assessment. If enough people had made a case about a specific theme that didn't exist, we were open to adding that theme. I think we probably will continue to investigate whether there are themes that emerge that we haven't yet picked up on. But there wasn't a real strong case for any additions at this time. GMJ: What would you most like to accomplish with StrengthsFinder 2.0?

Rath: Our big goal and mission as a company is to help people do more of what they do well. We've topped two million completed StrengthsFinder assessments, and it's not too hard to imagine that number getting to twenty million soon. An organization that exists to help people has a responsibility to get better and better. By reaching beyond our initial audience, we help people get the latest and greatest research. But we also hope it helps people live better lives.
See all Editorial Reviews
Product Details

* Hardcover: 183 pages
* Publisher: Gallup Press; 1 edition (February 1, 2007)
* Language: English
* ISBN-10: 159562015X
* ISBN-13: 978-1595620156
* Product Dimensions: 7.5 x 4.9 x 0.9 inches
* Shipping Weight: 11.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
* Average Customer Review: 3.9 out of 5 stars See all reviews (493 customer reviews)
493 Reviews
5 star:
(254)
4 star:
(95)
3 star:
(44)
2 star:
(38)
1 star:
(62)

› See all 493 customer reviews...
› See all 5 discussions...
* Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #32 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
o #1 in Books > Business & Investing > Business Life > Motivation & Self-Improvement
o #2 in Books > Business & Investing > Management & Leadership > Management
o #7 in Books > Professional & Technical > Business Management

Would you like to update product info, give feedback on images, or tell us about a lower price?

More About the Author
Tom Rath
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

› Visit Amazon's Tom Rath Page

Customer Reviews
493 Reviews
5 star:
(254)
4 star:
(95)
3 star:
(44)
2 star:
(38)
1 star:
(62)

Average Customer Review
3.9 out of 5 stars (493 customer reviews)

Share your thoughts with other customers:
Create your own review
Most Helpful Customer Reviews

197 of 222 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars What are the strengths YOU can rely on?, July 14, 2009
By
Strengths Fanatic - See all my reviews
This review is from: StrengthsFinder 2.0 (Hardcover)
Strengths Finder 2.0 is the follow up to Gallup's Now, Discover Your Strengths. The book includes a revamped version of the StrengthsFinder test that shows you not just what your top five strengths are, but also how you rank in the rest of the 34 strengths from Clifton's model. The new book is light on content (very light) but the test is a substantial improvement.

Here's how the book is set up:

StrengthsFinder: The Next Generation
(A short introduction explaining the need for the enhanced edition of the test based upon new thinking and research in strengths psychology)

I: Finding Your Strengths
(A 30-page overview of strengths psychology and how the Gallup system works)

II: Applying Your Strengths
(150 pages outlining each of the 34 themes including what people with that strength look like, how to manage them, and ideas for action if you have that strength).

The StrengthsFinder
(If you haven't taken it before, the code to take the test is provided in a packet inside the book. You actually have to buy the book to take the test)

Emotional Intelligence 2.0 is another book I really enjoyed that follows the SF 2.0 format. Obviously, that test measures emotional intelligence (EQ), but Emotional Intelligence 2.0 has a unique format where the test tells you which of the book's 66 strategies will increase your EQ the most.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comments (10)

635 of 741 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars Beware: You Only Get Your Top 5 Themes And Not All 34 In Order, March 24, 2008
By
Gary Corbin (Grosse Pointe, MI) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: StrengthsFinder 2.0 (Hardcover)
The book is a quick read and very helpful in getting one to think about one's strengths and the potential complementary strengths to look for in others to offset one's weaker areas, if you work in a team environment. However, once I completed the online test and obtained the resultant reports, I was shocked to learn that I would only get the Top 5 Themes, and the other 29 remain a mystery. Upon contacting the company, I learned that for an additional $550.00 I could then obtain the other 29 themes, as well as their order of ranking. It is obvious to me that this book is being used as a sales "hook" to try to get you to spend more money with the company and may also be being used as a "beachhead" sales device to penetrate into potential corporate accounts. I was not surprised or enlightened at all by the results, as I have been through a number of these types of profiling and behavioral characteristics tests over the years. However, they were "somewhat" useful to reconfirm some of my prior findings as still being current as of today. I would recommend the book and online test if you have never been through something like this before. They are quick and very easy to use. Just be aware that the top 5 themes are only a glimpse of your total "being" and the other 29 are just as important to your knowledge about yourself. However, unless you are willing to cough up another $550.00, you may end up disappointed and still a bit "in-the-dark" about your overall strengths. Good luck.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comments (14)

179 of 214 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars Great if you haven't read "Now, Discover Your Strengths" and taken Strengthsfinder, February 19, 2007
By
flotcha (Green River, WY) - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: StrengthsFinder 2.0 (Hardcover)
If you've read Buckingham's books (esp. "Now, Discover Your Strengths") it's hard to say there's much more here. In fact, there isn't. The stickers you can paste on the front of the book and printable door hangers are silly gimmicks, and there is very little new information on your themes.

Is the test really any better or more accurate? It's impossible to say. The book says in most cases you'll end up with four of the same five themes.

If you take the test again and get one or two "new" top 5 themes, you've gained some insight I suppose. This begs the question, why doesn't Gallup rank your strengths 1 through 34 instead of giving you a glimpse of the top 5 only?

This is merely an extra entry fee to move the curtain only slightly. If you're a strengths-based fanatic like me, go ahead and buy it. But be warned, Rath is no Buckingham. "Now Discover" is a vastly superior book.

[[Studies on William James|http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/james.html#varieties]]

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/kevinhall/calvinism-te.pdf

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/kevinhall/calvinism-se.pdf

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/mcnabb/bible-answers-calvinism.PDF

Who was John Calvin?
John Calvin was one of the (if not the) most prominent theologians of the Protestant Reformation. He was
born in France on July 10, 1509 and died in Geneva on May 27, 1564.
Calvin began studying to become a Catholic priest. But being more interested in law and the humanities,
he was not ordained. On November 1, 1533, Calvin gave a speech attacking the Catholic Church and
calling for reforms. From that time forward, he became the most influential Reformation theologian. Today,
most (if not all) Protestant denominations adhere to Calvin's doctrines to some degree.
While Calvin was in Geneva, the Reformed Churches (Presbyterian) accepted his doctrine as though they
were infallible. Calvin is, therefore, known as the founder of the Reformed Churches (Presbyterian
Church).
What is Calvinism?
John Calvin's five main doctrines were adopted as the foundation of the Reformed system of doctrine.
They are conveyed in the acronym "TULIP":
! Total inability (total hereditary depravity, original sin): man is totally depraved, the guilt of sin passes
from generation to generation originating with Adam.
! Unconditional election (predestination): God has predestined certain people to be saved.
! Limited atonement: Christ died only for the people who had been predestined.
! Infallible grace (irresistible grace): the Holy Spirit operates directly upon people, who have been
predestined, to convert them.
! Perseverance of the saints: it is impossible for the elect (the predestined) to fall away once they
have been converted.
For information on Calvinism, go to Tulip.org which is a pro-Calvinism web site maintained by Christ
Covenant Reformed, a particular church of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA).

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/davidriggs/catholic-teaching-examined.PDF

[[Read the booklet here|http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/davidriggs/catholic-teaching-examined.PDF]]

Introduction

Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn, is the story of a desperate young man in search of a teacher. The teacher he finds is a lowland gorilla, who, being a member of a species entirely different from ours, has an entirely different vision of our history and our role in the universe.

The book won the Turner Tomorrow Fellowship in 1991 for a work of fiction offering positive solutions to global problems. It was selected from more than 2500 entries from around the world by a panel of judges that included Nadine Gordimer and Ray Bradbury. Since its initial publication in English in 1992, it has been published in German, Italian, Hungarian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, and Spanish and will soon appear in Dutch.

The author was startled when he began getting letters from teachers telling him they were assigning Ishmael to their classes. Even more surprising was the fact that they were not just teachers of literature, who might be expected to use a novel in class, but teachers of biology, anthropology, sociology, psychology, philosophy, history, and more. He heard from teachers in universities, in graduate schools, in high schools, and even middle schools. They told him how they were using Ishmael in their classes, but they also asked if he knew of other teachers with whom they might compare ideas and notes.
That’s why we put together The Ishmael Companion. The teachers who share their thoughts and classroom activities with you in the following pages are representative of the several hundred who have written the author over the past few years to share their classroom experience of using Ishmael. What we found, in collecting information for this guide is that Ishmael lends itself to diversity. The ways teachers use the book are as different and creative as the teachers themselves and the schools they teach in. We hope you’ll find their experience stimulating and useful in your own teaching.

Sally Helms Maher & Rennie Quinn

The Ishmael Companion: Classroom Notes from Teachers
Copyright © 1995 QGQ Incorporated
Published by The Hard Rain Press, Austin, TX

This book is intended as a tool for teachers, and the information in it may be freely copied and shared in whole or in part. It may not, however, be reproduced in any medium for resale without permission of the copyright holder. For additional information or copies of The Ishmael Companion, write
The Ishmael Companion, PO Box 163686, Austin, TX 78716-3686.

Project development and coordination: Sally Helms Maher
Editorial and production: Rennie Quinn

Printed on recycled paper with soy-based ink.
Grades 6-12 Courses

Philosophy/History (Grade 6)
Rob Williams, Albuquerque Academy
Albuquerque, NM

The course and students This is an interdisciplinary, teacher-driven and -planned sixth grade program with 140 students. The seven teachers have regular meetings (every other day for 45 minutes) to plan curriculum together and work out schedules. Students come to the Academy from elementary schools all over the greater Albuquerque area and are generally a bright, creative, and articulate bunch, looking for new intellectual challenges. Instead of the usual class section divisions, students form villages, clans, and lodges and operate within these groups all year. The configuration changes according to what suits the needs of a particular course or day’s work. (Two clans from different villages may meet for a special math session. Then they may join others in their village, but from different clans, for a large-group session in history.) This structure provides an enormous amount of flexibility for both teachers and students.

Why Ishmael? We initially decided to use the book be-cause the history teachers in the program were looking for a foundational text that connected the various components of the course—philosophy, geography, and a historical look at cultures, specifically the hunter/gatherer and agricultural modes of living. Ishmael proved a natural selection and served the needs of our program in a number of ways. It was the driving force for the philosophy program for the year, but overlapped other disciplines as well—ecology, science, writing, geography, even computer class (when students had papers to write).

Class activity Over the course of the year, from October to March (1994-95), we read the book, interspersing it with other projects and activities. We began the year with some dialogue about philosophy, defined in our program as “the love of and search for wisdom.” We then defined ourselves as a “community of philosophic inquiry,” and, together with the students, developed guidelines for engaging in phil-osophic dialogue with one another, talking first about the importance of effective question-asking and then about how to share ideas with one another in a constructive and respectful fashion. (See example A at the end of this narrative.) We always sat in a circle to facilitate direct eye contact and equality with one another and gradually turned over control of the class to the students, who began to moderate discussions by asking questions and drawing out important ideas, images, stories, and metaphors from the book, using a set of moderator ideas we’d developed as a guide. (See example B) By January the students were moderating all the discussions, and I only spoke up when points needed clarification or they had reached an impasse that needed outside intervention.
We read the book slowly (some students complained “too slowly”!) and trained them to read critically each portion of the text, marking their books as they did so. They looked for new and unfamiliar words, questions the author posed, major ideas of the story, powerful images or moments, marking them in appropriate ways (See example C), and included any other questions, comments, or drawings in the margin or at the end of the section. Students who showed up for class without any markings in their books were asked to leave the discussion to read critically and rejoin the discussion when finished. They soon learned the value placed on preparing their thoughts and their text ahead of time, and few were unprepared after the initial period of adjustment to our system.

Skills Questioning; developing a community of inquiry; learning to use moderating techniques; critical reading and thinking; writing.

Assessment Classroom observation of students on a daily basis proved critical, and with the students acting as moderators, I was free to observe the class in action, noting which students asked intelligent questions, which built on the ideas of others, and which seemed “out of it.” Keeping track of students who had not read critically proved useful, though with one or two exceptions, all remained faithful to the process. We had students complete two writing assignments with the book, although having them keep a log of thoughts would have proved useful and may be tried in the future. They also engaged in a final two-day philosophical exercise in which they wrote thoughtful responses to questions on the book given to them in advance (See example D) and identified almost one hundred new vocabulary words from the book (See example E). On a more creative note, we had each student choose his or her favorite metaphor or story from the book and illustrate it by creating a two- or three-dimensional project that represented the story or metaphor and describing it in a written attachment as well. A final written reflective piece at the very end of the year summarized each student’s thoughts on the book and what he or she learned from reading it in terms of both skills and content (See example F).
We also used the ideas in the book with two group simulations (the Adapt program of the Interact Company). In this project students, in groups of four or five, imagine them-selves first as leaders of a small band of hunter/gatherers and then as a small village of agriculturalists who must select a place to live on an imaginary continent, keeping in mind geographic variables and potential hazards of the continent.

Student response The students generally enjoyed the book. Initially, many felt it to be too difficult, but the slow pace, combined with valuable classroom questioning and reflective discussion time, allowed them to air their concerns in a safe and supportive environment. Many found the critical reading process to be beneficial, while others found it too tedious. Most thought the book should be used again in sixth grade. A typical response was that of the student who thought the book contained too little plot to captivate eleven-year-olds, but also felt his thinking had been changed by the book: “Before I read Ishmael I had an empty spot in my mind, and now I can never imagine living without it.” Some students found the ideas in the book to be scary, but dealing with the notion of a society that might self-destruct if its excesses aren’t checked is very much on young people’s minds. Every once in a while I let students just talk about how they felt about the book itself, rather than having them always fleshing out the ideas. This seemed to work well.

Summing up I was pleased with how deeply the students got into the book, and I would certainly use it again in a sixth grade class. I’d have the students do more writing (probably in a journal-type format) about their reactions to Ishmael. I’d also hold them more accountable for vocabulary: rather than giving them a final vocabulary exercise, I’d incorporate the new words into our discussions on a more regular basis. I’d recommend balancing the critical reading component for the philosophical sections of the book with regular reading for the sections of plot—a technique I’ll try in the future.
The daily moderating process was remarkable. Sixth graders are a creative bunch, and my students really took the opportunity to create some engaging classroom dialogues as moderators, using either the techniques I suggested or the ones they created themselves. Any opportunity to provide them with a creative outlet for the ideas in the book proved useful. We even got the students together with a class of twelfth graders who had read the book, and they put together a full-length film version of their interpretation of the book. Very cool!
There are all kinds of ways to spin off the ideas in the text (ecology, media studies and literacy, ancient history, current events, etc). I’d advise going slowly at first, and laying the philosophical groundwork. I found that students this young needed to be reminded continually of their responsibilities to the text and to each other. But they soon found that learning from one another is both challenging and fun, and I was rewarded by realizing that I’d empowered these students to be independent learners—certainly a worthwhile goal. Ishmael is of great significance in raising challenging and provocative questions about our own culture, where we’ve been, and where we’re headed. Thus, it’s an important book.

(In their original form, each of the following examples was a sheet of one or more pages. We’ve condensed —and in some cases abridged— them because of space limitations. But because these students are the youngest we know of using Ishmael, we wanted to give you most of the actual material used with the class. ED.)

A: Student-generated Discussion Guidelines
(The class wrote these guidelines on poster board, which we kept on display in the center of our circle as a reminder of our responsibilities to one another.)
AN ENGAGED MEMBER OF “THE SACRED HOOP”: 1. RESPECTS the ideas of others; 2. ASKS effective questions; 3. REFERS to the text, early and often; 4. LISTENS actively to the discussion; 5. BUILDS ON the ideas of others, even when disagreeing; 6. LEAVES if unwilling or unable to participate.

B: Moderator Ideas Sheet
Here are some ideas you can use as moderator for any discussion (including class discussions on Ishmael). Feel free to create your own ideas and add them to the list. Remember, an effective moderator steers a discussion and helps the class get the gist of the reading but talks as little as possible. Always (!) sit in a circle: doing so fosters eye contact, equality, and respect for each other.
1. In advance, develop one or two open-ended questions based on the reading. Write them on the board and spend the class discussing them.
2. At the beginning of class, assign each person a page or two, and ask them to select the word, phrase, sentence, concept, or idea that is most important on that page, and write it on the board. Then discuss as a class.
3. At the beginning of class, divide the class up into smaller groups and continue with #1 or #2 above. If you have time, bring the smaller groups together for a large group debriefing during the second half of the class.
4. Have individuals or small groups develop their own ques-tions, based on the reading. Write them on the board and then discuss them as a class.
5. Give the class a few minutes to collect thoughts, then randomly ask individuals to share their own perspective on the reading. You can determine which questions you want to follow up on, and which you want to “let sit” for awhile.
6. Go around the circle, and, with no one interrupting, have each person share a thought on the reading. Then, after everyone has spoken, open it up for discussion.
7. In advance, select one or more significant quotations from the reading. Write them on the board and discuss them.
8. In advance, select key concepts or ideas from the reading. Write them on the board and give members of the class a few minutes to illustrate them. Then discuss.
9. Create your own moderating scenario.

C: Thoughts on Reading Critically
Reading critically demands that we pay attention to our level of engagement in a text. Rather than pleasure reading (which has its own importance), critical reading requires more energy. Below you will find several useful steps that will enable you to become a more effective critical reader. Internalize this process so that it becomes part of your learning.
A Suggested Five-Step Process
1. Find a comfortable place to read. It must be relatively quiet and allow you to write easily in the text. (Beds may be great, but they induce sleep.)
2. Find a writing implement—a pen or a pencil. (Highlighters do not allow for writing in the text.)
3. Read the text slowly and careful, allowing yourself time to stop and reflect on what’s being said and how it’s being said.
4. Read the text again, with pen or pencil in hand: a. Draw a box around any words that are new to you and define the word in the margin, using a dictionary if needed. b. Underline any major ideas or points you feel the author is trying to make. c. Place a “Q” in the margin next to questions the author raises. c. Place a star next to descriptive images or intriguing phrases that grab you. d. Finally, write your own questions and comments in the margin.
5. Gather your thoughts together for class discussion.

D: Ishmael Final: Written Philosophical Exercise
Greetings, fellow philosopher. You will be participating in an Ishmael final that will consist of two parts: 1. Correctly identifying philosophical vocabulary from the book (one class). 2. Discussing essential questions from the book (one class). In an effort to help you, I am providing you with both the “essential questions” and the vocabulary below. I will choose one of the questions, and you will choose two of them. You will write on all three during one class period. Please be as specific as possible, using examples from the book when necessary.
1. Discuss, specifically, the various roles of Ishmael and the narrator in the book. What philosophical and metaphorical purposes do each of them serve?
2. As fully as you can, explain what Ishmael means by “Mother Culture,” and “her” relationship to us as individuals.
3. Explain and discuss the meaning of THREE of the following stories: a. the jellyfish story; b. The Taker Thunderbolt; c. Cain and Abel; 4. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; 5. The story of Ishmael (Old Testament)
4. According to Ishmael, what three specific ingredients make up a culture? Which of the three do you think is most important?
5. Discuss FOUR important difference between Leaver cultures and Taker cultures, according to the book. (You may want to provide specific examples of the two cultures in your answer.)
6 Explain the historic importance of our agricultural revolution, according to Ishmael. How, specifically, did it change society?
7. Toward the end of the book, the narrator says that people “need a vision of the world and of themselves that inspires them.” What are the specific ingredients of that vision, according to Ishmael and the narrator?

E: Ishmael Vocabulary Final Exercise
(Only five of the original fifty quotes from the book are given here, as a sample. ED.)
Directions: Identify the meaning of each of the underlined words in the sentences below, in a few words or less. Use your knowledge of the words and the context of the sentence to help you! Good luck, fellow philosopher.
1. “Takers believe in their revolution, even when they enjoy none of its benefits. There are no grumblers, no dissidents, no counter revolutionaries. “
2. “According to your maps, the world of thought is coterminous with your culture.”
3. “As an omnivore, his dietary range is immense.”
4. “With agriculture, those limitations vanished, and his rise was meteoric.”
5. “It’s another case where diversity seems to work better than homogeneity.”

F: Ishmael Final Reflection
What a year it has been with this text! I am proud of your hard work and effort in reading such a challenging and provocative work. You taught me many things! I need your constructive feedback on using this book in a sixth grade program. In reflecting on your relationship with the book, please consider the following: the critical reading process, class discussions in philosophy, the moderating process, writing (the letter to Daniel Quinn, the two-day in-class final), the filmmaking project, and any other activities or experiences associated with the book.
1. In reading Ishmael, what did you learn: a. about yourself? b. about the world? c. about learning?
2. What do you feel are the most important themes in Ishmael?
3. Describe your most favorite and your least favorite Ishmael activity and why you chose each.
4. Would you recommend this book to other readers your age? Why or why not? Should it be taught in the sixth grade next year? Why or why not?

World Civilizations (Grades 7-9)
World Cultures (Grades 9-12)
Stephen Myers, Traveling School International
Santa Cruz, CA

World Civilizations
The course and students The school is a comprehensive junior/senior high (grades 6-12), nonprofit, private school averaging 35 students. We educate students to be global citizens through travel and international exchange programs combined with a comprehensive academic course of studies. Most students are highly motivated and college-track. World Civilizations has about 10-12 students, and we study both past and present civilizations.

Why Ishmael? I use Ishmael in both World Civilizations and World Cultures because it provides my students with a context for their study. The book challenges the traditional point of view, which defines progress as human beings building, controlling, and conquering nature. Ishmael gives an alternative interpretation. This encourages students to rethink their definitions of civilization and of progress.

Class activity We read Ishmael at the start of the course, over a period of about five weeks, using a combination of methods. Sometimes I have them read aloud in class and sometimes on their own or in reading groups. I also have parents get together with a group and read with them. (Parents come in several times a week and work with the students. It works well, and they all like doing it.) I’ve also used the audio tape of Ishmael. Although it's condensed (cut nearly in half to fit 180-minute format, ED.), it gives a good overview. Whether or not I use the tape depends on the class. If they find the text too daunting, listening to the tape helps them get started. Or I might use at it the end as a summary.
I have a group of students take a civilization and analyze it in terms of both the contemporary, common point of view and then from Ishmael’s point of view. Once they’ve read Ishmael, they reconsider what is the criterion of a civilized society. They discuss this in groups and then make a presentation to the class. (A lot of what comes out is new ways to design laws to protect the environment and prevent growth.)
Many of the things we do are related to what comes up in class, what their questions are, what they’re ready for. I structure the class to allow this and stay alert to their interest and readiness. Each class is different.

Skills Critical thinking; vocabulary (I have the students make lists of words that are foreign to them and then we discuss them.); knowledge of history (When an event or place is mentioned in the text I may ask students to do some research. For example, in one section Ishmael talks about the Tigris/Euphrates area. This opens up a conversation with the students: Do you know what this is, where this is, and what he's talking about? Then they research that area.); writing (Especially dialogue. When Ishmael talks, he has a special tone. Sometimes it’s condescending, sometimes compassionate, sometimes exasperated. We discuss what is being used to create that kind of tone or feeling. I then ask students to try to write their own dialogue creating a specific tone they have in mind.)

Assessment I give quick little quizzes each day to see if they understand the content and have them write a couple of essays to see if they’re getting the concepts. There might be a final test, usually a group test (we do nearly everything in groups), where they'll have to take a position and defend it using the book as a back up. They can attack or support a thesis, but they must show that they have used material from the book. They may also use other sources.

Student response It's somewhere between fascination and confusion. They’re fascinated with the ideas, and en-thralled, but they’re confused about coming to terms with a new idea and what it might mean for them. This group is young and some of the concepts in the book are difficult.

Summing up Some of the younger students get bogged down in the reading and get more out of listening, so I’ve considered using just the audio tape for them. I might supplement the tape with some reading from the book. For example, the history lessons are not on the tape, so I might read some of those to the class. Our school spends a lot of time traveling and studying different places. I find that Ishmael relates not just to social sciences but to the way we live and relate to one another, and it helps students understand their own behavioral dynamics more clearly.

World Cultures
The course and students This is a full-year course with 10-12 senior high students. The major portion of the class is a two- or three- month visit to another country, usually in late winter/early spring. We stay with families and also spend some time touring. Students attend classes in the country we visit, but also have class with me at other times, and I teach classes in an exchange program. Where we go varies from year to year. South Africa, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Thailand, Australia, India, Ireland, Indonesia, England, and Malaysia are some of the countries we’ve visited. We study the culture of the country before we go, and read Ishmael to provide a context for that study.

Class activity In this class we focus more on debate and discussion than in World Civilizations, and students usually write four or five essays during the four weeks we spend on Ishmael. When we read the book depends on the class. Generally, I assign it before we travel, but the most recent group wasn’t ready for it, so we went to Zimbabwe first and experienced the culture. When we returned, students were able to read Ishmael and relate its ideas to what they had personally seen and felt and learned in Africa. Because they had seen Great Zimbabwe (the ancient stone ruins from which the country takes its name) and learned about its history firsthand, they could write about it in relation to ideas in Ishmael with greater understanding.

Sample: Essay Assignments:
1. Write a paper from the Takers’ point of view telling the story of Great Zimbabwe; then write it from the Leavers’ point of view.
2. Based on the projections described in the book, write a history of the world for the next five decades. Make up events that are consistent with the point of view you adopt (the cynics generally adopt a Taker point of view.)
3. You're a politician transformed by reading Ishmael. What laws would you enact in order to turn things around?

Skills Critical thinking; writing; vocabulary; debating; un-
derstanding and appreciating cultural diversity.

Assessment In addition to the essays and regular exams, I give them a questionnaire to help them assess their own work.

Student response The students like the book, though sometimes they think it's weird. (Older kids sometimes have trouble buying into a telepathic ape, but they get past that when we look at it as a lesson in metaphor.) It validates students’ point of view about what's wrong with the world and more or less reinforces their own idealism. It also sustains their motivation. Sometimes they get annoyed because they think the student in the book is so willingly led. Then when they see the love that grows between the two characters, they shift and become sympathetic.

Summing up I’ve been using Ishmael since 1992, and I’ll certainly continue to do so. (It’s used in our science department as well. The ecology teacher discusses habitats and niches and what would happen if something on the food chain were eliminated. So Ishmael creates a macro view of ecology.) When we travel I’d like to present Ishmael when I teach in other classes to see how students react (in South Africa, for example). I think it might be very different for them.

Foundations of Civilization (Grade 9)
Sr. Seminar on Political Science (12)
Karen Quackenbush, Rowland Hall-St. Mark’s School, Salt Lake City, UT

Foundations of Civilization
The course and students The school is a progressive private school with highly motivated students, of whom about 85% take advanced college placement courses. There’s a great deal of parent support, and the school is noted for hands-on learning (e.g. participating in an archaeological dig). Foundations of Civilization Extended Studies is an honors class of 15 students. The course begins with the Paleolithic period and ends with the Fall of Rome. It also examines modern corollaries to each of these periods. ( e.g. after studying the Fertile Crescent, students would consider origins of modern conflict in the Middle East.)

Why Ishmael? As soon as I read Ishmael I knew it was a book that would be important and useful for both these classes. It’s a rich and unique book that teases rather than spoon-feeds and elicits consideration of the limits of our beliefs and life-styles. It’s ideal to get students thinking. With my younger Foundation of Civilization students it provided an underlying thread for the study of past and present. In the Political Science seminar, with older students, it was an ideal springboard for more involved analysis of problems we face today.

Class activity Pre-assignment: Before I assign any reading in Ishmael I have students collect, review, and analyze images and messages offered in local magazines and newspapers (local rather than national or international because I want them to relate to their own community). They create a collage out of the clippings and consider the priorities and values suggested by the images. The exercise not only prepares students for later discussion of Mother Culture (and reconsideration of their initial interpretations) but also encourages application of the ideas presented in Ishmael to their own upbringing and sense of community.
Reading assignments: Students read the entire book before we begin discussion and analysis. I assign one of the 13 sections each night for a couple of weeks and give weekly quizzes. This encourages all to keep up and provides an opportunity for clarifying questions about things that come up in their reading, like terms and metaphors they come across in the text (e.g. Mother Culture, teacher, student, captivity, culture, Takers, Leavers, certain knowledge, peace-keeping laws, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, the airman and the craft of civilization, and Bwana). Then, when they’ve finished reading the book, and are equipped with their notes and questions, we launch into a series of discussions, using the Socratic method.

Sample: Discussion Questions
I give some background information and examples of the Socratic method and have students point to its use by Ishmael in his dealing with his student.
1. Why doesn’t Ishmael simply lecture, tell the student all of his ideas up-front and be done with it? Does the process of learning by questioning encourage more learning or frustration? As a reader, do you take the student’s place and consider Ishmael’s questions for yourself? (This discussion of Socratic method can easily be directed to consideration of the concept of teacher or student and the roles of each.)
2. What is Mother Culture, according to Ishmael? Are the messages described by Ishmael and the student consistent with those identified in the pre-assignment collage? Are there any perceived messages in our collage that counter or challenge Ishmael’s interpretation of Mother Culture?
3. (Students first read a biblical version of the Garden of Eden and Cain and Abel stories. In our school we deal with most questions of religion as philosophy, and students are accus-tomed to this approach. Thus they don’t feel threatened by a discussion of these stories.) Describe Ishmael’s version of the Garden of Eden. What was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and why might it be a dangerous illusion (or placebo) for man? Why are there different versions of this story, according to Ishmael? What triggered the cultural amnesia we experience? What framework for decision-making (paradigm) would man have by eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? What is the usual explanation of Cain’s attack on Abel? Ishmael relates the story to Taker expansion. Explain. Why must Takers expand?
4. Consider the airman and aircraft of civilization metaphors. What has blinded the airman? What evidence suggests that the civilization built by Takers is not working? What evidence do Takers point to that suggests it is working? From what laws does Ishmael suggest that Takers exempt themselves and why? Does Ishmael suggest the only way Takers can escape the “crash” is by abandoning “civilization” and returning to nomadic, hunting-gathering lifestyles? Explain.
5. Ishmael claims one expertise. What is it? Relate this expertise to lessons shared in the story (role-play) of Bwana. What is Bwana’s basic fear of Leaver cultures? Why must he “modernize” these societies. What threat does he perceive and why? What is holding Bwana-Takers captive? Is cynicism a part of this captivity? What is Ishmael’s challenge to the student (and to us)?

Sample: Other Activities
We did all these things, usually in a group, which triggers more responses.
1. Brainstorm to create a list of characteristics of a “healthy” Taker culture.
2. Read short stories, poems, or political documents like the U.S. Constitution for evidence of the cultural myths suggested by Ishmael.
3. Interview people from backgrounds different from your own and begin to put together a greater cultural story of humanity. (Students look for commonalities and differences and explore the “why” of each. Especially enlightening are interviews and exchanges with people from traditional cultures. In Salt Lake, for example, we’re able to draw on both Native Americans and Tibetans and create rich counterexamples to Taker society. )
4. Design a project in political/cultural/social/economic activ-ism that addresses the paralysis induced by cynicism, the attitude that “everything is so screwed up nothing I can do will make any difference.” (They research a particular topic and become immersed in it, keeping a scrapbook of media coverage, their contacts and interviews, pictures of themselves involved with the problem, whatever they want. I grill them to make sure they’ve selected an issue they’re truly interested in. Through the study of Ishmael they’ve learned not to just accept in-formation at face value. Consequently they’re able to evaluate arguments, look at propaganda from both sides, and become, ultimately, problem solvers.)

Skills Critical thinking; problem solving; analysis; political participation; character development.

Assessment I used quizzes during the reading, and an essay question on Ishmael dealing with cynicism and paralysis that enabled students to relate what they’d learned in the book to their projects.

Student response They soaked it up! But even this group of advanced freshmen found the going hard at times because they didn’t understand all the references to metaphors and needed more guidance than the older students. They often needed permission to question and still looked to me for answers. (But my group of less-advanced freshmen was very put out that they weren’t in on the Ishmael project too, because they heard their friends talking about it all the time!)

Summing up In future uses, I’ll work to get students to to look beyond me as teacher-authority figure, to get them to see that “teacher” equals “leader” rather than someone who sets limits.

Senior Seminar on Political Science
The course and students In this course, which is a history elective, we spend the first trimester on political philosophy and the second on political models (parliamentary in the U.K., presidential in Brazil, Communist in China, emerging in South Africa). In the third trimester we study the United States and foreign policy and read Ishmael. This was a senior seminar class of six very motivated students who operated at a very high level, college level.

Class activity I had students read Ishmael in its entirety, noting their questions, before we began discussing it. (Specific discussion questions were very much like those for Foundations of Civilization.) This discussion formed the basis of the seminar and for the development of the foreign policy project—the major project. Here’s a general synopsis of how it worked: After reading Ishmael, especially the Bwana role-play, students described a pessimistic frame-work that shapes the decisions and priorities of Takers—no trust, need for control, need to establish our own security, etc. They related this pessimistic attitude to the political philosophers we studied in the second segment of the course (Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Mill, Marx, etc.) who have shaped Western culture and tied it to a cultural celebration of cynicism. Specifically, they noted cynicism and pessimism embedded in pragmatic approaches to foreign policy, which, of course, are based on the strategic needs of the U.S. They considered the limits and costs of this approach and whether any other policy options could be viable in a decidedly non-utopian world, or in effect, are we captive to a myth? With this as their underlying structure, they undertook the study of a specific foreign policy situation (Tibetan relocation and occupation of Tibet by China) and wrote a paper offering their own policy suggestions.
Salt Lake City is part of a federally funded Tibetan relocation program through which Tibetans are granted visas in order to advocate Tibetan culture and point up the occupation of Tibet by China. Consequently, the students were able to interview monks, students, government workers, and tradespeople who had been relocated. They also gathered information from the Chinese embassy, Congress, the State Department, and the International Campaign for Free Tibet. Each student considered the lessons of Ishmael and wrestled with the task of reducing large, abstract ideas to concrete policy suggestions. The project was not only a hands-on approach to familiarization with the process and conflicts of policy-making but also was a vehicle for response to the challenge proposed by Ishmael—to build a new paradigm.

Assessment Quizzes and essay tests on policy-making and Ishmael. The extended paper on formal policy proposal was the major tool.

Student response The seniors gobbled Ishmael up, took it as an intellectual challenge. (One called me as soon as he finished to thank me for assigning it, and they’ve introduced their friends to it as well.) They were willing to take on the hard issues and found it refreshing not to be preached to. This was the main difference between the two classes: the older students welcomed the challenge, the younger ones were a bit afraid of it.
Summing up Ishmael’s exploration of cultural mythology,
of paradigm building, of power relationships and drive for control, and his reinterpretation of human stories provide a rich resource for any class addressing political philosophy and organization. I was able to bring the Tibetan program into this seminar because I was using Ishmael as a springboard. Otherwise I would have just had to preach the idea of looking at alternatives. This way, students could see alternatives, that it might be possible to create a different foreign policy. They could recognize the need for creative thinking and problem-solving as a way they might make a difference in their world, and they discovered they were willing to roll up their shirtsleeves and dive into it.

World History (Grades 9 and 10)
Michael Read, Stephen F. Austin HS
Austin, TX

The course and students This is an honors course of freshmen and sophomores. This year I’m teaching four sections, with about 35 students in each. Since the school is located centrally, it draws a pretty mixed group of students, from all parts of the city. Reading levels of this class range from the 60th to 90th percentile.

Why Ishmael? I knew as soon as I read Ishmael that it was an important book I had to share with my students. For World History, especially, it offers an overview of how we got where we are today that helps students see the whole picture. Because I was so excited by the book, I figured my students would be too. (I also use it with my Humanities elective for gifted and talented juniors and seniors. I use it as a jumping off point for comparison of Western and Eastern Civilization because the issues raised are philosophical, and it gives the students a different point of view.)

Class activity I’ve been using Ishmael for the past three years and have tried out different things. Some have worked, others I’ve tossed out. But I always assign the book at the beginning of the year, before I even hand out the textbook, so they start right out realizing that there is another point of view. They get a sense of the Leaver story as a basis for the rest of their study of world history. We spend about three weeks of class on Ishmael, then go on to the text. But throughout the year I refer the students back to the book. We talk about what Ishmael would say about the issues we’re discussing. This year, for the first time, I assigned only about 20 pages of the book each night and asked them to write out five questions about the material. This worked much better than what I’d done previously (assigning whole sections, which sometimes ran to 60 pages). Teaching style is crucial to understanding with this book. Mine is Socratic, so I when I make an assignment I tell students to come in with their questions, for me and for each other. I also generate questions, and each day in class we set up a dialogue around a body of information.

Skills Critical thinking is my focus. The two things I feel they should learn in this course are to view a body of work critically and to see that there are different points of view.

Assessment I give some quizzes but mainly just include questions on Ishmael as part of ordinary testing for class. One essay question, for example, asked them to give three different interpretations of the koan that appears on Ishmael’s poster.

Student response Some have trouble with the idea of a gorilla that communicates telepathically, and one class couldn’t get past it. Most are very positive and come away with the sense that they can make a difference in the world. One student who was in my class as a freshman read Ishmael again on his own as a senior. He got something completely different out of it as a more mature reader and understood it better. Quite a few ask if they can take the book home to their parents to read, and it becomes family dinner table talk.

Summing up This is a book that can be used all through the study of World History, even after the few weeks of formal study of Ishmael are over. Bringing it back in throughout the course helps students step back from events in history and evaluate them. I’d advise other teachers to teach it as a work of philosophy rather than as a novel and to break it up into small assignments. I rushed through it to meet the curriculum, but now I’d use Ishmael and The Republic and throw everything else away. ( A cautionary note: don’t get hung up on the Genesis stories if they’re troubling for some of your students. Deal with them and move on; sometimes I don’t even talk about them, depending on the class.)

Anthropology (Grades 11 and 12)
Terence Collins, Chippewa Valley HS
Clinton Township, MI

The course and students I first used Ishmael in both sections of my Anthropology class in the spring of 1995. Most of the 55 students were juniors and seniors, but there were a few sophomores, and nearly all were bound for college.

Why Ishmael? The book was mentioned in two different sessions at the Annual Conference of the World History Association and the Rocky Mountain World History Association in 1994. I got a copy, read it as soon as I got home, and was very impressed. It promised to be a vehicle I could use to convey many of the issues I wanted my students to address. (I wanted to deal with the “big picture” of human evolution and its astounding implications; to get free of our anthropocentric view of evolution; and to examine the extraordinary relationship between the human species and the biophysical environment and consider whether this relationship is sustainable.) Ishmael enabled me to do all these things.

Class activity Ishmael was the primary text for this class, which might better be called Philosophical Anthropology. Our regular Anthropology text became a reference and background source in connection with issues raised by Ishmael. We used several videos (Millennium, Mindwalk) in connection with the book, and in the second half of the course I had students read Kurt Vonnegut’s Galápagos to compare and contrast with Ishmael . Our class discussions were conducted using the Paideia Seminar model (Social Education, January 1995). (This is similar to the pattern described by Rob Williams on p. 4 and Stacy Studebaker on p. 13. ED.) Here are some of the topics covered, with a few of the questions raised for each.

Sample: Anthropology Topics and Quesions
1. The concept of captivity as a metaphor for culture in relation to thoughts and behavior of that culture. (Can we as a culture identify the bars of our prison, or are we too happy in our captivity to care? Is our society really a cultural prison? )
2. Questions of culture brought out by Ishmael. (Can the cultural myth be exposed so that all people see it for a myth? Could the myth be changed to create a new culture with a sustainable way of life? What might get in the way of such change? What are the origins of culture and cultural beliefs, especially ours?)
3. The need to create a new cultural myth. (Is the cultural myth of our society leading to our demise? Can a complex cultural myth such as ours be sufficiently changed, and how?
4. Living in conformity with the natural law. (Can we make our own laws, or with the natural law ultimately catch up to us? Is it possible, with technology, for man to control nature itself and all its processes? Or would this attempt make things worse? Since it isn’t feasible for current society to go back to hunting and gathering, what can we do?)

Assessment In addition to usual course tests, students wrote a paper with the title How Should We Live? This was their chance to draw together all the strands of our class discussion revolving around Ishmael and supplementary articles, books, and videos and analyze and synthesize it.

Student response My students had mixed reactions. Those few given to a consideration of large issues and possessed of much tolerance for ambiguity found Ishmael to be stimulating and thought-provoking. Others found it perplexing and confusing. It’s very difficult to stand back from one’s own culture and question its deep underlying premise at any age—let alone at 15 or 16, when such questioning has never before been asked of you. A number of them had questions they felt were not addressed adequately in the book (some of these are addressed in the section Student Puzzlers on p. 22, ED.)
Summing up A current emphasis in education is on meta-cognition, or thinking about thinking. I found Ishmael to be a great tool in this type of teaching. Throughout the book Ishmael tries to get his student to step back from his own culture, to study its thought processes and see the underlying premises behind them. The Socratic dialogue and relationship between Ishmael (the Socratic teacher) and his student makes each individual reader into his student as well. Because the teacher is a gorilla, the reader is no longer tied to the idea that life processes are human centered and can indeed step back and see the whole picture more easily. The entire book is based on a meta-cognitive way of thinking and so gets the students thinking in this direction, bringing out ideas and discussion topics from them and getting them to think about their own thinking. Ishmael is almost a detailed guide to how to study the human process of thought and the deep-seated cultural basis of our thought and language. One task of anthropology is to stand outside cultural assumptions and question them, and Ishmael is a tool especially suited for this.

World Geography (Grade 9)
Isobel Stevenson, Johnston HS
Austin, TX

The course and students This is an honors course and the introductory social studies class for students at the Liberal Arts Academy, a magnet program at Johnston High School. There are five sections for approximately 125 students. I wrote the course and teach two sections.

Why Ishmael? One of the main things I want my students to learn is to challenge assumptions. Traditional textbooks present facts as they are understood, but they rarely, if ever, give students any idea of how we came to think a certain way. But Ishmael challenges those assumptions and provides a new way of looking at the familiar.

Class activity The course is issues-based rather than being region-based as most geography courses are. I put emphasis on having models to describe and predict geographical events. The students, therefore, must master some difficult concepts, such as the global circulation of the atmosphere, the demographic transition model, and the species-area curve. During the fall semester we study physical systems, resources and economic development, population, and food, farming, and famine. In the spring we cover endangered species, natural hazards, water, and energy.
We start reading Ishmael at the beginning of the spring semester, as a complement to the endangered species unit, though we are halfway through the semester by the time they’ve done all that I assign on the book. I don’t require students to finish reading it, but most of them do. We have class discussions, and they make responses in the journal they keep for the whole course. We’ve watched a video on how zoos help endangered species and students then contrasted that assumption with what Ishmael says about zoos.

Skills The skill I’m really looking for in having the students read Ishmael is close reading of text. By that I mean that they will be able to extract a line of argument from text and cite evidence for their answers. For example, they take the jellyfish account of creation, show how the author builds his argument, and cite evidence from the text to support that argument.

Assessment I ask students to respond to questions based on the reading assigned over a two-week period. These are open-ended questions, with no right answers, so I grade on the basis of the reasons students give for their responses. Here are some of the things I ask them to consider.

Sample: Open-ended Questions
1. What does Ishmael think of zoos? How does that compare with what your research on saving endangered species tells you?
2. How does Ishmael illustrate the difference between anthropocentrism and biocentrism?
3. Why did the author choose a gorilla and not a cockroach?
4. What does the jellyfish story tell you?
5. What do you think of the “tricks” Ishmael talks about?

Student response The students really like Ishmael. Reading it was easily the most popular thing we did all year, in terms of projects that took longer than a day or two to complete.

Summing up I’m delighted with the way our use of Ishmael worked out. I’ve used it for two years now and don’t anticipate making any changes in the third. I’d caution teachers to distance themselves from the views in the book, since some may be at odds with values students and their families hold. (This especially true of the jellyfish story of creation and the chapters on the Middle East.)

Global Problems in Moral Perspective
(Grades 11 and 12)
Gary Partenheimer, Northfield Mount Hermon School, Northfield, MA

The course and students This is an independent coeducational boarding school with 1100 students in grades 9-12. More than 20% are from 65 countries outside the U.S. and nearly all go on to college. Two years of coursework in Religious Studies (including biblical studies, comparative religion, philosophy, and ethics ) are required for graduation. The course is a one-term Religious Studies elective open to juniors and seniors (and a few highly motivated soph-omores). Many students take it concurrently with courses in environmental studies. It is well subscribed by international students, with China, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Venezuela, and Zaire represented in recent years. About 60 students take the course each year, and two instructors teach it in four sections of about 15 students each. (The other teacher uses Ishmael as well.)

Why Ishmael? I read Ishmael for the first time as part of an NEH Independent Study project called “Twenty-first Century Heroes in Twentieth Century Literature,” a survey of fiction about people, communities, and nations struggling with the global crises described in works like Silent Spring, Limits to Growth, and Earth in the Balance. After ten years of teaching this Global Problems course I had discovered that the facts students learned about population, species extinction, and the Greenhouse Effect, usually couched in scientific or mathematical terminology, were either too abstract or too overwhelming to be truly useful. Many left the course depressed about the world’s future, but most maintained the same aspirations for their individual lives: college, good job, happiness.
Certain that education should enable and ennoble rather than disable, I turned to literature for imaginative models of the world that these facts predicted and the consequent moral challenges for persons of good will. I also sought resources for teaching the wide perspectives of religious studies, with their emphasis on questions of meaning, purpose, and value, and their power to integrate insights from the sciences and social sciences. Daniel Quinn seems to have read my mind! Ishmael’s concept of Mother Culture whispering the Taker story explains like a laser the most persistent question students ask year after year: “If we know so much about what’s wrong with the world, why do we keep doing it?” Furthermore, the narrator’s “earnest desire to save the world” rings true for so many of my students who have bravely tried to get their classmates to recycle or change their consumption patterns. Finally, the book promises no foolproof program for survival, but in answer to Tolstoy’s lingering question, “What then shall we do?” Ishmael grounds the future in a simple moral imperative: “First, Cain must stop murdering Abel.” The implied assignment of working out the details makes this novel an ideal centerpiece for the Global Problems course.

Class activity We’ve used Ishmael with Donnella Meadows’ collection of editorials, The Global Citizen, as the two major texts for the past three years and plan the same for Winter 1996. Meadows’ opening essay on the concept of “paradigm” with her assertion that: “to solve the world’s gravest problems...the first step is thinking differently,” sets the stage beautifully for Ishmael. I divide reading assignments in accordance with the novel’s 13 sections and spend four class weeks on it in the middle of the course, which allows for ample student discussion, use of related short materials, and project time. (Most of my colleagues allow less time, even as little as two weeks.) Discussions are consistently lively and substantive in every section, whether I lead classes deliberately through each major point or allow freewheeling excursions initiated by the most assertive students. Among the many activities and assignments generated in response to the novel, these have been consistently successful:

Sample: Activities
Discussion topics: How the book would be different as an essay rather than a novel; Mother Culture and the influence of gender; the significance of Ishmael’s name and his name change; the relevance of the Holocaust to Ishmael’s teachings; the concept of myth and how it differs in popular usage; the concept of the sacred and the meaning of “in the hands of the gods”; the difference between Takers and Leavers; the peace-keeping law and whether it applies to humans.
Classroom activities: Individuals or groups volunteer to tell their own (or their culture’s) creation myth and analyze it; several volunteers find themselves aboard the ”Taker Thunder-bolt” and must reach agreement on what to do; individuals or groups choose favorite (or troublesome) passages to present to the class, making connections with course concepts; go around the class asking each student if he or she would accept an invitation to join the “faraway land” described in Chapter Seven.
Writing assignments: Write to the author; summarize what you think are the novel’s five major points; review the twilight treadmill scenario in Chapter Eleven and respond to Ishmael’s question, ”So, do you press the button?” ; write Ishmael’s commencement address (at NMH the commence-ment speaker is selected by the Senior Class Steering Committee); analyze our school from the perspectives of Takers and Leavers.
All-time favorites: Students tell someone outside the class about Ishmael and report to the class about the encounter. (They most frequently choose roommates, faculty they know well such as dorm advisors or coaches, and parents. They love to compare notes on what happened.); a group of students dressed up as gorillas and stood outside the dining hall displaying a two-sided poster like Ishmael’s, then reported to the class on their encounters.

Skills Critical reading and thinking; imaginative problem solving and communication; moral reasoning.

Assessment Ishmael and Elie Wiesel’s Night are two books that almost all students read for their own merits without the usual academic checks. Thus, having given short answer and essay tests in the past, this year I abandoned all quizzes and tests except for optional open-ended take-home mid-term and final exams to comply with current school policy. Instead, it was up to each student to design his or her own mode of response (poetry, sculpture, stories, etc.), subject to the guidance and approval of the instructor and the rest of the class.

Student response The hardest section for most students is the discussion of the stories of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel, but those who have taken our Old Testament course usually sustain the discussion of these chapters. Some foreign students with limited English proficiency have trouble reading, but usually say they like the novel more than most of the difficult materials assigned by our department. At the end of the course, students are required to submit a Personal Learning Summary discussing how they’ve changed as a result of participation in the course, with specific references to important books, assignments, ideas, and classes. Many wrote that reading and discussing Ishmael was a highlight of this course and their whole secondary education!

Summing up Based on my enthusiasm for the book, Ishmael is now a required text in Human Futures, an upperclass history course, and Environmental Problems, a science elective. Five freshmen read it on their own in my Humanities class last year (after reading class notes from Global Problems on my board), and we’re considering it as the culminating text for our required introductory course for younger students. It is also a candidate for the school’s Book-in-Common project, which includes all students, faculty, and staff, plus interested parents.

Environmental Studies (Grades 11and 12)
Stacy Studebaker, Kodiak HS
Kodiak, AK

The class and students Environmental Studies is a junior-senior elective course I initiated two years ago. It’s an honors class, but credit is given only if two semesters are completed (mainly because of a year-long major project). The number of students varies each year from 24 to 33.
I called the class Environmental Studies rather than Environmental Science because I didn’t want to be limited by the accepted traditions or approaches in teaching a science class. I wanted the latitude to teach the course in an interdisciplinary manner, incorporating philosophy, psych-ology, art, music, writing, literature, and multicultural perspectives. My justification for this is that to understand
the environment and the human relationship to the earth, science seems too limiting. I also wanted to offer an alternative to students interested in taking more than the required two years of science—those who might be intimidated by the traditional chemistry-physics route or didn’t want to follow it.

Why Ishmael? A friend gave me the book in 1993, and after reading it through in practically one sitting, I knew it was THE book I’d been looking for to use in my class. Wanting to introduce a keystone work of environmental literature to my students, I had tried using Silent Spring, but found they got bogged down in the technical aspects and missed much of the big message. Ishmael, on the other hand, is short and fairly easy to read at one level, and because of the Socratic format of the conversation between Ishmael and the narrator, it would lend itself perfectly to the Socratic Seminar format of discussing literature I wanted to use. I also intuitively felt the kids would like the book because it’s so nontraditional. (What? The whole book is a conversation between a gorilla and a man?) It leads so methodically and smoothly into many important discoveries of our behavior and how we relate to the earth and raises many essential questions about the human role on earth—timely and important ideas among thinking adolescents.
Mainly, I wanted a book that would generate discussions in which everyone could have something to talk about. That’s the magic of Ishmael. Everyone can relate to it. No matter the culture, gender, economic, or religious background.

Class activity Most of the third quarter of my class is dedicated to reading Ishmael, using the Socratic Seminar Format developed by Michael D. Strong.

Sample: Socratic Seminar Format
1. We all sit around the edge of one big circle; everyone has a copy of Ishmael and a notebook to jot down ideas or questions.
2. All I tell my students about the book beforehand is that it’s a book about how people relate to the environment. I also tell them that there are two groups of people in the book, the Leavers and the Takers. Their job is to learn as much as they can about these two kinds of people for their final assessment project.
3. One student volunteers to begin the reading out loud. Each student reads a page aloud while the others follow along in their copy. We go around the circle reading aloud until we get to a place in the book that I have previously decided is a good place to ask some questions that will generate a discussion. I have my questions written down in front of me, but more always come up during the discussions.
4. We stop reading, and I begin with a question. The only rules for the discussion are: raise your hand before you speak, give the speaker your full attention, everyone’s opinion is valid, no put-downs, everyone should share their thoughts.
5. My role is to ask questions that will spark discussion. I stay pretty neutral and don’t provide answers to the questions. I clarify now and then, try to keep the discussion on track, and give necessary background information. I call on shy students to get them involved or sometimes guide the discussion a little by asking a series of questions. I keep a check list in front of me with the names of the students and keep a record of how many times each student speaks. This helps me know which students need more encouragement.
6. We always have a dictionary or two in the circle to look up unfamiliar words. Students keep a list of new vocabulary words and definitions.
7. At the end of each seminar (class period) we do a de-briefing. We go around the circle, and every student says something about the reading or discussions that day. I then assign a one-paragraph reaction that is due the next day. (I usually get more than one paragraph.) Each day, we begin where we left off the previous day.
8. When we finish the book, at the end of the quarter, the group has really bonded! They have shared much of themselves and explored new territory within. They have touched on and refined some of their primary values. They have developed more self-confidence through expressing and discussing their ideas and values. They have learned to respect the opinions of others and have experienced the power and stimulation of collective intellectual inquiry.

Skills Academic: reading, speaking, listening, critical thinking; Social: teamwork, sensitivity, good manners; Personal: honesty, willingness to accept criticism, respon-sibility, initiative.

Assessment As a final assessment I ask students to demonstrate their understanding of the differences between Leavers and Takers. This demonstration is to be presented to the class and can be in the form of poetry, music, a series of photographs, a video, paintings, sculpture, posters, or a report. I love to see what my students come up with. The work they produce for this assignment is generally of high quality because they’re motivated to put so much of themselves into it.

Student response They’re overwhelmingly positive. Many want to buy their copies of the book when they’re through reading it in class. Many buy more copies for friends and relatives. This is a rather unusual phenomenon at the high school level. (One student bought the book for her mother and father and led them in Socratic Seminars on Ishmael at home. She was a potential drop-out the previous year, but she’s been academically successful ever since.) I’ve had students tell me that Ishmael is the first book they wanted to read from cover to cover. English teachers have told me that students have magically become interested in literature all of a sudden! One English teacher wondered what in the world a science teacher was doing discussing and reading literature in a science class!

Summing up Juniors and seniors seem to really like the Socratic Seminar format. They also have enough maturity to handle some of the more controversial aspects of the book. If you plan to use the book in this format, I’d suggest reading it a couple of times first and deciding ahead of time where your discussion points will be each day. Having a list of already prepared questions each day helps things go more smoothly at first, but don’t be afraid to be spontaneous. Be prepared for some emotional discussion! A lot of personal “stuff” comes out as students explore their own values.
When I discovered that my students were well versed in Taker culture but knew very little about Leaver culture, I assigned Marlo Morgan’s book Mutant Message Downunder. It’s a short, easy-to-read book about the Australian Aborigines (though there’s some controversy about whether it’s fiction or fact). It gives the reader a glimpse into a different mode of human operation that my students found very interesting and made a great follow-up to Ishmael.

Multi-level, English/Science/History
Avery Kerr, Santa Fe Secondary School
Santa Fe, NM

The class and students Santa Fe Secondary school is an independent high school with multi-graded classrooms, which offers basic subjects plus creative and expressive arts, physical exercise, and noncompetitive sports. It’s recognized by the NM State Department of Education, and we’re working toward accreditation. My co-director, Dana Rodda, and I started the school in the fall of 1994, with 24 students—two multi-graded groups of 12 each, ranging in age from 14 to 18 and in reading skills from sixth grade to college freshman.

Why Ishmael? I chose Ishmael to begin our school year because it poses so many questions, both practical and philosophical. It deals with mankind’s origins, the memories and myths about those origins, and the progress and process of our shared experience. It also seemed an ideal book to use with our varied group of students because the language is not difficult, and the ideas and philosophies can be explored in a number of ways, from 3-D art projects to research papers.

Class activity Everybody read Ishmael. We spent five to six weeks on it and incorporated the book into all subject areas: science (evolution), history (values and socio-political interaction), and English (vocabulary, character, the novel, etc.) (The science and history segments were taught by the school’s teachers in those fields.) Drawing on Ishmael , we defined myth and talked about the myths of the Taker culture (media and family myths). We often read articles on current issues and events (e.g Zero Population Growth) and discussed them in relation to Ishmael. For some writing assignments I asked students to respond creatively to different statements made by Ishmael. For example, “A family is like a hand,” or “Everything you need to know can be found in the library.” And, using the book, students also learned to write character sketches.

Skills Creative writing; vocabulary; critical reading and thinking; the development of themes; discussion.

Assessment We used simple vocabulary tests, creative writing assignments, and a semester final. This was a five-page paper (approximately 1000 words) completed over several weeks, from rough draft through final paper.

Sample: Semester Final—English/Science/History
Choose two or three of the following themes: Courage/integrity/
honor; Invention/creativity; Power; Friendship/family; Justice; Individuality/privacy; Nature; Religion; Education/knowledge; Survival.
Explain the relevance of these themes throughout one of the following texts: Ishmael by Daniel Quinn, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, Hamlet by William Shakespeare.
Trace the themes through one of the following aspects of BOTH science and history: Science (evolution, biotechnology, human genome project, scientific enquiry); History (Renais-sance values, Greek-Roman values, the Church, socio-economic class).

Student response Response was mixed. Most everyone “understood” the book, but some complained that “Nothing happened !” (Ishmael is definitely not an action-adventure saga!) Some were discouraged by the vast Taker culture we are part of. Others were hopeful for change.

Summing up I’ll use the book again in a few years when we have a new student body. But next time I’ll proceed more slowly and perhaps even divide the book into sections to explore in depth. For example, I’d explore Leaver societies that exist today and examine their systems. The book also lends itself to in-depth units that relate to our current situation on Planet Earth, and I’d suggest that students investigate some of Ishmael’s biblical, philosophical, mythical, and political references.

Oral Reading (Grades 10, 11,12 Math)
Scott Sauter, Blue Mountain Union School
Wells River, VT

The course and students I teach everything from algebra through calculus in a small rural town in Vermont. Two years ago our daily schedule was changed to accommodate a science lab conflict. The net effect was to take our typical 43-minute block of time and make one block into a 60-minute period. We were told by the administration that we could do anything we wanted with the extra time added to this period. Most teachers chose to use it as a study hall or project period, but I decided to turn the extra time into a read-aloud period à la Jim Trelease in his The Read-Aloud Handbook. So 29 sophomores, juniors, and seniors became listeners for the last 17 minutes of our Algebra II class each day. I began by reading The Education of Little Tree by Forrest Carter.

Why Ishmael? When I learned that teachers in other schools were using Ishmael in the classroom, I decided to give it a try. I had been so impressed with the book when I read it, I felt that if even one student came away under-standing the book’s message, it would be worth it.

Class activity I read and the students listened. They were not held accountable for the books we read, and they didn’t know quite what to make of that. (What? No tests. No papers. Why listen?) I believe, without exception, the entire class was quickly attending to the story at hand. At the end of each book we had a brief discussion. By December, when we had read several books, we all looked forward to the last segment of our math class with relish.
The reading of Ishmael went quite well overall, though it was hard to keep the continuity of its arguments clear in 17-minute snatches. I found myself explaining and re-explaining the argument at hand. I tried to engage the listeners at times by taking Ishmael’s questions and posing them to the class. I also brought articles from the newspaper to help show examples of Mother Culture buzzing away. (e.g. statistics on world population, articles on bio-engineering and en-dangered species.) Things got a bit “hot” in the section of the book with references to the biblical creation story. One mother came in very concerned that I had chosen this book to read. But when I offered to loan her a copy to read herself, she wasn’t interested.

Student response One of the direct spinoffs of reading Ishmael came just as we were finishing the book. Our school found itself in the midst of an environmental crisis. The air quality of the school was tested and found unfit. Five students from the Ishmael class came to me asking what action they could take. We decide to form a student action group, which we called Student Advocates For the Environment (S.A.F.E). Our motto was “Be Part of the Solution.”
Since it began a year ago this group has established a recycling program at our school (more than 6000 pounds of trash in the first five months of school); built composting bins and composted school cafeteria food scraps, which are used on school flower beds and for the elementary school’s indoor tomato-growing project; raised money to buy five acres of rainforest in the Children’s Rainforest in Costa Rica; made a proposal for the three towns that attend our union school to start a recycling station (our modified proposal has recently been accepted by the three towns and should be in operation soon); sent teams of high school students into the elementary school to teach lessons on recycling; and raised money to send five students to Costa Rica during spring vacation to visit the Children’s Rainforest.

Summing up I was amazed at the number of students who were thoroughly engaged during the reading of Ishmael. I would estimate that a third of them were right with me throughout the book. Another third were with me most of the time, and the rest were in and out. (Attendance played a part in losing some of this last group.) Overall, I was amazed and pleased with the interest. I’ve been reading Ishmael again during the same period this year, and so far the response has been similar, very favorable. One student (who struggled academically throughout his school career) went out and bought his own copy of the book because we were reading too slowly for him in class. I gave the book to my brother-in-law, also a teacher. He gave it to a student he thought might like it. The student (a reluctant reader) came back to him and said, “Where did you get this book? I didn’t know there were books like this!” That student is now turning his friends on to the book.

College & University Courses

Economy/Ecology/Ethics
Sabine O’Hara, Siena College
Loudenville, NY

The course and students The course is an upper level elective in Religious Studies. (Siena is a Franciscan college and requires at least two courses in religious studies.) The 35 students were mainly juniors or seniors from all three divisions of the college: Business, Science, and Art and Humanities.

Why Ishmael? After a colleague recommended the book, I adopted it for my class. My intention in using Ishmael was to increase the students’ awareness that though our religious concepts shape our understanding of nature, religion itself is not absolute but is shaped by its social and cultural context. Ishmael’‘s voice of Mother Culture and the distinction made between the Takers and the Leavers, which influences the interpretation of scripture (as in the story of Cain and Abel) makes this point powerfully. Ishmael thus forms a powerful basis for subsequent readings (e.g. a text taking a critical view toward the conceptual framework of The Enlightenment and its resulting attitudes toward nature and technology). The reading of a such a text can easily call forth defensive attitudes, particularly of students in science or business oriented fields. Ishmael makes it easier to question common perceptions and absolutes, and assists in bringing about
openness toward differing world views.

Class activity Ishmael was one of two required texts for the course. The other was After Nature’s Revolt: Eco-Justice and Theology, a collection of essays dealing with various aspects of the Judeo-Christian understanding of stewardship and environmental ethics. (Students found Ishmael much more readable and engaging than the more theoretical essays contained in the reader.) The basic questions addressed in the course concerned the link between economics and ecology and the ethical ramifications of our behavior, around the globe and into the future: Who has a right to grow, a right to prosperity and resource use? Who pays the price for progress and growth? What criteria do we apply to evaluate these questions?
We started by exploring ecological versus economic concepts and issues, then went on to explore concepts of ethics, both social and ecological, that have shaped our human/ecological interactions. A main focus was to question how our religious traditions influence and shape our ethical concepts, both with respect to an ecological and a social ethic. Guest speakers shared with the class their own traditions’ perspective on a socio-ecological ethic.
Finally, in order to keep an applied focus, we looked at the most pressing ecological questions of different continents and/or nations to distinguish between religious and cultural ethical values and their influence on human behavior.
In addition to reading assignments and class discussion, students had a written research assignment, which was a group project for presentation to the class and counted for 30% of the course grade.

Sample: Written Research Assignment
This paper is part a group project, and each group member will contribute an independent aspect to the overall project. Issues to be researched are the most pressing ecological problems in the U.S., Europe, China, India, Latin America, and Africa. Individual aspects include: historic problem assessment, ecological impact, social impact, institutional consequences, and global effects (ecological and/or political).

Skills The ability to critically reflect on one’s own standpoint and context was the major skill. Particularly in higher education, where the absolutes of an objectivist, distanced, and dissecting view of scientific inquiry are alive and well, a questioning of one’s own context and shaping of context is very important. A saying attributed to Einstein makes the point well; “We can’t solve a problem with the same attitude we had when we created it.” Yet a critical reflection of one’s own familiar ways of thinking and frames of reference is not a comfortable thing. The far out, yet loving and intimate story of Ishmael somehow makes this questioning of one’s own frame of reference less painful. It is reminiscent of a coming home, a connecting with a closeness to nature’s animal kingdom familiar from childhood, yet buried under ‘adult’ knowledge.

Student response Students were very positive about the course and most responded positively to Ishmael as well, engaging in some lively and insightful discussions, made even more interesting by the fact that students came from all three divisions of the college. Some had thought extensively about ethics and its relevance for economic and ecological issues, but others had been immersed in their field of science, business, or finance with little concern for ethical questions. I found that business majors tended to take a more pragmatic approach to the ideas than did the liberal arts or social studies students.

Summing up My experience in using Ishmael was very positive. Currently, I’m not teaching an interdisciplinary course like the one described here, since I switched schools and am now teaching at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. However, I am planning on using Ishmael again in the future, possibly as a reading assignment in Ecological Economics or in a First Year Studies course on Nature and Society. I’d heartily encourage teachers to use Ishmael, particularly in interdisciplinary courses involving ecology and culture, philosophy, or values. However, I would also caution them to be prepared for resistance. While the majority of my students related and responded well to Ishmael, it was important to some that the points made in the book were reinforced by more “scientific” readings taken from our other textbook and/or academic journals in the areas of critical theory, philosophy of science, or religion and ethics. Otherwise it could become too easy for some to simply reject Ishmael as fiction with no or little connection to the real world of enlightened citizens.

Freshman Composition
Barbara Bass, Towson State University
Towson, MD

The course and students I've used Ishmael for the past few semesters in my Freshman Composition class to inspire students writing essays about their personal connections with environmental issues. This is a required course, and since Towson State has a very large business department, many of the students are career-track business majors. I had 18 students in each of my two sections.

Why Ishmael? When I read the book, I was very enthusiastic about it and was sure my students would be, too. I like to see Freshman Composition as an avenue for, at the least, consciousness raising and, at the most, social change, and I felt Ishmael would help do that.

Class activity We spend about two weeks with the book doing a variety of activities. 1. As students read the book they write a series of letters to me giving their reactions, raising questions, exploring their thoughts. I read the letters and respond, so we have an ongoing dialogue about it. This gives them a chance to say what they really think without exposing their ideas to anyone but me. (I initially had them use a journal format but found these responses very general. The letters brought out much more personal and individual response to the material. In future classes I may have them choose someone other than me to write to, even Ishmael himself if they want.) 2. They spend several class periods working in groups to develop lists of questions they have about Ishmael and things they learned from reading the book. These lists are written out on newsprint and become the basis for our class discussion. 3. For the final part of the assignment I ask them to write an essay, then work in peer groups to help each other with the organization and development of their ideas through several drafts. Their first drafts, peer group responses, and final papers are all turned in to me.

Sample: At Home Essay (Choose either A or B)
A. Write a well-organized and developed essay explaining a personal perspective on an environmental issue. Incorporate into the essay your readings from Ishmael, using the following format:
1. Choose an environmental issue, preferably one with which you have a personal connection.
2. Describe the issue and write about the conflicts involved in it.
3. Use Quinn's ideas on the environment and our connection with nature to support your thesis and main ideas.
4. Once you have described the issue and the conflicts involved in it, suggest possible consequences and/or propose convincing solutions to the problem.
B. Compare or contrast the environmental philosophies of Forrest Carter as described in The Education of Little Tree and Daniel Quinn in Ishmael. Be sure to include your opinion in this paper. Be sure to support your ideas with examples from Ishmael. You can also refer to other environmental articles we have studied.

Skills Basic writing; organizational skills; working together in groups; critical reading and thinking.

Assessment This final paper was my main assessment tool, but because of their letters to me I had an ongoing sense of the students’ understanding of the material and their ability to communicate their ideas in writing.

Student response Ishmael gets my students thinking. Once they suspend their disbelief and accept a thinking gorilla, they become fascinated with the ideas. Even my fundamentalist students who are Creationists enjoy the reading. They tell their friends and relatives about the book. After reading the book, one of my students said, "This is what college is supposed to be like. I'm really thinking now."

Summing up One student who had trouble with the book in the beginning (a narrator who did not have to report to a daily job bothered him almost as much as a telepathic gorilla) ultimately suspended his disbelief and in his last letter said, “I think this book is great for these times and should be mandatory for students to read.” Ishmael definitely lived up to my expectations. It’s perfect for college students; it inspires them to think. For freshmen it’s a wonderful introduction to a liberal education. I plan on using it in my classes for the foreseeable future.

Environmental Inquiry
Bob Henderson, McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

The course and students These are seniors in the Arts & Sciences Program, a small enclave within the university. Students in this program have a background of high academic achievement and are very motived. Before they get to me, they’ve had courses in Western thought, statistics, calculus, creative arts, writing, logic, technology and society, literature, and physics. The 20 students in the class are a varied group, from different parts of Canada. Many are pursuing a second degree while in Arts & Sciences. All this means that a diverse group deal with issues of Ishmael that demand diversity. Though Environmental Inquiry is a very broad title, I didn’t want to be limited to any particular concept, like deep ecology or environmental management.

Why Ishmael? I didn’t want to create a course that jumped in and answered students’ questions. I wanted to slow them down, so they would ask the crucial questions. I knew Ishmael would help them do that.

Class activity In the first class of the first term, I tell students to read Ishmael, that we can’t move forward in the course until they’ve read the book! This intrigues them because they’re not used to getting assignments on the first day. (And I don’t do any of what they are used to, handing out reading lists, test schedules, etc.) I allow them a week to read it, introducing it simply as an overview to environmental inquiry, a frame in which to consider the course. When they’ve read it, we spend several class sessions on it, doing different things.

Sample: Class Activities
1. We go around the room making open comments, then role-play. (I assign a different role to each student, who must then act what they think of a certain section of the book according to the that role. One might be told to think like a computer, another to be depressed, another a Pollyanna type, one to build consensus, another to create dissension, etc.) The roles ensure a variety of views and really help students understand what’s being said in the book.
2. In groups students are asked to: a. Write an open letter to Ishmael; b. Rewind the story—go back to a certain point and explore a different direction from that point; c. Prepare a campaign slogan for the students’ future efforts in politics.
3. They form a writing circle (a group of five with myself as part of one of the groups). After they read the section in Ishmael that describes the differences between the Taker and Leaver stories, they are to write their life as a Leaver (though still a McMaster student). Starting with getting out of bed, how would a routine day be different (e.g. ways of knowing, ways of valuing, ways of living )? At a signal, they begin writing and write stream of consciousness style, ignoring punctuation, capitalization, etc., until told to stop. At the end they can share some or all of what they’ve written with the class.
In a future class I may ask students to write a journal entry or a short position paper on the topic “He’s just a gorilla anyway, get serious, it’s dumb fiction.” Why this topic? Students, I hope, will see the absurdity of our contemporary view that all is okay, that a technological fix is coming, or we’ll change when we have to (à la the lifeboat ethic).

Student response I found with this group a tendency to criticize everything. (Many thought the book’s narrator was just too stupid and the text dragged.) To them it seemed superficial to “like” something. There was always a “but.” The role-play helped because it took them out of the Arts & Sciences critique mode and made the material more personal. They’ve been trained to the idea that intellect = critique and fear celebration because they don’t want to look unintelligent. I challenged them to tell me (in their journals) what they actually celebrate without a “but.”

Summing up It’s very unusual to ask a class to read one book well rather than read many books superficially. I think the students understood the book’s contents but didn’t take an ”inside view,” a deep view, a celebratory view. Many will later. Their view of themselves as critics hurt the effect, and I’ll address this concern in future classes. Students read the book in September, but in March a few read it again and got a lot more from it. I think I’ll ask them to do a reread when I use it in 95/96. Or I might have the group listen to the audio tape in March instead of rereading the book, which will get a different response perhaps. (Though I read Ishmael again when my students read it, I also keep the tape in my car and listen to it as well. The tape provides a good overview of the book’s content.)

Sociology
Larry R. Ridener, Baylor University
Waco, TX

The course and students I’ve used Ishmael in several classes in different types of colleges in different parts of the U.S. for several years. (Introductory Sociology for lower division undergraduates at the University of Texas-San Antonio; Environmental Sociology for seniors at Mississippi College, an independent church-related school, and at Seattle University, a Roman Catholic school, and Bellevue Community College in Washington. I’m now using the book at Baylor in a Sociological Theory course for upper level students. Class sizes in these courses ranged from over 100 to 25 or 30.

Why Ishmael? I read the book in 1992 when it first came out in hardback and immediately fell in love with it and began using it in class. It seemed a really good vehicle for encouraging students to think.

Class activity We’d spend about two weeks on the book, but I continued to refer to it throughout the course when it was appropriate. My primary interest was in getting students to think. Though just reading the book is provocative in itself, we had class discussions and students wrote a paper on their reactions to the book. In San Antonio we invited Daniel Quinn to visit and answer questions, which gave students additional insight into the book and an opportunity for both group and individual dialogue with the author. For example, one student asked if the gorilla was named Ishmael because he was the symbol for the whole community of life that humans put themselves above and think they can control (the student’s own theory, developed after reading). This was not the author’s original reason for the choice of the name, but he liked it and commended the student on his perception. The student was delighted to have surprised the author (who now has added this explanation to those he gives when asked “Why Ishmael? Or Why a gorilla?”)

Skills Critical thinking; writing ability; creativity.

Assessment The paper I assigned toward the end of the semester was my main assessment tool. It not only brought out what students had learned from reading Ishmael but showed their ability to relate those concepts to the basic sociological concepts we had studied.

Sample: A Guide to Writing Your Paper on Ishmael
This paper should be an interpretive sociological analysis of the book Ishmael. It should be more than a book report and should be written in a scholarly manner. You should include some of the things you have learned in sociology, particularly theoretical orientations and concepts. For example, you should be able to apply some sociological theory to the ideas Daniel Quinn uses in the book. Discuss the Takers and Leavers in terms of conflict theory, structural functionalism, symbolic interactionism, etc. Who are the Takers and Leavers? What is meant by the term Mother Culture? How does it operate? Who is Ishmael? What is he trying to teach and why?
Pick out a portion of the text in Ishmael and expand on it. There is symbolism in the book that can be tied to notions such as: stratification in terms of class, race, or gender; the sociology of religion; political sociology; economics; organi-zations; philosophy; social movements and collective behavior; or any topic of your choice. The possibilities are wide open and are limited only by your imagination (within reason, of course). Relate these ideas to various types of societies—hunter-gatherers, agrarian societies, industrial societies, or post-industrial societies. But don’t rely on long, extensive quotes as the essence of the paper. Tell me what you’ve learned from reading the book.

Student response The reaction of almost all my students has been extremely positive. Every semester I’ve had students thank me for introducing them to Ishmael. Some, on their own initiative, wrote to Daniel Quinn with questions. A couple of students thought I was some kind of far-out radical who was un-Christian and not suited to teach them, but this has been an exception to the general rule. Most students have been challenged by the book and have responded in a very positive manner.

Summing up I’ve used the book since 1992 and will continue to use it in a variety of courses because it teaches a form of critical thinking by experience, and not many teaching tools do that. Ishmael is a great challenge to all my students, and I’d highly encourage any teacher to use it. I’ve recommended it to other professors in anthropology, sociology, and religion, who all told me how much they enjoyed the book, and now they’re using it in their classes too. I’d encourage others to have students write papers giving their interpretations and analyses, because I find that many students will relate the book to some personal experience, which gives it an extra special meaning.

Environmental Policy-Making
Christopher Tracy, James Madison College,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI

The course and students This is an elective course I taught the summer of 1994, but which was not taught this past summer because of insufficient enrollment. The course met for eight weeks, two hours twice a week, and was designed as an introduction to environmental policy-making. The ten students were mainly sophomores and juniors majoring in political theory or international relations. But one was a life studies major at the University of Pennsylvania and another was enrolled in the environmental program at MSU.
Why Ishmael? Ishmael brings out the alarming reality of humanity’s future and the world’s future better than any other source I’ve read. The issues and tentative solutions are presented in a much more accessible way than other sources. I wanted students to understand that economic influences shouldn’t be the only criteria for policy-making, and Ishmael presents the best conglomeration of these other considerations—environmental ethics, philosophy, and religion. Quite often, too, certain ideas can be explored more easily through fiction than the more traditional textbook.

Class activity Because of the small size of the class I taught the course as if it were a seminar, with much interaction and student participation. Essentially, we explored ways in which environmental policy is made. Because this was an introductory course, we were obliged to focus on established modes of policy-making, which entails a significant amount of discussion of cost benefit analysis, economics, and science. However, we also brought in environmental ethics, religion and philosophy, and several other disciplines, and I attempted to have students discover that a variety of disciplines and thought processes shape environmental policy. I assigned Ishmael in particular to aid this far-ranging discussion in terms of considering whether we have preconceived notions of how we as humans relate to the environment. Since students read the book at the beginning of the course, it cropped up again and again during discussions throughout the course. I encouraged students to explore policy decisions through the lens of what might be broadly called environmental ethics, and I believe that Ishmael helped shape the discussion of “alternative” modes of thought a great deal.

Student response Some students responded to the idea of learning from a gorilla with jesting comments, but a great deal of serious interchange also occurred, both in class discussions and on the final exam. The students genuinely enjoyed the book, and I sensed that it encouraged them to think about issues with a new perspective. For example, when they were writing on global warming for the final exam, all the students went through the cost benefit analysis and covered the other typical current thinking on policy-making. But some, after doing that, continued to write as if they were Ishmael, exploring alternatives and looking at the problem from an ethical, philosophical, and planetary perspective.

Assessment I included a long final exam question that drew on students’ understanding of Ishmael and was meant to encourage them to consider how our current policy-making modes of thought (those often driven by economic and/or scientific concerns) might be shaped by our cultural moment. Students were asked to play the role of law clerks involved in a case before the World Court of Justice. (We’ve condensed the question from two single-spaced pages in order to provide a glimpse of what the students were dealing with. ED.)

Sample: Final Exam Question
The World Court of Justice Case #94-8675309
Plaintiffs: The Leavers, members of an environmental interest group/non-governmental organization. Their attorney: the Right Honorable Ishmael. Defendants: The Takers, bureaucrats from a world political body. Their attorney: Dr. Excessive Growth. Justices: J. Blinded B.Y. Science, J. Economic Phil Enmore, and J. Enviro Greenfield.
The issue: The right of “the world” to a balanced and healthful ecology. Plaintiffs seek an order from the court preventing defendants from further logging in “Antreetica,” alleging that deforestation is causing environmental damage and putting at risk the area’s rainforest, rare and unique species of flora and fauna, and its indigenous peoples.
Defendants maintain that plaintiffs don’t have science to support their claims and assert that plaintiffs have no standing to bring this matter before the world court because many of the specifics they cite (dislocation of cultural communities, drought, flooding) are based on future-harm, speculation and/or harm to others.
Write opinions from each justice. Indicate the important facts the justices rely on to reach their conclusions. Set forth the policies and regulations they use as a basis for their opinions. Explain how their perspectives have guided their thinking in reaching their final conclusions. Finally, set forth the conclusion of each justice.
The students, for the most part, readily accepted the challenge, and came up with a variety of interesting responses. One, for example, explained her feelings about how being raised a Roman Catholic may have shaped her notion of nature and the role of humanity in the world. The student sincerely attempted to avoid pigeon-holing organized faith as a negative or positive in the discussion, but rather attempted to objectively consider its influence.

Summing up I was truly excited about using the book in my course, though I admit that because of time and subject matter constraints, I may not have gotten as much out of the text as I desired. I’ll definitely use it again when I teach this course. I would encourage other teachers to use the book, particularly if more time could be committed to exploring the variety of issues the text raises.

Minority Voices in Literature
Richard L. Krupnow
Waupun Correctional Institution, University of Wisconsin Center-Fond du Lac, WI

The course and students Students in this maximum security prison college program must meet basic community college entrance requirements to qualify for the class, which is a writing emphasis course with an enrollment capped at 25. I taught in both the mens’ and women’s divisions of the prison, and chose to focus on myths as the basis for our discussion and writing.

Why Ishmael? It’s a provocative novel, thoughtfully examining our culture and its underlying mythology, and I felt it would provide a central core for our study.

Class activity I use Ishmael with several other works that focus on how myths and the stories we grow up with impact how we perceive reality (Kingston’s The Woman Warrior, Campbell’s The Power of Myth, and Hamilton’s examination of creation myths, In the Beginning). I bring in current headlines and news stories to show how the actions of our society belie our rhetoric and invite students to share some of the stories they grew up with (about relatives, kids in the neighborhood, etc.) and recognize how those stories have shaped their perceptions.
Then I introduce Ishmael, and we analyze how we perceive the world based on Quinn’s Takers and Leavers: Do we really perceive the world differently than native cultures? If so, why? What’s the basis for that belief? Are we pretending we have stolen the knowledge of the gods (because, of course, we can’t really steal it) and acting as if we can determine the fate of all around us? Is our society/civilization really crashing? What evidence is there for positive answers to any of the above questions? Finally, what can we do to change the course of our descent?
I then build on the students’ newly gained perception to examine Native American, Tibetan Buddhist, and Pagan views of humanity’s role in the world with Storm’s Seven Arrows, Yongden’s Mipam, and Bradley’s The Mists of Avalon. I don’t suggest any single one of these philosophies is better than another. But, believing that teaching without values is an ineffective way of teaching, I emphasize that we’re crashing and we better begin looking around to see how we can change our pattern of imagined flight (à la Ishmael). I initiate and encourage discussion of cultural patterns as they’re evidenced in our treatment of native peoples and the environment and within our family and economic structures. During the course, students are assigned several essays, which reflect the focus described above.

Student response All were impressed with Ishmael. After reading it, some approached me with comments like “Wow!” and “Man, I never realized that before.” (The men in particular had a kind of epiphany experience with the book. The women had a more gut level understanding of the concepts and weren’t so surprised at the ideas.) Some were perturbed about the apparent answers to ending our headlong crash—we have to change our myth, and we have to stop pretending we’re the most important things on this planet and in the universe.

Summing up I’ve taught college courses to inmates for four years and have discovered an almost universal common trait—a tendency to see the world in black and white. Ishmael thoughtfully examines what I have been teaching in my English classes since I began teaching in 1986: maybe humanity isn’t God’s gift to the universe, and all the others—plants, animals, and minerals—are patiently waiting for us to catch up to their own level of enlightenment. I will be using it again, though there is a question about funding for this program in the future.

Systems of Survival
Visionaries
Harvey T. Lyon, DePaul University School for New Learning, Chicago, IL

Systems of Survival
The course and students The School for New Learning is an alternative college within the University and has about 2000 students. All work full-time and must be 24 years old to enroll. We have no academic departments at SNL, and the course offerings are not the standard ones found in the rest of the university. Students must take courses that fulfill certain competences within five areas (Arts of Living, Human Community, Physical World, World of Work, and Lifelong Learning) in order to graduate. (In more traditional terms, these might be listed as Arts-Humanities, Sociology-Psychology, Science, Business, and Basic Skills.) These are very challenging and exciting students to teach. (One of my colleagues described them as similar to the GIs who entered college after World War II, very focused and serious about learning.)
The course takes its name from Jane Jacobs’ book Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics. It meets one night a week for ten weeks and averages 25 students.

Why Ishmael? I teach Ishmael as a kind of spiritual detective story. It takes hold of the students just as it did me, which is why I’ve used it in more than one context. I use Ishmael in particular in Systems because it provides a point of view completely opposed to that presented in Jacobs’ book, our main text, and does it through a unique novelistic prism.

Class activity In addition to Jane Jacobs’ book, we read parts of Plato’s The Republic, as well as Machiavelli’s The Prince, and More’s Utopia, and finish the class with Ishmael. Among the questions we explore are: Is work (and should it be) organized inherently differently in commerce and government? Can personal and organizational differences be separated and defined? Can it be argued that there can be only two systems to pursuing a livelihood? If so, what happens in society when the two systems get intermixed (e.g. bringing business efficiency into government and social responsibility into business)? Do past societies as well as contemporary ones give us clues to the answers to such questions? Students give class oral reports and write a term paper on the subject of their choice.

Visionaries
The course and students This is a Capstone Seminar, a five-session course designed to permit students to explore a topic through cross-disciplinary methods of inquiry. I took the title from The Utne Reader (Jan./Feb. 1995), which describes a mixed bag of 100 “visionaries”—activists, academics, poets, physicists, and others. About 20 took the course last year.

Why Ishmael? In this class, the creative experience of Ishmael is more important than in my other class. Students can see more deeply into the subject matter, in a way that puts the ideas almost beyond argument. It addresses them at a level that’s almost mythical and gives them a deep look at a vision of the world.
.
Class activity Students choose several of the visionaries profiled by the magazine to focus on in relation to their chosen competence and personal interests. They prepare written presentations, based on the Utne models (e.g. developing one of the Utne Reader’s brief profiles into a longer profile of that person). The class reads and critiques all of these, thus fulfilling all the tasks of composition and editing, and learning the nature and limits of a journalistic approach to a subject of depth and mystery. The third class meeting focuses on Ishmael, which they read in its entirety. To deepen their understanding of the book, I also have several students report to the class on three related books: Quinn’s autobiographical follow-up to Ishmael, Providence: The Story of a Fifty-Year Vision Quest, Barbara Ward’s Spaceship Earth, and Paul Hawken’s The Ecology of Commerce. (Ward and Hawken deal in different ways with some of the subject matter of Ishmael.) In using these books I want students to see the difference not only in doctrine but in the conception and power of the vision presented in the different approaches to the hard (and perhaps unanswerable) questions we’re struggling with.

Student response The students in both these classes are older, all are involved with earning a living, and some have families, so they respond in a way that’s different from younger students with less experience of the “real” world. They desperately want Ishmael to be wrong, but they don’t feel they’re being preached at or lectured. This book is a very unusual model, for either fiction or nonfiction, and students have little experience with this kind of thing. They find it very powerful, a “blockbuster” in fact.

Summing up I’ve taught Ishmael several times now, and continue to explore new facets of it. Since my background includes both business and literature, I also deal with Ishmael as a novel, trying to show students how it works not just as a prism through which to view our culture but as a literary piece. It’s a very unusual novel. One of its greatest attributes is that it gives students a sense that the author is a companion on their intellectual journey, not just a presenter of ideas in the academic way they’re accustomed to. I look on my Visionaries course as an ongoing experiment in learning in which the teacher is merely the oldest of the students, and Ishmael provides a unique guide for exploration.

Student Puzzlers

These questions aren’t necessarily substantive, but they come close to being universal in classrooms. The following replies and suggestions were developed on the basis of replies offered by the author in many different class situations.

Why doesn’t the narrator have a name?
Discuss possible pros and cons involved in names like John, Derek, Aaron, Miguel, Moustafa, Marcello, David, Pete. (Names invariably evoke ethnic and social connotations that are inviting to some people and offputting to others.) What does NOT giving the narrator a name accomplish? (Reduces his importance as an individual.) What point(s) might the author be making by giving the teacher a name but not the pupil?

How did Ishmael get himself installed in an office building? How did he get himself out of the office and into the carnival?
Have students suggest possible scenarios—clearly there are hundreds of possibilities. The more important question is, why didn’t the author include a scenario of his own? Would it have enhanced the book? In what sort of novel (story/film) would you expect to see every such action explained? How does that sort of novel (story/film) differ from the sort of novel Ishmael is? (Ishmael is a novel of ideas, unlike action-thrillers, for example, which are plot-driven.)

Why did you make Ishmael a gorilla?
This question is by far the most frequently asked of the author, who prefers to turn it back to the questioner. Why did they make Mickey a mouse? Why did they make Donald a duck? Why did they make Bugs a bunny? Why did they make the Keeper of the Crypt (in Tales from the Crypt) a corpse? The same reasoning that went into these decisions went into the decision to make Ishmael a gorilla. To carry the matter a step farther: Why any animal? What’s the point of having the conversation be between a human and an animal? (The human “speaks for” humans, while the animal “speaks for” rest of the living community.) Even so, it would be possible for a human to speak for the rest of the living community, so why not a human? Why not a cow, an elephant, a whale? Discuss the drawbacks and problems involved with each.

Why is the pupil a man rather than a woman?
The pupil is on hand to answer for our culture’s destructiveness on this planet (to answer the question posed by Ishmael’s koan). If the pupil has to be one gender or the other, which gender in our culture do you think should be called upon to answer for our destructiveness? Which gender has the greater need to understand the con-sequences of our destructiveness?

Why is the pupil so dumb?
Have one group of students edit a section of Ishmael to produce a dialogue with a pupil much smarter than the narrator. Have another group edit the same section to produce a dialogue with a pupil much dumber. Then have them assess how readers would be affected by these changes. (If the pupil is too smart, average readers will get lost; if the pupil is too dumb, average readers will get bored.)

Why is Ishmael seated behind a pane of glass at the beginning?
In the context of this work of fiction, who do you presume designed Ishmael’s office? (Presumably Ishmael designed it.) What purpose did he have in mind for it? (He expected pupils to come there.) Why would he separate himself from his pupils in this way? What was his probable theory? (He thought his pupils would feel less uneasy, less intimidated if he was in “another room.”) If a potential new pupil walked into a room that had no such partition, what would probably happen?

What’s the meaning of the koan on Ishmael’s poster?
A koan isn’t a riddle, with a single correct answer (“What’s black and white and red all over?”) but rather a subject for mediation and reflection that has no definable endpoint (“What is the sound of one hand clapping?”).

Why the name Ishmael?
According to our cultural mythology, God lost interest in all other creatures on this planet when humans came along. According to Genesis, this is exactly what happened to Ishmael when Isaac came along: his father Abraham lost interest in him. In other words, what Genesis says happened to Ishmael is exactly what our mythology says happened to the nonhuman community on this planet. This makes “Ishmael” an appropriate name for someone who speaks for this community.

Why “Mother” Culture?
Culture is a mother everywhere and at every time, because culture is inherently a nurturer—the nurturer of human societies and life-styles. Among Leaver peoples, Mother Culture explains and preserves a life-style that is healthy and self-sustaining. Among Taker peoples she explains and preserves a life-style that has proven to be unhealthy and self-destructive. If culture is a mother among the Alawa of Australia and the Bushmen of Africa and the Kayapo of Brazil, then why wouldn't she be a mother among the Takers? (To confirm the notion that “culture is a mother everywhere,” have students check foreign language dictionaries for the word culture. In languages that recognize “masculine” and “feminine” nouns—French, Italian, Latin, and so on—the noun culture is invariably feminine.)

Is Ishmael saying we should give up agriculture?
As Ishmael says again and again, many Leaver peoples practiced agriculture. Its only our special style of agriculture, found only in our culture, that is problematic. It’s problematic because it’s based on the idea that all the food in the world belongs to humans, and we’re free to destroy any other creature—to the point of extinction, if we wish—that tries to compete with us for that food.

Isn’t it true that Leaver peoples hunted some species to extinction, like the woolly mammoth?
Whenever a new species makes its appearance in a community, it registers an impact at all levels and in many different ways. For example, when the big cats arrived on the scene in Africa, some of the species they preyed on were unable to reproduce fast enough to maintain viable populations, and they eventually disappeared; in other words, the big cats “hunted some species to extinction.” This kind of change is precisely what evolution is all about. When humans arrived on the scene, they undoubtedly had the same effect as the big cats—they “hunted some species to extinction.” Hunting species to extinction, however, was certainly not something they set out to do or were even remotely aware of doing. The species they hunted to extinction were, after all, their food, and they would hardly want to eliminate their own food. As time went on, species that were hard to find in the previous generation were even harder to find in this generation, and in the next were even harder to find, until eventually they were no longer found at all. This is quite different from the activity of Taker farmers, who deliberately set out to make competitor species extinct. They don’t want to eat the coyotes, they just want to make them dead.

Why don’t Ishmael and the narrator observe the rules of gender-neutral language that we’re taught to use?
Have students check a wide assortment of published material with an eye to the question of gender-neutral language. A thorough study would be the work of a doctoral dissertation, but in general students will find that nonfiction authors are much more likely to observe “the rules” than fiction authors, dramatists, poets, and screen writers. In particular, fictional and dramatic characters rarely observe the rules. Discuss the reasons why the speech of fictional and dramatic characters often departs from rules followed in formal writing. (For example, should Eddie Murphy’s character in 48 Hours be expected to obey the same rules as a television news commentator? Should Bruce Willis’s character in the Die Hard films be expected to obey the same rules as an essayist in World Policy Journal? If not, why not?) Does the narrator of Ishmael (who is of course a fictional character) have a greater obligation to “stick to the rules” than other fictional characters?

Additional Reading

A number of books and videos have been suggested by
the teachers in this book. Here are a few that Daniel Quinn recommends to readers who write and ask for further reading suggestions.

Farley Mowat, People of the Deer; Bantam Books, 1952. An intimate study of a Leaver people, the Ihalmiut, living in the Great Barrens of Canada. The Desperate People, Bantam/Seal, 1980. A follow-up, showing what happened to these people in the ensuing years.

Peter Farb, Man's Rise to Civilization as Shown by the Indians of North America from Primeval Times to the Coming of the Industrial State, E.P. Dutton, 1968. A different sort of history, exploring issues central to Ishmael.

Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline, Doubleday/Currency, 1990. An introduction to systems thinking (of which Ishmael is an example). A fairly demanding book, but the only one of its kind.

Marvin Harris, Cows, Pigs, War and Witches, Vintage Books, 1974, and Cannibals and Kings, Vintage Books, 1977. A distinguished anthropologist examines aspects of culture in a highly readable and accessible form.

Paul Hawken, The Ecology of Commerce, HarperCollins, 1993. An important and influential study of sustainability issues.

Jean Liedloff, The Continuum Concept, Addison/Wesley, 1985. This book, almost a companion piece to Ishmael, shows why Leaver children grow up sane and healthy.

Jack Weatherford, Native Roots: How the Indians Enriched America, Fawcett, 1991. A treasure house of little known information.

Teacher Addresses

Barbara Bass, Dept. of English
Towson State University, Towson, MD 21204
410-830-2937 e7e4bas@toe.towson.edu

Terry Collins, Chippewa Valley HS, 18300 19 Mile Rd., Clinton Township, MI 48038-1204 810-286-5530

Bob Henderson, Dept. Of Kinesiology, McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8S 4K1

Avery Kerr, Santa Fe Secondary School
Rt. 7 Box 124AA, Santa Fe, NM 87505

Richard L. Krupnow, N363 4th Ave.
Coloma, WI 54930-9008 715-228-2329

Harvey T. Lyon, 2533 N. Orchard, Chicago, IL 60614

Steve Myers, Traveling School International
1021 Cayuga St., Santa Cruz, CA 95062 408-423-4451

Sabine O’Hara, Dept. Of Economics
Sage Building, Room 3502, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Troy, NY 12180-3590 518-276-6387 FAX 276-2235

Gary Partenheimer, Religious Studies Dept., Northfield Mount Hermon School, PO Box 2659, Northfield MA 01360
413-498-2717 gary_partenheimer@nmh.northfield.ma.us

Karen Quackenbush, Rowland Hall-St. Mark’s School
843 Lincoln St., Salt Lake City, UT 84102 801-355-7494

Mike Read, Social Studies Dept., Austin High School
1715 Cesar Chavez St., Austin, TX 78703 512-414-7220

Larry R. Ridener, Dept. of Sociology
Baylor University, Waco, TX 76798-7326
817-755-1165 Larry_Ridener@Baylor.edu

Scott Sauter, Blue Mountain Union School
RR 1, Box 50A, Wells River, VT 05081 802-757-2711

Isobel Stevenson, Johnston HS, 1012 Arthur Stiles Rd., Austin, TX 78721 512-867-3849 ips@tenet.edu

Stacy Studebaker, Kodiak High School
722 Mill Bay Rd., Kodiak, AK 99615 907-486-6498

Rob Williams, Park School
171 Goddard Ave., Brookline, MA 02167
617-277-2456 ext. 144, rcw@park.pvt.k12.ma.us

What Students Say

“Within the department I’m working in (Agronomy), the ideas put forth in Ishmael have had a significant impact on how we (students and professors) think about our research.”
—Mark Liebig, Lincoln, NE

“Your book made complete sense and it really opened my eyes to a lot of new ideas.”
— Abby Foulds, Pittsburgh, PA

“My Native American Studies instructor assigned [Ishmael] as extra credit.... I was apprehensive and didn’t think it would be anything more than a stuffy textbook-style reading assign-ment.... What a revelation! I cannot tell you how much of a positive effect your book has had on me. It caused me to think, and to question on a plane of thought I never knew I possessed.”
—Jane Graham-Free, Missoula, MT

“[Ishmael] is one of the most thought-provoking books I have ever read. It has made me rethink my role in our society and
the role of our society in the world.”
—Lora A. Wieman, Menomonie, WI

“[Ishmael] took my ideas of the world, which were crude and vague, and refined them. Your examples have inspired me and a few others in my classs to carry out the ideas of your book to a further extent.”
—Taylor Geer, Mendocino, CA

“A project for one of my classes was to write about the Navajo/Hopi land dispute. My greatest struggle was to try to communicate to the white instructor that the government intervention was based on a completely different concept than the Navajo and Hopi have about land. Had I read your book before that time I could have asked the instructor to read it, then maybe he and I would have been able to communicate.” —Lela K. Rhodes, Denver, CO

“Your novel both disturbed and inspired me because it presented a unique, yet logical, way of looking at the state of our world.”
—Chris Russell, Hurst, TX

“As a philosophy major, I have been exposed to a good portion of the idealogy utilized in your novel, but never has it all been pulled together and presented in such a Zen-like
simplicity.”
—David Michael, Garnerville, NY

How to Order Ishmael

Ishmael
by Daniel Quinn
A Bantam/Turner Book
ISBN 0-553-37540-7
$10.95 US / $14.95 CAN

How to order a review copy of Ishmael
Examination copies are available from Bantam Doubleday Dell for a fee of $2.00. Make your check or money order payable to Bantam Doubleday Dell (sorry, no CODs, purchase orders, or cash). Mail to:

Examination Copy Dept.
Bantam Doubleday Dell
2451 South Wolf Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018

Please provide your school address. Books cannot be sent to your home address. Allow four weeks for delivery.

In Canada
Send your examination copy requests to:

Education & Library Dept.
Bantam Doubleday Dell Canada
105 Bond St.
Toronto, Ontario M5B 1Y3

How to order classroom sets
Order through your college bookstore or Bantam’s telemarketing department:

Telemarketing Dept.
Bantam Doubleday Dell
1540 Broadway
New York, NY 10036

FAX: 800-233-3294
Phone: 800-223-5780
8:30 a.m.-6:00 p.m. EST
(To open an account, use these same toll free numbers.)

<<allTags excludeLists>>

<<tabs txtMoreTab "Tags" "All Tags" TabAllTags "Miss" "Missing tiddlers" TabMoreMissing "Orph" "Orphaned tiddlers" TabMoreOrphans "Shad" "Shadowed tiddlers" TabMoreShadowed>>

<<allTags excludeLists [a-z]>>

/***
|Name:|TagglyTaggingPlugin|
|Description:|tagglyTagging macro is a replacement for the builtin tagging macro in your ViewTemplate|
|Version:|3.3.1 ($Rev: 6100 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-07-27 01:42:07 +1000 (Sun, 27 Jul 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TagglyTaggingPlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
!Notes
See http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TagglyTagging
***/
//{{{

merge(String.prototype,{

	parseTagExpr: function(debug) {

		if (this.trim() == "")
			return "(true)";

		var anyLogicOp = /(!|&&|\|\||\(|\))/g;
		var singleLogicOp = /^(!|&&|\|\||\(|\))$/;

		var spaced = this.
			// because square brackets in templates are no good
			// this means you can use [(With Spaces)] instead of [[With Spaces]]
			replace(/\[\(/g," [[").
			replace(/\)\]/g,"]] "). 
			// space things out so we can use readBracketedList. tricky eh?
			replace(anyLogicOp," $1 ");

		var expr = "";

		var tokens = spaced.readBracketedList(false); // false means don't uniq the list. nice one JR!

		for (var i=0;i<tokens.length;i++)
			if (tokens[i].match(singleLogicOp))
				expr += tokens[i];
			else
				expr += "tiddler.tags.contains('%0')".format([tokens[i].replace(/'/,"\\'")]); // fix single quote bug. still have round bracket bug i think

		if (debug)
			alert(expr);

		return '('+expr+')';
	}

});

merge(TiddlyWiki.prototype,{
	getTiddlersByTagExpr: function(tagExpr,sortField) {

		var result = [];

		var expr = tagExpr.parseTagExpr();

		store.forEachTiddler(function(title,tiddler) {
			if (eval(expr))
				result.push(tiddler);
		});

		if(!sortField)
			sortField = "title";

		result.sort(function(a,b) {return a[sortField] < b[sortField] ? -1 : (a[sortField] == b[sortField] ? 0 : +1);});
		
		return result;
	}
});

config.taggly = {

	// for translations
	lingo: {
		labels: {
			asc:        "\u2191", // down arrow
			desc:       "\u2193", // up arrow
			title:      "title",
			modified:   "modified",
			created:    "created",
			show:       "+",
			hide:       "-",
			normal:     "normal",
			group:      "group",
			commas:     "commas",
			sitemap:    "sitemap",
			numCols:    "cols\u00b1", // plus minus sign
			label:      "Tagged as '%0':",
			exprLabel:  "Matching tag expression '%0':",
			excerpts:   "excerpts",
			descr:      "descr",
			slices:     "slices",
			contents:   "contents",
			sliders:    "sliders",
			noexcerpts: "title only",
			noneFound:  "(none)"
		},

		tooltips: {
			title:      "Click to sort by title",
			modified:   "Click to sort by modified date",
			created:    "Click to sort by created date",
			show:       "Click to show tagging list",
			hide:       "Click to hide tagging list",
			normal:     "Click to show a normal ungrouped list",
			group:      "Click to show list grouped by tag",
			sitemap:    "Click to show a sitemap style list",
			commas:     "Click to show a comma separated list",
			numCols:    "Click to change number of columns",
			excerpts:   "Click to show excerpts",
			descr:      "Click to show the description slice",
			slices:     "Click to show all slices",
			contents:   "Click to show entire tiddler contents",
			sliders:    "Click to show tiddler contents in sliders",
			noexcerpts: "Click to show entire title only"
		},

		tooDeepMessage: "* //sitemap too deep...//"
	},

	config: {
		showTaggingCounts: true,
		listOpts: {
			// the first one will be the default
			sortBy:     ["title","modified","created"],
			sortOrder:  ["asc","desc"],
			hideState:  ["show","hide"],
			listMode:   ["normal","group","sitemap","commas"],
			numCols:    ["1","2","3","4","5","6"],
			excerpts:   ["noexcerpts","excerpts","descr","slices","contents","sliders"]
		},
		valuePrefix: "taggly.",
		excludeTags: ["excludeLists","excludeTagging"],
		excerptSize: 50,
		excerptMarker: "/%"+"%/",
		siteMapDepthLimit: 25
	},

	getTagglyOpt: function(title,opt) {
		var val = store.getValue(title,this.config.valuePrefix+opt);
		return val ? val : this.config.listOpts[opt][0];
	},

	setTagglyOpt: function(title,opt,value) {
		if (!store.tiddlerExists(title))
			// create it silently
			store.saveTiddler(title,title,config.views.editor.defaultText.format([title]),config.options.txtUserName,new Date(),"");
		// if value is default then remove it to save space
		return store.setValue(title,
			this.config.valuePrefix+opt,
			value == this.config.listOpts[opt][0] ? null : value);
	},

	getNextValue: function(title,opt) {
		var current = this.getTagglyOpt(title,opt);
		var pos = this.config.listOpts[opt].indexOf(current);
		// a little usability enhancement. actually it doesn't work right for grouped or sitemap
		var limit = (opt == "numCols" ? store.getTiddlersByTagExpr(title).length : this.config.listOpts[opt].length);
		var newPos = (pos + 1) % limit;
		return this.config.listOpts[opt][newPos];
	},

	toggleTagglyOpt: function(title,opt) {
		var newVal = this.getNextValue(title,opt);
		this.setTagglyOpt(title,opt,newVal);
	}, 

	createListControl: function(place,title,type) {
		var lingo = config.taggly.lingo;
		var label;
		var tooltip;
		var onclick;

		if ((type == "title" || type == "modified" || type == "created")) {
			// "special" controls. a little tricky. derived from sortOrder and sortBy
			label = lingo.labels[type];
			tooltip = lingo.tooltips[type];

			if (this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortBy") == type) {
				label += lingo.labels[this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortOrder")];
				onclick = function() {
					config.taggly.toggleTagglyOpt(title,"sortOrder");
					return false;
				}
			}
			else {
				onclick = function() {
					config.taggly.setTagglyOpt(title,"sortBy",type);
					config.taggly.setTagglyOpt(title,"sortOrder",config.taggly.config.listOpts.sortOrder[0]);
					return false;
				}
			}
		}
		else {
			// "regular" controls, nice and simple
			label = lingo.labels[type == "numCols" ? type : this.getNextValue(title,type)];
			tooltip = lingo.tooltips[type == "numCols" ? type : this.getNextValue(title,type)];
			onclick = function() {
				config.taggly.toggleTagglyOpt(title,type);
				return false;
			}
		}

		// hide button because commas don't have columns
		if (!(this.getTagglyOpt(title,"listMode") == "commas" && type == "numCols"))
			createTiddlyButton(place,label,tooltip,onclick,type == "hideState" ? "hidebutton" : "button");
	},

	makeColumns: function(orig,numCols) {
		var listSize = orig.length;
		var colSize = listSize/numCols;
		var remainder = listSize % numCols;

		var upperColsize = colSize;
		var lowerColsize = colSize;

		if (colSize != Math.floor(colSize)) {
			// it's not an exact fit so..
			upperColsize = Math.floor(colSize) + 1;
			lowerColsize = Math.floor(colSize);
		}

		var output = [];
		var c = 0;
		for (var j=0;j<numCols;j++) {
			var singleCol = [];
			var thisSize = j < remainder ? upperColsize : lowerColsize;
			for (var i=0;i<thisSize;i++) 
				singleCol.push(orig[c++]);
			output.push(singleCol);
		}

		return output;
	},

	drawTable: function(place,columns,theClass) {
		var newTable = createTiddlyElement(place,"table",null,theClass);
		var newTbody = createTiddlyElement(newTable,"tbody");
		var newTr = createTiddlyElement(newTbody,"tr");
		for (var j=0;j<columns.length;j++) {
			var colOutput = "";
			for (var i=0;i<columns[j].length;i++) 
				colOutput += columns[j][i];
			var newTd = createTiddlyElement(newTr,"td",null,"tagglyTagging"); // todo should not need this class
			wikify(colOutput,newTd);
		}
		return newTable;
	},

	createTagglyList: function(place,title,isTagExpr) {
		switch(this.getTagglyOpt(title,"listMode")) {
			case "group":  return this.createTagglyListGrouped(place,title,isTagExpr); break;
			case "normal": return this.createTagglyListNormal(place,title,false,isTagExpr); break;
			case "commas": return this.createTagglyListNormal(place,title,true,isTagExpr); break;
			case "sitemap":return this.createTagglyListSiteMap(place,title,isTagExpr); break;
		}
	},

	getTaggingCount: function(title,isTagExpr) {
		// thanks to Doug Edmunds
		if (this.config.showTaggingCounts) {
			var tagCount = config.taggly.getTiddlers(title,'title',isTagExpr).length;
			if (tagCount > 0)
				return " ("+tagCount+")";
		}
		return "";
	},

	getTiddlers: function(titleOrExpr,sortBy,isTagExpr) {
		return isTagExpr ? store.getTiddlersByTagExpr(titleOrExpr,sortBy) : store.getTaggedTiddlers(titleOrExpr,sortBy);
	},

	getExcerpt: function(inTiddlerTitle,title,indent) {
		if (!indent)
			indent = 1;

		var displayMode = this.getTagglyOpt(inTiddlerTitle,"excerpts");
		var t = store.getTiddler(title);

		if (t && displayMode == "excerpts") {
			var text = t.text.replace(/\n/," ");
			var marker = text.indexOf(this.config.excerptMarker);
			if (marker != -1) {
				return " {{excerpt{<nowiki>" + text.substr(0,marker) + "</nowiki>}}}";
			}
			else if (text.length < this.config.excerptSize) {
				return " {{excerpt{<nowiki>" + t.text + "</nowiki>}}}";
			}
			else {
				return " {{excerpt{<nowiki>" + t.text.substr(0,this.config.excerptSize) + "..." + "</nowiki>}}}";
			}
		}
		else if (t && displayMode == "contents") {
			return "\n{{contents indent"+indent+"{\n" + t.text + "\n}}}";
		}
		else if (t && displayMode == "sliders") {
			return "<slider slide>\n{{contents{\n" + t.text + "\n}}}\n</slider>";
		}
		else if (t && displayMode == "descr") {
			var descr = store.getTiddlerSlice(title,'Description');
			return descr ? " {{excerpt{" + descr  + "}}}" : "";
		}
		else if (t && displayMode == "slices") {
			var result = "";
			var slices = store.calcAllSlices(title);
			for (var s in slices)
				result += "|%0|<nowiki>%1</nowiki>|\n".format([s,slices[s]]);
			return result ? "\n{{excerpt excerptIndent{\n" + result  + "}}}" : "";
		}
		return "";
	},

	notHidden: function(t,inTiddler) {
		if (typeof t == "string") 
			t = store.getTiddler(t);
		return (!t || !t.tags.containsAny(this.config.excludeTags) ||
				(inTiddler && this.config.excludeTags.contains(inTiddler)));
	},

	// this is for normal and commas mode
	createTagglyListNormal: function(place,title,useCommas,isTagExpr) {

		var list = config.taggly.getTiddlers(title,this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortBy"),isTagExpr);

		if (this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortOrder") == "desc")
			list = list.reverse();

		var output = [];
		var first = true;
		for (var i=0;i<list.length;i++) {
			if (this.notHidden(list[i],title)) {
				var countString = this.getTaggingCount(list[i].title);
				var excerpt = this.getExcerpt(title,list[i].title);
				if (useCommas)
					output.push((first ? "" : ", ") + "[[" + list[i].title + "]]" + countString + excerpt);
				else
					output.push("*[[" + list[i].title + "]]" + countString + excerpt + "\n");

				first = false;
			}
		}

		return this.drawTable(place,
			this.makeColumns(output,useCommas ? 1 : parseInt(this.getTagglyOpt(title,"numCols"))),
			useCommas ? "commas" : "normal");
	},

	// this is for the "grouped" mode
	createTagglyListGrouped: function(place,title,isTagExpr) {
		var sortBy = this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortBy");
		var sortOrder = this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortOrder");

		var list = config.taggly.getTiddlers(title,sortBy,isTagExpr);

		if (sortOrder == "desc")
			list = list.reverse();

		var leftOvers = []
		for (var i=0;i<list.length;i++)
			leftOvers.push(list[i].title);

		var allTagsHolder = {};
		for (var i=0;i<list.length;i++) {
			for (var j=0;j<list[i].tags.length;j++) {

				if (list[i].tags[j] != title) { // not this tiddler

					if (this.notHidden(list[i].tags[j],title)) {

						if (!allTagsHolder[list[i].tags[j]])
							allTagsHolder[list[i].tags[j]] = "";

						if (this.notHidden(list[i],title)) {
							allTagsHolder[list[i].tags[j]] += "**[["+list[i].title+"]]"
										+ this.getTaggingCount(list[i].title) + this.getExcerpt(title,list[i].title) + "\n";

							leftOvers.setItem(list[i].title,-1); // remove from leftovers. at the end it will contain the leftovers

						}
					}
				}
			}
		}

		var allTags = [];
		for (var t in allTagsHolder)
			allTags.push(t);

		var sortHelper = function(a,b) {
			if (a == b) return 0;
			if (a < b) return -1;
			return 1;
		};

		allTags.sort(function(a,b) {
			var tidA = store.getTiddler(a);
			var tidB = store.getTiddler(b);
			if (sortBy == "title") return sortHelper(a,b);
			else if (!tidA && !tidB) return 0;
			else if (!tidA) return -1;
			else if (!tidB) return +1;
			else return sortHelper(tidA[sortBy],tidB[sortBy]);
		});

		var leftOverOutput = "";
		for (var i=0;i<leftOvers.length;i++)
			if (this.notHidden(leftOvers[i],title))
				leftOverOutput += "*[["+leftOvers[i]+"]]" + this.getTaggingCount(leftOvers[i]) + this.getExcerpt(title,leftOvers[i]) + "\n";

		var output = [];

		if (sortOrder == "desc")
			allTags.reverse();
		else if (leftOverOutput != "")
			// leftovers first...
			output.push(leftOverOutput);

		for (var i=0;i<allTags.length;i++)
			if (allTagsHolder[allTags[i]] != "")
				output.push("*[["+allTags[i]+"]]" + this.getTaggingCount(allTags[i]) + this.getExcerpt(title,allTags[i]) + "\n" + allTagsHolder[allTags[i]]);

		if (sortOrder == "desc" && leftOverOutput != "")
			// leftovers last...
			output.push(leftOverOutput);

		return this.drawTable(place,
				this.makeColumns(output,parseInt(this.getTagglyOpt(title,"numCols"))),
				"grouped");

	},

	// used to build site map
	treeTraverse: function(title,depth,sortBy,sortOrder,isTagExpr) {

		var list = config.taggly.getTiddlers(title,sortBy,isTagExpr);

		if (sortOrder == "desc")
			list.reverse();

		var indent = "";
		for (var j=0;j<depth;j++)
			indent += "*"

		var childOutput = "";

		if (depth > this.config.siteMapDepthLimit)
			childOutput += indent + this.lingo.tooDeepMessage;
		else
			for (var i=0;i<list.length;i++)
				if (list[i].title != title)
					if (this.notHidden(list[i].title,this.config.inTiddler))
						childOutput += this.treeTraverse(list[i].title,depth+1,sortBy,sortOrder,false);

		if (depth == 0)
			return childOutput;
		else
			return indent + "[["+title+"]]" + this.getTaggingCount(title) + this.getExcerpt(this.config.inTiddler,title,depth) + "\n" + childOutput;
	},

	// this if for the site map mode
	createTagglyListSiteMap: function(place,title,isTagExpr) {
		this.config.inTiddler = title; // nasty. should pass it in to traverse probably
		var output = this.treeTraverse(title,0,this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortBy"),this.getTagglyOpt(title,"sortOrder"),isTagExpr);
		return this.drawTable(place,
				this.makeColumns(output.split(/(?=^\*\[)/m),parseInt(this.getTagglyOpt(title,"numCols"))), // regexp magic
				"sitemap"
				);
	},

	macros: {
		tagglyTagging: {
			handler: function (place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
				var parsedParams = paramString.parseParams("tag",null,true);
				var refreshContainer = createTiddlyElement(place,"div");

				// do some refresh magic to make it keep the list fresh - thanks Saq
				refreshContainer.setAttribute("refresh","macro");
				refreshContainer.setAttribute("macroName",macroName);

				var tag = getParam(parsedParams,"tag");
				var expr = getParam(parsedParams,"expr");

				if (expr) {
					refreshContainer.setAttribute("isTagExpr","true");
					refreshContainer.setAttribute("title",expr);
					refreshContainer.setAttribute("showEmpty","true");
				}
				else {
					refreshContainer.setAttribute("isTagExpr","false");
					if (tag) {
        				refreshContainer.setAttribute("title",tag);
						refreshContainer.setAttribute("showEmpty","true");
					}
					else {
        				refreshContainer.setAttribute("title",tiddler.title);
						refreshContainer.setAttribute("showEmpty","false");
					}
				}
				this.refresh(refreshContainer);
			},

			refresh: function(place) {
				var title = place.getAttribute("title");
				var isTagExpr = place.getAttribute("isTagExpr") == "true";
				var showEmpty = place.getAttribute("showEmpty") == "true";
				removeChildren(place);
				addClass(place,"tagglyTagging");
				var countFound = config.taggly.getTiddlers(title,'title',isTagExpr).length
				if (countFound > 0 || showEmpty) {
					var lingo = config.taggly.lingo;
					config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"hideState");
					if (config.taggly.getTagglyOpt(title,"hideState") == "show") {
						createTiddlyElement(place,"span",null,"tagglyLabel",
								isTagExpr ? lingo.labels.exprLabel.format([title]) : lingo.labels.label.format([title]));
						config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"title");
						config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"modified");
						config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"created");
						config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"listMode");
						config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"excerpts");
						config.taggly.createListControl(place,title,"numCols");
						config.taggly.createTagglyList(place,title,isTagExpr);
						if (countFound == 0 && showEmpty)
							createTiddlyElement(place,"div",null,"tagglyNoneFound",lingo.labels.noneFound);
					}
				}
			}
		}
	},

	// todo fix these up a bit
	styles: [
"/*{{{*/",
"/* created by TagglyTaggingPlugin */",
".tagglyTagging { padding-top:0.5em; }",
".tagglyTagging li.listTitle { display:none; }",
".tagglyTagging ul {",
"	margin-top:0px; padding-top:0.5em; padding-left:2em;",
"	margin-bottom:0px; padding-bottom:0px;",
"}",
".tagglyTagging { vertical-align: top; margin:0px; padding:0px; }",
".tagglyTagging table { margin:0px; padding:0px; }",
".tagglyTagging .button { visibility:hidden; margin-left:3px; margin-right:3px; }",
".tagglyTagging .button, .tagglyTagging .hidebutton {",
"	color:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryLight]]; font-size:90%;",
"	border:0px; padding-left:0.3em;padding-right:0.3em;",
"}",
".tagglyTagging .button:hover, .hidebutton:hover, ",
".tagglyTagging .button:active, .hidebutton:active  {",
"	border:0px; background:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryPale]]; color:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryDark]];",
"}",
".selected .tagglyTagging .button { visibility:visible; }",
".tagglyTagging .hidebutton { color:[[ColorPalette::Background]]; }",
".selected .tagglyTagging .hidebutton { color:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryLight]] }",
".tagglyLabel { color:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryMid]]; font-size:90%; }",
".tagglyTagging ul {padding-top:0px; padding-bottom:0.5em; margin-left:1em; }",
".tagglyTagging ul ul {list-style-type:disc; margin-left:-1em;}",
".tagglyTagging ul ul li {margin-left:0.5em; }",
".editLabel { font-size:90%; padding-top:0.5em; }",
".tagglyTagging .commas { padding-left:1.8em; }",
"/* not technically tagglytagging but will put them here anyway */",
".tagglyTagged li.listTitle { display:none; }",
".tagglyTagged li { display: inline; font-size:90%; }",
".tagglyTagged ul { margin:0px; padding:0px; }",
".excerpt { color:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryDark]]; }",
".excerptIndent { margin-left:4em; }",
"div.tagglyTagging table,",
"div.tagglyTagging table tr,",
"td.tagglyTagging",
" {border-style:none!important; }",
".tagglyTagging .contents { border-bottom:2px solid [[ColorPalette::TertiaryPale]]; padding:0 1em 1em 0.5em;",
"  margin-bottom:0.5em; }",
".tagglyTagging .indent1  { margin-left:3em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent2  { margin-left:4em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent3  { margin-left:5em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent4  { margin-left:6em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent5  { margin-left:7em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent6  { margin-left:8em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent7  { margin-left:9em;  }",
".tagglyTagging .indent8  { margin-left:10em; }",
".tagglyTagging .indent9  { margin-left:11em; }",
".tagglyTagging .indent10 { margin-left:12em; }",
".tagglyNoneFound { margin-left:2em; color:[[ColorPalette::TertiaryMid]]; font-size:90%; font-style:italic; }",
"/*}}}*/",
		""].join("\n"),

	init: function() {
		merge(config.macros,this.macros);
		config.shadowTiddlers["TagglyTaggingStyles"] = this.styles;
		store.addNotification("TagglyTaggingStyles",refreshStyles);
	}
};

config.taggly.init();

//}}}

/***
InlineSlidersPlugin
By Saq Imtiaz
http://tw.lewcid.org/sandbox/#InlineSlidersPlugin

// syntax adjusted to not clash with NestedSlidersPlugin
// added + syntax to start open instead of closed

***/
//{{{
config.formatters.unshift( {
	name: "inlinesliders",
	// match: "\\+\\+\\+\\+|\\<slider",
	match: "\\<slider",
	// lookaheadRegExp: /(?:\+\+\+\+|<slider) (.*?)(?:>?)\n((?:.|\n)*?)\n(?:====|<\/slider>)/mg,
	lookaheadRegExp: /(?:<slider)(\+?) (.*?)(?:>)\n((?:.|\n)*?)\n(?:<\/slider>)/mg,
	handler: function(w) {
		this.lookaheadRegExp.lastIndex = w.matchStart;
		var lookaheadMatch = this.lookaheadRegExp.exec(w.source)
		if(lookaheadMatch && lookaheadMatch.index == w.matchStart ) {
			var btn = createTiddlyButton(w.output,lookaheadMatch[2] + " "+"\u00BB",lookaheadMatch[2],this.onClickSlider,"button sliderButton");
			var panel = createTiddlyElement(w.output,"div",null,"sliderPanel");
			panel.style.display = (lookaheadMatch[1] == '+' ? "block" : "none");
			wikify(lookaheadMatch[3],panel);
			w.nextMatch = lookaheadMatch.index + lookaheadMatch[0].length;
		}
   },
   onClickSlider : function(e) {
		if(!e) var e = window.event;
		var n = this.nextSibling;
		n.style.display = (n.style.display=="none") ? "block" : "none";
		return false;
	}
});

//}}}

http://www.dailydisciples.org/

http://www.dailydisciples.org/study_archive.html

Test send

[img[http://www.saintgabriels.org/images/rosary.gif]]

http://www.saintgabriels.org/rosary.html

The Anglican Rosary
A Form of Contemplative Prayer

The Anglican Rosary is a relatively new form of prayer which uses a blending of the Roman Catholic Rosary and the Orthodox Jesus Prayer Rope.

Since the earliest of times, people have used pebbles or a string of knots or beads on a cord to keep track of prayers offered to God. Some form of a rosary or prayer beads can be found in virtually every major religious tradition in the world.

Sacred Symbolism

The configuration of the Anglican Rosary relates contemplative prayer to several levels of traditional Christian symbolism. Contemplative prayer is enriched by these symbols whose purpose is always to focus and concentrate attention, allowing the one who prays to move more swiftly into the Presence of God.

The circle of the Anglican Rosary symbolizes the wheel of time. Prayer, which moves around the wheel of the Rosary, represents the Christian's spiritual pilgrimage through time following Christ as Lord.

The Anglican Rosary is made up of thirty-three beads divided into four groups of seven called weeks. Between each week is a single bead called a cruciform bead.

In Christian tradition the sacred number four represents the four quadrants of the church's year. In theology there are also the four cardinal virtues: prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance which are the four corners in the moral foundation of all human life. In addition to these there are four weeks to a lunar month and the four cardinal directions: north, south, east, and west, as well as the four primary elements: earth, water, wind, and fire.

The number seven is repeated four times in the Rosary to create a conventional month. In the Judeo-Christian tradition the number seven represents spiritual perfection and completion. Prayer is the Christian's cry for completion. Symbolic completion is represented by adding together the four weeks of seven week beads to the four cruciform beads plus the additional entry bead representing the divine Unity at the beginning of the Rosary. The full number of the beads, thirty-three, the number of years Christ lived (a multiple of three), prayed three times (signifying the Trinity) equals ninety-nine, which in the Middle Eastern traditions is the complete number of the Divine Names. Adding the crucifix at the beginning or the end, brings the total to one hundred which is the total of the Orthodox Rosary and represents the fullness of creation.

How To Use

The use of the rosary or prayer beads helps to bring us into contemplative prayer, really thinking about and being mindful of praying, of being in the presence of God by use of mind, body, and spirit. The touching of the fingers on each successive bead is an aid in keeping our mind from wandering, and the rhythm of the prayers leads us more readily into stillness.

To begin, hold the Cross and say the prayer you have assigned to it (most often The Lord's Prayer), then move to the Invitatory Bead. Then enter the circle of the rosary with the first Cruciform Bead, moving through the Weeks and the other Cruciforms, saying the prayers for each bead, and then exiting by way of the Invitatory Bead and the Cross. It is suggested that you pray around the circle of the beads three times (which signifies the Trinity) in an unhurried pace, allowing the repetition to become a sort of lullaby of love and praise that enables your mind to rest and your heart to become quiet and still. A period of silence should follow the prayer, for a time of reflection and listening. Listening is an important part of all prayer.

Saying the Rosary

Begin praying the Rosary by selecting the prayers you wish to use for the cross and each bead. Practice them until it is clear which prayer goes with which bead, and as far as possible commit the prayers to memory.

Find a quiet spot and allow your body and mind to become restful and still. After a time of silence, begin praying the Rosary at an unhurried, intentional pace. Complete the circle of the beads three times.

When you have completed the round of the Rosary, you should end with a period of silence. This silence allows you to center your being in an extended period of silence. It also invites reflection and listening after you have invoked the Name and Presence of God.

If you wish to see a picture or purchase a Rosary click here.
Two Sample Collections of Prayers
Mix and match or put together your own.

The Cross
Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy Name,
thy kingdom come,
thy will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.

Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those
who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.

For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory,
for ever and ever. Amen.

The Invitatory
Let the words of my mouth
and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in you sight,
O Lord, my strength and my redeemer.

The Cruciforms
Oh, Lamb of God that taketh
away the sins of the world
have mercy upon us,
Oh, Lamb of God that taketh
away the sins of the world
have mercy upon us,
Oh, Lamb of God that taketh
away the sins of the world
give us Thy Peace.

The Weeks
Almighty and merciful Lord,
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
bless us and keep us.
Amen.
The Cross
Glory to the Father,
and to the Son,
and to the Holy Spirit.
as it was in the beginning,
is now, and will be for ever.
Amen.

The Invitatory
Open my lips, O Lord,
and my mouth shall proclaim
Your praise.

The Cruciforms
Guide us waking, O Lord,
and guard us sleeping;
that awake we may watch
with Christ, and asleep
we may rest in peace.

The Weeks
Jesus, lamb of God,
have mercy on us.
Jesus, bearer of our sins,
have mercy on us.
Jesus, redeemer of the world,
give us your peace.

Home

http://www.religionfacts.com/big_religion_chart.htm

www.GotQuestions.org

Author: The Book of Acts does not specifically identify its author. From Luke 1:1-4 and Acts 1:1-3, it is clear that the same author wrote both Luke and Acts. The tradition from the earliest days of the church has been that Luke, a companion of the Apostle Paul, wrote both Luke and Acts (Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11).

Date of Writing: The Book of Acts was likely written between 61-64 A.D.

Purpose of Writing: The Book of Acts was written to provide a history of the early church. Acts emphasis (emphasizes or Acts’ emphasis is) the importance of the day of Pentecost and being empowered to be effective witnesses for Jesus Christ. Acts sheds light on the ministry gift of the Holy Spirit, which empowers, guides, teaches, and serves as our Counselor. When reading the Book of Acts many of the readers will be enlightened and encouraged by the many miracles that were being performed during this time by the disciples Peter, John, and Paul. The Book of Acts emphasizes the importance of obedience to God’s Word and the transformation that occurs as a result of knowing Christ. There are also many references to those that rejected the truth that the disciples preached about in Jesus Christ. Power, greed, and many other vices of the devil or (are) evidenced in the book of Acts. Acts 1:8 serves as a good summary of the Book of Acts. Acts records the apostles being Christ's witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the rest of the surrounding world.

Key Verses: Acts 1:8, "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth."

Acts 2:4, "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and begun to speak other tongues, as the spirit gave them utterance."

Acts 4:12, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

Acts 4:19-20, "But Peter and John answered and said unto them, whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, Judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard."

Acts 9:3-6, "As he (Saul) journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shown around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground , and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” And he said, “Who are You, Lord?” Then the Lord said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It is hard for you to kick against the goads.” So he, trembling and astonished, said, “Lord, what do You want me to do?” Then the Lord said to him. “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.

Acts 16:31, "So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved..."

Brief Summary: The book of Acts has a total of twenty-eight chapters and it’s (its) primary purpose was to give the history of the Christian church and thereby to equip the church to reach people for Christ. Many faithful servants carried out the work of God in the earth. Although many faithful servants were used to preach and teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Saul, whose name was changed to Paul, was the most influential. Before he was converted, Paul took great pleasure in persecuting and killing Christians. After his conversion he went to the ultimate extreme of loving God and preaching his word with power, fervency and the Spirit of the true and living God. In this book the main emphasis was in Acts 1:8, when the disciples were told by Jesus to wait until they had been empowered by the Holy Spirit from on high to be his witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth. Acts chapters 1-7 record the apostles being Christ's witnesses in Jerusalem and Judea. Acts chapter 8 records the apostles being Christ's witnesses in Samaria. Acts chapters 9-28 record the apostles being Christ's witnesses "to the ends of the earth."

Practical Application: God can do amazing things through ordinary people. God essentially took a group of fisherman and turned the world upside down (Acts 17:6). God took a Christian-hating murderer and changed him into the greatest Christian evangelist, the author of almost half the books of the New Testament. God used persecution to cause the quickest expansion of a "new faith" in the history of the world. God can and will do the same through us if we fully submit ourselves to Him.

(Middle English: The Cloude of Unknowyng) is an anonymous work of Christian mysticism written in Middle English in the latter half of the 14th century. The text is a spiritual guide on contemplative prayer and the esoteric techniques and meanings of late medieval monasticism.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Description and influence
o 1.1 Quotations
* 2 Popular culture
* 3 Other works
* 4 Editions
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 External links

[edit] Description and influence

The book counsels a young student to seek God, not through knowledge and intellection, but through intense contemplation, motivated by love, and stripped of all thought. This is brought about by putting all thoughts, except the love of God, under a "cloud of forgetting", and thereby piercing God's cloud of unknowing with a "dart of longing love" from the heart. This form of contemplation is not directed by the intellect, but involves spiritual union with God through the heart:

"For He can well be loved, but he cannot be thought. By love he can be grasped and held, but by thought, neither grasped nor held. And therefore, though it may be good at times to think specifically of the kindness and excellence of God, and though this may be a light and a part of contemplation, all the same, in the work of contemplation itself, it must be cast down and covered with a cloud of forgetting. And you must step above it stoutly but deftly, with a devout and delightful stirring of love, and struggle to pierce that darkness above you; and beat on that thick cloud of unknowing with a sharp dart of longing love, and do not give up, whatever happens."[1]

In a follow-up to The Cloud, called The Book of Privy Counseling, the author characterizes the practice of contemplative unknowing as worshiping God with one's "substance," coming to rest in a "naked blind feeling of being," and ultimately finding thereby that God is one's being.

The Cloud of Unknowing draws on the mystical tradition of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, which focuses on the via negativa road to discovering God as a pure entity, beyond any capacity of mental conception and so without any definitive image or form. This tradition has reputedly inspired generations of mystical searchers from John Scotus Erigena, through Book of Taliesin, Nicholas of Cusa and St. John of the Cross to Teilhard de Chardin (the latter two of whom may have been influenced by "The Cloud" itself).

The practical prayer advice contained in The Cloud of Unknowing forms a primary basis for the contemporary practice of Centering Prayer, a form of Christian meditation developed by Trappist monks William Meninger, Basil Pennington and Thomas Keating in the 1970s.[2]
[edit] Quotations
Ch. 39-40 quotation: other versions

Evelyn Underhill (1922/2003)
And if we will intentively pray for getting of good, let us cry, either with word or with thought or with desire, nought else nor no more words, but this word “God.” For why, in God be all good.. Fill thy spirit with the ghostly bemeaning of it without any special beholding to any of His works—whether they be good, better, or best of all—bodily or ghostly, or to any virtue that may be wrought in man’s soul by any grace; not looking after whether it be meekness or charity, patience or abstinence, hope, faith, or soberness, chastity or wilful poverty. What recks this in contemplatives?.. they covet nothing with special beholding, but only good God. Do thou.. mean God all, and all God, so that nought work in thy wit and in thy will, but only God.[3]

Middle English original
And yif we wil ententifly preie for getyng of goodes, lat us crie, outher with worde or with thought or with desire, nought elles, ne no mo wordes, bot this worde God. For whi in God ben alle goodes.. Fille thi spirit with the goostly bemenyng of it withoutyn any specyal beholdyng to any of His werkes whether thei be good, betir, or alther best, bodily or goostly—or to any vertewe that may be wrought in mans soule by any grace, not lokyng after whether it be meeknes or charité, pacyence or abstynence, hope, feith, or sobirnes, chastité or wilful poverté. What thar reche in contemplatyves?.. thei coveyte nothing with specyal beholdyng, bot only good God. Do thou.. mene God al, and al God, so that nought worche in thi witte and in thi wile, bot only God.[4]

From a description of how to practice contemplation (from chapters 39 and 40):

When we intend to pray for goodness, let all our thought and desire be contained in the one small word "God." Nothing else and no other words are needed, for God is the epitome of all goodness.. Immerse yourself in the spiritual reality it speaks of yet without precise ideas of God's works whether small or great, spiritual or material. Do not consider any particular virtue which God may teach you through grace, whether it is humility, charity, patience, abstinence, hope, faith, moderation, chastity, or evangelical poverty. For to a contemplative they are, in a sense, all the same.. Let this little word represent to you God in all his fullness and nothing less than the fullness of God.[5]

From elsewhere (chapter 23, The Book of Privy Counseling):

"And so I urge you, go after experience rather than knowledge. On account of pride, knowledge may often deceive you, but this gentle, loving affection will not deceive you. Knowledge tends to breed conceit, but love builds. Knowledge is full of labor, but love, full of rest."[6]

[edit] Popular culture

Leonard Cohen references "The Cloud of Unknowing" in the 1979 song "The Window" (of Recent Songs).
Plastic Beach, the 2010 album by Gorillaz, includes a track called "Cloud of Unknowing".
James Blackshaw released an album in 2007 by the same name.
John Luther Adams' orchestral work "Clouds of Forgetting, Clouds of Unknowing", completed in 1995, was inspired by "The Cloud of Unknowing".
Steve Roach's album The Magnificent Void (1996) includes a track named "Cloud of Unknowing".
Don DeLillo references "The Cloud of Unknowing" in the 1998 novel "Underworld";
In the episode A Measure of Salvation of the reimagined Battlestar Galactica television series, Lee Adama mentions that the Cylons were saying a prayer to the Cloud of Unknowing.
[edit] Other works

In addition to The Cloud of Unknowing and The Book of Privy Counseling, the Cloud author is believed to be responsible for several other spiritual treatises and translations, including:

* Deonise Hid Divinity, a free translation of the Mystical Theology by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite;
* An Epistle of Prayer;
* An Epistle of Discretion of Stirrings;
* An Epistle of Discretion of Spirits, a free translation of Sermones di Diversis no. xxiii, by Bernard of Clairvaux; and
* A Treatise of the Study of Wisdom that Men Call Benjamin, a free translation of the Benjamin Minor by Richard of St. Victor;

[edit] Editions

* Butcher, Carmen Acevedo (2009). The Cloud of Unknowing with the Book of Privy Counsel. Boston: Shambhala. ISBN 978-1590306222. http://www.amazon.com/Cloud-Unknowing-New-Translation/dp/1590306228/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1290659357&sr=8-1.
* Johnston, William; Huston Smith (1996). The Cloud of Unknowing and the Book of Privy Counseling. New York: Image Books. ISBN 0-385-03097-5. (original publication, 1973; foreword by Huston Smith, 1996 edition)
* The Cloud of Unknowing and other works. Penguin Classics. 2001. ISBN 978-0-14-044762-0. Translated by A. C. Spearing
* Underhill, Evelyn (2003). The Cloud of Unknowing: The Classic of Medieval Mysticism. Mineola, NY: Dover. ISBN 0486432033. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/anonymous2/cloud.titlepage.html. (original publication, 1922)
* The Cloud of Unknowing: And The Book of Privy Counseling (1944). ed., Phyllis Hodgson. Early English Text Society. Oxford University Press, hardback: ISBN 0197222188.
* The Cloud of Unknowing (1981). translator, James Walsh. Paulist Press Classics of Western Spirituality. 2004 HarperCollins edition, paperback: ISBN 0-06-073775-1
* The Cloud of Unknowing (1957). translator, Ira Progoff. Dell/Doubleday. 1983 paperback: ISBN 0440319943, 1989 paperback: ISBN 0-385-28144-7

Editions of related texts include

* Deonise Hid Divinite: And Other Treatises on Contemplative Prayer Related to The Cloud of Unknowing (1955). ed., Phyllis Hodgson. Early English Text Society. Oxford University Press, 2002 paperback: 0859916987
* The Pursuit of Wisdom: And Other Works by the Author of The Cloud of Unknowing (1988). translator, James Walsh. Paulist Press Classics of Western Spirituality. paperback: ISBN 0-8091-2972-8.

[edit] See also
P christianity.svg Christianity portal

* Theosis (deification, the search of union with God)
* Jesus Prayer

http://www.biblelogic.com/Documents/Cross.html

Why have Christians adopted a pagan symbol?

The words "cross" and "crucify" are miss-translations, a "later rendering," of the Greek words stauros and stauroo. According to Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words and other references, STAUROS denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake, a tree.

The shape of the two-beamed cross had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the Phoenician diety "Tammuz," a pagan god (being the first letter ' t ' of his name) see also Eze. 9:12-15 and Strong's #8542.

In the third century AD, pagans were received into the apostate Roman ecclesiastical system and were permitted to retain many of their pagan signs and symbols to increase Church membership.

According to The Companion Bible, and other excellent references, crosses were also used as symbols of the Babylonian Sun-god. These crosses are many times displayed as a cross below a circle, or shown as a cross within a circle. These symbols are all of pagan origin, and are NOT Christian. The evidence is complete; the Messiah was put to death upon an upright stake, not on two pieces of timber placed at an angle.

According to Encyclopedia Britannica, in the Egyptian churches the cross was a pagan symbol of life borrowed by the Christians and interpreted in the pagan manner. Believers should not use, display, or adore the letter ' t ' the symbol of the pagan god Tammuz.

Comment
"Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and one on the left." Matt. 27 :38, See also Luke 23: 33; Mark 15: 27; John 19: 18.

"....Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs; But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water." John 19: 32-34.

Question?
Since there was crucified with Yahshua two thieves, "one on the right hand, and one on the left," have you ever wondered why the soldiers would "skip over" Yahshua to break the legs of the second thief instead of coming to Yahshua, who was crucified in the middle, and would have been next in line??.

Answer
The "logical" answer is that they were all crucified and hanging on the same "pale, stake, or tree." The soldiers were simply walking around the tree, coming to Yahshua last. The Romans would never have spent the time looking for two squared timbers, and then take the time to fasten or secure them together at right angles for visual effect in order to "secure" three condemned men for death. It did not happen.

Every time the letter "t" is displayed, well meaning but ignorant Christians promote the pagan god "Tammuz" not the Messiah, Redeemer, King of Israel. Have you ever wondered why Satanists also like to display the cross symbol? Think about it.

For aletheia, Biblelogic.com

[[Read the Daily Bread here|http://rbc.org/odb/odb.shtml]]

[[Read book here|http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=587580]]

On Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life. - Review - book review
Donald A. Nielsen

On Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life, edited by N. J. ALLEN, W. S. F. PICKERING, and W. WATTS MILLER. London and New York: Routledge, 1998, xi + 224 pp. $50.00.

Study Guide for Test #1

6. Weber replaces the base/superstructure lens with:
a. a dialectic between base and superstructure
b. disciplinary power
c. the iron cage of church corruption
d. the social construction of norms

Please note: I reserve the right to adjust questions about Omi and Winant and to add questions on Panopticism and Jakobsen after we have covered them in class.

By [[EMILE DURKHEIM]]

[[Read it here|http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=587580]]

"If religion has given birth to all that is essential in society, it is because the idea of society is the soul of religion."
(Bellah, 1973, p. 191 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

"For we know today that a religion does not necessarily imply symbols and rites, properly speaking, or temples and priests. This whole exterior apparatus is only the superficial part. Essentially, it is nothing other than a body of collective beliefs and practices endowed with a certain authority."
(1973, p. 51 [excerpt from "Individualism and the Intellectuals"])

The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, the last major work published by Durkheim, five years before his death in 1917, is generally regarded as his best and most mature. Where Suicide focused on a large amount of statisitics from varying sources, The Elementary Forms used one case study in depth, the Australian aborigines. Durkheim chose this group because he felt they represented the most basic, elementary forms of religion within a culture.

Durkheim set out to do two things, establish the fact that religion was not divinely or supernaturally inspired and was in fact a product of society, and he sought to identify the common things that religion placed an emphasis upon, as well as what effects those religious beliefs (the product of social life) had on the lives of all within a society.

Durkheim's finding that religion was social can best be described by this excerpt from The Elementary Forms:

"The general conclusion of the book which the reader has before him is that religion is something eminently social. Religious representations are collective representations which express collective realities; the rites are a manner of acting which take rise in the midst of assembled groups and which are destined to excite, maintain, or recreate certain mental states in these groups. So if the categories are of religious origin, they ought to participate in this nature common to all religious facts; they should be social affairs and the product of collective thought. At least -- for in the actual condition of our knowledge of these matters, one should be careful to avoid all radical and exclusive statements -- it is allowable to suppose that they are rich in social elements."
(Thompson, 1982, p. 125 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

Recognizing the social origin of religion, Durkheim argued that religion acted as a source of solidarity and identification for the individuals within a society, especially as a part of mechanical solidarity systems, and to a lesser, but still important extent in the context of organic solidarity. Religion provided a meaning for life, it provided authority figures, and most importantly for Durkheim, it reinforced the morals and social norms held collectively by all within a society. Far from dismissing religion as mere fantasy, despite its natural origin, Durkheim saw it as a critical part of the social system. Religion provides social control, cohesion, and purpose for people, as well as another means of communication and gathering for individuals to interact and reaffirm social norms.

Durkheim's second purpose was in identifying certain elements of religious beliefs that are common across different cultures. A belief in a supernatural realm is not necessary or common among religions, but the separation of different aspects of life, physical things, and certain behaviors into two categories -- the sacred and the profane -- is common. Objects and behaviors deemed sacred were considered part of the spiritual or religious realm. They were part of rites, objects of reverance, or simply behaviors deemed special by religious belief. Those things deemed profane were everything else in the world that did not have a religious function or hold religious meaning. But while these two categories are rigidly defined and set apart, they interact with one another and depend on each other for survival. The sacred world cannot survive without the profane world to support it and give it life, and vice versa. In general, those aspects of social life given moral superiority or reveance are considered sacred, and all other aspects are part of the profane. For example, the Catholic church respects the crucifix and the behaviors and actions performed during mass as sacred, while other behaviors and objects are not. While Native American societies differed greatly in the details, those religions also held certain objects and behavior sacred, such as certain animals and the rituals and rites performed by the shaman. This division of things into two separate but interacting spheres is common among all religions.

"...sacred things are simply collective ideals that have fixed themselves on material objects."
(1973, p. 159 [excerpt from "The Dualism of Human Nature and its Social Conditions"])

Durkheim, concerned with social solidarity throughout his academic career, was primarily concerned with religion as a functional source of social cohesion. As said before, religion acts to pull people together (mentally and physically, in the form of relgious services or assemblies). By doing so, religion is able to reaffirm collective morals and beliefs in the minds of all members of society. This is important, because if left to their own for a long amount of time, the beliefs and convictions of individuals will weaken in strength, and require reinforcement. Religion maintains the influence of society -- whereas "society" represents the norms and beliefs held in common by a group of individuals.

"A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices realtive to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden -- beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them."
(1982, p. 129 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

"This system of conceptions is not purely imaginary and hallucinatory, for the moral forces that these things awaken in us are quite real -- as real as the ideas that words recall to us after they have served to form the ideas."
(1973, p. 160 [excerpt from "The Dualism of Human Nature and its Social Conditions"])

"Since it is in spiritual ways that social pressure exercises itself, it could not fail to give men the idea that outside themselves there exist one or several powers, both moral and, at the same time, efficacious, upon which they depend."
(1973, p. 171 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

"Since religious force is nothing other than the collective and anonymous force of the clan, and since this can be represented in the mind only in the form of the totem, the totemic emblem is like the visible body the god."
(1973, p. 184 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

"But from the fact that a 'religious experience,' if we choose it this, does exist and that it has a certain foundation ... it does not follow that the reality which is its foundation conforms objectively to the idea which believers have of it."
(1973, p. 190 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

"That which science refuses to grant to religion is not its right to exist, but its right to dogmatize upon the nature of things and the special competence which it claims for itself for knowing man and the world. As a matter of fact, it does not know itself. It does not even know what it is made of, nor to what need it answers."
(1973, p. 205 [excerpt from The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life])

Sources:
Bellah, Robert N. 1973. Emile Durkheim: On Morality and Society, Selected Writings. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Thompson, Kenneth. 1982. Emile Durkheim. London: Tavistock Publications.

The Faith Factor and Prisoner Reentry

Author: Byron R. Johnson (Baylor University)

  Download/Printing is only available to registered users. Please login.

ABSTRACT

Between 1980 and 2006, the U.S. prison population increased by 467 percent (from 319,598 to 1,492,973). The inevitable increase in the number of released prisoners returning to communities across the country (approximately 700,000 ex-prisoners per year) has created a national debate about how best to handle the prisoner reentry crisis. Religious activities can play a positive role in the lives of prisoners while they are incarcerated, and research shows that religiosity is associated with reducing negative outcomes and promoting prosocial behavior. Consequently, faith-based organizations can play an important role in helping to reduce recidivism. A multifaceted approach to prisoner reentry would require new public-private partnerships and a significant influx of volunteers, many of whom could be drawn from religious congregations. Intermediary groups are necessary to bring a comprehensive prisoner reentry effort to scale because these organizations serve as the bridge between ex-prisoners and the many social service providers and governmental agencies that are active in the areas of employment, housing, education, and counseling. Intermediaries can provide technical assistance and oversight as well as offering training to strengthen faith-based and community-based organizational capacity.

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/f/frazer/james/golden/

The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion is a wide-ranging comparative study of mythology and religion, written by Scottish anthropologist Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941). It was first published in two volumes in 1890; the third edition, published 1906–15, comprised twelve volumes. It was aimed at a broad literate audience raised on tales as told in such publications as Thomas Bulfinch's The Age of Fable, or Stories of Gods and Heroes (1855). It offered a modernist approach to discussing religion, treating it dispassionately [1] as a cultural phenomenon rather than from a theological perspective. The impact of The Golden Bough on contemporary European literature was substantial.

Mircea Eliade starts off The Sacred & the Profane (1957) with a few paragraphs on Rudolf Otto's Das Heilige (1917), translated from the German as The Idea of the Holy. Eliade offers a perspective on Otto which suits his own purposes but ignores a large part of what Otto has to say. [1]

Rudolf Otto's The Idea of the Holy 1: Summary
The aim of this article is to provide a reasonably comprehensive account of Otto's work. It will deal in some detail with that aspect of Otto which was of interest to Eliade, his analysis of the nature of religious experience. But it will be equally be concerned with that aspect of Otto which Eliade signally chose to ignore, his account of the history of religious experience.

There will be no attempt here to comment on Otto's ideas. That will be done in the second part of this article.

The Numinous in Religious Experience
Otto starts The Idea of the Holy by arguing that the non-rational in religion must be given its due importance, then goes on to introduce and develop his notion of the numinous. As a kind of first approximation for the wholly new concept he is giving us, Otto characterises the numinous as the holy (i.e. God) minus its moral and rational aspects. A little more positively, it is the ineffable core of religion: the experience of it cannot to be described in terms of other experiences.

[Note that the German heilig can be rendered as either holy or sacred. The translator had to make a choice and chose holy. So in the context of Otto, for holy it is possible to read sacred: the religious experience he discusses is the experience of the sacred.]

Otto's next approximation is the notion of creature-feeling. He suggests that those who experience the numinous experience a sense of dependency on something objective and external to themselves that is greater than themselves.

The Experience of the Numinous in Real Life
The writer goes on to indicate in concrete terms the kind of experience he is considering. Quotations are essential here so that we are absolutely clear on what Otto has in mind.

It is:
'The deepest and most fundamental element in all strong and sincerely felt religious emotion.'
It is to be found:
'in strong, sudden ebullitions of personal piety, ... in the fixed and ordered solemnities of rites and liturgies, and again in the atmosphere that clings to old religious monuments and buildings, to temples and to churches.'
It may peaceful and:
'come sweeping like a gentle tide, pervading the mind with a tranquil mood of deepest worship.'
or faster moving:
'thrillingly vibrant and resonant, until at last it dies away and the soul resumes its 'profane', non-religious mood of everyday experience'
even violent, erupting:
'from the depths of the soul with spasms and convulsions'
and leading to:
'the strangest excitements, to intoxicated frenzy, to transport, and to ecstasy' [pp 12-13 in the standard English version]

Otto's Mysterium Tremendum
Otto has reached the heart of the matter. He pins down this sort of experience for dissection in terms of a Latin phrase, mysterium tremendum. He presents the tremendum component of the numinous that is being experienced as comprising three elements: awfulness (inspiring awe, a sort of profound unease), overpoweringness (that which, among other things, inspires a feeling of humility), energy (creating an impression of immense vigour).

The mysterium component in its turn has two elements, which Otto discusses at considerable length. Firstly, the numinous is experienced as 'wholly other.' It is something truly amazing, as being totally outside our normal experience. Secondly, here is the element of fascination, which causes the subject of the experience of the numinous to be caught up in it, to be enraptured. [2]

Some Points Arising
There are several important points to be made about this description and analysis of religious experience. First of all note Otto's passing mention of the profane. In this account the religious person operates on two levels: usually on the profane or everyday level, but with occasional moments or longer periods of accession to a higher, sacred level.

Secondly, note the situations in which this higher level may be attained. Otto refers not only to personal piety, where he is presumably talking about prayer and religious meditation. He also includes participation in religious ceremonies and even visits to churches and the like.

Thirdly, note that although Otto initially mentions participation in ceremonies and visits to holy buildings as occasions for profound religious experience, he proves in the discussion of the five elements to be concerned above all with mysticism. This is surely a matter of personal piety.

Religious Progress: a Preview
Fourthly and finally, note that in the course of the analysis of the mysterium tremendum Otto gives us a preview of his ideas on religious progress. In the section on the first of his elements, awefulness, the writer explains how this part of the experience of the numinous still retains something of its origins in the most primitive form of religious experience:

'let us give a little further consideration to the first crude, primitive forms in which this 'numinous dread' or awe shows itself. It is the mark which really characterizes the so-called 'religion of primitive man', and there it appears as 'daemonic dread'. This crudely naïve and primordial emotional disturbance ...' [pp 15-16]

In this context, Otto suggests four stages of religious progress: the worship of 'daemons', followed by the higher level of the worship of 'gods', through to 'the highest level of all, where the worship of God is at its purest' [p 17]. The third stage is implied: that of those religions where in Otto's eyes the worship of God is not at its purest. In his sections on the last two of his elements, the wholly other and the element of fascination, the writer refers again to 'daemonic dread' as the primitive starting point of the numinous experience.

Having established early in the book (by p 40] exactly what he means by the numinous and the experience of it, Otto goes on to explore various ramifications of the idea. Much of this kind of material seems to have no bearing on the development of ideas of the sacred in the c20th and is irrelevant to the purposes of this site. So we shall skip it. As has been suggested previously, the issue that is of interest is the writer's treatment of religious progress.

The Profane
However, let us note in passing that Otto returns briefly at one point to the question of the profane. He argues that the experience of the numinous leads in people to much more than the sense of personal unworthiness he had spoken of in his discussion of creature-feeling. It leads, according to the writer, to a sense of the worthlessness of the whole of ordinary existence. He calls this 'the feeling of absolute profaneness' [p 51]. Thus the experience of the sacred has as its inevitable concomitant the experience of the profane.

The 'Awefulness' of God
Also worthy of attention is Otto's effort in his chapters on the numinous in the Old Testament, in the New Testament and in Luther to emphasise that the rise of the rational in the Judeo-Christian tradition did not eliminate the non-rational numinous. In particular, he reminds the reader of the continuing presence of the 'awefulness' aspect, as in ideas of a dread inspiring, vengeful and wrathful God.

In the chapter on the numinous in the Old Testament, Otto discusses the transition of the Old Testament God from an early Yahweh, still bearing traces of the 'daemonic dread' of the pre-god stage of the numinous , to an Elohim in whom 'the rational aspect outweighs the numinous' [p 75], though the latter continues to be very much present.

In the New Testament likewise, Otto looks at the balance between non-rational and rational. Here the rational aspect of God reaches its consummation, but the numinous aspect has not been lost. Thus Otto sees the numinous in New Testament references to a God of vengeance, who will 'destroy wicked men' [p 84]. The author also notably sees St Paul's doctrine of predestination as 'non-rational' [p 86] and springing from the numinous.

With regard to Luther, Otto argues that the non-rational in the reformer's religion has come to be ignored:

'the Lutheran school has itself not done justice to the numinous side of the Christian idea of God. By the exclusively moral interpretation it gave to the terms, it distorted the meaning of 'holiness' and 'wrath'. [p 108]

An Evolutionary Context
It is a measure of the importance of the theme of religious progress in Otto that, when he gets to it, he allots nearly as much space to it as he has done to the analysis of the experience of the mysterium tremendum. (Clearly, it has to be significant that Eliade and others choose to turn a blind eye to this aspect of Otto.)

The writer starts his treatment by placing the whole matter in an evolutionary context. He seems to express the view that human nature has been unchanged since humans became humans:

'The history of humanity begins with man ... we must presuppose man as a being analogous to ourselves in natural propensities and capacities.' [p 114]

The Human Predisposition for Religious Experience
So religious growth has occurred not because of any development in human capacities, but because of a predisposition towards religious experience that was always present but only gradually awakened. The writer emphasises that this predisposition is a characteristic not just of some individuals, but of the whole human species.

Otto goes on to identify and discuss a series of phenomena he associates with the earliest expressions of the human predisposition for religion. His eight phenomena are not part of religion as he understands it, but of pre-religion. He begins with: magic, worship of the dead, ideas regarding souls and spirits, belief that natural objects have powers that can be manipulated by spells etc, belief that natural objects like mountains and the sun and the moon are actually alive, fairy stories (and myths). A little more advanced are: belief in daemons (pre-deities, so to speak), notions of pure and impure.

The Beginnings of Religion
Religion proper starts only when feelings prompted by the predisposition for religious experience are no longer projected on to things out there in the natural world, but are accounted for in terms of gods. From then on the progress of religion is a matter of the gradual refinement of people's understanding of their experience of the divine, till the culmination in Christianity. (Note Otto's view of Christianity as the end product of religious development: for example, 'Christianity ... stands out in complete superiority over all sister religions.' [p 142])

The Motive Force Driving Religious Progress
Now the human predisposition for religious experience does not explain how religious progress took place, how humanity gradually advanced towards Christianity. There had to have been some mechanism or mechanisms to drive things forward. At the very end of his main text, Otto points to 'three factors by which religion comes into being in history'. [p 176] But, not for the first time, he expresses himself obscurely. The general idea seems to be that it is basically a matter of the cumulative effect of the interactions between the human predisposition to religion and the contingent events of human history (somewhat like the interactions between nature and nurture, heredity and environment in the development of human individuals, one might suppose).

A specific type of historical event that Otto draws into his argument is the emergence of particular people far more sensitive to the numinous than their fellows and who sensitised those around them. These special individuals included the Bible prophets and pre-eminently Jesus, of course, as the writer points out in the final words of his main text.

As indicated initially, we shall comment on Otto's ideas in the second part of this article.

NOTES
1 Eliade
In fact, Eliade's reference to Otto is a red herring. It diverts attention away from Emile Durkheim's The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912), in which the sacred - profane dichotomy is a central theme. Any truly serious scholar introducing a book entitled The Sacred & the Profane would have surely have referred to the most important previous authority on the subject, Durkheim, rather to mention an authority of merely tangential relevance, Otto. Eliade was certainly aware of the key work of this founding father of sociology: it is listed in his bibliography and dismissed in a single misleading sentence on p 231.

It seems impossible to supply Eliade with any creditable motive for ignoring Durkheim. For example, when you have chapters on sacred space and sacred time, how can you ignore the authority who has discussed these notions 45 years previously, as far as I am aware introducing them? [Back to Article]
2 fascinans
June 2007: When I wrote this summary 6 years ago, I was not aware of the widespread use in references to Otto of the pseudo-quotation mysterium tremendum et fascinans, for which see on this site The Rudolf Otto Virus. The term fascinans is indeed used by Otto, but only on a few isolated occasions and not in conjunction with mysterium tremendum. I still don't think the term fascinans as such has an important enough place in Otto's book to warrant inclusion in my summary. [Back to Article]

http://www3.open.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/arts-and-humanities/religious-studies/index.htm

[[Go to the homepage here|http://radicalacademy.com/homepage.htm]]

[[Read the Study Guide here|http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/protestantethic]]

Home » Book Reviews
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism | Book Reviews

Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

Review Essay by Stanley Engerman, Departments of Economics and History, University of Rochester

Capitalism, Protestantism, and Economic Development:

Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism after Almost One Century

Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism has had an enduring impact on the field of economic history. Ironically, Weber's contemporary, Joseph Schumpeter (1991, 220-229) argued that, althoughWeber's academic career began with chairs in economics, "he was not really an economist at all," but rather a sociologist. Schumpeter (1954, 21 and 819) distinguished between economic analysis, which "deals with the questions of how people behave at any time and what the economic effects are they produce by so behaving," and economic sociology, which "deals with the question how they came to behave as they do." This concern with the latter question is reflected in Weber's still important work on the development of capitalism.

Weber's concerns within economic history, particularly in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, fit well into the general interests of the turn-of-the-century historical schools in Germany and in England. These scholars were concerned with explaining the rise of modern economies, as well as with the explanation of the institutions and conditions that influenced the development and operation of economies and societies. Weber, unlike others in the German School, spent little time describing the role played by economic policies of governments in economic change. He focused, as did Werner Sombart, more on the study of modern capitalism, its natureand the causes of its rise. As the interest in this topic waned, the interest in Weber's work was lessened, a pattern that persisted for several decades.

Weber's major contribution to the study of economic history no doubt remains his classic study The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, first published in 1904-1905, and republished with some revision in 1920, with the addition of extensive footnotes. Weber did not originate the thesis linking Protestantism and capitalism, as he himself pointed out. Jacob Viner (1978, 151-189), among others, has indicated thatthis idea of linking religion to the onset of capitalism had a long history in regard to Protestantism and to other religions prior to Weber's writings. Earlier writers, including the English economist William Petty, made some of these links. What Weber did was to provide the specifics for the argument, with the details of the mechanism by which the belief in a"calling" and in worldly asceticism developed, leading to modern capitalism. Nevertheless, Weber argues that these behavioral changes alone could not bring about modern capitalism as it required the appropriate set of conditions in the economic sphere.

To clarify his contention on the uniqueness of the west, Weber undertook several major studies in the sociology of religions in different areas, particularly Asia, in order to understand why other religions did not generate the emergence of a modern capitalism. These comparative religious studies have yielded insights into the impact of these different religious systems in China, India, and elsewhere, and their impacts on behavior. To some scholars, however, it was the political nature and openness to new beliefs and innovations in those countries in northwest Europe that lead to developments in science, business, and political freedom that permitted economic and scientific progress to take place.

The issue of the relation of Protestantism and capitalism remains a historic perennial, frequently cited and necessarily discussed and evaluated in all works dealing with its general time period. Weber clearly had raised a central issue for historic studies. The general question and Weber's approach have remained important to recent works by economic historians for several reasons. First, they have made central the question of the uniqueness of western civilization and the nature of its economicand social development. Whatever might have been the relative incomes of different parts of the world before 1700, it is clear that since then economic growth has been much more rapid in Western Europe and its overseas off shoots than in other parts of the world.

Modern economic growth has taken place with a quite different economic and social structure from that which had existed earlier. Economic growth occurred at roughly the same time, or soon after, these areas experienced the rise of Protestant religions. Some may hold this similarity to be of completely different occurrences, but for many such a non-relationship would seem difficult to understand and accept. Second, Weber has pointed to the significance of non-pecuniary (or what some would call non-economic) factors in influencing economic change, at least in conjunction with some appropriate set of conditions. For Weber, the key non-pecuniary factor wasbased on a particular religion and set of religious codes; to others it was a religious influence, but from a different religion, such as Catholicism or Judaism; while to other scholars it has been some different factorleading to behavior changes, such as rationalism, individualism, or the development of an economic ethic. Some, such as R. H. Tawney (1926), invertWeber's argument, making the economic change a basic contribution to the religious changes. To still other scholars, the major factor has been the nature of a minority group of penalized outsiders in society. These scholars include William Petty (1899, 260-264), who looked at several different areas in the seventeenth century, Sombart (1969) and Thorstein Veblen (1958) who wrote on the Jews, and Alexander Gerschenkron (1970) who examined the Russian Old Believers. Each of these explanations has been advanced in the attempt to describe the primary cause of those changes in economic behavior that have lead to the distinction between the modern and pre-modern worlds.

In explaining the rise of capitalism in the Western World, Weber makes it clear that "the impulse to acquisition, pursuit of gain, of money, of the greatest possible amount of money, has in itself nothing to do with capitalism"; and "unlimited greed for gain is not in the least identical with capitalism, and is still less its spirit." The desire for gain has been seen in "all sorts of conditions of men at all times and in all countries of the earth." Rather what developed in the West was "the rational capitalistic organization of formally free labor," which was based on "the separation of business from the household" and "rational book keeping," although the basic factor was the presence of free labor. The ability to calculate, the development of technical capabilities, the creation of systems of law and administration - all have been important to Western culture but, according to Weber, their economic usefulness is "determined by the ability and disposition of men to adopt certain types of practical rational conduct," unobstructed by spiritual and magical beliefs.

Since religion has always had a major impact upon conduct, the particular development of the West is attributed by Weber to "the influence of certain religious ideas on the development of the economic system," which, in the case "of the spirit of modern economic life [is] the rational ethics of ascetic Protestantism." That the impact of the actual teachings of the church was limited is suggested by Weber's contention that his concerns were with "predominately unforeseen and even unwished-for results." Hedenies that he believes that the spirit of capitalism could only have derived from the Reformation, and claims that he only wishes "to as certain whether and to what extent religious forces have taken part in the qualitative formation and of quantitative expansion of that spirit over the world." Nevertheless, he often does suggest that is was Christianasceticism and Calvinism that provided the orientation that led to the development of such ideas as the "necessity of proving one's faith in worldly activity," "the preaching of hard, continuous bodily or mentallabor," and "rational conduct on the basis of the idea of the calling" that were to provide "the fundamental elements of the spirit of modern capitalism."The recent literature by economic historians, dealing with "How the West Grew Rich," "The Rise of the Western World," "The European Miracle," "The Lever of Riches," "The Unbound Prometheus," and related titles, has begun, as did Weber, with the perceived uniqueness of the Western European economy. These studies, by such leading economic historians as Nathan Rosenberg ((1986) with L.E. Birdzell, Jr.), Douglass North (alone (1990),and with Robert Paul Thomas (1973)), Eric Jones (1981), Joel Mokyr (1990),and David Landes (1969, 1998), with the related writings by Fernand Braudel(1981, 1982 and 1984), Immanuel Wallerstein (1974, 1980 and 1989), John R.Hicks (1969), and Deepak Lal (1998), focus on somewhat different explanatory factors from Weber's, but the problem to be analyzed isidentical. Posited answers include the role of political freedom, the development of property rights, changes in technology and organization of workers, the changing ratio of land to labor, the reactions to different environmental conditions, the emergence of markets, the rise of rational thought, the inflow of specie and various others. Some focus more on what might be regarded as economic factors, while others are more in theWeberian tradition, even if there is no unanimity concerning specific causal factors. Rather curious, however, is that several of these recent works by economic historians do not refer to Weber's work on the Protestantethic, and in those that do not completely ignore him, his work is not seen as central to explaining the rise of the West, either because the role of religion is seen as more endogenous, or because other religions have been consistent with economic development during the growth of the West. Nevertheless, it is clear that as long as there is a belief that the economic performance of Western Europe has been unique, Weber has presentedan argument that must be confronted. Early in the second half of the twentieth century a non-western nation, Japan, as well as, somewhat later, several East Asian nations, came to experience some of the characteristics of modern economic and social change, with the development of a pattern of thrift and of a work ethic (even if cooperative not individualist), but with a different form of religion. This seems, however, to have done more to reawaken interest in Weber's arguments than to lead to their dismissal.

Despite the frequency of the criticism, of the specific hypothesis in the past, the Weber thesis remains central to posing questions about the onset of modern economic growth and social and religious change in seventeenth-and eighteenth-century Western Europe. Its importance as a spiritual and ideological counter to a concentration on material conditions, as in the works of Karl Marx, provides an alternative approach to understanding economic change. In addition to the debates on economic growth there are subsidiary questions about related aspects of western development, which might be regarded as either substitutes for or complements to the Weber Thesis. These include debates on the rise of individualism, the causes ofthe development of a more deliberate and rational approach to economic and other behavior, and the link between the emergence of modern capitalism and modern science. Weber discussed the role of those climate and geographic factors that have interested such present-day economic historians as Eric Jones, arguing that the development of firstly cities, and then nation-states, left Europe, unlike Asia, with rational states and rational law. This set of developments reflected, according to Weber, initial differences in natural forces.

As with all "big theories," there are several different types of criticisms that have been made, posing some rather different questions. First, it is often unclear what the proponent had really said, particularly crucial since we usually look only at the briefest summary of what was presented, without paying as much attention to the various qualifications and boundary conditions that the author was intelligent enough to have added. Second, there are these complications in defining precisely what are regarded ascauses, and what are the effects. In terms of the Weber Thesis, we need to be clearer both on what was to be considered the nature of religion and religious beliefs, and also what exactly we are trying to explain when we discuss capitalism. Third, is the manner by which the cause and effect can be linked, whether we believe they can be related by other than a pattern involving direct causation, and whether the same cause will yield a different effect or, alternatively, the same effects can be achieved with a broader range of causes. Variants of all these types of criticisms have been applied to The Protestant Ethic, and much more space than that available here would be needed to provide a complete examination of this debate.

Many of the disagreements about Weber's linking of Protestantism and capitalism contain a distinct moral flavor. To those who find capitalism and the modern world morally distasteful, linking capitalism's rise to religious beliefs places an unfortunate and unfair burden upon the religion, which can lead to a denial of any relationship between the two. Presumably those more sympathetic to modernism and capitalism would find a relationship more acceptable. Weber, himself, believed that capitalism generated important problems, and he did not believe that capitalist growth could continue indefinitely. The decline of capitalism was anticipated because of the development of rigid institutions and the rise of a bureaucratic state, posing a threat to political freedom as well as causing economic stagnation. Weber's use of the image of the "iron cage" to describe modern society reflected his belief that certain cultural problems emerged because of capitalist development. And while Weber did not describe the same scenario for capitalism's demise as that later presented by Schumpeter, it was similarly based upon the impact of increasing bureaucracy and rationalism on the belief system in society. Many of Weber's works dealt with topics in the area of economic history, and even his more sociological writings were concerned with economic comparisons. Particularly rich in presenting his later views was his book devoted exclusively to the study of world economic history, GeneralEconomic History (1981), based on the transcripts of lectures in1919-1920, taken from students' notes. A look at this work is useful inputting Weber's economic history in a broad perspective.

General Economic History is an overall survey of economic developments,from ancient times to the modern world. It provides summary statements (insome cases, revisions) of key arguments found in earlier writings, useful descriptions of the pattern of western economic development, and insightful brief views of major economic changes that are sometimes detailed in other writings. Its major contributions include the claim that forms of what could be considered capitalism had long existed, leading to earlier accumulations of wealth, but it was only with the development of capital accounting and rational commerce, and with the need for rules and trust that arise when there are continued transactions among individuals, that the modern form of capitalism emerged in Western Europe. This development was unique to that particular geographic region. In describing this evolution Weber also provides discussions of the changing organization of the manor, the stages in the rise of industry, the impacts of slavery and other forms of labor organization upon the economy as well as the reasons for their transformation over time, and numerous other topics that are still covered, often in a quite similar manner, in today's textbooks in European economic history.

Weber gave some attention to the importance of non-pecuniary tastes in actions within the economy. Following a strand of argument raised by a member of the Older German Historical School, Karl Knies, he argued that people did not necessarily profit-maximize at all times. Non-economic factors play a role in human behavior. Weber believed that it was certainly possible that there may be less extensive attempts at the maximum degree of maximization within a market economy, at least as a short term goal, than in other forms of social organization. Weber argued that "the notion that our rationalistic and capitalistic age is characterized by a stronger economic interest than other periods is childish," and claims that while Cortez and Pizarro had strong economic interests, they certainly did not have "an idea of a rationalistic economic life." Weber distinguished between economic interests, found in many past societies, and arationalistic, capitalistic channeling of those interests. To Weber, the market system was not an idealized means of solving social problems. He recognized the conflicts that existed within the market system, suggesting that price and market outcomes should be seen as the result of conflict, since people disagreed over the use of the economic surpluses that could exist. But to Weber the market, with its various difficulties, seemed to provide a reasonable way to resolve conflicts and to allocate resources with some limitations on destruction and loss of freedom.

While attention was given to the cultural problems due to capitalism, in Weber's view the rise of capitalism was related to favorable changes in the distribution of economic resources within society. It was what Weber called the "democratization of luxuries" that was the key source of early market demand, rather than "Army, Luxury, or Court Demands." None of these factors, important as they may have seemed at the time or to subsequent scholars (for example, Sombart), based on demand from a limited segment of the population, had led to prolonged economic growth anywhere. Prolonged growth, rather, was the result of growth of the mass market which arose with capitalism, and which lowered prices permitting the broad masses to imitate the consumption patterns of the rich. Weber argued that "first the prices fell relatively and then came capitalism," the price declines being due to preceding shifts in technology and economic relations.

One of the major substantive legacies of Weber is his description of the characteristics of modern capitalism. Weber regarded capitalism as an evolving system, so that present-day capitalism has some features rather different from those at the onset of modern capitalism. He did not, however, regard commercial and capitalist activity as something new in the modern era, since such behavior had existed in most societies in earliertimes, as well as in other societies considered non-capitalist at the present time. Under modern capitalism, however, activities of a somewhat different pattern and nature occurred from those in the other forms of capitalism.

The principal characteristics of modern capitalism that Weber points to are the centrality of rationality and those measures that help to implementrational behavior. The emergence of a rationally organized formally free labor market to replace the various forms of labor institutions that had characterized earlier forms of capitalism, the development of rational law and administration in large firms and governments, the evolution of forms of rational bookkeeping and capital accounting, and the growth of bureaucracies in the public and private sectors to order the behavior of the larger-scale units in economic society - all these represent those factors developed out of Protestantism which permit continued capitalist accounting procedures to separate business and household capital in the interests of determining growth. Other accounting procedures of the modern capitalist economy include the use of interests of rational decisionmaking, and the increased number of business leaders whose leadership is based upon their personal charisma, not on either traditional or legal influences. Weber's argument that charisma weakens the growth of bureaucracy resembles Schumpeter's contention of the decline of the entrepreneurial function in modern capitalism, leading to a declining social appeal of capitalism. Recent studies in leadership of management, however, have focused upon so-called "change agents" and shapers of corporate culture, leading to attempts to determine what are the crucial characteristics of successful business leaders and what they have done to achieve their success.

Weber's contribution to the study of economic history includes both methodological approaches and substantive conclusions. His general questions on the role of changing institutions and human behavior have again come into vogue, as has his interest in the law, legal rationality, and the process of historical development. Thus, in a number of ways, Weber reads very much like a present-day economic historian, a development that has taken place after a long period in which Weber was relatively ignored by economic historians. In part his loss of influence was due to a shift in questions, to those mainly dealing with only a relatively short, recent period in the history of the west, based, in the 1930's, on a primary focuson the relatively short-run set of economic cycles, and, in the 1940's, ona belief that with the right economic conditions all societies could achieve economic growth. As it became clear that the process of economic growth was rather more complex than believed in the mid-twentieth century, and that its understanding was based on happenings over a much longer timespan than was being examined, Weber's analysis, with its broad chronological, spatial, and intellectual sweep, again became more central.

Bibliographical Note:

There have been several publications of The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit of Capitalism since the first English-language translation in 1930. All use the original translation by Talcott Parsons, differing only in their introductions. Among them are: - New York: Scribner, 1930, 1948, and 1958 (foreword by R. H. Tawney). - London: Allen & Unwin, 1976; London: Routledge, 1992 (introduction by Anthony Gidden)- Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, 1996 and 1998 (introduction by Randall Collins) and- Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2000 (introduction by Stephen Kalberg). A recent analysis of the work of Weber is in Stephen P. Turner, editor,Cambridge Companion to Weber (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2000). This includes my essay on "Max Weber as Economist and Economic Historian," parts of which have been drawn upon h

http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/how-to-say-the-rosary.html

HOW TO SAY THE ROSARY,
AND DRINK IN THE
SWEET FRAGRANCE OF FAITH

[img[http://www.ourcatholicprayers.com/images/MotherofGodChantartph.jpg]]
Picture of the Blessed Virgin Mary courtesy of Chant Art

Do you know how to say the Rosary? Would you like to walk through a fragrant rose garden of love for the Blessed Virgin Mary and her Divine Son, Jesus? You can get there by saying this simple yet powerful prayer! Saint Louis De Montfort, famous for encouraging devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, called the Rosary “a blessed blending of mental and vocal prayer.” He further said we “honor and learn to imitate the mysteries and virtues” of the lives of Jesus and Mary through this prayer.

In case you’ve heard it's too boring or too repetitive, think again! When you learn how to say the Rosary, you can “bond” with our Lord and His Blessed Mother as you reflect on their efforts for our salvation, and on what they endured out of love for each one of us!

They had more than their share of problems, just like we do at times! And yet, we know from our Lord’s Resurrection and His Mother's Coronation as Queen of Heaven and Earth that they also had their triumphs. This thought can help you cope with your own difficulties.

In learning how to say the Rosary we are learning how to “imitate what they [the mysteries] contain and obtain what they promise,” as we say in the final prayer below. We pray for strength and wisdom and for the graces the Rosary can give us and others.

(By the way, if the word “mysteries” makes you feel more like Inspector Clouseau than Lt. Columbo, don’t worry! You’re not solving a case! A mystery in this case refers to a particular event in the lives of Jesus and Mary.)

Rosary picture courtesy of Istockphoto Getting started is simple: You can purchase a Rosary, such as the one shown at right, at any number of Catholic book stores, gift shops, or perhaps other stores online. The beads help you keep track of each mystery listed below as you meditate. (You can also use your fingers if you don’t have a Rosary.)

You start the Rosary by saying the [[Apostles' Creed]] on the cross,followed by one [[Our Father]], three [[Hail Marys]] and one [[Glory Be]].

Then you say the five decades of the Rosary. Each decade consists of one Our Father, followed by ten Hail Marys (which are said on each of ten beads grouped together, as in the picture above), one Glory Be, and then the Fatima Prayer (printed below).

THE FATIMA PRAYER
“Oh my Jesus forgive us our sins save us from the fires of hell, lead all souls to heaven especially those most in need of thy mercy.”
(Please note that the Blessed Virgin Mary specifically requested at Fatima in 1917 that we include this prayer after each decade.)

During each decade you meditate on the following events in the lives of Jesus and Mary:

The Five Joyful Mysteries
(said on Mondays and Saturdays)
1. The Annunciation
2. The Visitation
3. The Nativity
4. The Presentation
5. The Finding of the Child Jesus in the Temple

The Five Luminous Mysteries
(Said on Thursdays)
1. The Baptism of Jesus
2. The Wedding at Cana
3. The Proclamation of the Kingdom of God
4. The Transfiguration
5. The Institution of the Eucharist

The Five Sorrowful Mysteries
(said on Tuesdays and Fridays)
1. The Agony in the Garden
2. The Scourging at the Pillar
3. The Crowning with Thorns
4. The Carrying of the Cross
5. The Crucifixion

The Five Glorious Mysteries
(said on Wednesdays and Sundays)
1. The Resurrection
2. The Ascension
3. The Descent of the Holy Spirit
4. The Assumption
5. The Coronation

(Note: we say the Sorrowful Mysteries during the Sundays of Lent and
the Joyful Mysteries on Sundays in Advent.)

Then conclude with the Hail Holy Queen prayer and the following:

"LET US PRAY: O God, whose only begotten Son, by his life, death and resurrection, has purchased for us the rewards of eternal life, grant, we beseech thee, that meditating upon these mysteries of the most holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, we may imitate what they contain and obtain what they promise, through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.”

Keep in mind you can say the Rosary anywhere that works for you, while walking, commuting, or perhaps in your office, anyplace you feel you can concentrate.

Also, if it helps, you can say a decade at a time at different times of the day if you're busy. And, of course, if the spirit moves you, you can pray more than one set of mysteries a day!

Remember, in any case, that knowing how to say the Rosary opens up a wonderful world of structured meditation to help you with your prayer life. To make this easier, try different approaches to the Rosary. You can:

• Read a meditation at the start of each mystery to give you “food for thought."

• Try any number of scriptural Rosary methods, either in books or online. These usually involve reading a Biblical verse relating to the mystery you’re contemplating before each “Hail Mary.” (The events of each mystery “unfold” well that way.)

• Read and study the events, both in scripture and in commentary by the Saints and by learned religious or lay people. You’ll find you’ve learned not just how to say the Rosary but how to pray it better it as you come
up with your own “scriptural Rosary” thoughts for each decade!

You might also wish to study the history of the Rosary as well for inspiration. The Blessed Virgin Mary once said that with the Rosary and the [[scapular]] (a special piece of cloth you can wear) she could save the world.

(According to St. Louis De Montfort, tradition has it that Mary taught St. Dominic how to say the Rosary in the 13th century.)

St. Pio once refrerred to the Rosary as his “weapon” against Satan and sin. We can all form a Heavenly Army here on Earth for Our Lord and His Blessed Mother. Help them help us! In addition to reciting it often (every day is best!), teach someone you know how to say the Rosary.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/sbe/

The Sacred: Supernatural and Innate
This page reviews the different understandings of the sacred discussed on this site.

http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/versions.html

1 The Energetic Sacred:
This is the sacred understood as the manifestation of the power of the supernatural in the natural world.

Confusion exists because, historically, English speaking Protestants have not used the term sacred in talking about their own religion. They have reserved it for discussions of the mediated sacred as this occurs in other religions.

In talking about the sacred in their own religion English speaking Protestants have preferred terms like the holy and the divine. Thus we find Rudolf Otto's book translated into English as The Idea of the Holy.

In The Varieties of Religious Experience, William James suggests that 'spiritual energy' is transferred from the supernatural to the natural world during what he calls 'genuine prayer'. See Spiritual energy.

2 The Unmediated Sacred:
This is a first version of the energetic sacred. It is the sacred understood as the power of the supernatural experienced personally and immediately. It is a matter of brief episodes of great emotional intensity.

The unmediated sacred is what English speaking Protestants understand as the experience of the holy or of the divine. Otto, very notably, analysed it as the numinous. In Catholicism, the unmediated sacred is a matter of mystical experience, the supernatural as experienced by mystics.

Note that this experience is unmediated in the sense that intermediate agencies are not involved. It is not completely raw experience however, because subjects must inevitably understand it in terms of their particular belief system or other culturally generated expectations.

3 The Mediated Sacred:
This is a second version of the energetic sacred. It is the manifestion of the power of the supernatural to the believer through intermediate agencies.

For example, in Catholicism, one of the ways in which the sacred is mediated is through the saints. These are in effect individuals declared by the Church to have had unmediated experience of the supernatural. Some form of engagement with them can enable ordinary believers to receive an input of supernatural power. Thus, touching a relic of a saint allows a believer to experience the mediated sacred. If asked what is being transmitted to the believer, Catholics would say something like 'God's grace'.

The sacred mediated through individuals is observable also in Protestantism. For example, faith healing may be seen as the contact of the believing sufferer with the power of the supernatural through the mediation of the healer. Protestants themselves will understand the phenomenon as something like 'divine power' acting through the healer.

4 The Sacred as Interface:
In Christian writing today, the term 'sacred' may be connected with location, as in 'sacred place' and 'sacred time'.

In this understanding, the sacred is the interface between the supernatural and the natural. It is not the power of the supernatural transferred to the natural, but simply the reality of the supernatural experienced in the natural. Thus a church can be seen as a sacred place, a religious service as a sacred time: both of them particularly conducive to personal experience of the supernatural, experience that is beneficial, though not usually of the overwhelming kind described by James, Otto and even Durkheim.

The distinction between the sacred as interface and the mediated sacred is not absolute. In the city where I live, it is not unknown for people who are upset to go and sit quietly in the medieval cathedral, Protestant since the Reformation, in order to regain some peace of mind. In this scenario, the cathedral may be understood as an interface, but alternatively as a form of mediation.

5 The Synonymous Sacred:
'Sacred' as an adjective is also often used these days as an alternative to 'supernatural' in references to what religions are all about. This usage may have arisen because the term 'supernatural' can present difficulties. For instance, the latter has associations with horror literature that have been gradually accumulating since the Gothic novel some two centuries ago.

'The sacred' as a noun is frequently merely a postmodern/politically correct/commercial synonym for 'religion' (in general), matching the use of 'faith' as a synonym for 'religion' (in particular). Thus a current UK undergraduate textbook on the anthropology of religion has a section entitled 'Sex and the Sacred'. [1]

6 The Innate Sacred:
This is the alternative understanding of the sacred offered by this site. It is about the sense of connectedness with their world that most people seem to lose in childhood, but which some individuals retain throughout their lives. When you feel essentially connected with your world, you feel that it is in some sense sacred.

The innate sacred must be distinguished radically from the unmediated sacred. The former is a matter of a permanent relationship with the natural, the latter of discrete encounters with the supernatural.

The innate sacred goes unrecognised as such among those who live with it because our culture does not provide them with knowledge of it as a possibility. This can cause them great difficulties. For example, it is probable that the art of Vincent Van Gogh was an expression of his experience of the innate sacred and that at least some of his problems resulted from him not being able to cope with that experience.

In our culture, the only resource people living with the innate sacred have had in trying to make sense of their experience has been supernatural religion. Thus they may have supposed that what they were feeling was the presence of God in their lives. It seems probable, for instance, that over the centuries many Catholics have interpreted their experience of the innate sacred as a vocation for the religious life and become priests or nuns as a result.

It probably needs to be emphasised that the innate sacred has absolutely nothing to do with the supernatural or anything comparable.

7 The Proximal Sacred and the Distal Sacred:
Another way of differentiating between the innate or inherent sacred as presented by this site and the sacred of religions of the supernatural is to use the contrast between proximal and distal. The former relates to things we find sacred through immediate experience, through familiarity, things such as our family and our home; the latter relates to things that are essentially remote, things we find sacred only through some process of acquiring knowledge, things such as God and the Church.

It is in this light that Van Gogh may be seen as an artist of the sacred: his art, as in The Potato Eaters or the pictures of his and Gauguin's chairs or his representation of a starry sky, depicts the proximal sacred. By contrast, what is conventionally understood as sacred art, that of El Greco, for instance, is art of the distal sacred: evocations of people and events from far beyond the artist's actual experience.

Of course, religions of the supernatural may involve the proximal as well as the distal sacred, as in the way Christianity these days emphasises the importance of the family alongside beliefs in transcendent reality.

NOTES
1 The Anthropology of Religion
The commercial phrase 'Sex and the Sacred' doubtless derives ultimately from the 1964 film title Sex and the Single Girl. The textbook in question is Fiona Bowie: The Anthropology of Religion: An Introduction [2000].

The 'Sex and the Sacred' section is part of a chapter called 'Sex, Gender and the Sacred'. It is made up of 9 fairly substantial paragraphs, but only 2 of them actually discuss religion: then mainly in relation to virginity in Catholicism and with no mention of the sacred. Predictably, another section of the same chapter is called what else but 'Deconstructing Gender': in it, religion doesn't get mentioned at all.

Sex and violence:
A section of another chapter of the book is entitled 'Violence and the sacred'. So, sex and violence: a formula that sells books. (Compare Malinowski's catchy titles: The Sexual Life of Savages, Sex and Repression in Savage Society, Crime and Custom in Savage Society.)

But most significantly, Bowie, in line with her purely commerical use of the term, makes no attempt anywhere in the book to offer any understanding of the sacred as such. The closest she gets is a single sentence dismissing Durkheim's sacred ~ profane distinction, as not being regarded as important: no doubt a postmodernist knee-jerk rejection of distinctions rather than the result of any consideration of Durkheim, such as is undertaken on this site.

In contrast, Bowie has lengthy discussions on definitions of religion and of ritual, plus a couple of dozen glossary boxes offering definitions of various technical terms. Thus Victor Turner gets a full page box for his terminology and even Roy A Rappaport gets a box for 4 bits of his utterly obscure jargon.

The historical and the marginal:
This failure to comprehend the sacred is part of the book's complete failure to confront the totality of religion seriously. In so far as the book is actually about religion, it is about the historical and the marginal rather than about the present and the central. Thus there is a whole chapter on witchcraft, but not a single word on Protestantism and very little if anything on any other of the major religions.

But then this is not just a failure of the book. Bowie reflects the state of anthropology, which has not progressed to any significant extent since its early days, a century ago. For its founders, people like James Frazer, anthropology was about the ancient and the exotic, the quaint goings-on of long ago or far away. It is still today about the humanly remote and therefore curious: rather than about ourselves, the assumed human norm.

The anthropological taboo:
In this light, we may say that anthropology has a built in 'us and them' distinction, based on, yes, a taboo against studying 'us'. For Frazer, the distinction was between the civilised and the primitive; for Eliade - not an anthropologist, but discussed by Bowie - the distinction was between modern man and religious man; for Douglas in Purity and Danger, it was between compartmentalised and unified experience. Today, the distinction may no longer be explicit, but it is nevertheless still there.

In fact, given its disinclination to study the human here and now, as in the culture of the anthropologists themselves, anthropology cannot possibly be regarded as a science: any more than chemistry could, if it refused to study hydrogen, oxygen and carbon. [Back to Article]

[[From the Keys for Kids|http://cbhministries.org/kfk/home.php]]

"Who left the back door open?" asked Mom as she entered the kitchen. 

Jake looked over his shoulder at the wide open door. "Oops! It was me," he said. "I just came in with all these library books, and I forgot close it. Sorry, Mom."

Mom glanced around with a worried look. "Where's Brady?" 

Jake's gaze darted to the rug where the cat usually sunned himself. The spot was empty. "Do you think he sneaked outside again?" asked Jake.

"I wouldn't be surprised," said Mom, heading toward the door. 

Jake set the books aside and joined her in the backyard. They searched under the deck and behind bushes. "Look!" Jake exclaimed, pointing toward a black and white cat running through a neighbor's flowers. "Brady's heading straight for trouble!" He raced to catch the cat. Just as their neighbor's dog saw Brady and started to growl and bare his teeth, Jake scooped up his pet. Brady struggled to get loose, but Jake held him firmly until they were back inside. "You shouldn't go out there," scolded Jake. "It's dangerous for you-that dog doesn't like you. So stay inside. This is your safety zone." 

Jake let the cat go and returned to his books. "Mom, why can't I get that new adventure series?" he asked. "My friends say it's great!" 

"I know those books look appealing to you," Mom replied, "but the reviews aren't positive." 

"So I suppose Christians shouldn't read them," said Jake. He sighed. "Why are there so many things Christians can't do? I feel like I'm missing out on the fun."

Mom looked at the cat. "Do you think Brady feels that way, too?" she asked. "He thinks it's fun to go outside, so why not let him?"

"Because we don't want him to get hurt by a dog or hit by a car," replied Jake. 

"Exactly," said Mom with a smile. "We want to keep him safe because we love him. And because God loves us, He provides boundaries-a safety zone-for us. Sometimes the ways of the world look like fun, but joining in puts us in danger." 

"But God doesn't say adventure books are dangerous, does He?" challenged Jake. He sighed as his mother started to answer. "I know . . . I know," he interrupted. "One of God's rules for kids is to obey their parents. So . . ." Jake grinned and gave Brady a playful pat, "you stay inside and I obey Mom."


HOW ABOUT YOU?
Do you feel like you have too many boundaries? Are you tempted by books, movies, games, or activities that wouldn't glorify God? Do your parents refuse to let you take part in those activities? Satan wants you to disobey God, so he often tempts you to disobey your parents. When you do that, you enter the danger zone. Stick to the place of safety that comes from obeying God.


TODAY'S KEY VERSE:
Whoever listens to me (God) will dwell safely. Proverbs 1:33

The Secret Gospel of Mark

I find the Secret Gospel of Mark fascinating. Copied by a scribe in the 18th century from an earlier (how early we don't know) copy, there has been a great deal of controversy among scholars regarding its authenticity. I believe the Clementine letter is authentic for reasons of style. There can be no justifiable suspicion of Morton Smith 's integrity and I give no airing time to claims that Professor Smith forged the document..period!

Beginning of three-page handwritten addition penned into the endpapers of a printed book, Isaac Voss' 1646 edition of the Epistolae genuinae S. Ignatii Martyris. The addition is in 18th century Greek minuscule copying a letter of Clement of Alexandria "to Theodore" concerning a dispute with the Carpocratians, an heterodox Christian sect. It was discovered by Morton Smith in 1958 when he, as a graduate student of Columbia University , was cataloguing the manuscript collection of the Mar Saba Monastery south of Jerusalem.

Click on thumbnails to enlarge

Page 1

Translation of Andrew Bernhard (his website listed below)

01 From the letters of the most holy Clement of the Stomateis. To Theodore:

02 You did well silencing the unspeakable teachings of the Carpocratians.
03 For they are the prophesied wandering stars. From the narrow road of the commandments
04 they are wandering into a boundless abyss of carnal and bodily sins.
05 For having been puffed up in knowledge - as they call it - of the depths of Satan, they fail to notice
06 that they are throwing themselves down into the darkness of dark lies. And having boasted
07 that they are free, they have become slaves of servile desires. With these people, then, it is
08 necessary to check them constantly and in everything. For even if they say something true, still
09 the lover of the truth should not agree with them. For not all true things are truth.
10 One must not value what human opinion considers truth more than the
11 true truth, which is recognized through faith. Now, concerning their babblings about the divinely
12 inspired Gospel according to Mark: some are wholly false while others, even if partly true,
13 are still not completely true. The true parts, because they have been mixed
14 with invented stories are debased so that, as the saying goes, even the
15 salt loses its flavor. As for Mark then, during the time when Peter was in Rome,
16 he wrote up the deeds of the Lord, not actually recording everything, nor
17 hinting at the mysteries, but instead picking out the things he thought would
18 increase the faith of those being taught. Then, when Peter was martyred, Mark went
19 to Alexandria, bringing both his knowledge and the things he remembered hearing from Peter.
20 From what he brought, he supplemented his first book with the appropriate items
21 about knowledge for those who are making progress. He arranged a more spiritual
22 gospel for the use of those being perfected. Nevertheless, he did not reveal the things
23 which are not to be discussed. He did not write out the hierophantic instruction of the
24 Lord, but added other deeds to the ones he had already written. Then, he
25 added certain sayings, the interpretation of which he knew would initiate the hearers
26 into the innermost sanctuary of the truth which has been hidden seven times. This is the way
27 he prepared them, in my opinion, not ungrudgingly or unguardedly. And
28 when he died, he left his writing to the church in

Page 2

01 Alexandria, where it is even now still extremely carefully guarded, being read
02 only to those who have been initiated into the greatest mysteries. The miserable
03 demons, however, are always devising destruction for the human race.
04 After being taught by them and using their deceptive arts, Carpocrates
05 was able to enslave some elder from the church in Alexandria
06 and get the written part of the secret gospel from him. And he
07 interpreted it according to his blasphemous and carnal opinion. Still
08 he defiles it, mixing with the most undefiled and holy narratives the most
09 shameless lies. The teaching of the Carpocratians is derived from this mixture.
10 Therefore, one must never yield to them, just as I said before. Also, one must not concede
11 to them that the secret gospel is from Mark, when they put forth their lies.
12 Rather one must deny it, even with an oath. For one does not have to speak
13 the whole truth to everyone. For this reason the wisdom of God declares through Solomon,
14 "Answer the fool from his folly," teaching that, from people whose minds are blinded,
15 the light of the truth must be concealed. At once, she (Wisdom)
16 says, "From the one who has not, it will be taken," and, "Let the fool go in darkness."
17 But we are the children of light, who have been illuminated in the rising of the heights of the
18 spirit of the Lord. "Where the spirit of the Lord is," she says, "there is freedom." For all
19 things are pure to those who are pure. So I will not hesitate to answer the questions for you,
20 exposing their lies from the actual words of the gospel.
21 At any rate, after the part, "They were going up on the road to Jerusalem" and the following things
22 until, "after three days he will arise," it takes up according to the text:
23 "And they went to Bethany and there was a woman whose brother had died.
24 And coming up to him, she prostrated herself before Jesus and said to him, 'Son of David,
25 have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked her. And becoming angry,
26 Jesus went with her to the garden where the tomb was. And

Page 3

01 immediately a great sound was heard from the tomb, and Jesus, going toward it
02 rolled away the stone from the entrance to the tomb. And going in immediately where
03 the young man was, he stretched out a hand and raised him up, holding
04 his hand. Then, the man looked at him and loved him and
05 he began to call him to his side, that he might be with him. And going from
06 the tomb, they went to the house of the young man. For he was rich. And after
07 six days, Jesus instructed him. And when it was late, the young man went
08 to him. He had put a linen around his naked body, and
09 he remained with him through that night. For Jesus taught him
10 the mystery of the kingdom of God. After he got up from there,
11 he turned to the region of the Jordan." And after these things, this follows:
12 "James and John go to him," and that whole section.
13 But the "naked man with naked man" and the other things you wrote about are
14 not found. After, "and he goes to Jericho," it adds only, "And the
15 brother of the young man whom Jesus loved was there, as well as
16 his mother and Salome. And Jesus did not welcome them."
17 But the many other things which you wrote both seem, and are, most false. So,
18 the truth according to the right interpretation. . .

Where did this letter come from? I believe that a monk at Mar Saba noticed that the original, a very ancient copy, or perhaps even the autograph, was so deteriorated that the manuscript was in danger of being lost forever. He transcribed the ancient text in a hurried, cursive minuscule script on the last three fly leaves of the 1646 volume with the intention to recopy it later in a more elegant hand. Perhaps he followed through with this plan and his copied manuscript has since been lost. Perhaps he never got the opportunity to to recopy the manuscript and all that was left for Morton Smith to discover was his "rough draft" of the original. If the monk worked so hurriedly to preserve an ancient manuscript of this Clementine letter, I think the original would have looked like THIS.

sm1sm.gif (3340 bytes)

Click on line one above for complete text

Secret Mark Links

[[Study Guide to Ishmael]]

[[Some more info links|http://www.joeinvestoronline.com/library/The-Story-of-B.php]]

[[An Essay About Quinn's Theory]]

The Story of B a 1996 novel written by Daniel Quinn and published by Bantam Publishing. It chronicles the teachings of a colleague of Ishmael, whose story is told in the book Ishmael, published in 1992.

The Story of B acts as a halfway point between the novels [[Ishmael]] and [[My Ishmael]], also by Daniel Quinn. While referring to (but not based upon) the gorilla Ishmael, Quinn's novel takes readers alongside Jared Osborne, a [[Laurentian priest]]. Jared is sent by his superiors to Europe to investigate an itinerant preacher who has been stirring up trouble. The preacher is known to his followers as "B", but his enemies say he's the "Antichrist". Pressed for a judgment, Osborne is driven to penetrate B's inner circle where he soon finds himself an anguished collaborator in the dismantling of his own religious foundations.

Contents

* 1 The teachings of B: The Great Forgetting
* 2 Food and population control
o 2.1 ABCs of ecology
* 3 History of humanity since the Great Forgetting
o 3.1 Collapse of culture
* 4 The Great Remembering
o 4.1 Tribal societies
o 4.2 Salvation
* 5 References
* 6 External links

The teachings of B: The Great Forgetting

The fictional teachings of B are documented in full at the end of the book. Although the book is written in first person point of view from Jared’s naïve perspective, the author's real-life perspective echoes that of B. The following teachings are therefore Daniel Quinn’s historically-based ideas of the descent of man and the future of human history.

[[The Great Forgetting]] is the term B uses to describe an occurrence during the formative millennia of our civilization. What was forgotten is that there was a time when people lived without civilization and were sustained by hunting and gathering rather than by animal husbandry and agriculture. By the time history began to be written down, thousands of years had passed since abandoning the hunter-gatherer lifestyle and it had been assumed that people had come into existence farming. Quinn argues that our knowledge and worldview today would be greatly altered had the foundation thinkers of our culture known there was history beyond the beginning of civilization. When Paleontology uncovered 3 million years worth of human generations, making it untenable that humanity, agriculture, and civilization all began at roughly the same time, our worldview was still not affected. Instead, humanity used terms like “pre-history” and “The Agricultural Revolution” to label these events, rather than grafting their ramifications into our societal fabric.

Food and population control

A continual theme through B’s teachings is that population growth is dependent upon food production, with increases in food production leading to increases in population.

Quinn's thinking here should not to be confused with the ideas of [[Thomas Malthus]], who made the prediction that population would outrun food supply. In Quinn's own words, "Malthus's warning was about the inevitable failure of totalitarian agriculture. My warning is about its continued success."[1] Quinn characterizes the Malthusian problem as "How are we going to FEED all these people?" and contrasts this with his own: "How are we going to stop PRODUCING all these people?"[1]

ABCs of ecology

To better exemplify his ideas of food production and population control, Quinn introduces the ABCs of Ecology.

The first part of ecology (Part A) consists purely of food. Food is best described as all life forms.

The second part of ecology (Part B) consists of how populations are affected by the food supply. Part B is therefore dependent upon Part A. Quinn explains that populations are a function of produced food.

History of humanity since the Great Forgetting

The people of our culture established a style of agriculture that Quinn labels as "Totalitarian Agriculture." Prehistoric hunters and gatherers hunted according to a worldview that promoted coexistence and competition between predator and prey. However, the totalitarian agriculturist, operates with the worldview that the world is theirs to control and all the food in the world is theirs to produce and eat. Totalitarian agriculturists, while originally representing a single society, eventually began to overrun other societies as their food supply and populations grew. World population began to double, first taking 2000 years; then taking 1600 years; and eventually only taking 200 years between 1700-1900 AD; then again between 1900-1960 AD; and yet again between 1960-1996 AD. Over the last 10,000 years, this single society has expanded to include 99.8% of the world’s population.

Quinn argues that this exponential growth of the human population is not sustainable. He points to several major problems in our society that he claims arose from over-produced food and an over-crowded population. He states that war, crime, famine, plague, an exploited labor force, drugs, slavery, rebellion, and genocide have resulted from Totalitarian Agriculturists' continual expansion. Quinn emphasises that to reverse the damage we have caused, humankind does not inherently need to change, but rather a single culture has to be changed.

Collapse of culture

Quinn uses the phrase “cultural collapse” to describe the point of history that we are living through today. He believes that circumstances have rendered the cultural mythology of the Takers meaningless to its people. When this happens to a culture, Quinn states, things fall apart. "Order and purpose are replaced by chaos and bewilderment. People lose the will to live, become listless, become violent, become suicidal, and take to drink, drugs, and crime... laws, customs and institutions fall into disuse and disrespect, especially among the young, who see that even their elders can no longer make sense of them."

The Great Remembering

During his lectures, B introduces The Great Remembering as this generation’s repose to The Great Forgetting. He comments that, because we have already experienced a collapse of culture, our society is ready to abandon our totalitarian agriculture and industrial trends. Quinn uses the examples of tribal cultures as the basis for this new society.

Tribal societies

Quinn looks to tribal societies as models for future societies because they exhibited 3 million years of societal evolution before being overtaken by the totalitarian agriculturalist.

Quinn specifically looks at tribal law as a basis for law in the future. In hunter/gatherer tribes, there are no formal laws, only inherent practices that determine the identity of the tribe. Tribes do not write or invent their laws, but honor codes of conduct that arise from years of social evolution. Quinn rejects the modern idea that there is one set moral standard for people to live by. Instead, he argues that the laws and customs that arise from each tribe are sustainable and “right” in their own way because they work for the tribe.

Tribal societies offer a tested way to for people to live and work today as well as they ever did.

Salvation

Quinn finally discusses the idea of salvation. He states that man only began to think that he needed saving from humanity because of the historical evolution of war, famine, etc., that resulted from totalitarian agriculture. The need for salvation by a Savior, he argues, like civilization and war, is not inherent to humanity but are conditions created by man.

B ends his series of lectures by boldly claiming that his is the [[Antichrist]] because The Great Remembering will lead people away from the love of salvation and a Savior and toward a love for this world.

References

1. ^ Quinn, Daniel. The Story of B. New York: Bantam Books. 1997 pg.305

[edit] External links

* Story of B at the Ishmael Community
* [[Ishthink]], An online community discussing issues related

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_079.jpg/456px-Rembrandt_Harmensz._van_Rijn_079.jpg]]

The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue, are a list of religious and moral imperatives that, according to Judeo-Christian tradition, were authored by God and given to Moses on the mountain referred to as "Mount Sinai" (Exodus 19:23) or "Horeb" (Deuteronomy 5:2) in the form of two stone tablets. They feature prominently in Judaism and Christianity. In Biblical Hebrew language, the commandments are termed עשרת הדברים (translit. Aseret ha-Dvarîm) and in Rabbinical Hebrew עשרת הדברות (translit. Aseret ha-Dibrot), both translatable as "the ten statements." The name "Decalogue" is derived from the Greek name δεκάλογος or "dekalogos" ("ten statements") found in the Septuagint (Exodus 34:28, Deuteronomy 10:4), which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew name.[2]

The phrase "Ten Commandments" is generally used to refer to similar passages in Exodus 20:2–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21. Some scholars distinguish between this "Ethical Decalogue" and a different series of ten commandments in Exodus 34 that they call the "Ritual Decalogue".

Although Exodus 34 contains ten imperative statements, the passages in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 contain more than ten, totaling fourteen or fifteen in all. However, the Bible assigns the count of "ten" to both lists.[3] Various denominations divide these statements into ten in different ways, and may also translate the Commandments differently.

The lists which are commonly known as the Ten Commandments are given in passages in two books of the Bible: Exodus 20:2–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21. These passages are provided in English below, using the New Revised Standard Version translation and formatting. Various religions and denominations group the commandments differently; see the Division of the Commandments section for a detailed accounting.
The Ten Commandments Exodus 20:2–17 Deuteronomy 5:6–21

2 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;

3 Do not have any other gods before me.

4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,

6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.

7 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.

8 Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.

9 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.

10 But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns.

11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and consecrated it.

12 Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.

13 You shall not murder.

14 You shall not commit adultery.

15 You shall not steal.

16 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.

17 You shall not covet your neighbour’s house; you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.
6 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;

7 you shall have no other gods before me.

8 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

9 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me,

10 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.

11 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.

12 Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you.

13 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.

14 But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, or your son or your daughter, or your male or female slave, or your ox or your donkey, or any of your livestock, or the resident alien in your towns, so that your male and female slave may rest as well as you.

15 Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day.

16 Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you, so that your days may be long and that it may go well with you in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.

17 You shall not murder.

18 Neither shall you commit adultery.

19 Neither shall you steal.

20 Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbour.

21 Neither shall you covet your neighbour’s wife. Neither shall you desire your neighbour’s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.

Division of the Commandments

The commandments passage in Exodus contains more than ten imperative statements, totalling 14 or 15 in all. While the Bible itself assigns the count of "10", using the Hebrew phrase aseret had'varim—translated as the 10 words, statements or things, this phrase does not appear in the passages usually presented as being "the Ten Commandments".[3] Various religions parse the commandments differently. The table below highlights those differences.

The broken set and the second set

After receiving the commandments and returning to Mount Sinai, Moses saw that the Israelites had "defiled themselves", and that his brother, Aaron, had made a Golden Calf and an altar in front of it. Moses, in terrible anger, broke the tablets.[12] God later offered Moses to carve two other tablets, to replace the ones he smashed.[13] God himself appears as the writer.[14] This second set, brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses,[15] was placed in the Ark of the Covenant,[16] hence designated as the "Ark of the Testimony."[17]

The Bible also makes other references to the commandments. References to them and the consequences for not following them are found throughout the book of Deuteronomy.

Reference by Jesus

In the New Testament, Jesus refers to the commandments in several verses,[18] and condenses them into two general commands:

‘“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.’
—Matthew 22:34-40

Here Jesus is quoting the Old Testament, namely Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18 respectively.

The arrangement of the commandments on the two tablets is interpreted in different ways in the classical Jewish tradition. Rabbi Hanina ben Gamaliel says that each tablet contained five commandments, "but the Sages say ten on one tablet and ten on the other".[19] Because the commandments establish a covenant, it is likely that they were duplicated on both tablets. This can be compared to diplomatic treaties of Ancient Egypt, in which a copy was made for each party.[20]

According to the Talmud, the compendium of traditional Rabbinic Jewish law, tradition, and interpretation, the Biblical verse "the tablets were written on both their sides"[21], implies that the carving went through the full thickness of the tablets. The stones in the center part of some letters were not connected to the rest of the tablet, but they did not fall out. Moreover, the writing was also legible from both sides; it was not a mirror image of the text on the other side. The Talmud regards both phenomena as miraculous.[22]

Significance of the Decalogue

The Torah includes hundreds of commandments (generally enumerated in Rabbinic Judaism as 613 mitzvot), including the ten from the Decalogue. When compared to the whole canon of Jewish law, the Ten Commandments are not given any greater significance in observance or special status. In fact, when undue emphasis was being placed on them, their daily communal recitation was discontinued.[23] Jewish tradition does, however, recognize them as the ideological basis for the rest of the commandments; a number of works (starting with Rabbi Saadia Gaon) have made groupings of the commandments according to their links with the Ten Commandments.

The traditional Rabbinical Jewish belief is that the observance of these commandments and the other mitzvot are required solely of the Jewish people, and that the laws incumbent on humanity in general are outlined in the seven Noahide Laws (several of which overlap with the Ten Commandments). In the era of the Sanhedrin, transgressing any one of six of the Ten Commandments theoretically carried the death penalty,[24] though this was rarely enforced due to a large number of stringent evidentiary requirements imposed by the oral law.

Traditional division and interpretation

According to the Medieval Sefer ha-Chinuch, the first four statements concern the relationship between God and humans, while the next six statements concern the relationships between people. Rabbinic literature holds that the Ten Statements in fact contain 14 or 15 distinct instructions; see listing under Yitro (parsha).

1. "I am the LORD your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before Me..."

This commandment is to believe in the existence of God and His influence on events in the world [25], and that the goal of the redemption from Egypt was to become His servants (Rashi). It prohibits belief in or worship of any additional deities

2. "Do not make an image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above..."

This prohibits the construction or fashioning of "idols" in the likeness of created things (beasts, fish, birds, people) and worshipping them.

3. "Do not swear falsely by the name of the LORD..."

This commandment is to never take the name of God in a vain, pointless or insincere oath.[26]

4. "Remember [zachor] the Sabbath day and keep it holy" (the version in Deuteronomy reads shamor, "observe")

The seventh day of the week is termed Shabbat and is holy, just as God ceased creative activity during Creation. The aspect of zachor is performed by declaring the greatness of the day (kiddush), by having three festive meals, and by engaging in Torah study and pleasurable activities. The aspect of shamor is performed by abstaining from productive activity (39 melachot) on the Shabbat.

5. "Honor your father and your mother..."

The obligation to honor one's parents is an obligation that one owes to God and fulfills this obligation through one's actions towards one's parents.

6. "Do not murder"

Murdering a human being is a capital sin.[27]

7. "Do not commit adultery."

Adultery is defined as sexual intercourse between a man and a married woman who is not his wife.[26]

8. "Do not steal."

According to Rashi, this is not understood as stealing in the conventional sense, since theft of property is forbidden elsewhere and is not a capital offense. In this context it is to be taken as "do not kidnap."[26]

9. "Do not bear false witness against your neighbor"

One must not bear false witness in a court of law or other proceeding.

10. "Do not covet your neighbor's wife"

One is forbidden to desire and plan how one may obtain that which God has given to another. Maimonides makes a distinction in codifying the laws between the instruction given here in Exodus (You shall not covet) and that given in Deuteronomy (You shall not desire), according to which one does not violate the Exodus commandment unless there is a physical action associated with the desire, even if this is legally purchasing an envied object.

Use in Jewish ritual

The Mishnah records that it was the practice, in the Temple, to recite the Ten Commandments every day before the reading of the Shema, but that this practice was abolished in the synagogues so as not to give ammunition to heretics who claimed that they were the only important part of Jewish law.

In the normal course of the reading of the Torah, the Ten Commandments are read twice a year: the Exodus version in parashat Yitro around January, and the Deuteronomy version in parashat Va'etchanan in August-September. In addition, the Exodus version constitutes the main Torah reading for the festival of Shavuot. There is a widespread custom for the congregation to stand while they are being read.

In printed Bibles the Ten Commandments carry two sets of cantillation marks. The ta'am 'elyon (upper accentuation), which makes each Commandment into a separate verse, is used for public Torah reading, while the ta'am tachton (lower accentuation), which divides the text into verses of more even length, is used for private reading or study. As it happens, the verse numbering in Christian Bibles follows the ta'am elyon while that in Jewish Bibles follows the ta'am tachton. It is thought that these differences originally represented the difference between the customs of Eretz Yisrael and those of Babylonia.

The term ta'am 'elyon also refers to the special elaborated tune which is used for the Ten Commandments in public Torah reading.

Samaritan

The Samaritan Pentateuch varies in the ten commandments passages, both in that their Deuteronomical version of the passage is much closer to that in Exodus, and in the addition of a commandment on the sanctity of Mount Gerizim.

The text of the commandment follows:

And it shall come to pass when the Lord thy God will bring thee into the land of the Canaanites whither thou goest to take possession of it, thou shalt erect unto thee large stones, and thou shalt cover them with lime, and thou shalt write upon the stones all the words of this Law, and it shall come to pass when ye cross the Jordan, ye shall erect these stones which I command thee upon Mount Gerizim, and thou shalt build there an altar unto the Lord thy God, an altar of stones, and thou shalt not lift upon them iron, of perfect stones shalt thou build thine altar, and thou shalt bring upon it burnt offerings to the Lord thy God, and thou shalt sacrifice peace offerings, and thou shalt eat there and rejoice before the Lord thy God. That mountain is on the other side of the Jordan at the end of the road towards the going down of the sun in the land of the Canaanites who dwell in the Arabah facing Gilgal close by Elon Moreh facing Shechem.[28]

Christianity
Christians believe that Jesus is the mediator of the New Covenant (see Hebrews 8:6). His famous sermon from a hill representing Mount Zion is considered by many Christian scholars to be the antitype [29] of the proclamation of the Ten Commandments (Old Covenant) by Moses from Mount Sinai.
[hide]

Roman Catholic and Lutheran Christianity

The Lutheran (Protestant) and Roman Catholic division of the commandments both follow the one established by St. Augustine, following the then current synagogue scribal division. The first three commandments govern the relationship between God and humans, the fourth through eighth govern public relationships between people, and the last two govern private thoughts. For additional information on the Catholic understanding of the Ten Commandments, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), sections 2052–2557. References to the Catechism are provided below for each commandment as well as the interpretation used by Lutherans and Catholics. The following text is from Deuteronomy 5:6–5:21 NRSV

1. "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments."

Catholic teaching distinguishes between dulia—paying honor, respect and veneration to saints and also indirectly to God through contemplation of objects such as paintings and statues—and latria— adoration directed to God alone. (See Catechism 2084–2141.)

2. "You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not acquit anyone who misuses his name."

This commandment prohibits not just swearing but also the misappropriation of religious language in order to commit a crime, participating in occult practices, and blaspheming against places or people that are holy to God. (See Catechism 2142–2167.)

3. "Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work. But the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God; you shall not do any work—you, or your son or your daughter, or your male or female slave, or your ox or your donkey, or any of your livestock, or the resident alien in your towns, so that your male and female slave may rest as well as you. Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day."
4. "Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God commanded you, so that your days may be long and that it may go well with you in the land that the LORD your God is giving you."

This commandment emphasizes the family as part of God's design, as well as an extended metaphor that God uses for his relationship with his creation. (See Catechism 2197–2257.)

5. "(Roman Catholic) You shall not kill / (Lutheran) You shall not murder"

The right of states to execute criminals is not absolutely forbidden by this commandment. However, other methods of protecting society (incarceration, rehabilitation) are increasingly available and more in keeping with other Christian moral teaching. Catholics (along with many Protestants) also consider abortion sinful and a violation of this commandment. War, if rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy are met (that is, the "use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated"), is not a violation because "governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed." (See Catechism 2258–2330.)

6. "Neither shall you commit adultery."

Adultery is the breaking of the holy bond between husband and wife, and is thus a sacrilege. This commandment includes not just the act of adultery, but lust as well. (See Catechism 2331–2400.)

7. "Neither shall you steal."

(See Catechism 2401–2463.)

8. "Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor."

This commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in relations with others. This also forbids lying. (See Catechism 2464–2513.)

9. "Neither shall you covet your neighbor's wife."

(See Catechism 2514–2533.)

10. "Neither shall you desire your neighbor's house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

(See Catechism 2534–2557.)

The Commandments are seen as general "subject headings" for moral theology, in addition to being specific commandments in themselves. Thus, the commandment to honor father and mother is seen as a heading for a general rule to respect legitimate authority, including the authority of the state. The commandment not to commit adultery is traditionally taken to be a heading for a general rule to be sexually pure, the specific content of the purity depending, of course, on whether one is married or not. In this way, the Ten Commandments can be seen as dividing up all of morality.

Protestant Christianity

There are many different denominations of Protestantism, and it is impossible to generalize in a way that covers them all. However, this diversity arose historically from fewer sources, the various teachings of which can be summarized, in general terms.

Lutherans, Reformed (Calvinists) and Anglicans, and Anabaptists all taught, and their descendants still predominantly teach, that the Ten Commandments have both an explicitly negative content, and an implied positive content. Besides those things that ought not to be done, there are things which ought not to be left undone. So that, besides not transgressing the prohibitions, a faithful abiding by the commands of God includes keeping the obligations of love. The ethic contained in the Ten Commandments and indeed in all of Scripture is, "Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, and mind, and soul, and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself", and, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Lutherans theorize that there is an antithesis between these two sides of the Word of God, the positive and the negative. Love and gratitude is a guide to those under the Gospel, and the prohibitions are for unbelievers and profane people. This antithesis between Law and Gospel runs through every ethical command, according to Lutheran understanding.

The Anabaptists have held that the commandments of God are the content of the covenant established through Christ: faith is faithfulness, and thus, belief is essentially the same thing as obedience.

Reformed and Anglicans have taught the abiding validity of the commandments, and call it a summation of the "moral law", binding on all people. However, they emphasize the union of the believer with Christ - so that the will and power to perform the commandments does not arise from the commandment itself, but from the gift of the Holy Spirit. Apart from this grace, the commandment is only productive of condemnation, according to this family of doctrine.

Modern Evangelicalism, under the influence of dispensationalism, commonly denies that the commandments have any abiding validity as a requirement binding upon Christians; however, they contain principles which are beneficial to the believer. Dispensationalism is particularly emphatic about the dangers of legalism, and thus, in a distinctive way de-emphasizes the teaching of the law (see also antinomianism). Somewhat analogously, Pentecostalism and the Charismatic movement typically emphasizes the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and the freedom of the Christian from outward commandments, sometimes in antithesis to the letter of the Law. Quakers and Pietists have historically set themselves against the Law as a form of commandment binding on Christians, and have emphasized the inner guidance and liberty of the believer, so that the law is fulfilled not merely by avoiding what the Law prohibits, but by carrying out what the Spirit of God urges upon their conscience.

Typical Protestant view

For those Christians who believe that the Ten Commandments continue to be binding for Christians (see also Old Testament—Christian view of the Law), their negative and positive content can be summarized as follows.

Exodus 20:

Preface: vs 1–2
Implies the obligation to keep all of the commandments of God, in gratitude because of the abundance of his mercy.
Forbids ingratitude to God and denial that he is our God.

1. vs 3
Enjoins that God must be known and acknowledged to be the only true God, and our God; and, to worship him and to make him known as he has been made known to us.
Forbids not worshiping and glorifying the true God as God, and as our God; and forbids giving worship and glory to any other, which is due to him alone.
2. vs 4–6
Requires receiving, observing, and keeping pure and entire, all such religious worship and ordinances as God has appointed; and zeal in resisting those who would corrupt worship; because of God's ownership of us, and interest in our salvation.
Prohibits the worshiping of God by images, or by confusion of any creature with God, or any other way not appointed in his Word. (According to the traditional presbyterian and reformed view, this commandment also prohibits any man-made inventions to worship, which formed a basis for their criticsm of Roman Catholic liturgies.)
3. vs 7
Enjoins a holy and a reverent use of God’s names, titles, attributes, ordinances, Word, and works.
Forbids all abuse of anything by which God makes Himself known. Some Protestants, especially in the tradition of pacifism, read this Commandment as forbidding any and all oaths, including judicial oaths and oaths of allegiance to a government, noting that human weakness cannot foretell whether such oaths will in fact be vain.
4. vs 8–11
Requires setting apart to God such set times as are appointed in his Word. Many Protestants are increasingly concerned that the values of the marketplace do not dominate entirely, and deprive people of leisure and energy needed for worship, for the creation of civilized culture. The setting of time apart from and free from the demands of commerce is one of the foundations of a decent human society. See Sabbath.
Forbids the omission, or careless performance, of the religious duties, using the day for idleness, or for doing that which is in itself sinful; and prohibits requiring of others any such omission, or transgression, on the designated day.
5. vs 12
The only commandment with explicitly positive content, rather than a prohibition; it connects all of the temporal blessings of God, with reverence for and obedience to authority, and especially for father and mother.
Forbids doing anything against, or failing to give, the honor and duty which belongs to anyone, whether because they possess authority or because they are subject to authority.
6. vs 13
Requires all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life, and the life of others.
Forbids taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor, unjustly (Just taking of life includes self-defense, executions by the magistrate and times of war.); and, anything that tends toward depriving life. By extension it condemns even verbal abuse and anger, as exmplified by Christ's interpretation in the sermon on the mount.
7. vs 14
Enjoins protection of our own and our neighbor’s chastity, in heart, speech, and behavior.
Forbids all unchaste thoughts, words, and actions.
8. vs 15
Requires a defense of all lawful things that further the wealth and outward estate of ourselves and others.
Prohibits whatever deprives our neighbor, or ourselves, of lawfully gained wealth or outward estate.
9. vs 16
Requires the maintaining and promoting of truth between people, and of our neighbor’s good name and our own, especially in witness-bearing.
Forbids whatsoever is prejudicial to truth, or injurious to our own, or our neighbor’s, good name.
10. vs 17
Enjoins contentment with our own condition, and a charitable attitude toward our neighbor and all that is his, being thankful for his sake that he has whatever is beneficial to him, as we are for those things that benefit us.
Forbids discontent or envy, prohibits any grief over the betterment of our neighbor's estate, and all inordinate desires to obtain for ourselves, or scheming to wrest for our benefit, anything that is his.

In Islam Moses (Musa) is venerated as one of the greatest prophets of God. However, Islam also teaches that the texts of the Torah and the Gospels have been corrupted from their divine originals over the years, due to carelessness and self-interest. Despite this purported corruption, messages from the Torah and the Gospels still coincide closely with certain verses in the Qur'an. This is by-and-large the case with the Ten Commandments. Consequently, despite the Ten Commandments not being explicitly mentioned in the Qur'an they are substantially similar to the following verses in the Qur'an (using Jewish numbering of the Commandments):

1. "There is no other god beside God." (Qur'an 47:19)
2. "My Lord, make this a peaceful land, and protect me and my children from worshiping idols." (Qur'an 14:35)
3. "And make not Allah's (name) an excuse in your oaths against doing good, or acting rightly, or making peace between persons; for Allah is One Who heareth and knoweth all things." (Qur'an 2:224) This quranic verse is not entirely analogous to the Old Testament's "You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God..." Verse 2:224 is explained by the Prophet Muhammad as: "If anyone takes a solemn oath [that he would do or refrain from doing such-and such a thing], and thereupon realizes that something else would be a more righteous course, then let him do that which is more righteous, and let him break his oath and then atone for it" (Bukhari and Muslim; and other variants of the same Tradition in other compilations).
4. "O you who believe, when the Congregational Prayer (Salat Al-Jumu`ah) is announced on Friday, you shall hasten to the commemoration of GOD, and drop all business." (Qur'an 62:9)
The Sabbath was relinquished with the revelation of the Quran. Muslims are told in the Quran that the Sabbath was only decreed for the Jews. (Qur'an 16:124) God, however, ordered Muslims to make every effort and drop all businesses to attend the congregational (Friday) prayer. The Submitters may tend to their business during the rest of the day.
5. "....and your parents shall be honoured. As long as one or both of them live, you shall never (even) say to them, "Uff" (the slightest gesture of annoyance), nor shall you shout at them; you shall treat them amicably." (Qur'an 17:23)
6. "....anyone who murders any person who had not committed murder or horrendous crimes, it shall be as if he murdered all the people." (Qur'an 5:32)
7. "You shall not commit adultery; it is a gross sin, and an evil behaviour." (Qur'an 17:32)
8. "They shall not steal." (Al-Mumtahanah 60: 12) and "The thief, male or female, you shall mark their hands as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as an example from God. God is Almighty, Most Wise." (Qur'an 5:38)
9. "Do not withhold any testimony by concealing what you had witnessed. Anyone who withholds a testimony is sinful at heart." (Qur'an 2:283)
10. "And do not covet what we bestowed upon any other people. Such are temporary ornaments of this life, whereby we put them to the test. What your Lord provides for you is far better, and everlasting." (Qur'an 20:131)

It can also be noted that in the 17th chapter, "Al-Israa" ("The Night Journey"), verses [Qur'an 17:22], the Qur'an provides a set of moral stipulations which are "among the (precepts of) wisdom, which thy Lord has revealed to thee" that can be reasonably categorised as ten in number. According to S. A. Nigosian, Professor of religious studies at the University of Toronto, these resemble the Ten Commandments in the Bible and "represents the fullest statement of the code of behavior every Muslim must follow". [30] It should be noted however, that these verses are not regarded by Islamic scholars as being somehow set apart from any other moral stipulations in the Qur'an, nor are they regarded as a substitute, replacement or abrogation of some other set of commandments as found in the previous revelations.

1. Worship only God: Take not with Allah another object of worship; or thou (O man!) wilt sit in disgrace and destitution. (17:22)
2. Be kind, honourable and humble to one's parents: Thy Lord hath decreed that ye worship none but Him, and that ye be kind to parents. Whether one or both of them attain old age in thy life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honour. (17:23) And, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say: "My Lord! bestow on them thy Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood." (17:24)
3. Be neither miserly nor wasteful in one's expenditure: And render to the kindred their due rights, as (also) to those in want, and to the wayfarer: But squander not (your wealth) in the manner of a spendthrift. (17:26) Verily spendthrifts are brothers of the Evil Ones; and the Evil One is to his Lord (himself) ungrateful. (17:27) And even if thou hast to turn away from them in pursuit of the Mercy from thy Lord which thou dost expect, yet speak to them a word of easy kindness. (17:28) Make not thy hand tied (like a niggard's) to thy neck, nor stretch it forth to its utmost reach, so that thou become blameworthy and destitute. (17:29)
4. Do not engage in 'mercy killings' for fear of starvation: Kill not your children for fear of want: We shall provide sustenance for them as well as for you. Verily the killing of them is a great sin. (17:31)
5. Do not commit adultery: Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils). (17:32)
6. Do not kill unjustly: Nor take life - which Allah has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). (17:33)
7. Care for orphaned children: Come not nigh to the orphan's property except to improve it, until he attains the age of full strength...(17:34)
8. Keep one's promises: ...fulfil (every) engagement [i.e. promise/covenant], for (every) engagement will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning). (17:34)
9. Be honest and fair in one's interactions: Give full measure when ye measure, and weigh with a balance that is straight: that is the most fitting and the most advantageous in the final determination. (17:35)
10. Do not be arrogant in one's claims or beliefs: And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning). (17:36) Nor walk on the earth with insolence: for thou canst not rend the earth asunder, nor reach the mountains in height. (17:37)

Analogues in other traditions

In atheist Soviet Union the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism had many notions much resembling the Ten Commandments.

Controversies

Sabbath day

Main articles: Sabbath in Christianity and Shabbat

Most Christians believe that Sunday is a special day of worship and rest, every week commemorating the Resurrection of Jesus on the first day of the week on the Jewish calendar. Most Christian traditions teach that there is an analogy between the obligation of the Christian day of worship and the Sabbath-day ordinance, but that they are not literally identical—for a believer in Christ the Sabbath ordinance has not so much been removed as superseded, because God's very work of creation has been superseded by a "new creation" (2 Corinthians 5:17), according to this Christian view. For this reason, most teach that the obligation to keep the Sabbath is not the same for Christians as in Judaism, and for support they point to examples in the New Testament, and other writings surviving from the first few centuries. Some conservative Christians, most of them within the Reformed tradition, are "Sabbatarians," believing the first day of the week or Lord's Day to be the new covenant Sabbath (the 4th commandment never having been revoked and Sabbath-keeping being in any case a creation ordinance).

Still others believe that the Sabbath remains as a day of rest on Saturday, reserving Sunday as a day of worship. In reference to Acts 20:7, the disciples came together on the first day of the week (Sunday) to break bread and to hear the preaching of the apostle Paul. This is not the first occurrence of Christians assembling on a Sunday; Jesus appeared to the Christians on the "first day of the week" while they were in hiding. One can maintain this argument in that Jesus himself maintained the Sabbath, although not within the restrictions that were mandated by Jewish traditions; the Pharisees often tried Jesus by asking him if certain tasks were acceptable according to the Law (see: Luke 14:5). This would seem to indicate that while the Sabbath was still of importance to the Jews, Sunday was a separate day for worship and teaching from Scriptures.

The Seventh-day Adventists, Seventh-Day Baptists, True Jesus Church, United Church of God, Living Church of God and some other churches disagree with some of these views. They argue that the custom of meeting for worship on Sunday originated in paganism, specifically Sol Invictus and Mithraism (in which sun-god worship took place on Sunday) and constitutes an explicit rejection of the commandment to keep the seventh day holy. Instead, they keep Saturday as the Sabbath as a memorial to God's work of creation (Genesis 2:1–3, Exodus 20:8–11, Exodus 16:23,29–30) believing that none of the ten commandments can ever be destroyed (Matthew 5:17–19, Exodus 31:16). Seventh-day sabbatarians claim that the seventh day Sabbath was kept by the majority of Christian groups until the 2nd and 3rd century, by most until the 4th and 5th century, and a few thereafter, but because of opposition to Judaism after the Jewish-Roman wars, the original custom was gradually replaced by Sunday as the day of worship. The history of these changes is certainly not altogether lost regardless of any belief in a suppression of the facts by a conspiracy of the pagans of the Roman Empire and the clergy of the Catholic Church. See Great Apostasy.

Jews had come to be loathed in the Roman Empire after the Jewish-Roman wars, and this led to the criminalization of the Jewish Sabbath. Hatred of Jews is apparent in the Council of Laodicea (4th Century AD) where Canon 37–38 states: "It is not lawful to receive portions sent from the feasts of Jews or heretics, nor to feast together with them." and "It is not lawful to receive unleavened bread from the Jews, nor to be partakers of their impiety." [4] In keeping with this rejection of the Jews, this Roman council also criminalized the Jewish Sabbath as can be seen in Canon 29 of the Council Laodicea: "Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honoring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema (excommunicated) from Christ."[5]

Killing or murder

Multiple translations exist of the sixth commandment; the Hebrew words לא תרצח are variously translated as "thou shalt not kill" or "thou shalt not murder." Older Protestant translations of the Bible, those based on the Vulgate and Roman Catholic translations usually render it as "Thou shalt not kill," whereas Jewish and newer Protestant versions tend to use "You shall not murder." There is controversy as to which translation is more faithful, and both forms are quoted in support of many opposing ethical standpoints.

The Vulgate (Latin) translation has Non occides, i.e. "Thou shalt not kill." English translations using "kill" include the King James (Authorised) (1611) [although note Matthew 19:18 "do no murder," following the Vulgate non homicidium facies], the American Standard (1901) and Revised Standard (American Protestant, 1952) Versions. Almost all Roman Catholic translations, including the Douay-Rheims Bible (1609/1752), the New American Bible (1970), the New Jerusalem Bible (1985) and the Christian Community Bible (1986), have "kill." Martin Luther (German, 1534) also uses töten (kill).

Protestant translations using "murder" include the New International Version (American, 1978), New American Standard Bible (American, 1971), New English Bible (British Protestant, 1970), and the New King James (American, 1982), New Revised Standard (American, 1989) and English Standard (American Protestant, 2001) Versions. Jewish translations almost all use "murder," including the Jewish Publication Society of America Version (1917), the Judaica Press tanach (1963) and the Living Torah (1981). A Jewish exception to this pattern is the Artscroll or Stone Edition tanach (1996).

The Old Testament's examples of killings sanctioned by God are often cited in defense of the view that "murder" is a more accurate translation. Additionally, the Hebrew word for "kill" is הרג (harog), while the Hebrew word for "murder" is רצח (retzach), which is found in the Ten Commandments לא תרצח (lo tirtzach). In the fullness of the Old Testament Exodus 20:13 is abundantly evidenced as prohibiting unjust killing, rather than a universal injunction against all killing, as retzach is never used in reference to the slaying of animals, nor the taking of life in war, while its most frequent use is in reference to involuntary manslaughter and secondarily for murderers.

You shall not steal

Significant voices of academic theologians (such as German Old Testament scholar A. Alt: Das Verbot des Diebstahls im Dekalog (1953)) suggest that commandment "you shall not steal" was originally intended against stealing people—against abductions and slavery, in agreement with the Jewish interpretation of the statement as "you shall not kidnap" (e.g. as stated by Rashi).

Idolatry

Main articles: Idolatry, Idolatry in Judaism, and Idolatry in Christianity

Christianity holds that the essential element of the commandment not to make "any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above" is "and bow down and worship it". Roman Catholicism specifically holds that one may build and use "likenesses", as long as the object is not worshipped. As a result, many Roman Catholic Churches and services feature images, some feature statues, and in some Orthodox services, icons are venerated. For most Roman Catholics, this practice is understood as fulfilling the observance of this commandment, as they understand these images are not being worshipped.

Eastern Orthodoxy traditionally teaches that while images of God, the Father, remain prohibited, depictions of Jesus as the incarnation of God as a visible human are permissible. To emphasize the theological importance of the incarnation, the Orthodox Church encourages the use of icons in church and private devotions, but generally prefers a non-naturalistic, two-dimensional depiction as a reminder of this theological aspect. In modern use (usually as a result of Roman Catholic influence), more naturalistic images and images of the Father, however, also appear occasionally in Orthodox churches, but statues, i.e. three-dimensional depictions, continue to be banned.

For Jews and Muslims veneration violates this commandment. Jews and Muslims read this commandment as prohibiting the use of idols and images in any way.

Some Protestants will picture Jesus in his human form, while refusing to make any image of God or Jesus in Heaven.

Very few Christians oppose the making of any images at all, but some groups have been critical of the use others make of images in worship. (See iconoclasm.) In particular, the Orthodox have criticized the Roman Catholic use of decorative statues, Roman Catholics have criticized the Orthodox veneration of icons, and some Protestant groups have criticized the use of stained-glass windows by many other denominations. Jehovah's Witnesses criticize the use of all of the above, as well as the use of the cross. Amish people forbid any sort of graven image, such as photographs.

Public monuments in the United States

See also: Roy Moore, Van Orden v. Perry, and Separation of church and state in the United States

A controversial Ten Commandments display at the Texas State Capitol in Austin.

There is an ongoing dispute in the United States concerning the posting of the Ten Commandments on public property. Certain conservative religious groups have taken the banning of officially-sanctioned prayer from public schools by the U.S. Supreme Court as a threat to the expression of religion in public life. In response, they have successfully lobbied many state and local governments to display the Ten Commandments in public buildings. Posting the Decalogue on a public building can take a sectarian stance, if numbered. Protestants and Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and Jews number the commandments differently. However, this problem can be circumnavigated by simply not numbering the commandments, as was done at the Texas capitol (shown here). Hundreds of these monuments—including some of those causing dispute—were originally placed by director Cecil B. DeMille as a publicity stunt to promote his 1956 film The Ten Commandments.[6]

Others oppose the posting of the Ten Commandments on public property, arguing that it violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

In contrast, groups supporting the public display of the Ten Commandments claim that the commandments are not necessarily religious but represent the moral and legal foundation of society, and are appropriate to be displayed as a historical source of present day legal codes. Also, some argue that prohibiting the public practice of religion is a violation of the first amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion.

Those in the opposition counter that several of the commandments are explicitly religious and that statements of monotheism like "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" are unacceptable to many religious viewpoints, such as atheists or followers of polytheistic religions. Putting aside the constitutional issue of whether the constitution prohibits the posting of the commandments, there is clearly a legitimate political and civil rights issue regarding whether the posting of what could be construed as religious doctrine alienated religious minorities and created the appearance of impropriety by making it appear that a state church had been established, creating the impression that the very intent of the establishment clause was being undermined.
The Ten Commandments on a monument on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol

In addition, it has been argued if the Commandments are posted, it would require that members of other religions be allowed to post the particular tenets of their religions as well. For example, an organization by the name of Summum has won court cases against municipalities in Utah for refusing to allow the group to erect a monument of Summum aphorisms next to the Ten Commandments. The cases were won on the grounds that Summum's right to freedom of speech was denied and the governments had engaged in discrimination. Instead of allowing Summum to erect its monument, the local governments chose to remove their Ten Commandments.

This incident shows another practical reason why not posting religious doctrine on government property is expedient; it is unlikely that a believer in the commandments would appreciate having a shrine to another religion placed next to them, and taken to its logical outcome (as shown by the Summum incident), it is clear that permitting religious speech through the mouthpiece of the state is impractical, given the reality of the diversity of religious belief and non-belief in the United States. Rather than enforcing any religious belief, or irreligion, many feel that the state ought to be neutral on the subject of religion, and allow people to find their own faith, rather than have the state endorse or appear to endorse any particular beliefs. In response, still others argue that this can amount to State imposition of a minority belief of secularism and moral relativity, rather than the State reflecting the will of a majority, emphasizing the impossibility of the State so fully separating itself from any belief system.

Some religious Jews oppose the posting of the Ten Commandments in public schools, as they feel it is wrong for public schools to teach their children Judaism. The argument is that if a Jewish parent wishes to teach their child to be a Jew, then this education should come only from practicing Jews. This position is based on the demographic fact that the vast majority of public school teachers in the United States are not Jews; the same is true for the students. This same reasoning and position is also held by many believers in other religions. Many Christians have some concerns about this as well; for example, can Catholic parents count on Protestant or Orthodox Christian teachers to tell their children their particular understanding of the commandments? Differences in the interpretation and translation of these commandments, as noted above, can sometimes be significant.

Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have launched lawsuits challenging the posting of the Ten Commandments in public buildings. Opponents of these displays include a number of religious groups, including some Christian denominations, both because they don't want government to be issuing religious doctrine, and because they feel strongly that the commandments are inherently religious. Many commentators see this issue as part of a wider kulturkampf (culture struggle) between liberal and conservative elements in American society. In response to the perceived attacks on traditional society, other legal organizations, such as the Liberty Counsel, have risen to advocate the conservative interpretation.

The Ritual Decalogue

Main article: Ritual Decalogue

The term "Ten Commandments" without a modifier generally applies to the lists mentioned in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. However, there is a continuous narrative starting in Exodus 31:18 (where the stones are created), Exodus 32:19 (where the tablets are broken) and Exodus 34, which lists a very different set of commandments, sometimes referred to as the "Ritual Decalogue". Later sources, starting with Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and later the proponents of the documentary hypothesis, note that Exodus 34:28 seems to refer to these Ten Commandments rather than the traditional ones. These commentators have theorized that the commandments in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 represent a later set of Ten Commandments, and that the ten listed in Exodus 34 were the original Ten Commandments, now known as the Ritual Decalogue (as opposed to the better-known "Ethical Decalogue"). The differences between the two Decalogues highlight the development of sacred texts over vast amounts of time and from differing narrative traditions by incorporating two differing sets of Ten Commandments.

Cultural references

The phrase "Ten Commandments" is highly familiar in Western culture and is often extended to any immutable code of conduct.

Two famous films of this name were directed by Cecil B. DeMille, a silent movie released 1923, and another in 1956, starring Charlton Heston as Moses.

The Decalogue is also a series of ten one-hour films written and directed by the famed Polish film maker Krzysztof Kieślowski in 1988 for Polish television, each based on one of the Ten Commandments.

The form and content of the Decalogue have often been parodied and satirized. One eminent example from the Victorian era is Arthur Hugh Clough's poem The Latest Decalogue. [7]

Mel Brooks's film History of the World, Part I contains a segment where Moses originally receives fifteen commandments from God on three stone tablets, but he accidentally drops and breaks one, and goes on to proclaim that there are ten commandments.

In 2007, David Wain directed and co-wrote a movie called "The Ten," which was a series of vignettes loosely based on the Ten Commandments. Paul Rudd plays the character Jeff Reigert who introduces each story while standing in front of two large stone tablets depicting the Roman Catholic version of the 10 Commandments. [8]

Who are we, and what do we believe in?

Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) is a cell church.

Every worshiper is expected to be actively involved in a cell. We meet in homes weekly to edify one another and to evangelize the unsaved. The cells are basic building blocks of church life in DUMC and every Christian, who is a minister, is equipped through the School of Leadership (SOL) to do the work of ministry through the cells. The cells may cluster in different areas for special “Congregation” activities but assemble altogether every Saturday and Sunday for the “Celebration” of God’s grace, goodness and power.

DUMC seeks to be a community modeled after the Early Church in the Book of Acts (Acts 2:42-47) in terms of 6 W’s.

* She seeks to be a ‘Word’ (‘the apostles’ teaching’) community where her members give themselves to learning and applying the Word of God in daily life.
* She takes ‘Warfare’ (‘prayer’) seriously where members earnestly pray for God’s Kingdom to come and His will to be done on earth as it is in heaven.
* She continues to long for a ‘Wonders’ (‘many wonders and miraculous signs’) community where healing, deliverance and the miraculous are a normal part of church life.
* She seeks to be a ‘Works’ (‘they gave to anyone as he had need’) community where members would share and do good to one another and the society.
* She will give herself to the ‘Worship’ (‘continue to meet together in the temple courts’) of the living God that is authentic, exuberant and dynamic.
* She would be a ‘Witness’ (‘the Lord added to their numbers’) community where she continues to testify to the Good News, grace and power of Christ so that people are daily being saved.

DUMC desires to be a servant to society at large. To be in the mainstream of society making her contribution and having an impact. In fact, she sees the whole Klang Valley as her pastoral responsibility together with all the other churches in it. Hence, she seeks to work with churches across different denominations to fulfill that responsibility. In DUMC, we are cultivating core values and a culture that is biblical and holistic. The following are the values and culture we promote:

* Integrity
* Respect
* Trust
* Excellence
* Accountability
* Good stewardship
* Faith
* Hope
* Love
* Humility
* Holiness
* Personalness

Because time is short and life is precious, all who are in DUMC are challenged to have a sense of destiny of their future, lay hold of that destiny and make their lives count in a significant way for the Kingdom of God. Our vision is to build a church that is strong, vibrant, dynamic and community transforming.

Such is the ethos of DUMC.

The Varieties of Religious Experience
by [[William James]]

[[Read full book here|http://etext.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/JamVari.html]]

[[Read Study Guide here|http://www.bookrags.com/studyguide-religiousexperience/crit.html]]

[[Summary|http://www.bookrags.com/The_Varieties_of_Religious_Experience]]

[[Read the free Ebook Here|http://www.gutenberg.org/files/621/621.txt]]

http://www.thefullwiki.org/

The Will to Believe by William James

[[Read text here|http://infomotions.com/etexts/philosophy/1800-1899/james-will-751.txt]]

[[Read the old book here|http://www.archive.org/stream/thewilltobelieve00jameuoft]]

Study Questions and Discussion Questions
for
William James’ The Will to Believe

Study Questions to be answered and discussed in the SQs folder titled Will to Believe.

1. In his description of different kinds of options, briefly describe what James means by living and dead options.
2. Briefly describe what he means by forced and avoidable options.
3. Briefly describe what he means by momentous and trivial options.
4. What is the point James is making in the second paragraph of section II?
5. How would you summarize Pascal’s Wager as described by James?
6. How would you summarize James’ main point in section IV?
7. Please briefly describe the distinction James is making in section VII.
8. Briefly describe the main point James is making in section IX.
9. In section James describes what he terms "the religious hypothesis." What is that hypothesis which he says is pretty much universal among religions?:
10. Please try to summarize in a sentence or two what you understand James’ overall argument in this essay to be (he concludes it in the final 3-4 paragraphs of section X).

Discussion Questions, to be answered and discussed in the week four classroom folder.

1. Pick one or two ideas in this lecture that you found to be particularly interesting.

a. Explain what each idea is.

b. Explain what it is about that idea that you find particularly interesting.

2. Do you personally find James’ argument in this essay to be cogent and persuasive? Why or why not?

http://www.uark.edu/campus-resources/rlee/intrau00/study2.html

Introduction to Philosophy Richard Lee
Philosophy 2003 C 001 Autumn 2000

Study Guide for the Second Examination

A note of explanation: There is no guarantee that all the questions on the examination will be taken from this study guide. However, any student who knows, understands, and is able to formulate clearly the answers to all the questions on this study guide should do quite well on the examination. A student who can give answers to practically none of the questions on this study guide will very likely do rather poorly on the examination.
Format of the Examination

This examination counts as fifteen percent (15%) of your course grade.

This is a closed-book, in-class examination on the scheduled date.

There will be two parts.

* Part I (for ten (10) points) will ask you to answer ten (10) "short answer" questions worth one (1) point each. By "short answer" I mean that a sentence or two (or three) will suffice.
* Part II (for five (5) points) will ask you to answer one (1) essay question worth five (5) points. You will have a choice from two (2) questions on this part. By "essay" I mean a discussion that will probably take more than a paragraph or two, but should take no more than a few pages.

Ground Rules

As always, cheating will not be tolerated. No help in answering the questions may be received from anyone (except yourself) during the examination. You may not use books or notes during the examination.
Sample Questions and Points to Study

Whom is the "problem of evil" a problem for? Why. For whom is it not a problem? Why?

How does the evidential problem of evil differ from the logical problem of evil? Critically discuss.

Carefully explicate the problem of evil as an argument to the conclusion that God does not exist. Explain each premise in the argument and how the flow of the argument (i.e. how the inferences go from the premises to the subconclusions and the final conclusion).

Explore possible objections to the argument against the existence of God based on the logical problem of evil and explain how a defender of that argument might reply to those objections. Critically discuss.

B. C. Johnson asks of a six-month old baby painfully burned to death, "Could we possibly describe as 'good' any person who had the power to save this child and yet refused to do so?" (P 78a) What does this have to do with reasons not to believe in the existence of God? Explain.

It is often suggested that the fact that human beings have "free will" explains the existence of evil in the world and that God is, therefore, not to be held accountable for that evil. Thus, it is concluded, the existence of evil in the world is not really a good reason not believe that a very good, very powerful God does not exist. How would Johnson reply to this suggestion? Is his reply adequate? Critically discuss.

What is a theodicy?

Explain the free will theodicy. What critique has been offered of the free will theodicy? Explain.

Carefully explain one objection to the argument against the existence of God based on the problem of evil and explore how a defender of that argument might reply to that objection. Critically discuss.

Explain the argument based on wagering that Pascal offers in regard to belief in God. Be sure to make clear what the conclusion of the argument is.

How is Pascal's wager argument similar to an argument that one should send in a sweepstakes entry one receives in the mail instead of throwing it in the trash? What important differences are there between Pascal's argument and an analogous argument concerning sending in the sweepstakes entry? Explain.

According to Pascal, if someone believes God exists but is wrong and God does not exist, has the person lost or gained? Explain.

Suppose someone said "I don't believe in heaven." Would this person then be immune to Pascal's wager argument? That is to say, does the argument depend on the premise that there is a heaven? Explain.

Explain carefully a strong objection to Pascal's wager argument.

Explain and critique Pascal's answer to the objection to his position which claims that one cannot choose to believe.

What does Pascal think the effects in this life of believing in God will be? How does this affect his argument? Critically discuss.

Explain Pascal's response to those who prefer not to wager because they do not want to act on anything except certainties.

What does James mean by an "hypothesis?"

Be able to explain and give examples of what James means by living options, dead options, forced options, avoidable options, momentous options, trivial, and genuine options.

What does William James mean by a "genuine option?"

State the rule which William Clifford put forward concerning the conditions under which we morally may believe a claim. Give examples of someone following and of someone not following that rule. Explain.

Is "Clifford's rule" a rule we should follow? Explain.

What does Clifford think one should do when there is neither good reason to believe nor good reason to disbelieve a proposition? According to James, are there circumstances where it is all right to believe a proposition for which there is not good evidence? Explain. What does James think is the fundamental difference between his view and Clifford's?

What does James mean by our "passional nature?" What does this have to do with his argument in "The Will to Believe?"

State the overall thesis that James attempts to defend in "The Will to Believe?" Explain what the thesis means.

Under what conditions does William James believe it is permissible to believe something on the basis of our passional nature instead of our intellectual nature? Explain.

James speaks of two "commandments" or "laws" for would-be knowers. What are these and how are they related? What would happen if we were to follow one of these to the exclusion of the other? Critically discuss.

Under what circumstances, if any, does James think it is reasonable to follow Clifford's rule? Under what circumstances, if any, does James think it is not reasonable to follow Clifford's rule? Explain.

William James writes in "The Will to Believe" that there are situations in which "faith in a fact can help create the fact." Explain this using an example or two. Is belief without sufficient evidence justified in such cases? Critically discuss.

Does James think the choice of whether to accept what he calls "the religious hypothesis" is a genuine option? Explain.

Is the choice of whether to believe "the religious hypothesis" a forced option? Critically discuss.

Is the choice of whether to believe "the religious hypothesis" a momentous option? Critically discuss.

Is the choice of whether to believe in the existence of God a genuine option? Why or why not? Explain.

What, according to James, is the value of believing in the existence of God, if the religious hypothesis is true.

In "The Will to Believe" William James writes: "There are, then, cases where a fact cannot come at all unless a preliminary faith exists in its coming. And where faith in a fact can help create the fact, that would be an insane logic which should say that faith running ahead of scientific evidence is the `lowest kind of immorality' into which a thinking being can fall." Explain what James is saying. (Examples may help.) Is James right about this? Critically discuss.

Explain the difference between descriptive morality (or ethics) and normative morality (or ethics). Give examples of questions that are questions of descriptive morality. Give examples of questions that are questions of normative morality. What is metaethics? Give examples of questions that are questions of metaethics.

State and explain the argument Rachels calls the "cultural differences argument." What is Rachels' criticism of that argument?

If something is right in one society but wrong in another, does it follow that there is no objective truth in morality? Why or why not? Explain.

Critique Lee's revised ("improved") version of Rachels' cultural differences argument.

What consequences does Rachels see the truth of cultural relativism would have?

Rachels suggests that if cultural relativism were true the idea of moral progress in a society would be meaningless. Explain.

How can what Rachels perceives as consequences of relativism appealed to to form an argument against cultural relativism?

Does Kant believe that morality is based in human nature? Why or why not?

What, according to Kant, is the only thing that can be called good without qualification?

Suppose there was a will such that "owing to a special disfavour of fortune or the niggardly provision of a step-motherly nature, this will should wholly lack power to accomplish its purpose, if with its greatest efforts it should yet achieve nothing." (P 420a) What, if anything, could or would the value of this will be, according to Kant? Explain.

Explain Kant's "jewel" analogy. What point is he trying to make?

Explain the distinction Immanuel Kant draws between acting from duty and acting merely in accordance with duty. Give examples of each. What does Kant claim to be the relevance of this distinction? (I.e., what difference does it make whether we act from duty or merely in accordance with duty?) Is Kant right about all this? Critically discuss.

Explain Kant's distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting from duty. Use examples.

Apart from duty or respect for the moral law, what other motives does Kant think one can have in acting?

Under what circumstances, according to Kant, is there moral worth in an action (i.e., when does a person deserve moral credit for acting as she does)? Is Kant's view on this reasonable? Why or why not?

Explain the difference between a hypothetical imperative and a categorical imperative.

Give an example of a hypothetical imperative. What makes it a hypothetical imperative?

According to Kant how many categorical imperatives are there?

What does Kant mean by the term "maxim?" Give examples. What maxims does Kant say it is permissible or impermissible to act from? Explain.

Explain Kant's distinction between "perfect" and "imperfect" duties. Give examples of each and critically explore the distinction.

State one of Kant's formulations of his categorical imperative and explain why some action is right according to it. Then state a significantly different one of Kant's formulations of the categorical imperative and explain why some action is wrong according to it. Does either of these formulations seem to you to express what we morally should or should not do? Explain.

"A ... man, for whom things are going well, sees that others (whom he could help) have to struggle with great hardships, and he asks, `What concern of mine is it? Let each one be as happy as heaven wills, or as he can make himself; I will not take anything from him or even envy him; but to his welfare or to his assistance in time of need I have no desire to contribute.'" What would Kant say to such a man? Why? Critically discuss.

Kant considers four illustrations of the application of the categorical imperative. Explain one of these. What in that illustration is Kant saying is morally right or morally wrong? How does he use the categorical imperative to derive this answer? Is his derivation a good one? Why or why not?

Suppose that Lisa Appleby, a bright electrical engineering student, devises a "black box" which when attached to her telephone allows her to make long distance calls from her home in such a way that neither she nor anyone else is billed for them. She wonders whether it would be morally right to use her invention in this way. Consider how Kant would address her question and how he would support his position.

What does it mean to treat a person as an end and not as a means only? Give an example of such treatment or explain why there can be no examples. Critically discuss.

What is it to treat someone as a means? What is it to treat someone as an end? Does Kant say we must never treat someone as a means? Does Kant say that we should always treat people as ends? Critically discuss.

The "Theses on Feuerbach" are eleven short philosophical notes written by Karl Marx in 1845. They outline a critique of the ideas of Marx's fellow Young Hegelian philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach. But the text is often seen as more ambitious than this, criticizing the contemplative materialism of the Young Hegelians alongside all forms of philosophical idealism. The "Theses" identify political action as the only truth of philosophy, famously concluding: "Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it". (in the German original: "Die Philosophen haben die Welt nur verschieden interpretiert; es kömmt drauf an, sie zu verändern".) While the text wishes to retain the critical stance of German critical idealism, it transposes that criticism into practical, material, political terms (leading directly to Marx's later assertion that the "criticism of weapons" must at some point do the work of the "weapons of criticism").

Marx did not publish the "Theses on Feuerbach" during his lifetime; they were later edited by Friedrich Engels and published in 1888, with the original text emerging in 1924. They seem to have been intended as a note on principles which Marx wished to write out once, clearly, as a reminder to himself; the text may actually have been hung above his writing-desk.

[edit] Uses of the text

The Eleventh Thesis was used by Sergey Prokofiev in his Cantata for the 20th Anniversary of the October Revolution, Op. 74.

[edit] See also

    * Young Marx
    * Marxism
    * Marxist philosophy
    * Ludwig Feuerbach
    * Young Hegelians
    * German Idealism
    * materialism

[edit] External links

    * Theses on Feuerbach from the Marx-Engels Internet Archive
    * Free audio recording of Eleven Theses on Feuerbach, from Librivox
    * 1888 text on German Wikisource

[hide]
v • d • e
The works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
Marx 	
Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843), On the Jewish Question (1843), Notes on James Mill (1844), Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 (1844), Theses on Feuerbach (1845), The Poverty of Philosophy (1847), Wage-Labor and Capital (1847), The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon (1852), Grundrisse (1857), Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859), Theories of Surplus Value, 3 volumes (1862), Value, Price and Profit (1865), Capital, Volume I (Das Kapital) (1867), The Civil War in France (1871), Critique of the Gotha Program (1875), Notes on Wagner (1880)
Marx and Engels 	
The German Ideology (1845), The Holy Family (1845), Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848), Writings on the U.S. Civil War (1861), Capital, Volume II [posthumously, published by Engels] (1885), Capital, Volume III [posthumously, published by Engels] (1894)
Engels 	
The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844 (1844), The Peasant War in Germany (1850), Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany (1852), Anti-Dühring (1878), Socialism: Utopian and Scientific (1880), Dialectics of Nature (1883), The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (1884), Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy (1886)

[[Read Page Here|http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aquinas/]]

Saint Thomas Aquinas
First published Mon Jul 12, 1999; substantive revision Sun Jan 9, 2005

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) lived at a critical juncture of western culture when the arrival of the Aristotelian corpus in Latin translation reopened the question of the relation between faith and reason, calling into question the [[modus vivendi]] that had obtained for centuries. This crisis flared up just as universities were being founded. Thomas, after early studies at Montecassino, moved on to the University of Naples, where he met members of the new Dominican Order. It was at Naples too that Thomas had his first extended contact with the new learning. When he joined the Dominican Order he went north to study with [[Albertus Magnus]], author of a paraphrase of the Aristotelian corpus. Thomas completed his studies at the University of Paris, which had been formed out of the monastic schools on the Left Bank and the cathedral school at Notre Dame. In two stints as a regent master Thomas defended the mendicant orders and, of greater historical importance, countered both the [[Averroistic]] interpretations of Aristotle and the Franciscan tendency to reject Greek philosophy. The result was a new modus vivendi between faith and philosophy which survived until the rise of the new physics. Thomas's theological writings became regulative of the Catholic Church and his close textual commentaries on Aristotle represent a cultural resource which is now receiving increased recognition. The following account concentrates on Thomas the philosopher and presents him as fundamentally an Aristotelian.

Life and Works
Vita Brevis

Thomas was born in 1225 at Roccasecca, a hilltop castle from which the great Benedictine abbey of Montecassino is not quite visible, midway between Rome and Naples. At the age of five, he was entered at Montecassino where his studies began. When the monastery became a battle site — not for the last time — Thomas was transferred by his family to the University of Naples. It was here that he came into contact with the "new" Aristotle and with the [[Order of Preachers]] or [[Dominicans]], a recently founded mendicant order. He became a Dominican over the protests of his family and eventually went north to study, perhaps first briefly at Paris, then at Cologne with [[Albert the Great]], whose interest in Aristotle strengthened Thomas's own predilections. Returned to Paris, he completed his studies, became a Master and for three years occupied one of the Dominican chairs in the Faculty of Theology. The next ten years were spent in various places in Italy, with the mobile papal court, at various Dominican houses, and eventually in Rome. From there he was called back to Paris to confront the hullabaloo variously called [[Latin Averroism]] and [[Heterodox Aristotelianism]]. After this second three year stint, he was assigned to Naples. In 1274, on his way to the Council of Lyon, he fell ill and died on March 7 in the Cistercian abbey at Fossanova, which is perhaps twenty kilometers from Roccasecca.

Education

Little is known of Thomas's studies at Montecassino, but much is known of the shape that the monastic schools had taken. They were one of the principal conduits of the liberal arts tradition which stretches back to Cassiodorus Senator in the 6th century. The arts of the [[trivium]] (grammar, rhetoric, logic) and those of the [[quadrivium]] (arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy) were fragments preserved against the ruinous loss of classical knowledge. They constituted the secular education that complemented sacred doctrine as learned from the Bible. When Thomas transferred to Naples, his education in the arts continued. Here it would have been borne upon him that the liberal arts were no longer adequate categories of secular learning: the new translations of Aristotle spelled the end of the liberal arts tradition, although the universities effected a transition rather than a breach.

Taking Thomas's alma mater Paris as reference point, the Faculty of Arts provided the point of entry to teen-aged boys. With the attainment of the Master of Arts at about the age of 20, one could go on to study in a higher faculty, law, medicine or theology. The theological program Thomas entered in Paris was a grueling one, with the master's typically attained in the early thirties. Extensive and progressively more intensive study of the scriptures, Old and New Testament, and of the summary of Christian doctrine called the Sentences which was compiled by the twelfth century Bishop of Paris, Peter Lombard. These close textual studies were complemented by public disputations and the even more unruly quodlibetal questions. Modeled more or less on the guilds, the student served a long apprenticeship, established his competence in stages, and eventually after a public examination was named a master and then gave his inaugural lecture.

Writings

Thomas's writings by and large show their [[provenance]] in his teaching duties. His commentary on the Sentences put the seal on his student days and many of his very early commentaries on Scripture have come down to us. But from the very beginning Thomas produces writings which would not have emerged from the usual tasks of the theological master. [[On Being and Essence]] and [[The Principles of Nature]] date from his first stay at Paris, and unlike his commentaries on Boethius' [[On the Trinity]] and [[De hebdomadibus]], are quite obviously philosophical works. Some of his disputed questions date from his first stint as [[regius master]] at Paris. When he returned to Italy his productivity increased. He finished the Summa contra gentiles, wrote various disputed questions and began the [[Summa theologiae]]. In 1268, at Rome, he began the work of commenting on Aristotle with [[On the Soul]], and during the next five or six years commented on eleven more (not all of these are complete). During this time he was caught up in magisterial duties of unusual scope and was writing such [[polemical]] works as [[On the Eternity of the World]] and [[On There Being Only One Intellect]].

At Naples, he was given the task of elevating the status of the Dominican House of Studies. His writing continued until he had a mystical experience which made him think of all he had done as "mere straw." At the time of his death in 1274 he was under a cloud in Paris and in 1277, 219 propositions were condemned by a commission appointed by the Bishop of Paris, among them tenets of Thomas. This was soon lifted, he was canonized and eventually was given the title of [[Common Doctor of the Church]]. But the subtle and delicate assimilation of Aristotle that characterized his work in both philosophy and theology did not survive his death, outside the Dominican Order, and has experienced ups and downs ever since.

Thomas Merton (January 31, 1915 – December 10, 1968) was a 20th century Catholic writer. A Trappist monk of the Abbey of Gethsemani, in the U.S. state of Kentucky, Merton was a poet, a social activist, a student of comparative religion as well as the author of numerous works on spirituality. He wrote more than 60 books, scores of essays and reviews, and is the subject of several biographies. Merton was a keen proponent of inter-religious understanding, engaging in spiritual dialogues with the Dalai Lama, Thich Nhat Hanh and D. T. Suzuki.

Biography

Early life

Thomas Merton was born on January 31, 1915 in Prades, France, to Owen Merton, a New Zealand painter active in Europe and the U.S.A., and Ruth Jenkins, an American Quaker and artist. Merton was baptized in the Church of England, following his father's wishes. Owen, a struggling painter, was often absent during Thomas's upbringing.

In August 1915, the Merton family left Prades because of the difficulties of World War I, settling first with Ruth's parents on Long Island, New York, United States, then Douglaston. In 1917 the family moved into an old house in Flushing, NY, where Merton's brother John Paul was born on November 2, 1918. The family was considering returning to France, when Ruth was diagnosed with stomach cancer, from which she died on October 21, 1921, in Bellevue Hospital in New York. Thomas was 6 years old.

In 1922, Owen and Tom traveled to Bermuda, having left John Paul with the Jenkins family in Douglaston, Long Island. While the trip was short, Owen managed to fall in love with the American novelist Evelyn Scott, then married to Cyril Kay-Scott. Still grieving his mother, Tom never quite hit it off with Evelyn. Evelyn's son, Creighton, later said that his mother was verbally abusive to Thomas during their stay.

Happy to get away from the company of Evelyn, in 1923 Tom returned to Douglaston to live with the Jenkins Family and John Paul. Owen, Evelyn and her husband Cyril set sail for Europe, traveling through France, Italy, England and Algeria. Thomas later half-jokingly referred to this odd trio as "the Bermuda Triangle". During the winter of 1924, while in Algeria, Owen became ill and was thought to be near death. In retrospect, the illness could have been an early symptom of the brain tumor that eventually took his life. The news of his father's illness weighed heavily on Thomas, and the prospect of losing his sole surviving parent filled him with anxiety.

By March 1925, Owen was well enough to organize a show at the Leicester Galleries, London. That summer he returned to New York and then took Tom with him to live in Saint-Antonin in France. Tom returned to France with mixed feelings, as he had lived with his grandparents for the last two years and had become somewhat attached to them. During their travels, Owen and Evelyn had discussed marriage on occasion, but Owen came to realize after the trip to New York that it could not work, as Tom and Evelyn were irreconcilable. Unwilling to sacrifice his son for the romance, he broke off the relationship.

France 1926

In 1926, at age eleven, Thomas and Owen parted ways again. Tom enrolled in a boys' boarding school in Montauban, the Lycée Ingres. The stay brought up feelings of loneliness and depression for him, with Merton feeling especially deserted by his father. During his initial months of schooling, Merton begged his father to remove him. Yet, as time passed, Merton gradually became more comfortable with his surroundings there. He had made friends with a circle of young and aspiring writers at the lycée and came to write two novels.[1]

Sundays at Lycée Ingres offered nearby Catholic mass, but Tom never went. He typically managed to visit home on such days. A Protestant preacher would come to teach on Sundays at the Lycée, for those who didn't attend mass, but Tom didn't show any interest. During the Christmas breaks of 1926 and 1927, Merton spent his time with friends of his father in Murat (a small town in the Auvergne). He admired the devout Catholic couple whom he saw as good and decent people, though Catholicism never came up as a topic between them. Owen was off painting and attending exhibits and galleries showing his work. Most of the time he spent in London. In the summer of 1928 Owen came and took Tom out of Lycée Ingres, informing him that they were headed to England.

England 1928

Merton and his father moved to the home of Owen's aunt and uncle in Ealing, a suburb on the west of London. Merton soon enrolled in another boarding school in Surrey, Ripley Court School. Merton enjoyed his studies here as there was more a sense of community than at the lycée. On Sundays all students attended services at the local Anglican church. Merton began routinely praying, but discontinued the practice after leaving the school.

During his holidays, Merton stayed at his great-aunt and uncle's home, where occasionally Owen would come. During the Easter vacation, 1929, Merton and Owen went to Canterbury. Merton enjoyed the countryside around Canterbury, taking long walks there. After the holiday ended, Owen returned to France and Merton, to Ripley. Towards the end of that year, he learned the news that his father was ill and living in Ealing. Merton went to see him, and together they left for a friend's house in Scotland who offered a place for Owen to recover. Shortly after, Owen was taken to London to the North Middlesex Hospital. Merton soon learned his father had a brain tumor. He took the news badly, but later, when he visited Owen in the hospital, the latter seemed to be recovering. This helped ease some of Merton's anxiety.

In 1930, Merton went to Oakham Public School, a boarding school in Rutland, England. He was successful there. At the end of the first year, his grandparents and John Paul visited him. His grandfather discussed his finances, telling him he would be provided for if Owen died. Merton and the family spent most of that summer visiting his father in hospital, who was so ill he could no longer speak. This caused Merton a lot of pain. On January 16, 1931, just as the term at Oakham had restarted, Owen died. Tom Bennett, Owen Merton's physician and former schoolmate in New Zealand, became Merton's legal guardian, and let Merton use his house in London, which was unoccupied, during the Oakham holidays. Merton appreciated this gesture.

That same year, Merton visited Rome and Florence in Italy for a week. He also saw his grandparents in New York during the summer. Upon his return to Oakham, Merton became joint editor of the school magazine the Oakhamian. In 1932, he took the college admissions exam for Clare College, Cambridge, and passing, left Oakham. On his 18th birthday, tasting new freedom, Merton went off on his own. He stopped off in Paris, Marseilles, then walked to Hyeres, where he ran out of money and wired Bennett for more. Scoldingly Bennett granted his request, which may have shown Merton he cared. Merton then walked to Saint Tropez, where finally he boarded a train to Genoa and traveled to Florence. From Florence he left for Rome, a trip that in some ways changed the course of his life.

Rome 1933

Upon arriving in Rome in February 1933 Merton had a severe toothache. So he went to a dentist who extracted the tooth the next day. He spent the remainder of the day recuperating in his hotel room. By morning he felt much better, and moved to a small pensione with views of the Palazzo Barberini and San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, two magnificent pieces of architecture rich with history. In The Seven Storey Mountain, his autobiography, Merton remarks:

I had been in Rome before, on an Easter vacation from school, for about a week. I had seen the Forum and the Colosseum and the Vatican museum and St. Peter's. But I had not really seen Rome. This time, I started out again, with the misconception common to Anglo-Saxons, that the real Rome is the Rome of the ugly ruins, the hills and the slums of the city.[2]

Merton began going to the churches, not quite knowing why he felt so drawn to them. He didn't attend any Masses, he was just observing and appreciating them. It began at The Forum, at the foot of Palatine Hill, where Merton happened upon one of the churches nearby. In the apse of the church, he set his eyes upon a mosaic of Jesus Christ that transfixed him. Merton had a hard time leaving the place, though he was unsure why. Merton officially had found the Rome he said he didn't see on his first visit: Byzantine Christian Rome.

From this point on in his trip he set about visiting the various churches and basilica sites in Rome, such as Lateran Baptistery, Santa Costanza, Basilica di San Clemente, Santa Prassede and Santa Pudenziana (to name a few). He purchased a Vulgate (Latin Bible), reading the entire New Testament. One night in his pensione, Merton had the sense that Owen was in the room with him for a few moments. This mystical experience led him to see the emptiness he felt in his life, and he said for the first time in his life he really prayed, asking God to deliver him from his darkness. The Seven Storey Mountain also describes a visit to Tre Fontane, a Trappist monastery in Rome. While visiting the church there he was at ease, yet when entering the monastery he was overtaken with anxiety. That afternoon, while alone, he remarked to himself: "I should like to become a Trappist monk."[3]

America 1933
This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (November 2008)

Merton took a boat from Italy to America to visit his grandparents in Douglaston for the summer, before entering Clare College in Cambridge. Initially he retained some of the spirit he had in Rome, continuing to read his Latin Bible. He wanted to find a church to attend, but still had not quite quelled his antipathy towards Catholicism. So he went to Zion Episcopal Church in Douglaston. He didn't come to appreciate his experience there, so he went to Flushing, New York, and attended a Quaker Meeting. Merton appreciated the silence of the atmosphere but couldn't feel at home with the group.

Quickly he melded in with life in New York City and became swept up in her ways. By mid-summer, Merton had lost nearly all interest in organized religion that he had found in Rome. At the end of the summer he was off for England again, this time to attend Clare College.

College

Clare College

In October 1933 Merton entered Clare College in Cambridge as a freshman. Merton, now 18, seems to have viewed Clare College as the end-all answer to his life without meaning. In The Seven Storey Mountain, the brief chapter on Cambridge paints a fairly dark, negative picture of his life there but is short on detail.

Some schoolmates of Merton at Oakham, then attending Cambridge with him, remember that Tom drifted away and became isolated at Cambridge. He started drinking excessively, hanging out at the local bars more than he would study. He was also very free with his sexuality at this time, some friends going so far as to call him a womanizer. He also spent freely - far too freely in Bennett's opinion - and he was summoned for the first of what was to be a series of stern lectures in his guardian's London consulting rooms. Although details are sketchy - they appear to have been excised from a franker first draft of the autobiography by the Trappist censors - most of Merton's biographers agree that he fathered a child with one of the women he encountered at Cambridge and there was some kind of legal action pending that was settled discreetly by Bennett.

By this time Bennett had had enough and, in a meeting in April, Tom and his guardian appear to have struck a deal: Tom would return to the States and Bennett would not tell Merton's grandparents about his indiscretions. In May Merton left Cambridge after completing his exams.

Columbia University

In January 1935 Merton enrolled as a sophomore at Columbia University in Manhattan while living with the Jenkins family in Douglaston and taking a train to the Columbia campus each day. Merton's years at Columbia matured him, and it is here that he discovered Catholicism in a real sense. These years were also a time in his life where he realized others were more accepting of him as an individual. In short, at 21 he was a man and an equal among his peers. At that time he established a close and long-lasting friendship with the proto-minimalist painter Ad Reinhardt.

Tom began an 18th Century English literature course during the spring semester taught by Mark Van Doren, a professor with whom he maintained a friendship until death. Van Doren didn't teach his students, at least not in any traditional sense; he engaged them, sharing his love of literature with all. Merton was also interested in Communism at Columbia, where he briefly joined the Young Communist League; however, the first meeting he attended failed to interest him further and he never went back.

During summer break John Paul returned home from Gettysburg Academy in Pennsylvania. The two brothers spent time bonding with one another for their summer breaks, claiming later to have seen every movie produced between 1934 and 1937. When the fall semester arrived, John Paul left to enroll at Cornell University while Tom returned to Columbia. He began working for two school papers, a humor magazine called the Jester and the Columbia Review. Also on the Jester's staff were the poet Robert Lax and the journalist Ed Rice. Lax and Merton became best friends and kept up a lively correspondence until Merton's death; Rice later founded the Catholic magazine Jubilee, to which Merton frequently contributed essays. Merton also became a member of Alpha Delta Phi that semester and joined the Philolexian Society, the campus literary and debate group.

In October 1935, in protest of Italy's invasion of Ethiopia, Merton joined a picket of the Casa Italiana. The Casa Italiana was conceived of by Columbia and the Italian government as a "university within a university", established in 1926. Merton also joined the local peace movement, having taken "the Oxford Pledge" to not support any government in any war they might undertake.

In 1936 Merton's grandfather, Samuel Jenkins, died. Merton and his grandfather had grown rather close through the years, and Merton immediately left school for home upon receiving the news. He states that, without thinking, he went to the room where his grandfather's body was and knelt down to pray over him.

In February 1937, Merton read a book that opened his mind to Catholicism. It was titled The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy by Etienne Gilson, and inside he encountered an explanation of God that he found both logical and pragmatic. Tom purchased this book because he was taking a class on medieval French literature, not seeing the nihil obstat in the book denoting its Catholic origin. This work was pivotal, paving the way for more encounters with Catholicism. Another author Merton began reading at this time was Aldous Huxley, whose book Ends and Means introduced Merton to mysticism. In August of the same year, Tom's grandmother, Bonnemaman, died.

In January 1938 Merton graduated from Columbia with a B.A. in English. After graduation he continued at Columbia, doing graduate work in English. In June, a friend, Seymour Freedgood, arranged a meeting with Mahanambrata Brahmachari, a Hindu monk in New York visiting from the University of Chicago. Merton was very impressed by the man, seeing that he was profoundly centered in God. Merton, curious, expected Brahmachari to espouse his beliefs and religion to them in some manner. Instead, Brahmachari recommended that they reconnect with their own spiritual roots and traditions. He suggested Merton read The Confessions of Augustine and The Imitation of Christ. Although Merton was surprised to hear the monk recommending Catholic books, he read them both. He also started to pray again regularly.

For the next few months Merton began to consider Catholicism as something to explore again. Finally, in August 1938, he decided he wanted to attend Mass and went to Corpus Christi Church located near to the Columbia campus. Mass was foreign to him, but he listened attentively. Following this experience Merton's reading list became more and more geared toward Catholicism. While doing his graduate work, he was writing his thesis on William Blake, whose spiritual symbolism he was coming to appreciate in new ways.

One evening in September, Merton was reading a book about Gerard Manley Hopkins' conversion to Catholicism and how he became a priest. Suddenly he could not shake this sense that he, too, should follow such a path. He grabbed his coat and headed quickly over to the Corpus Christi Church rectory, where he met with a Fr. George Barry Ford, expressing his desire to become Catholic. The next few weeks Merton started catechism, learning the basics of his new faith. On November 16, 1938, Thomas Merton was baptized at Corpus Christi Church and received Holy Communion. On February 22, 1939, Merton received his M.A. in English from Columbia University. Merton decided he would pursue his Ph.D. at Columbia and moved from Douglaston to Greenwich Village.

In January 1939 Merton had heard good things from friends of his about a part-time teacher on campus named Daniel Walsh, so he decided to take a course on Thomas Aquinas with Walsh. Through Walsh, Merton was introduced to Jacques Maritain at a lecture on Catholic Action, which took place at a Catholic Book Club meeting the following March. Merton and Walsh developed a lifelong friendship, and it was Walsh who convinced Merton that Thomism was not for him. On May 25, 1939, Merton received Confirmation at Corpus Christi, and took the confirmation name James.

Vocation

In October 1939, Merton invited friends back to sleep over at his place following a long night out at a jazz club. Over breakfast, Merton told them of his desire to become a priest. Soon after this epiphany, Merton visited Fr. Ford at Corpus Christi to share his feeling. Ford agreed with Merton, but added that he felt Merton was suited for the diocesan priesthood and advised against joining an order.

Soon after, Merton met with his teacher Dan Walsh, whom he trusted to advise him on the matter. Walsh disagreed with Ford's assessment that Merton was suited to a secular calling. Instead, he felt Merton was spiritually and intellectually more suited for a priestly vocation in a specific order. So they discussed the Jesuits, Cistercians and Franciscans. Since Merton had appreciated what he had read of Saint Francis of Assisi, he felt that might be the direction he was being called to.

Walsh set up a meeting with a Fr. Edmund Murphy, a friend at the monastery of St. Francis of Assisi on 31st street. The interview went well and Merton was given an application, as well as Fr. Murphy's personal invitation to become a Franciscan friar. However, he noted that Merton would not be able to enter the novitiate until August 1940 because that was the only month in which they accepted new postulants. Merton was very excited, yet disappointed that it would be another year before he would fulfill his calling.

By 1940 Merton began to have doubts about whether he was fit to be a Franciscan. He felt he had never truly been upfront about his past with Fr. Murphy or Dan Walsh. It is possible some of this may have concerned his time at Cambridge, though he is never specific in The Seven Storey Mountain about precisely what he felt he was hiding. Merton arranged to see Fr. Murphy and tell him of his past troubles. Fr. Murphy was understanding during the meeting, but told Tom he ought to return the next day once he had time to consider this new information. That next day Fr. Murphy delivered Merton devastating news. He no longer felt Merton was suitable material for a Franciscan vocation as a friar, and even said that the August novitiate was now full. Fr. Murphy seemed uninterested in helping Merton's cause any further, and Merton believed at once that his calling was finished.

St. Bonaventure University

In early August 1940, the month he would have entered the Franciscan novitiate, Merton went to Olean, New York, to stay with friends, including Robert Lax and Ed Rice, at a cottage where they had vacationed the summer before. This was a tough time for Merton, and he wanted to be in the company of friends. Merton now needed a job. Nearby the cottage was St. Bonaventure University, a Franciscan university he had learned about through Fr. Edmund. The day after arriving in Olean, Merton went to St. Bonaventure for an interview with then president Fr. Thomas Plassman. As providence would have it there was an opening for Merton in the English department and he was hired on the spot. Merton chose St. Bonaventure because he still harbored a desire to be a friar, and felt that he could at least live among them if not be one of them.

In September 1940, Merton moved into a dormitory on campus. (His old room in Devereux Hall has a sign above the door to this effect) While Merton's stay at Bonaventure would prove brief, the time was pivotal for him. While teaching there, Merton's spiritual life blossomed as he went deeper and deeper into his prayer life. He all but gave up drinking, quit smoking, stopped going to movies and became more selective in his reading materials. In his own way he was undergoing a kind of lay renunciation of worldly pleasures. In April 1941, Merton went to a retreat he had booked for Holy Week at the Abbey of Our Lady of Gethsemani near Bardstown, Kentucky. At once Merton felt a pull to the place, and could feel his spirits rise during his stay.

Returning to St. Bonaventure with Gethsemani on his mind, Merton returned to teaching. In May 1941 he had an occasion where he used his old Vulgate, purchased in Italy back in 1933, as a kind of oracle. The idea was that he would randomly select a page and blindly point his finger somewhere, seeing if it would render him some sort of sign. On his second try Merton laid his finger on a section of The Gospel of Luke which stated, "Behold, thou shalt be silent". Immediately Merton thought of the Cistercians. Although he was still unsure of his qualifications for a religious vocation, Merton felt he was being drawn more and more to a specific calling.

In August 1941 Merton attended a talk at the school given by Catherine de Hueck. Hueck had founded the Friendship House in Toronto and its sister house in Harlem. Merton appreciated the mission of Hueck and Friendship House, which was racial harmony and charity, and decided to volunteer there for two weeks. Merton was amazed at how little he had learned of New York during his studies at Columbia. Harlem was such a different place, full of poverty and prostitution. Merton felt especially troubled by the situation of children being raised in the environment there. Friendship House had a profound impact on Merton, and he would speak of it often in his later writing.

In November 1941 Hueck asked if Merton would consider becoming a full time member of Friendship House, to which Merton responded cordially yet noncommittally. He still felt unfit to serve Christ, and even hinted at such in a letter to Hueck that same month in which he implies he is not good enough for her organization. Merton soon let Hueck know in early December that he would definitely not be joining Friendship House, explaining his persistent attraction to the priesthood.

Monastic life

On December 10, 1941 Thomas Merton arrived at the Abbey of Gethsemani and spent three days at the monastery guest house, waiting for acceptance into the Order. The novice master would come to interview Merton, gauging his sincerity and qualifications. In the interim, Merton was put to work polishing floors and scrubbing dishes. On December 13 he was accepted into the monastery as a postulant by Dom Frederic Dunne, Gethsemani's Father Abbot since 1935. Merton's first few days did not go smoothly. He had a severe cold from his stay in the guest house, where he sat in front of an open window to prove his sincerity. But Merton devoted himself entirely to adjusting to the austerity, enjoying the change of lifestyle. During his initial weeks at Gethsemani, Merton studied the complicated Cistercian sign language and daily work and worship routine.

In March 1942, during the first Sunday of Lent, Merton was accepted as a novice monk at the monastery. In June, Merton received a letter from his brother John Paul stating he was soon to leave for war, that he would be coming to Gethsemani to visit Merton before leaving. On July 17 John Paul arrived in Gethsemani and the two brothers did some catching up. John Paul expressed his desire to become Catholic, and by July 26 was baptized at a church in nearby New Haven, KY, leaving the following day. This would be the last time the two would see each other. John Paul died on April 17, 1943 while flying over the English Channel when his plane's engines failed. A poem by Merton to John Paul appears at the end of The Seven Storey Mountain.

Writer

Merton kept journals throughout his stay at Gethsemani. Initially he had felt writing to be at odds with his vocation, worried it would foster a tendency to individuality. Fortunately his superior, Father Abbot Dom Frederic, saw that Merton had a gifted intellect and talent for writing. In 1943 Merton was tasked to translate religious texts and write biographies on the saints for the monastery. Merton approached his new writing assignment with the same fervor and zeal he displayed in the farmyard.

On March 19, 1944 Merton made his temporary profession vows and was given the white cowl, black scapular and leather belt. In November 1944 a manuscript Merton had given to friend Robert Lax the previous year was published by James Laughlin at New Directions, a book of poetry titled Thirty Poems. Merton had mixed feelings about the publishing of this work, but Dom Frederic remained resolute that Merton continue writing. New Directions published another poetry collection in 1946 for Merton titled A Man in the Divided Sea, which combined with Thirty Poems attracted some recognition for him. The same year Merton had his manuscript for The Seven Storey Mountain accepted by Harcourt Brace & Company for publishing. The Seven Storey Mountain, Merton’s autobiography, was written during two-hour intervals in the monastery scriptorium as a personal project.

By 1947 Merton was more comfortable with his role as writer. On March 19 Merton took his solemn vows, a commitment to live out his life at the monastery. He also began corresponding with a Carthusian at St. Hugh's Charterhouse in Parkminster, England. Merton harbored an appreciation for the Carthusian order since coming to Gethsemani in 1941, and would later come to consider leaving the Cistercians for the Order. On July 4 the Catholic journal Commonweal published an essay by Merton titled Poetry and the Contemplative Life.

In 1948 The Seven Storey Mountain was finally published to critical acclaim, with fan mail to Merton reaching new heights. Merton also published several works for the monastery that year, which were: Guide to Cistercian Life, Cistercian Contemplatives, Figures for an Apocalypse, and The Spirit of Simplicity. Saint Mary's College (Indiana) published a booklet by Merton that year also, titled What Is Contemplation?. Merton also published a wonderful biography that year titled Exile Ends in Glory: The Life of a Trappistine, Mother M. Berchmans, O.C.S.O. Merton’s Father Abbot, Dom Frederic Dunne, died on August 3, 1948 on a trainride to Georgia. Dunne’s passing was painful for Merton, who came to look at the Abbot as a father figure and spiritual mentor. Dunne was replaced by Dom James Fox on August 15, a former U.S. Navy officer. In October Merton discussed with the new Abbot his ongoing attraction to the Carthusian Order, to which Fox responded by assuring Merton that he belonged at Gethsemani. Fox permitted Merton to continue his writing, Merton now having gained substantial recognition outside the monastery. On December 21 Merton was ordained as a subdeacon.

On January 5, 1949 Merton took a train to Louisville and applied for U.S. citizenship. Published that year were Seeds of Contemplation, The Tears of Blind Lions, The Waters of Siloe, and the British edition of The Seven Storey Mountain under the title Elected Silence. On March 19 Merton became a deacon in the Order, and on May 26 (Ascension Thursday) Merton was ordained as a priest, saying his first Mass the following day. In June the monastery celebrated its centenary, for which Merton authored the book Gethsemani Magnificat in commemoration. By November Merton started teaching novices at Gethsemani in mystical theology, a duty he greatly enjoyed. Through subsequent years Merton would author many other books and amassed himself a wide readership. He would come to revise ‘’Seeds of Contemplation’’ several times, viewing his early edition as error prone and immature. One's place in society, views on social activism, and various approaches toward contemplative prayer and living became constant themes in his writings.

By the 1960s, he had arrived at a broadly human viewpoint, one deeply concerned about the world and issues like peace, racial tolerance, and social equality. He had developed a personal radicalism which had political implications but was not based on ideology, rooted above all in non-violence. He regarded his viewpoint as based on "simplicity" and expressed it as a Christian sensibility. In a letter to a Latin-American Catholic writer, Ernesto Cardenal, Merton wrote: "The world is full of great criminals with enormous power, and they are in a death struggle with each other. It is a huge gang battle, using well-meaning lawyers and policemen and clergymen as their front, controlling papers, means of communication, and enrolling everybody in their armies."[4]

Priest
Marker commemorating Merton in Downtown Louisville
"Thomas Merton Square" and Marker in Downtown Louisville

On May 26, 1949 (on Ascension Thursday) Thomas Merton was ordained as a priest, saying his first Mass that following day in honor of Our Lady of Cobre. In November, Merton began teaching the novices in mystical theology. By this time Merton was a huge success outside the monastery, The Seven Storey Mountain having sold over 150,000 copies. As a humorous side note, in December a fellow priest at the monastery allowed Merton to take the monastery jeep out on the property for a drive. Merton, having never learned to drive, wound up hitting some trees and running through ditches, flipping it halfway over in the middle of the road. Needless to say, he never used the jeep again.

During his long years at Gethsemani Merton changed from the passionately inward-looking young monk of The Seven Storey Mountain, to a more contemplative writer and poet. Merton became well known for his dialogues with other faiths and his non-violent stand during the race riots and Vietnam War of the 1960s. Merton finally achieved the solitude he had long desired while living in a hermitage on the monastery grounds in 1965. Over the years he had some battles with some of his abbots about not being allowed out of the monastery, balanced by his international reputation and voluminous correspondence with many well-known figures of the day.

Rev. Flavian Burns, the new abbot, allowed him the freedom to undertake a tour of Asia at the end of 1968, during which he met the Dalai Lama in India. He also made a visit to Polonnaruwa (in what was then Ceylon), where he had a religious experience while viewing enormous statues of the Buddha. There is speculation that Merton wished to remain in Asia as a hermit. It is also said that Merton had planned to visit Cid Corman in Kyoto, Japan but never achieved that goal.

Personal life

According to The Seven Storey Mountain, the youthful Merton loved jazz, but by the time he began his first teaching job, he had forsaken all but peaceful music. Later in life, whenever he was permitted to leave Gethsemani for medical or monastic reasons, he would catch what live jazz he could, mainly in Louisville or New York.

In April 1966, Merton underwent a surgical procedure to treat debilitating back pain. While recuperating in a Louisville hospital, he fell in love with a young nurse assigned to his care. He wrote poems to her and reflected on the relationship in "A Midsummer Diary for M." Their relationship, however, was not sexual. He said that they could be simply be together through their love for one another.

Merton died in Bangkok on December 10, 1968 after touching a poorly grounded electric fan while stepping out of his bath. His body was flown back to Gethsemani where he is buried.

Legacy

Merton's influence has grown since his death and he is considered by many[who?] to be an important 20th century Catholic mystic and thinker. Merton's letters and diaries, barred from publication by Merton until 25 years after his death[citation needed], reveal the intensity with which their author focused on social justice issues, including the civil rights movement and proliferation of nuclear arms.

The Abbey of Gethsemani benefited greatly from Merton's royalties[citation needed], and his writings attracted much interest in Catholicism and the Cistercian vocation.

In recognition of his close association with Bellarmine University, the official repository for Merton's archives is the Thomas Merton Center on the Bellarmine campus in Louisville, Kentucky. The Thomas Merton Award, a peace prize, has been awarded since 1972 by the Thomas Merton Center for Peace and Social Justice in Pittsburgh.

Bishop Morocco/Thomas Merton Catholic Secondary School in downtown Toronto, Canada is named in part after him.

References

Specific references:

1. ^ "The Seven Storey Mountain" p.57-58
2. ^ Seven Storey Mountain. 107
3. ^ Seven Storey Mountain. 114
4. ^ Letter, November 17, 1962, quoted in Monica Furlong's Merton: a Biography, p. 263.

General references:
This article includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations.
You can improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (November 2008)

* Forest, Jim, "Living With Wisdom: A Life of Thomas Merton" (1991), Orbis Books, ISBN 0-88344-755-X, 226 p. illustrated biography.
* Mott, Michael, The Seven Mountains of Thomas Merton (1984), Harvest Books 1993: ISBN 0-15-680681-9, 710 p. authorized biography.
* Shannon, William H., Christine M. Bochen, Patrick F. O'Connell The Thomas Merton Encyclopedia (2002), Orbis Books, ISBN 1-57075-426-8, 556 p.
* Shannon, William H., "Silent Lamp: The Thomas Merton Story" (1992), The Crossroad Publishing Company, ISBN 0-8245-1281-2 biography
* Merton, Thomas, The Seven Storey Mountain (1978), A Harvest/HBJ Book, ISBN 0-15-680679-7. (see notes for pages)
* Merton, Thomas, "Learning to Love, The Journals of Thomas Merton, Volume Six 1966-1967" (1997), ISBN 0-06-065485-6. (see notes for page numbers)
* "Thomas Merton’s 'Shining Like the Sun' Epiphany, March 18, 1958".
* "'The Strange Subject' - Thomas Merton’s Views on Sufism" by Terry Graham in SUFI: a journal of Sufism, Issue 30.

The Ministry and Thought of Paul Hamilton Beattie
by Daniel Ross Chandler
Introduction

Paul Hamilton Beattie was born an American citizen in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, on May 7, 1937. The growing boy was raised in Cleveland's inner city by his mother in a single-parent, low-income family. From age nine until he became a full-time minister, he held summer and part-time jobs, working in a steel mill, serving as a camp counsellor, selling men's clothing.

Seeking higher eduction at every turn, Paul Beattie received a B.A. from Mount Union College in 1959 and a B.D. from the Divinity School of the University of Chicago during 1961 and a complete year-long interim ministry at Unity Unitarian Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, in 1961-1962. The following year he returned to Chicago, working in the practicum at the counselling center maintained by the University. The youthful scholar would go on to pursue doctoral studies seriously in the University's English Department. Rabbi Sherwin T. Wine articulated a common observation:
# Paul was deeply intellectual. He loved the world of ideas. His view of the ideal religious community was a continuous open dialogue of opposing view in which ideas and beliefs would be taken seriously.

A lover of the ancient Greeks, he embraced the tragic view of life. Greek tragedy was neither pessimistic nor despairing. It was heroic. The heroic person confronts a morally indifferent universe, with all its unavoidable and undeserved calamities, with resolute courage and defiance and with a determination to live. 1

The aspiring minister served several congregation, coming to exert a powerful influence upon the humanist movement. Between 1963 and 1969 Beattie was minister of the Unitarian Church in Concord, New Hampshire. During this productive six-year period, he served as both president of the local ministers' association, and as president for the Emerson-Ballou Ministerial Association comprised of Unitarian Universalists in New Hampshire and Vermont; he also volunteered as a board member of the Concord Red Cross, the New Hampshire Social Welfare Council, and the Greater Concord Mental Health Association.

Beattie's interest in relating psychology to religion secured expression during three years when he participated in a continuing conversation among the professional staff who attended the alcohol division of the state hospital. These ongoing discussions emphasized and explored case studies and were coordinated with readings in Sigmund Freud's central writings.

Beattie's increasing influence upon the liberal religious movement in the United States was evident when he became minister of All Souls Unitarian Church in Indianapolis from 1969 until 1982 and of the First Unitarian Church in Pittsburgh between 1982 and 1989. He served several terms on the board of the American Humanist Association. For seventeen eventful years he served as president of the Fellowship of Religious Humanists and edited this present journal, religious humanism.

An inquisitive individual with insatiable intellectual tastes, he was granted a sabbatical from his Indianapolis congregation between 1976-1977. This allowed him to commence the aforementioned doctoral studies in English literature at the University of Chicago, where he concentrated on the concept of tragedy in nineteenth-century American authors. Simultaneously he served as minister-in-residence and visiting lecturer at Meadville-Lombard Theological School where he taught a course on the ministry and presented five lectures on the thought of Sigmund Freud.

While residing in Indianapolis, he served on the boards of the Social Health Association, the Indianapolis Council of World Affairs, and an organization for developing low-cost housing.

Among Paul's outstanding achievements was his work as the founder and first president of Unitarian Universalists for Freedom of Conscience on behalf of which he labored incessantly to maintain and expand political and religious pluralism within the UUA. An articulate and ardent proponent of intellectual freedom, Beattie affirmed the primacy of individual conscience, renouncing the hegemony of any political or religious ideology within the free church community.

Another extraordinary accomplishment was his leadership in conceiving of the idea and helping to establish the Humanist Institute (sponsored by the newly founded North American Committee for Humanism) as a graduate-level educational institution for training humanist religious leaders. As Jean Kotkin, Humanist Institute administrator, explained:
# The idea for the Humanist Institute originated in Pittsburgh in 1976 and was the brainchild of Paul Beattie, a Unitarian Universalist minister. In August 1982, Rabbi Sherwin Wine organized a gathering of forty-five humanist leaders at the University of Chicago [where] the North American Committee for Humanism [NACH] was formed with Rabi Wine as president.

This new alliance was a response to the urgent need to defend humanism against the assaults of its enemies and to find an effective way to bring the message of humanism to a wider public. It was at this meeting that the Humanist Institute was voted to be established. 2

As a graduate school intended for educating professional humanist leaders, the Humanist Institute identifies potential leaders, provides training, cooperates with other educational insitutions to offer courses that are relevant to the Institute's curriculum, and assists in placing these leaders in existing or newly established positions.

Paul Beattie was, clearly, a dedicated parish minister, an outstanding humanist leader, and a prolific writer. His career exeplified the learned ministry. As an author he contribued articles to numerous periodicals such as Free Inquiry and religious humanism and books, including The Encyclopedia of Unbelief and The Future of Global Nuclearization: World Religious Perspectives. He died on May 22, 1989 while undergoing surgery to correct heart problems. At a beautiful memorial service conducted at the First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh, St. Louis ministerial colleague Earl Holt summarized Beattie's enduring legacy:
# Many people knew Paul at a distance, through his writing and intellectual leadership as well as by his involvement in institutional causes. In this regard he came as close as anyone of his generation to fulfilling the ideal of what is called the Learned Ministry, a tradition, I should say, more often honored in word than in fact. Paul did honor it. The range and scope of his scholarship was truly astounding and even intimidating. He was in this sense a minister's ministeróan intellectual resource: what I mean is that almost everybody stole sermon ideas from him! 3

Another minister predicted that "in historical perspective fifty or a hundred years hence, his sermons and writings will stand the test of time better than those of any other minister of our generation."4 Almost ironically Beattie had written:
# When my mind is still and alone with the beating of my heart, I remember many things too easily forgotten: the purity of early love, the maturity of unselfish love that asksódesiresónothing but another's good, the idealism that has persisted through all the tempests of life.

When my mind is still and alone with the beating of my heart, I find quiet assurance, an inner peace, in the core of my being. 5

Not especially surprising, the minister who professed religious humanism poured his life into the people and events that he knew and cared about; his autobiographical reflections were cometimes expressed in his sermos. Beattie reported that his childhood church was Christian; he attended a fundamentalist Baptist church but became a liberal Methodist. 6 Following his freshman year in college, he concluded that he was not a Christian although Christianity was acknowledged for nurturing numerous humane and exemplary lives on the one hand and on the other, practicing absurdities such as burning books and instituting the Inquisition. Nevertheless Beattie was not a Christian:
# These then are my reasons for not calling myself a Christian: I cannnot put Christ at the center of my life; I cannot feel comfortable in any religious group that would exclude humanists, agnostics, and atheists, or that insists that [everyone] should believe in God; I cannot put the Bible at the center of my devotional or intellectual life; I am not comfortable with the Christian moral tradition whch sees issues in terms of black and white, which is often judgmental, and which cuts [people] off from naturalistic ethics; and finally, I am not a Christian becasue I cannot identify with much that has happened in Christian history, so often has Christianity fought the very things that I believe in most stronglyósuch as freedom and the scientific quest. 7

Convinced that he was not a Christian, he concluded that he would study the world's great religious teachers: Buddha, Confucius, Lao-Tzu, Zoroaster, Mohammed, and others. Beattie described himself as "an agnostic leaning toward atheism"8 and contended that "no one at the present time can prove or disprove whether or not there is a cosmic spirit or mind at work in the universe."9 No evidence proves the existence of God; neither can God's existence be disproved; believeing in God requires a leap of faith. From the scientific viewpoint, no reason requires a God-concept; postulating God neither expands human knowledge, provides insightful understanding, or initiates new directions for scientific research. Nonetheless, Beattie was unconvinced that God's disappearance would be beneficial; he believed that a culture collapses when its value system degenerates; historically, cultures that abandoned religion tended to collapse. Concluding that humanism represents the finest hope for providing an adequate framework for interpreting humanity's exploding knowledge, he maintained:
# Man must take his destiny into his own hands. For the first time man knows through an increasingly sophisticated evolutionary theory how he came to be what he is. Now he must try to make human life self-directing. To do this he must unify his understanding of the human past with the new insights that are emerging in all fields of human endeavor, and especially in the sciences. The old theologies simply do not provide a world view capable of integrating and systematizing our growing store of knowledge. 10

Beattie believed that an intelligent individual can either reformulate concepts about God consistent with scientific knowledge or conclude that religion without God is possible. A contemporary concept about God should embrace scintific knowledge, repudiate supernatural possibilities, and renounce naive personalism or teleological superimpositions thrust upon a naturalistic world order. Beattie recognized the striking similarities between a theist and a humanist, emphasizing that humanism is religious:
# Every man who would live harmoniously and well in this world and with his fellow man must live by religious principles. Religion for the humanist and theist alike, is a life-long search for the most adequate response to all of life. Religion is a man's attitude toward the concerns which for him constitute the meaning of life. Religion for the theist and humanist alike is a man's attempt to transform himself evermore completely by the light of the highest good he knows. 11
The Tragic View of Life

Paul Beattie's religious philosophy stressed the tragic view of life expressed in classical Greek culture. This unconventional preacher maintained that the Greeks exhibited a serene greatness characteristic of Apollo and the passion and tolerance associated with Dionysus. Christian civilization, to the degree that Western civilization is Christian, perceives the ancient Greeks inaccurately. Paul maintained that the Greeks explored the complete range of human experiece, and that the Judeo-Christian and Greek world-views are antitheitical. The Greeks attempted to overcome suffering through heroic exertion of the human will, while the Hebrews sought harmony with the will of Yahweh as a resolution for their suffering: no other concept comes closer to what is uniquely Greek than tragedy, and no other concept is more alien to the Judeo-Christian tradition. Although reconstucting the Greek concept remains difficult, tragedy expresses not despair, but triumph over it and confidence in the value of human life. Tragedy arises when a person consciously recognizes calamity yet remains serenly confident in the face of it. The tragic view of life stems from the realization that within the universe human can become over-whelmed by forces beyond their control. However, some individuals, through some nobility discerned within their character, are not defeated by terrible reversals in fortune even when they are destroyed. A person who exhibits heroic character prefers fame above longevity. The tragic view promises no assurance beyond the grave; existence in a shadowy world provides no compensation; there is niether an escape from fate nor guaranteed recompense. Life is considered as a great good but always uncertain. Humans confront a world in which they can be instantaneously obliterated. A person's fate is beyond a god's command; gods can attempt to affect the outcome, but they cannot determine an individual's destiny. Hence a hero's life, whether one endures or is destroyed, transpires within an uncertainty that evades human control. Struggling with this awareness humans comprehend that while their actions can affect, they cannot determine the final outcome or ultimate consequences. Sometimes a tragic hero facilitates one's own destruction through an error in judgment. Thus the tragic view confirms the significance intrinsic to human experience, especially suffering.

From an historical perspective, said Beattie, the tragic view begins with Homer. This concept was developed subsequently through Athenian drama. The great Greek dramatistsóAeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripidesódepicted the struggles that humans wage against fate although each writer advanced a different interpretation. According to Beattie, the tragic view secured a different expression through Socrates, who exhibited a different personality or character. Socrates marked a turning-point in world history by dislpaying what Paul termed "heroic moral character":
# Until his day the Greek civilization was in many ways mainly external and self-conscious in its achievements, while, after Socrates, Greek civilization became internalized. 12

Socrates, the founder of Western moral philosophy, espoused teachings predicated neither upon supernatural revelation nor divine dictates. Socrates attempted to analyze human attitudes and behavior using a distinctive process of reasoning. Preceding Socrates, the heroic character portrayed in the Homeric writings and Greek tragic drama presented godlike individuals struggling against fate; after Socrates, the heroic individual was an individual who maintained self-control, tranquility, and goodness regardless of external circumstances. Soctrates's behavior, perhaps the first instance of civil disobedience in history, confirmed his enormous respect for the rule of law. Beattie explained that with Socrates, heroic character became a philosophic calm that remains unshaken in the conviction as to what is right and appropriate. Socrates was a tragic figure because he met his destiny alone, unflinching and unshaken. Beattie concluded that besides Homer and the Greek dramatists, Socrates presented a third enduring concept through which the tragic view eventually became expressed through almost unlimited variation. As Beattie points out:
# We end by noting that Socrates stands in stark contrast to Jesus. Jesus is not a tragic figure. Jesus went to his death to fulfill a divine plan. He rose from the grave to prove, in the words of St. Paul, thath he had "overcome the law of sin and death." Some Christians have tried to portray Jesus as a man who died to consecrate his ideas, but such attempts diverge from the Christianity of the New Testament. The early Christians saw Jesus, not as an heroic individual struggling against fate, but as a divine supernatural savior. 13
The Classical Greek Tradition

Beattie drew heavily upon the classical Greek tradition in developing his distinctive religious humanism. His love for the classics was informed by a strong historical perspective. Describing an epoch-marking moment when philosophy became a search for truth rather than a contemplation of myths, he indicates:
# A change of similar magnitude began in the Mediterranean world around 600 B.C. where, by that time, the ancient Greeks were scattered in city-states throughout Greece, Asia Minor, and southern Italy. A new type of thinking evolved among the Greeks of Ionia. We call it philosophy. It was the first systematic and sustained attempt to make sense of the world through analytical reason. 14

Beattie described Protagoras as the most famous Sophist who believed that laws and customs do not represent divine absolutes and who might have been the first philosopher to include an existentialist or individualist dimension within his epistemology. 15 Paul thus believed that historical consciousness commences with Homer; that Homer was the educator of Greece who suppied the Greek traditions with their "ideal type;" and that the Iliad and the Odyssey constitute the first Western literature, indeed, the first great literature. 16 Homer, Paul argued, freed human culture from bondage to any single authority or controlling concept and that within his writing can be seen "civic consciousness among a free people beginning to arise." 17 Beattie identified Socrates as among humanity's great moral heroes who bequeathed to us a contribution greater than the progress prompted by either Moses or Jesus: admittedly, Moses transformed his people's tradition while Jesus summarized and initiated a new influence in prophetic Israel. Beattie stated that Moses, Jesus, and Socrates remain uncovered through historical research, although more is known about Socrates. Socrates, he said, gave a new direction to Greek culture, and exemplified the notion of character development and an analytical philosophical style. 18 Socratic method inspired the dialogues of Plato and the logic of Aristotle. A greater champion of free inquiry can hardly be imagined.
# Never has the principle of the freedom to think and to speak been more clearly or beautifully stated than in Plato's Apology which was inspired by Socrates and is surely one of the most historical of Plato's dialogues.

Four hundred years before Jesus, Socrates made this first, profound defense of the citizen's right to think and speak... 19

Beattie reported that Epictetus arose from slavery to become a renowned philosopher; Epictetus's example confirms that Stoicism was not a philosophy that paralyzed human achievement or inhibited individuals' capacity for enduring difficult moments. 20 Epictetus realized that some aspects are within a person's control and others are not: people possess the power to place their own interpretation of meaning and appropriations of emotion upon the events that transpire in their lives. Greeks thus provided a mirror in which Western people throughout their history could discern their portrait.

The classics scholar who loved ancient Greek culture and studied their literature and history also studied their mythology and analyzed its content. Beattied employed a reference to Plato's Republic where Glaucon reminds Socrates about the myth of Gyges who discovered a ring with which a person could become invisible. 21 The preacher questioned how humans would behave if they could travel anywhere, see anything, and do anything without being seen. This myth, he insisted, remains painfully pertinent when modern technology has grown increasingly powerful Beattie contended that unless a significant number of individuals add new dimension to their moral and intellectual sophistication, this generation could become terminal:
# None of us will ever get to try the Ring of Gyges, and so we can never be sure how we would have used it. But in another sense we all are wearing the "Ring of Gyges." The magnitude of power, the technology that is commonplace in our world, give us the power to do almost anything we try to do. This is why our religious-ethical stance has become more important than ever before. For ours could very well be the last human experiment on this planet. 22

Declaring that living religion is that which emphasizes strong ethical behavior and effective social responsibility, Paul concludes:
# To grow stronger for good in the course of life, not weaker; to grow more honest with age, not less; to become a little more thoughtful and kind with each passing day; to let the hurts and the scars of the years teach us gratitude for what we have been given and courage for the future; to face the years ahead with the knowledge that we have lived fully and well, with a good conscience, this is our goal. 23

In a sermon discussing mythology, Beattie discussed myth as fiction, as history-poetry, and as a perspective yielding ultimate esoteric truth. The preacher described myth as the method with which most persons attempt to understand the world, human nature, and the purpose of human existence. He maintained, however, that truth derived from myth is uncertain because myths are ultimately subjective through retelling and thereby change constantly. Consequently, a philosophical approach ultimately abandons mythological interpretations and asserts a more mundane, commonsense approach. Beattie believed that philosophical method produces various ways of knowing that are preferable to a mythological world-view. He questioned whether myths have encouraged human progress or exerted an inhibiting influence. Beattie recognized that innumerable individuals experience difficulty in distinguishing folk tales from myths. "Western literature," he said, "is studded with meaningful and enlightening references to mythologcal figures,and, for this reason, knowledge about myths can be enriching and an important part of life for every educated person." 24 Another method for analyzing myths attempts to gain insight for understanding the increasingly complex patterns within modern life; this approach assumes that myths provide a unique window upon the world, a perspective that has profound metaphysical meaning. Some people affirm that myths impart meanings that are discovered exclusively through immersion in mythological thinking; myths, in other words, constitute a category of truth. Beattie nonetheless concluded that sacred traditions, primordial insights, and exemplary models found in myths assist us little in living effectively in today's turbulent times.
The Sacred Scriptures

Taking a critical approach toward the Bible consistent with the finest contemporary scholarship, Beattie explained that the word, Bible, comes from the Greek, meaning "the books" He stated that the books contained in the Hebrew, Roman Catholic, and Protestant collections are different. The Jewish tradition honors thirty-nine books; Roman Catholics add another twenty seven and fourteen other books called the Apocrypha; the Protestant collection contains fourteen fewer books than the Roman Catholic compendium. Paul attributed bibliolatry to a two-thousand year-old Christian tradition and a thirty-five-hundred-year-old Jewish tradition. Beattie criticized exegetical preaching that represents a "depsrate attempt to punp meaning into a moribund, irrelevant, scriptual passage." 25 He dismissed as absurd the assumption that "an ancient compilation of books is more relevant, week after week, than are the current writings of historians, psychologists, economists, philsophers, and other teachers representing the whole range of learning emanating from the modern university." 26 Although the speaker acknowledged that some sections in these books contain profound psychological and religious truth and that people are illiterate unless they know and appreciate the profundities found within Biblical literature, Beattie refused to establish the Bible as central to his religious life.

Moreover, he claimed that large sections of the Bible are unfit for children. He recalled that as a child he was saturated with biblical information and that his own children received discrete doses. Although the biblical passages receive different interpretations, he described some teachings as barbaric and denounced "a fanatic intolerance at the heart of the Bible," noting that in the Old Testament the death penalty is prescribed for gathering firewood on the Sabbath, consulting wizards, unchastity, and intercourse during menstruation. 27 Substantial psychological observation as well as common human experience sustain Beattie's argument that "Countless lifes have been perverted by an insance search for unrealistic purity, a purity that would have human beings be disembodied spirits." 28 He remarked that the Bible exceeds a popular 1950s novel, Peyton Place, with numerous stories about adultery, incest and sexual pandering. Beattie concluded that perhaps the greatest defect in the Bible is its humorlessness: he dismisses the authoritarianism expressed in the scriptures as anti-democratic, anti-intellectual, and anti-scientific. He criticized "a harshness, a good-bad, right-wrong, black-white dichotomy to the prophetic tradition that has led to an immoral, self-righteous sort of morality." 29 Ever ethically sensitive, Paul described the Bible as an "adult book" that might provide a rewarding reading experience with its biography and mystic, poetic world-view. In sum:
# As adults, we are uneducated if we do not have an acquaintance with the Bible as literature; but were are ignorant if we expect the Bible to solve the perplexities of modern civilization; and we are fooolish if we are not extremely cautious in the way that we expose our children to the famous, but also infamous, book. 30

Beattie observed that technological innovations, such as breakthroughs in making flint arrowheads, penetrate cultural boundaries more easily than religions or ideologies. The speaker noted that humnas have lived largely in ignorance about beliefs different from their own; humans generally exhibit a tendency toward ethnocentricity. Beattie suspected that Ralph Waldo Emerson was chiefly responsible for encouraging the insightful employment of religion different from one's own; with Emerson, something new happened in approaching religion. Paul suggested a reason for this significant changeónamelyóthat people walking the streets of Salem and Boston conversed with the sailors and sea captains who had "actually talked with oriental heathens." 31 He emphasized:
# Our bible is never finishedóit is the loose-leaf bibleóa changing, growing collection, some things being added, some things falling away, of insights which move us deeply to a better life. The loose-leaf bible is a book of insights which help us aspire to be better people; it is filled with insights which enlarge our appreciations and our view of life's possibilities. 32
Jesus

Beattie recognized that the traditional God has vanished for Westerners and that Jesus disappeared in a similar manner. The preacher maintained that Jesus was primarily a subjective phenomenon and that for New Testament scholars, Jesus resembles a puppet that can do anthing. Beattie summarized by saying that Jesus is presented variously: a good man and ethical teacher who professed love to God and one's fellows; a fanatic who wanted the world to end, and professing an imminent eschatology; a minor revolutionary who was executed by the Romans; an historical accident that inspired individuals to endure the collapsing Greco-Roman civilization; and a schemer who poltted his own resurrection. St Paul made Christianity something more than a Jewish sect; during the ensuing process, the "dogma of Christ outlasted the historical man." 33 Beattie specified four different perspectives about Jesus that remain relevant: Jesus as an historical figure who was an ethical teacher and prophet; Jesus as a Jewish prophet who remained within the Jewish tradition and never intended to establish a new religion; Jesus as a central informing myth for contemporary Christianity; and Jesus as unimportant for modern humans. 324 He contended that people should know something about Jesus and his teachings as they are understood within Western society; but Beattie concluded that a modern secularist discovers little in either Jesus or the Christian tradition that provides integration for living their lives.

Beattie questioned whether Jesus, a man credited with inspiring the Christian religion, could be considered a proto-Christian. He concluded that Jesus "died a lonely suffering Jew on a Roman cross." and that later "the Christian church resurrected the dead Jew by making him into a diving supernatural saviour." 35 Beattie concluded that Jesus was a man who cannot be comprehended when separated from the country where he was born or the religious beliefs embraced by his people. As a Jew, Jesus was loyal to the Torah and the prophets. Jesus considered himself a Jew; Jesus was not the first Christian, Paul was. Beattie speculated that had Jerusalem not been destroyed, the Christian religious as popularly known might never have arisen; the concept about Jesus that Paul preached would have been contradicted by a more authoritative tradition emanating from a competing community composed of persons who actually knew Jesus. Beattie contended that acceptance of the conclusion that Jesus was a Jew and neither God nor a Christian, would terminate the triumphalist assertion that Christianity constitutes the only true religion. Beattie envisioned persons drawing insight and inspiration from all the world's great religions; such expanded perspectives might encourage people to open themselves to a splendor emanating from the entirety of human experience; persons could draw knowledge from all the exemplars who enrich humanity's seemingly diverse religions. With this perspective, persons would be encouraged to preserve the best that humans know and have known, while welcoming new truth discovered at the frontiers of knowledge.

On Easter Sunday, 1984, Beattie stated that although few religious liberals within the UU movement would affirm Jesus's physical resurrection, several helpful meanings arise from serious reflction. Said Beattie:
# The pilgrimage Jesus makes from his entry into Jerusalem to his death on the cross is symbolic of the pilgrimage all must make, for it portrays the agony which is life. The agony of life grows out of the fact that the struggle for authenticity is painful. The struggle to maintain and be true to one's highest values is difficult, sometimes painful, and at times even demands sacrifice. The agony of life is that if we would choose the good, if we would choose excellence, then we must, part of the time, suffer for our values. 36

Beattie believed:
# No one can step between illness and usóor face death for us. Friends and loved ones can give a little companionship and comfort, but they cannot remove the feeling of solitariness and isolation which surrounds every human being during the ultimate moments of life. To repress this essential solitariness is to dull ourselves to our ultimate responsibility, which is to live our own lives as best we can and to encourage other people to take responsibility for their lives. It is noteworthy that while the New Testament assumes that God exists and that, as Jesus says, not even a sparrow falls without God knowing it, yet Jesus is completely alone on the last day of his life. 37

The speaker remarks that during the Passover meal when Jesus broke bread and shared wine, perhaps using these elements to symbolize himself and his mission, the important instruction for Christians was the inner reality that these symbols awaken in believing Christians. Beattie indicated that humans may never know whether Jesus actually intended to institute a new rite or whether the early Christian community invented it. He concluded: If Jesus had not died on the cross, there would have bene no Christian religion, for Christianity grew out of the response of the early disciples to the death of their Lord." 38 Citing the scholarship of S.G.F. Brandon, Beattie speculated that following the Jewish revolt in 70AD when Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, there cease to be an authentic source indicating what Jesus actually taught and that a compensatory necessity arose for constructing an historical record that was apologetic. 39

Understanding and acknowledging the wisdom found in the world's religions and philosophies, Beattie encouraged resorting to Greek, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, and other traditions rather than confining oneself within a single tradition. Focusing upon Jesus and Socrates, he concluded that their approaches toward the world comprise some unreconcilable presuppositions. Paul explained that there exists more plausible and substantial information about Socrates, maintaining that "an ironic twist of fate turned a minor Jewish sect, the followers of Jesus the Jew, into a new religion which conquered the world." 40 He observed accurately the Christianity borrowed numerous ideas from the mystery religions existing in this geographical region, laying the foundation for the synthesis combining innumerable different religious elements found in the Mediterranean world. 41 Having survived persecution as a minority movement, the church, when eventually empowered, established religious conformity and imposed a straitjacket intellectual uniformity. Christianity, he contended, became a successful mass movement by demonstrating a capacity for unifying and inspiring emormous populations over a long period of time. Beattie concluded that Socrates has two advantages over Jesus: (1) the Greek philosopher represents a reasoned approach toward life that is compatible with emerging scientific knowledge; (2) his method was developed within a roughly democratic society that accomodated the ideal of the civic-minded individual whom Socrates himself exemplified. Among the contributions coming from ancient Greek culture that Beattie described as incompatible with the biblical traiditon are philosophy, the concept of tragedy, the beginnings of the scientific method, and the concept of democracy. Beattie regretted that countless persons may never appreciate philosphers like Socrates, preferring to worship charismatic saviors instead.
Political Activism and Intellectual Freedom

Paul Hamilton Beattie espoused the principles of individual intellectual freedom anchored in ancient Greek culture. He recognized that throughout history, most people lived in societies that permitted minimal intellectual and religious liberty. Beginning when Europe was dominated by Christianity around 500 A.D., the new state religion of the Roman Empire permitted no dissent from "the faith once delivered to the saints." Neither was the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century ever intended to advance religious freedom. No organized religious group in Europe during this period advocated individual intellectual freedom. Beattie said:

* Even dissenting groups who wanted freedom for themselves, did not grant it to others; and they insisted on conformity among those in their own community. The great glory of Unitarianism is that ours was the first religious group in Western history to espouse and practice freedom of conscience.

Through the urging both of Francis David and John Sigismund, the Diet of Torda gave its seal of approval to an edict of the King which was published in 1568. This edict was the first legal enactment of religious toleration in Western history, and it was issued by the first and only Unitarian king in history. 42

In powerful pulpit discourse, he traced the historical development. In 1644 John Milton wrote the first defense championing a free press appearing in the English language. In 1689 John Locke composed one of the strongest, most persuasive statements advocating freedom of conscience, A Letter Concerning Toleration. Thomas Jefferson was the first to affect enactment into law the principle of separation of church and state whe the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom was approved in 1786. Theodore Parker was among the first critics who attacked the concept of miracle contained in the Bible, using as his tool, emerging German biblical criticism. Beattie discerned that, "Every generation, apparently, has to learn anew that it is pernicious and cruel to try to compel the conscience." 43 Against this historical perspective, he denounced the tendency among contemporary religious liberals to compormise freedom of conscience by initiating political activism.
# In the late 1950s, 60s, and 70s, American and Canadian Unitarian Universalists have gone quite far in betraying the principle of freedom of conscience. What has happened is that some Unitarian Universalists, who would never think of imposing a theological creed, have in various ways imposed a social or political creed. 44

Persistently did he remind his contemporaries that the belief that a society can tolerate and flourish while allowing conflicting ideas and institutions to exist emerged initially during the eighteenth century. 45

Beattie reported abundant testimony from numerous churchmen stating that the church's primary purpose is to reform society. He stated that chruch involvement in initiating social action is nothing new and that the history of church-induced social activism has been astonishingly disastrous. Even with the church's long-standing commitment to promoting social justice, society remains almost unmodified by the chruch's pronouncements. He insisted: "The invention of refrigeration and its widespread use has done more to save lives and improve health and living standards than the combined church social action programs of all denominations." 46 He denounced insitutional social action initiated at the national level as ineffective. The churches can exert a profound influence upon persons' lives, but the churches are unsuccessful vehicles for promoting social change. The preacher described the church as a voluntary association and suggested a primary purpose:
# The main purpose of the church is that it is a community of healing and wholeness. We exist to help those individuals who come to us to restore a balance and tone to their lives. We exist to lift people when they feel down and to goad consciences when they become too confortable. But how can a church be a place of healing, a place of worship, a sanctuary for the spirit if it is constantly a place of acrimonious debate? 47

Like a prophet crying within the wilderness, he cautioned his fellow liberals against becoming politically sectarian, ceasing to encourage lively dialogue on important questions, and becoming a dogmatic political sect.48 Beattie warned that the movement was searching for a mission outside its parameters without becoming uniquely prophetic or especially effective. Insisting upon individual intellectual freedom, he envisioned the "free church" in a pluralistic society:
# The church I am describing is a religious community which is committed primarily to the educational process. It sees religion as a search rather than a set of answersÖSuch an approach to religion involves a conscious attempt to develop religious communities which are pluralistic. To live comfortably in such a community one must have a tolerance for religious or philosophical lifestances different from one's own. A life-philosophy, or a theology, or a political ideology does not represent some absolute truth, or realityóit is a grid, a set of "though-categories" into which we pour our experience of reality for the purpose of sharing our perceptions and for the purpose of organizing and directing our lives. 49

Beattie encouraged the church the includes Christians, theists, humanists, and others; a religious community composed of Republicans, Democrats, consumerists, and libertarians; and a fellowship hospitable to Marxists, socialists, capitalists, and free enterprisers. This cordial and congenial company could accomodate Milton Friedmanites and John Kenneth Galbraithians. Beattie acknowledged that withing a democratic society, numerous free forums are found where proposed programs for solving social problems are discussed and debated outside the church. he cautioned that political acrimony arising within the church undermines genuine educational experience and impedes the search for truth. The church that stands within a religious tradition that sustains a non-creedal affirmation has a opportunity to create a uniquely inclusive community for dialogue in a society splintered into endless pressure groups. Beattie emphasized that initiating institutional social action violates the historic tradition that champions the "free mind" by imposing a social creed. The preacher maintained that churchmen change their convictions not through acrimonious controversy and taking political positions, but from their participation in an inclusive, non-threatening community where thoughts and feelings are openly shared and respected. The free pulpit should provide a position from which individuals are convinced to accept and fulfill their social responsibilities; but persons should never be compelled or coerced to promote causes that contradict their conscience.
Religious Humanism: a Response to Life

Paul Hamilton Beattie preached a distinctive "religious humanism" describable as a reasoned response to the human situation that requires intellectual, emotional, and spiritual reflection. The unconventional minister saw life as a living and a dying, a success and a failure, a depair and a hope. In a manner suggestive of Hindu similarity, he said: "Life is an endless cycle of birth and death, a cycle within which human consciousness has arisen and replicated itself with increasing power for countless generations." 50 Life is harder, he surmised, when life is self-conscious; this situation makes persons characteristically human. In a manner that distinguishes religious humanism as a persuasion, he maintained that the test of a person's convictions is not the theological statement by how a human spends one's life. 51 Emphasizing an inescapable "tragic dimension" that pervades human existence, he repeated an uncompromised conclusion: "Yet it is the pain, the sorrow, the discomfort, the fear, and the anxiety in life that can teach us most about ourselves." 52

Thoughtfully he pondered the religious dimension within human experience. Beattie speculated that for any tribe or people, culture constitutes a single seamless web that is inevitably interconnected. Within this unity, religion contains the positive and the negative, the progressive and the repressive, the living and the dying. Beattie claimed that primitive religion required absolute certainty and complete commitment to beliefs and behavior that an individual must accept without questioning. Religion has been substantially tradition-oriented and sustained with sanctions ascribed to "supernatural inspiration." To take a sweeping historical stance: religion may be said to have prompted frenzied fanaticism and penetrating seriousness. With Christianity, the center was changed. Rather than providing glue for solidifying an empire, religion became a support-system sustaining individuals and small communities scattered around the Mediterranean. The "ultimate commitment" became personal; beliefs and behavior were calculated as a means for securing "heavenly rewards." In scrutinizing humans' historical progress, Paul concluded that scientific knowledge, democratic self-government, and attempts to improve the human situation are clearly secular achievements.

As a reasoned response to human existence, religion cannot guarantee success in an uncertain world but can provide a daily process whereby humans grow wiser, kinder, and more self-reliant. "Religion," he said, "is a whole response toward all of life that moves us toward the good as the good is progressively understood, discovered, and created." 53 Beattie explained:
# I define religion as our whole response to all of life, the core of attitudes and values out of which we live and make life decisions. Worship ascribes value or worth to something, and it is a public process buy which we condition and maintain that whole response to life which is our religion. 54

A central conviction was that religion can remain deeply emotional and at the same time be predicated upon scientific knowledge rather than tradition or opinion:
# Religion becomes and ongoing synthesis of the best of modern thought coupled with the great religious myths and insights of all religions which are enhanced through and appreciation for the humanities and the cultural achievements of humankind. Evolution becomes the epic which binds the spectrum of thought and experience togetheróthe evolution of the solar system, of this galaxy, of this planet, of life, of intelligent life, of human history and culture. 55

He maintained that the important thing at any time in an individual's life is that one has some religious stance that is one's own and from which that individual sincerely seeks to live in the service of goodness, truth, and beauty regardless of the specific names given to these elemental realities. 56 Beattie believed that there can be no absolute standard for determining a religion. 57

As much as and possibly more than any modern minister, Beattie gave shape and direction to humanism as a distinctive religious persuasion. Beattie presented religious humanism as a philosophy of life that claims that a person's lifestance must emanate from their understanding of the essential human condition and actual human experience. A humanist's life-stance is based upon human knowledge and human limitation rather than alleged divine revelations and supposed unsolvable mysteries. A complete flowering of humanism became possible during the nineteenth century with the writings of Darwin, Freud, and Feuerbach. Beattie professed:
# The humanist does not deny that millions of galaxies larger than humans exist; nor does the humanist deny the ecological realities of life on this planet and the integrity which must be granted other life forms. All the humanist claims is that, when it comes to making value judgments, human beings are, as far as we can tell, alone. No other creature thinks about goodness, truth, and beauty. To the best of our knowledge, human beings are the only self-consciousóand therefore, the only trustworthyóarbiters of the choices human civilization must make. 58

He maintained that religious humanism in the United States generally reveals these characteristics: a naturalistic world-view informed by reason and scientific method; the democratic process as the decision-making method; a special appreciation for the rational emphasis found in classical culture; religion and history comprehended as a cultural condition stemming from human need and directed progressively toward earthly goals; and an appreciation for the values emanating from the gradual secularization of the Western world. 59 For the humanist, science and the scientific method provide "the core of religion." 60 Although innumerable expressions of humanism exist, most humanists conclude that speculation about God or divinity remains fruitless in satisfying essential human needs or providing satisfactory guides for shaping human destiny. Religious experiences are explained as products from human minds rather than as objective statements describing reality.

Indicating that religious humanism provides a helpful frame-of-reference, Beattie concluded that the entire human venture constitutes an epic for the humanist. He stated:
# In summary, humanism is high culture (a historically conditioned commitment to goodness, truth, and beauty), welded to the scientific method and committed to the democrtatic process as the best decision-making tool making certain that all available knowledge is applied to any public question and that the people involved in a decision are consulted. 61

Humanism provides a ground for continuous dialogue rather than a package containing acceptable poltical nostrums. Religious huamnism articulates no divinely sanctioned message but draws upon the classics and growing human knowledge; this persuasion embraces no single charismatic founder but recognizes countless heroes and heroines within the humanist tradition. Beattie professed that the content within his religious humanism was informed with the secular perspective found in Western history, observing that the forces that created Renaissance humanism inaugurated the process of secularizing the Western world. Paul identified this process as a central defining characteristic of western history and culture throughout most of modern history. He indicated:
# Today most humanists are agnostic, atheistic, or ignostic. Most humnaists are hellenophiles, most accept the scientific method as the most trustworthy way of knowing, most think of the evolutionary hypothesis as the central metaphor for self-understanding and for best understanding how to direct human destiny, and most humansits believe in the democratic process and the ideals of the Enlightenment as interpreted in the Bill of Rights of the American Constitution. 62

Paul Hamilton Beattie strongly exemplified the religious humanist as minister, counsellor, and a friend serving the human spirit. He was a teacher and colleague, assisting individuals in finding their own answers. He was a visionary convinced that religion can increasingly become one with scientific knowledge even as ethics and social justice are one with religion. From his experiences as a minister, he concluded that from counselling persons he had assisted others in restoring their lives simply by listening and that through and empathetic relationship he had held others by simply participating in one of the most importnat aspects of the creative process that is inherest in life. He said:
# I have spoken with many who are seeking short term financial aid; I have taken bags of groceries to bums in run-down hotels; I have counselled separated couples; I have entered homes during domestic quarrels to preclude violence; I have searched bus stations for runaway teenagers; I have helped hospitalize people suffering a psychotic episode and married pregnant girls to their boyfriends when no other minister would marry them. I have had people call me at all hours of the day and night for encouragement or just to lay bare a plaguing problem. To be a minister is to be involved with people, during their highs and their lows, during their best moments and their worst. 63

His experience as a minister revealed to Paul that the quality of dialogue constitutes a central component within effective ministry. He knew: "What endless power for renewal there is iin a genuine and full commitment in community to the uninhibited, never ending dialogue of the mind!" 64 This challenging, intellectually inquisitive minister was an independent individualist steeped in the classical tradition who expressed a person-centered humanism addressing the fundamental questions that all serious seekers usually ponder.
Notes

1. Sherwin T. Wine, "President's Message," The NACH Quarterly (Summer, 1989), VIII (3), P. 3.

2. Jean Kotkin, "The Humanist Institute News," The NACH Quarterly (Summer, 1989), VIII (3), p. 2.

3. Earl K. Holt, III, "Reflections," religious humanism, (Autumn 1989) XXIII (4), p. 160.

4. Donald W. Rowley, "Reflections," religious humanism, (Autumn 1989) XXIII (4), p. 166.

5. Paul H. Beattie, "When My Mind is Still," The Community News, (October 16, 1983), P. 3.

6. Beattie, Why I am Not a Christian," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, December 9, 1973.

7. Ibid., p. 4.

8. Beattie, "Why I Don't Believe in God," The Humanist, (January-February, 1974), p. 21.

9. Ibid., p. 21.

10. Ibid., p. 23.

11. Beattie, "Religion Without God is Possible; Life Without Religion is Difficult," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, February 9, 1969, p. 4.

12. Beattie, "The Tragic View of Life," an unpublished paper presented to the Prairie Group, Chicago, 1974, p. 25. See Beattie, "The Tragic View of Life," religious humanism, (summer 1985) XIX 93) p. 111-121; (autumn 1985) XIX (4), p. 166-173., See Beattie, "The Tragic View of Life," religious humanism (autumn 1989) XXIII (4) p. 192-195.

13. Beattie, "The Tragic View of Life," P. 29.

14. Beattie, "Protagoras: The Maligned Philosopher," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, April 24, 1983, p. 1.

15. Ibid., p. 4.

16. Beattie, "The World of Homer," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, February 3, 1985, p. 3.

17. Ibid., p. 9.

18. Beattie, "The Great Socrates," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, September 19, 1982, p. 3.

19. Ibid., p. 5.

20. Beattie, "The Secret of Epictetus," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, September 11, 1983.

21. Beattie, "The Ring of Gyges," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, May 19, 1985.

22. Ibid., p. 8.

23. Ibid., p. 9.

24. Beattie, "A Perspective on Mythology," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, February 3, 1980, p. 3.

25. Beattie, "A Critical View of the Bible," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, September 24, 1984, p. 3.

26. Ibid.

27. Beattie, "Is the Bible Fit for Children?," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, December 4, 1977, p.1 See Beattie, "How Are Ethics Related to Religion?" Free INquiry (summer, 1982) p. 59-61.

28. Beattie, "Is the Bible Fit for Children?," p. 2.

29. Ibid., p. 6.

30. Ibid., p. 7.

31. Beattie, "The Loose-Leaf Bible," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, January 11, 1987, p. 4.

32. Ibid., p. 6.

33. Beattie, "Where is Jesus?" a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, July 16, 1967, p. 4.

34. Beattie, Radical Pluralism: A Program for Unitarian Universalists in the 80s," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, October 5, 1980, p. 5.

35. Beattie, "Was Jesus a Christian?," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, September 14, 1969, p. 1.

36. Beattie, "The Agony of Life," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, April 22, 1984, p. 2.

37. Ibid., p. 4.

38. Ibid., p. 8.

39. Beattie, "Why did Jesus Die?," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, April 3, 1983, p. 3-5.

40. Beattie, "Jesus or Socrates: Why I Prefer Socrates," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, March 6, 1977, p. 3.

41. Ibid., p. 4.

42. Beattie, "The Great Unitarian Commandment: Thou Shalt Not Compel Conscience," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, October 28, 1979, p. 1.

43. Ibid., p. 3.

44. Ibid., p. 4.

45. Beattie, "Beyond Tolerance to Radical Pluralism: A New Doctrine for the Liberal Church," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, February 8, 1987. See Beattie, "Radical Pluralism: A Program for Unitarian Universalists in the 80s."

46. Beattie, "Can the Church Reform Society?," a sermon preached at All Souls Unitarian Church, Indianapolis, April 1, 1973, p. 1.

47. Ibid., p. 4.

48. Beattie, "A New Kind of Church," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, OCtober 30, 1983,. p. 6.

49. Beattie, "The Only Basis for Unitarian Universalism," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, January 5, 1986, p. 13-14.

50. Beattie, "The Agony of Life," p. 60.

51. Beattie, "Religion Without God is Possible," p. 4.

52. Beattie, "The Courage to Grow," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, April 27, 1986, p. 2.

53. Beattie, "The Ring of Gyges," p. 4.

54. Beattie, "Twenty Years in a Unitarian Pulpit," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, April 15, 1984, p. 4.

55. Ibid., p. 6.

56. Beattie, "Why I am Not a Christian," p. 5.

57. Beattie, "The Religion of Secular Humanism Versus Anti-Religious Secularism," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, March 3, 1985, p. 9.

58. Beattie, "Protagoras," p. 5-6.

59. Beattie, "The Humanist Option in American Religion," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, January 12, 1986.

60. Beattie, "Unitarian Universalist Options: Christian, Theist, Humanist," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, February 27, 1983, p. 7.

61. Beattie, "Humanism in the 1980s: Cult or Culture," Free Inquiry, (Winter 1987-1982) p. 24.

62. Beattie, "The Religion of Secular Humanism," P. 8.

63. Beattie, "Twenty Years in a Unitarian Pulpit," p. 5.

64. Beattie, "Goodness, Truth, and Beauty," a sermon preached at the First Unitarian Church, Pittsburgh, May 20, 1984, p. 4.

/***
|Name:|ToggleTagPlugin|
|Description:|Makes a checkbox which toggles a tag in a tiddler|
|Version:|3.1.0 ($Rev: 4907 $)|
|Date:|$Date: 2008-05-13 03:15:46 +1000 (Tue, 13 May 2008) $|
|Source:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#ToggleTagPlugin|
|Author:|Simon Baird <simon.baird@gmail.com>|
|License:|http://mptw.tiddlyspot.com/#TheBSDLicense|
!!Usage
{{{<<toggleTag }}}//{{{TagName TiddlerName LabelText}}}//{{{>>}}}
* TagName - the tag to be toggled, default value "checked"
* TiddlerName - the tiddler to toggle the tag in, default value the current tiddler
* LabelText - the text (gets wikified) to put next to the check box, default value is '{{{[[TagName]]}}}' or '{{{[[TagName]] [[TiddlerName]]}}}'
(If a parameter is '.' then the default will be used)
* TouchMod flag - if non empty then touch the tiddlers mod date. Note, can set config.toggleTagAlwaysTouchModDate to always touch mod date
!!Examples
|Code|Description|Example|h
|{{{<<toggleTag>>}}}|Toggles the default tag (checked) in this tiddler|<<toggleTag>>|
|{{{<<toggleTag TagName>>}}}|Toggles the TagName tag in this tiddler|<<toggleTag TagName>>|
|{{{<<toggleTag TagName TiddlerName>>}}}|Toggles the TagName tag in the TiddlerName tiddler|<<toggleTag TagName TiddlerName>>|
|{{{<<toggleTag TagName TiddlerName 'click me'>>}}}|Same but with custom label|<<toggleTag TagName TiddlerName 'click me'>>|
|{{{<<toggleTag . . 'click me'>>}}}|dot means use default value|<<toggleTag . . 'click me'>>|
!!Notes
* If TiddlerName doesn't exist it will be silently created
* Set label to '-' to specify no label
* See also http://mgtd-alpha.tiddlyspot.com/#ToggleTag2
!!Known issues
* Doesn't smoothly handle the case where you toggle a tag in a tiddler that is current open for editing
* Should convert to use named params
***/
//{{{

if (config.toggleTagAlwaysTouchModDate == undefined) config.toggleTagAlwaysTouchModDate = false;

merge(config.macros,{

	toggleTag: {

		createIfRequired: true,
		shortLabel: "[[%0]]",
		longLabel: "[[%0]] [[%1]]",

		handler: function(place,macroName,params,wikifier,paramString,tiddler) {
			var tiddlerTitle = tiddler ? tiddler.title : '';
			var tag   = (params[0] && params[0] != '.') ? params[0] : "checked";
			var title = (params[1] && params[1] != '.') ? params[1] : tiddlerTitle;
			var defaultLabel = (title == tiddlerTitle ? this.shortLabel : this.longLabel);
			var label = (params[2] && params[2] != '.') ? params[2] : defaultLabel;
			var touchMod = (params[3] && params[3] != '.') ? params[3] : "";
			label = (label == '-' ? '' : label); // dash means no label
			var theTiddler = (title == tiddlerTitle ? tiddler : store.getTiddler(title));
			var cb = createTiddlyCheckbox(place, label.format([tag,title]), theTiddler && theTiddler.isTagged(tag), function(e) {
				if (!store.tiddlerExists(title)) {
					if (config.macros.toggleTag.createIfRequired) {
						var content = store.getTiddlerText(title); // just in case it's a shadow
						store.saveTiddler(title,title,content?content:"",config.options.txtUserName,new Date(),null);
					}
					else 
						return false;
				}
				if ((touchMod != "" || config.toggleTagAlwaysTouchModDate) && theTiddler)
						theTiddler.modified = new Date();
				store.setTiddlerTag(title,this.checked,tag);
				return true;
			});
		}
	}
});

//}}}

http://www.godweb.org/toptenprayers.htm


The Lord's Prayer

Twenty-Third Psalm

Make Me an Instrument of Your Peace

The Irish Blessing

A Short Grace For Use Before Meals

Christ Be With Me

A Table Blessing

Children's Bedtime Prayer

The Jesus Prayer

And, I'd want to add that prayer which is probably used more than any of these, or any of the ones you think I should have mentioned, but didn't.

Namely ...

And, there are two additional prayers that might be included on this list. Both are among the most popular prayers today, but I'm not so sure about their holding power:

The Prayer of Jabez

The Jelly Bean Prayer

Abortion, fetus is a child Ps. 139:13-16; Matt. 1:23; 2:1-2
Adultery Matt. 5:27-32; 19:9; Gal. 5:19; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; Rev. 21:8
Antichrist 1 Jn. 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 Jn. 7
Apostasy 1 Cor. 10:12; Gal. 5:4; Heb. 3:12; 6:1-8; 10:26-39; 12:15
Authority:
Commands 1 Tim. 4:11; 1 Cor. 14:37; 2 Tim. 3:15-17; 1 Jn. 5:3
Apostolic Examples 1 Cor. 4:16; 11:1; 2 Th. 2:15; 3:6-15
Expediencies 1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23-11:1
Inferences, Examples Matt. 4:5-7; Acts 10:9-16, 34; Acts 16:6-10
Inferences, Worship Ex. 12:1-28, 43-51; 20:8-11; 23:10-19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1-2
God's Silence not Authoritative 1 Cor. 4:6; Col. 3:17; 1 Pet. 4:11; Rev. 22:18-19
Silence, Examples Acts 15:24; Heb. 7:11-14
Baptism Matt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:16; Jn. 3:5; Acts 2:38; 8:38; 22:16; 1 Pet. 3:21
Baptism, into Christ Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:26-27
Baptism, not babies Acts 5:14; 8:12
Bible, Gospel, Truth Jn. 1:14; 14:6; 17:17, 19; Rom. 1:16; 1 Th. 2:13; Heb. 1:1-2; 4:12;
2 Tim. 2:15; 3:15-17; 2 Pet. 1:2-3; Eph. 3:4; 1 Cor. 4:6; 2 Jn. 9-10; 1 Pet. 1:23; Gal. 1:9; 2 Pet. 3:16
Blood Gen. 9:4; Matt. 26:28; Heb. 9:11-28; ; 10:1-18; 12:24; Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 1:2, 18-19, 22-23;
1 Jn. 1:7
Quick-Reference Scripture Guide By: Allan McNabb
BibleGuide.org 2 BibleStudyGuide.org
Confession Matt. 10:32-33; Lk. 12:8-9; Rom. 10:9-10; 14:11; Acts 8:37; 1 Jn. 4:15; Acts 19:18;
Ja. 5:16; 1 Jn. 1:9
Church:
General Info Matt. 16:18; Acts 2:38-47; 1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23; 1 Tim. 3:15;
Eph. 2:19-22
Doctrine 2 Jn. 9; Heb. 5:9; 1 Tim. 1:3; Gal. 1:6-9; 2 Tim. 3:15-17; Rev. 2:2, 14, 20; 3:8, 10
Financing 1 Cor. 16:1-2; 2 Cor. 9:6-10
Lord's Supper Matt. 26:26-29; Acts 20:27; 1 Cor. 11:23-30
Music Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; 1 Cor. 14:15
Names Identifying Matt. 16:18; Acts 20:28; Rom. 16:16; 1 Cor. 1:2; 3:9; Eph. 2:19; Col. 1:18;
1 Th. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 12:23; 1 Pet. 5:3
Organization Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23; 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Tit. 1:5-9; 1 Tim. 5:17-19; Heb. 13:17;
1 Pet. 5:2
Work Jn. 4:24; 2 Tim. 4:2; Acts 5:42; 9:31; 12:25-13:3; 1 Th. 5:11; Rom. 12:13
Worship Jn. 4:21-24; Heb. 10:24-25; Col. 2:16-23
Divorce Mal. 2:14-16; Matt. 5:31-32; 19:1-12; Mk. 10:1-12; Lk. 16:18; Rom. 7:1-4;
1 Cor. 7:10-16, 40
Drunkenness Pr. 20:1; Rom. 13:13; 1 Cor. 5:11; 6:9-10; 11:21; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:18-21
Faith Rom. 1:5; 5:1; 6:17-18; 10:17; 16:26; 2 Cor. 5:7; Gal. 5:6; Eph. 6:16; Col. 1:23; 2:12-13;
Heb. 11:1, 3, 6; Jude 3
Faith, a Work Jn. 6:28-29; Gal. 5:6
Faith, Demons Ja. 2:19
Faith, Obedience Gal. 5:6; Rom. 1:5; 16:26; Heb. 11:8; Ja. 2:26
Forgiveness Acts 2:38; 13:38; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:13-14; Matt. 6:12; Lk. 17:3; Col. 3:13
Fornication Matt. 15:19-20; 1 Cor. 5:1, 9, 11; 6:18; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 5:3
Grace Tit. 2:11; 2 Tim. 1:9; 2:1, 10; Rom. 3:24; Eph. 2:8-10; Gal. 5:4; Heb. 12:15
Quick-Reference Scripture Guide By: Allan McNabb
BibleGuide.org 3 BibleStudyGuide.org
God:
Godhead Col. 2:9; Jn. 1:1-2; Gen. 1:1, 26
Creator Heb. 1:2-3; 11:3; Col. 1:16-17; Acts 7:50; 14:15; 17:24
Foreknowledge Acts 15:18; Matt. 6:8; 24:36; Eph. 1:1-2:10; 1 Pet. 1:2
Omnipotent Rev. 19:6; Gen. 18:14; Job 42:2; Matt. 19:26; Lk. 1:37; Acts 26:8; Eph. 1:19; 3:20
Omnipresent Ps. 139:7-12; 1 Ki. 8:27; Jer. 23:23-24; Heb. 4:13
Omniscience 1 Sam. 2:3; 1 Ch. 28:9; 2 Ch. 16:9; Heb. 4:12-13
Happiness Ps. 40:8; Pr. 16:20; 29:18; Matt. 5:3-12; Rom. 5:1-5; 8:28-39; Phil. 4:4-13;
1 Th. 5:16-22; 1 Tim. 6:8; Ja. 1:2-8; 5:13
Heaven Matt. 5:12; 6:9; 7:13-14; 18:10; Acts 3:20-21; 1 Pet. 1:4-5; Rev. 2:10; 21:1-22:5, 14
Hell Matt. 10:28; 22:13; Mk. 9:47-48; 2 Th. 1:8-9; 2 Pet. 2:4-9; Rev. 14:10-11; 20:15; 21:8
Homosexuality 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 1 Tim. 1:8-11; Rev. 21:8; Rom. 1:26-32
Holy Spirit Lk. 11:20; Matt. 12:28; 28:19; Jn. 3:34; 14:15-26; 16:12-13; Acts 2:38; 8:14-19;
Heb. 2:4; 1 Pet. 1:12, 22-23; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; 1 Cor. 12:31-13:13
Judgment Matt. 7:13-14, 21-23; Jn. 12:48; 2 Cor. 5:7; Heb. 9:27; 1 Pet. 1:17; Rev. 20:11-15
Jesus Matt. 28:18; Jn. 1:1, 14; 12:48; 14:6; Phil. 2:5-11; Jn. 10:7; 14:6; 16:26; Rom. 3:25; 5:6-15;
Gal. 6:2; Eph. 5:2; Col. 1:16-18; 3:17; Heb. 5:9; 10:1-10; 12:1-2; Rev. 17:14; 19:16
Kingdom Matt. 7:21; 10:14-15; 16:28; 24:34; Lk. 16:16; 17:20-21; 23:1-3; Jn. 18:36-37; Col. 1:13;
Heb. 12:22-28; 1 Pet. 1:22-23; Rev. 17:14
Law of Christ 1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2; Matt. 28:18; Jn. 12:48; Eph. 1:21-23; Col. 1:16-18; 3:17;
Heb. 5:9; 7:12; Ja. 1:25; 2 Jn. 9
Love Matt. 22:34-30; Jn. 3:16; 13:34-35; 14:15; 15:10; Rom. 13:8; 1 Cor. 13:4-8; 16:22; Gal. 5:14;
Eph. 5:2; 1 Jn. 3:14-16; 4:19; 5:3
Lust & Licentiousness Mk. 7:20-23; Rom. 6:12; 2 Cor. 12:20-21; Eph. 4:17-19; 1 Tim. 6:9;
2 Tim. 2:22; Ja. 1:14; 2 Pet. 2:18; 1 Jn. 2:16
Marriage Gen. 2:21-24; Matt. 19:5-6; 1 Cor. 7:1-9; Heb. 13:4; Rom. 7:2
Quick-Reference Scripture Guide By: Allan McNabb
BibleGuide.org 4 BibleStudyGuide.org
Mosaic Law Rom. 3:20; 10:4; 2 Cor. 3:7-11; Gal. 2:16; 3:10, 24-25; 5:2-4; Heb. 7:12; 10:8-10
Obedience Matt. 7:21-23; Rom. 1:5; 2:8; 6:17; 16:26; Gal. 6:2; Eph. 1:22-23; 5:24; 2 Th. 1:8;
Heb. 5:9; 1 Pet. 1:2, 14, 22; 1 Jn. 1:6; 5:3; 2 Jn. 9
Prayer Matt. 6:5-15; Rom. 12:12; 1 Cor. 14:15-16; Phil. 4:6-9; 1 Th. 5:16-18; 1 Pet. 3:7-12; 5:6-7
Restoration, Erring Christian Acts 8:22-24; 1 Jn. 1:9-2:2; Gal. 6:1; Ja. 5:14-20
Satan 1 Pet. 5:8-10; 1 Jn. 3:8, 10; 2 Cor. 11:13-15; Eph. 6:10-18; Ja. 4:7; Rev. 12:11; 20:10
Sin Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 3:9, 23; 6:23; 14:23; Ja. 4:17; 1 Jn. 3:4; 5:17
Salvation 1 Tim. 2:3-4; Matt. 7:13-14, 21-23; Jn. 1:12; 12:48; 14:6; Acts 4:12; 2 Tim. 2:10
Believe Mk. 16:16; Jn. 8:24; Heb. 11:6
Obey Heb. 5:9; Rom. 6:17; 2 Th. 1:8; 1 Pet. 1:2, 14, 22-23
Repent Lk. 13:3, 5; Acts 2:38
Confess Jesus Matt. 10:32-33; Rom .10:10
Baptized Matt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Pet. 3:21
Remain Faithful 1 Cor. 15:1-2; Phil. 2:12; Rev. 2:10
Salvation, Examples Acts 2:38-47; 8:4-13, 26-40; 9:1-20; 10:34-48; 16:13-15, 25-34; 18:8; 19:1-
7; 22:16
Temptation Matt. 6:13; Ja. 1:12-15; 1 Cor. 10:13; 1 Tim. 6:9; Heb. 4:15
Unity Jn. 17:11, 20-21; 1 Cor. 1:10; Eph. 4:3-6; Jude 19; 1 Tim. 6:3-5; Tit. 3:9-11; 2 Th. 3:6, 14

Transcendence (religion)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

In religion, transcendence is a condition or state of being that surpasses physical existence, and in one form is also independent of it. It is affirmed in the concept of the divine in the major religious traditions, and contrasts with the notion of God, or the Absolute, existing exclusively in the physical order (immanentism), or indistinguishable from it (pantheism). Transcendence can be attributed to the divine not only in its being, but also in its knowability. Thus, God transcends the universe, but also transcends knowledge (is beyond the grasp of the human mind). Although transcendence is defined as the opposite of immanence, the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Some theologians and metaphysicians of the great religious traditions affirm that God, or Brahman, is both within and beyond the universe (panentheism); in it, but not of it; simultaneously pervading it and surpassing it.

http://www.trinitysem.edu/TrinityDifference/ISCourses.html#Masters

<html><a href="http://www.truthortradition.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.truthortradition.com/myspace/buttons/gottruth_button.gif" alt="" width="145" height="60" border="0" title="Click here!" /></a></html>

/***
Description: Contains the stuff you need to use Tiddlyspot
Note, you also need UploadPlugin, PasswordOptionPlugin and LoadRemoteFileThroughProxy
from http://tiddlywiki.bidix.info for a complete working Tiddlyspot site.
***/
//{{{

// edit this if you are migrating sites or retrofitting an existing TW
config.tiddlyspotSiteId = 'religiousstudies';

// make it so you can by default see edit controls via http
config.options.chkHttpReadOnly = false;
window.readOnly = false; // make sure of it (for tw 2.2)
window.showBackstage = true; // show backstage too

// disable autosave in d3
if (window.location.protocol != "file:")
	config.options.chkGTDLazyAutoSave = false;

// tweak shadow tiddlers to add upload button, password entry box etc
with (config.shadowTiddlers) {
	SiteUrl = 'http://'+config.tiddlyspotSiteId+'.tiddlyspot.com';
	SideBarOptions = SideBarOptions.replace(/(<<saveChanges>>)/,"$1<<tiddler TspotSidebar>>");
	OptionsPanel = OptionsPanel.replace(/^/,"<<tiddler TspotOptions>>");
	DefaultTiddlers = DefaultTiddlers.replace(/^/,"[[WelcomeToTiddlyspot]] ");
	MainMenu = MainMenu.replace(/^/,"[[WelcomeToTiddlyspot]] ");
}

// create some shadow tiddler content
merge(config.shadowTiddlers,{

'WelcomeToTiddlyspot':[
 "This document is a ~TiddlyWiki from tiddlyspot.com.  A ~TiddlyWiki is an electronic notebook that is great for managing todo lists, personal information, and all sorts of things.",
 "",
 "@@font-weight:bold;font-size:1.3em;color:#444; //What now?// &nbsp;&nbsp;@@ Before you can save any changes, you need to enter your password in the form below.  Then configure privacy and other site settings at your [[control panel|http://" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ".tiddlyspot.com/controlpanel]] (your control panel username is //" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + "//).",
 "<<tiddler TspotControls>>",
 "See also GettingStarted.",
 "",
 "@@font-weight:bold;font-size:1.3em;color:#444; //Working online// &nbsp;&nbsp;@@ You can edit this ~TiddlyWiki right now, and save your changes using the \"save to web\" button in the column on the right.",
 "",
 "@@font-weight:bold;font-size:1.3em;color:#444; //Working offline// &nbsp;&nbsp;@@ A fully functioning copy of this ~TiddlyWiki can be saved onto your hard drive or USB stick.  You can make changes and save them locally without being connected to the Internet.  When you're ready to sync up again, just click \"upload\" and your ~TiddlyWiki will be saved back to tiddlyspot.com.",
 "",
 "@@font-weight:bold;font-size:1.3em;color:#444; //Help!// &nbsp;&nbsp;@@ Find out more about ~TiddlyWiki at [[TiddlyWiki.com|http://tiddlywiki.com]].  Also visit [[TiddlyWiki.org|http://tiddlywiki.org]] for documentation on learning and using ~TiddlyWiki. New users are especially welcome on the [[TiddlyWiki mailing list|http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki]], which is an excellent place to ask questions and get help.  If you have a tiddlyspot related problem email [[tiddlyspot support|mailto:support@tiddlyspot.com]].",
 "",
 "@@font-weight:bold;font-size:1.3em;color:#444; //Enjoy :)// &nbsp;&nbsp;@@ We hope you like using your tiddlyspot.com site.  Please email [[feedback@tiddlyspot.com|mailto:feedback@tiddlyspot.com]] with any comments or suggestions."
].join("\n"),

'TspotControls':[
 "| tiddlyspot password:|<<option pasUploadPassword>>|",
 "| site management:|<<upload http://" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ".tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi index.html . .  " + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ">>//(requires tiddlyspot password)//<br>[[control panel|http://" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ".tiddlyspot.com/controlpanel]], [[download (go offline)|http://" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ".tiddlyspot.com/download]]|",
 "| links:|[[tiddlyspot.com|http://tiddlyspot.com/]], [[FAQs|http://faq.tiddlyspot.com/]], [[blog|http://tiddlyspot.blogspot.com/]], email [[support|mailto:support@tiddlyspot.com]] & [[feedback|mailto:feedback@tiddlyspot.com]], [[donate|http://tiddlyspot.com/?page=donate]]|"
].join("\n"),

'TspotSidebar':[
 "<<upload http://" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ".tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi index.html . .  " + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ">><html><a href='http://" + config.tiddlyspotSiteId + ".tiddlyspot.com/download' class='button'>download</a></html>"
].join("\n"),

'TspotOptions':[
 "tiddlyspot password:",
 "<<option pasUploadPassword>>",
 ""
].join("\n")

});
//}}}

http://www.eazypaper.com/index.cfm?engine=google&gclid=CM7U-4XkpKkCFcW8KgodIhWnwQ

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/turabian/turabian_citationguide.html

http://writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/tura.html

[[Style Checker|http://www.eturabian.com/turabian/index.html]]

Scapular

History of the Scapular

Most often when we hear the word scapular, we think of a scapular in its most recognizable form, a small necklace of sorts constructed from two wool patches of cloth. Scapulars, however, originated from the habit of monastic orders and started off as a work apron. From this “apron” developed a special monastic garment to be worn by specific religious orders. The scapular, in its original form, was often referred to as jugum Christi, or the yoke of Christ, and was even worn at bedtime. A scapular worn in this way is a large piece of cloth that covers the individual from shoulder to shoulder and hangs down as far as the ankles, with an opening in the center for the head.

During the early Middle Ages, the laity began to associate themselves with various monastic orders and formed Confraternities, secular oblates that would receive the scapular to wear upon death, as a sign of great honor. Eventually, this tradition transformed into the small sacramental scapulars of today that are worn daily under or over regular clothing as an open sign of devotion. The four oldest scapulars originated from four confraternities, the Carmelites, Servites, Trinitarians and Mercederiansy. Today there are many more scapulars, not all of them associated with a particular confraternity.

Rules for wearing a Scapular

A small scapular must consist of two wool squares of cloth, connected by two strings (of any material), so that one segment rests on your chest and the other on your back. If you would like, you can wear more than one scapular at a time, so long as each scapular is complete. Once you have your scapular it is important to have it blessed by a priest and if necessary to become invested with the confraternity associated with it (A further blessing that can be granted by an authorized priest). Once you have your scapular blessed it must be worn at all times in order to share in the indulgences and privileges of the particular scapular. Should you remove the scapular for any period of time you are no longer eligible for its associated blessings, however, as soon as you resume wearing the scapular you are reinvested in its indulgences. Should your scapular wear out, you may replace it with an unblessed scapular, as the indulgences are invested in the devotion of the wearer, not the object.

Types of Scapulars

Scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity (White Scapular)
Scapular of Our Lady of Ransom (Ransom)
Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel (Brown Scapular)
Scapular of the Seven Dolors of Mary (Black Scapular)
Scapular of the Immaculate Conception (Blue Scapular)
Scapular of the Most Precious Blood
Scapular of the Passion (Black Scapular)
Scapular of the Passion (Red Scapular)
Scapular of the Blessed Virgin Mary “Help of the Sick”
Scapular of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
Scapular of St. Michael the Archangel
Scapular of Conversion (Green Scapular)
Scapular of St. Benedict
Scapular of the Mother of Good Counsel
Scapular of St. Joseph
Scapular of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus
Scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary
Scapular of St. Dominic
Scapular of the Holy Face
Five-Fold Scapular
Scapular Medals

Scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity (White Scapular)

The scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity, commonly referred to as the white scapular, is associated with the Trinitarian order. The design of the white scapular dates back to January 28, 1198 when an angel appeared to the Spanish priest, John of Matha. The angel was wearing a white robe with a blue and red beam across his chest in the form of a cross, the vertical beam being red and the crossbeam blue. The scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity was first used to petition the ransom of captives, Christians taken prison by Muslims. In order to become invested in the Confraternity of the Blessed Trinity you must constantly wear this scapular and have it blessed by a priest as granted by the General of the Trinitarians.

Scapular of Our Lady of Ransom (Ransom)

The scapular of Our Lady of Ransom is made of white wool and bears the image of Our Lady of Ransom on the front segment of the scapular, the back segment being plain white. The scapular of Our Lady of Ransom was founded by the Fathers of the Order of Our lady of Mercy for the Ransom of Prisoners in 1256. Those invested in this confraternity may gain its indulgences by having the scapular blessed by an approved priest according to the General of the Mercedarians.

Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel (Brown Scapular)

The brown scapular is most likely the oldest of all the scapulars and has served as a model for all others. It was on July 15, 1251 that the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to St. Simon Stock in Cambridge, England, in response to his prayers for his oppressed order, the Carmelites. The Blessed Mother appeared to him with a scapular in her hand and said, “Take, beloved son this scapular of thy order as a badge of my confraternity and for thee and all Carmelites a special sign of grace; whoever dies in this garment, will not suffer everlasting fire. It is the sign of salvation, a safeguard in dangers, a pledge of peace and of the covenant.” Mary also promised to grant special aid, especially at the hour of death, to all those who wore the scapular with fidelity and honor throughout life. Also associated with the brown scapular is the Sabbatine privilege. This states that Mary will intercede and pray for those in Purgatory who in earthly life wear the brown scapular in good faith, are chaste according to their position in life, depart earthly life in charity and daily recite the Divine Office or the Little Office (with permission of your confessor, as it is a shorter version of the Divine Office) or pray the rosary. The general appearance of the scapular of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel consists of two brown pieces of wool, black is also acceptable, along with the image of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Those who wish to become invested in the Confraternity of Mount Carmel need only have their scapular blessed by a priest.

Scapular of the Seven Dolors of Mary (Black Scapular)

The scapular of the Seven Dolors of Mary is associated with the Servite Order, sanctioned in 1255 by Alexander IV. The Servite Order began when Our Lady appeared to seven prominent citizens of Florence, who in honor of His Mother in her sorrows, decided to give up all their possessions and follow Christ. The scapular of the Confraternity of the Seven Dolors of Mary is made of black wool and usually bears the image of the Mother of Sorrows on the front badge. Priests, with the permission of the General of the Servites, may bless and invest the faithful into the confraternity.

Scapular of the Immaculate Conception (Blue Scapular)

In her autobiography, the Venerable Ursula Benicasa, foundress of the Order of Theatine Nuns, describes how the blue scapular was revealed to her, by Christ, in a vision as a means to honor the Immaculate Conception. She asked the Lord to extend the great favors he promised to her Order to the faithful who wear the blue scapular to secure the conversion of sinners. The scapular of the Immaculate Conception must be made of blue woolen cloth and usually bears a symbol of the Immaculate Conception on one piece and the name of Mary on the other. According to the General of the Theatines a priest may admit the faithful to the confraternity and bless the scapular, but must also forward the names of those admitted to Rome or another canonically approved confraternity of the same kind.

Scapular of the Most Precious Blood

Unlike most of the other scapulars, the scapular of the Most Precious Blood does not carry any indulgences with it. The scapular of the Most Precious Blood is made of red cloth and carries the representation of the chalice with the Precious Blood adored by angels on one piece while the back portion is a solid piece of red cloth. The faithful who wish to join the Confraternity of the Precious Blood need only have their scapular blessed by a priest to become invested.

Scapular of the Passion (Black Scapular)

The scapular of the Passion, also referred to as the black scapular, was revealed to St. Paul of the Cross in an apparition before he founded the Congregation of the Passionists. This black habit with a badge upon the breast became the official habit of the order. The black scapular of the Passion bears an exact replica of the emblem of the Passion, a heart above a cross, with the words “Jesu XPI Passio” and below “sit simper in cordibus nostris.” The other half of the scapular is simply a black piece of cloth. According to the Superior General of the Passionists a priest may bless and invest with the scapular.

Scapular of the Passion (Red Scapular)

The red scapular of the Passion owes its origins to an apparition in 1846 to a Sister of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul. Jesus revealed to her a scapular and promised to all who wear it that on every Friday he would grant a great increase of faith, hope and charity. The red scapular of the Passion must be made of red woolen cloth and bands. On one segment of wool is Jesus on the Cross, below which are the implements of the Passion and the words, “Holy Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ Save us.” The second piece of cloth bears the image of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, above which is written, “Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, protect us.” The Superior General of the Lazarists has permitted other priests to bless and invest the faithful with the red scapular.

Scapular of the Blessed Virgin Mary “Help of the Sick”

The scapular of the Blessed Virgin Mary “Help of the Sick” was inspired by a painting in the Church of St. Magdalen in Rome. It was this painting of Mary, under the title Help of the Sick by a Dominican painter, that inspired Ferdinand Vicari, a brother of the Order of St. Camillus, to found the confraternity of the Mother of God for the sick in 1860. Members of the confraternity wear a black woolen scapular, which bears a copy of the same painting, and the images of St. Joseph and St. Camillus. The back segment of the scapular is adorned with a little red cloth cross, as a sign of blessing for the sick.

Scapular of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

The scapular of the Immaculate Heart of Mary originated from the Sons of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1877. The scapular consists of white wool, on which is fixed the burning heart of Mary with a lily growing from it, surrounded by a wreath of roses and pierced with a sword. The Superior General of the Congregation of Rites can grant other priests to bestow the blessing and investing of this scapular.

Scapular of St. Michael the Archangel

The scapular of St. Michael the Archangel was established in 1878, when the Church of St. Eustachius in Rome founded a confraternity in his honor. The scapular of St. Michael the Archangel is unique in form, as it is shaped like a shield, one black and one blue. Like the segments of wool, one band or string tying the two pieces together is black and the other is blue. On each shield is the image of St. Michael slaying the dragon along with the words, “Quis ut Deus.” According to the Congregation of Rites the scapular of St. Michael the Archangel may be blessed by any priest.

Scapular of Conversion (Green Scapular)

The green scapular, or the scapular of Conversion, was created in 1840 when Mary appeared to Sister Justine Bisqueyburu of the Daughters of Charity in Paris. The green scapular has become known as the scapular of conversion and carries promises of strengthening faith, protection against Satan, a happy death for Catholics and especially for the conversion of those outside of the church. The green scapular can be worn or carried by the faithful or given to an unbeliever in hopes of their conversion. Those who wear the scapular of Conversion are to say the following prayer daily, “Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.” If you decide to give the green scapular to an unbeliever you may pray the prayer on their behalf and hide the scapular somewhere near them if they do not wish to accept it. There is no need to enroll in any confraternity to wear the green scapular, however it should be blessed by a priest.

Scapular of St. Benedict

The scapular of St. Benedict is for the benefit of those wishing to associate themselves with the Oblates of St. Benedict. The scapular of St. Benedict is of black wool, with one segment usually bearing the image of St. Benedict. Wearers of the scapular of St. Benedict should have the scapular blessed in order to become invested in the confraternity.

Scapular of the Mother of Good Counsel

The scapular of the Mother of Good Counsel draws its name from a miraculous painting in the Augustinian church of Genazzano, Italy. In 1467, on the feast of St. Mark, the people of the town witnessed a mysterious cloud of smoke that covered an unfinished wall of the parish church. When the cloud dissipated a stunning fresco of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Christ Child was revealed. It is said that the fresco was transported from a church in Albania and that many miracles have taken place in front of it. Due to the petitions of the Augustinian monks the scapular of the Mother of Good Counsel was created in 1893. The scapular is formed from two pieces of white wool attached by two white strings. The front segment consists of the image of the Mother of Good Counsel with the inscription, “Mother of Good Counsel.” The back segment is adorned with the papal arms and the inscription, “Son, follow her counsel. Leo III.” Generally an Augustinian priest blesses the scapular, however, it is permitted for other priests to bestow the blessing as well.

Scapular of St. Joseph

The scapular of St. Joseph belongs to the Capuchin Order and was approved by the Diocese of Verona by Decree of the Congregation of Rites in 1880. The scapular of St. Joseph serves as a reminder of the virtues of St. Joseph (humility, modesty, and purity), as well as to pray to St. Joseph, ask him for his prayers for the Church and to assist the dying. The scapular of St. Joseph is created from two violet colored wool pieces, on which are sewn two pieces of gold fabric of the same size, connected with white strings. On the front segment of gold cloth is the image of St. Joseph holding the child Jesus in his right arm with a stem of lilies in his left. Below this image is the inscription, “St. Joseph, patron of the Church, pray for us.” The other gold piece of fabric is decorated with the papal crown, above the crown is the dove, to represent the Holy Spirit, and below a cross with the keys of Peter and the inscription, “The Spirit of the Lord is his Guide.” As with all other scapulars it is recommended to have the scapular of St. Joseph blessed by a priest.

Scapular of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus

The scapular of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus originated from a version created by Blessed Margaret Mary Alacoque, who made and distributed the scapulars herself. The scapular of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus was widely used during the plague at Marseilles as a form of protection, and also during the horrors of the French Revolution as a safeguard for the faithful. This first version of the scapular however, was called a scapular but did not carry any of the conditions of a scapular. It was not until 1900 that the official scapular of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus came to be and was designed from two segments of white woolen cloth connected by two strings. The first segment displayed the image of the Sacred Heart, while the other of the Blessed Virgin under the title, Mother of Mercy. The scapular of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus should be blessed by a priest in order for the wearer to become fully invested.

Scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary

The scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary is very similar to the red scapular of the Passion. Its origin is credited to the Congregation of the Daughters of the Sacred Heart and was granted indulgences in 1901. The scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary is made of two pieces of white wool, one with the image of the Heart of Jesus and the Heart of Mary pierced with a sword, below which are the implements of the Passion. The second piece of the scapular carries a small cross of red material. As with most scapulars, a priest should bless the scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary.

Scapular of St. Dominic

The scapular of St. Dominic was endowed in 1903 by Pope Pius X. Those who wear the scapular of St. Dominic are granted an indulgence of 300 days so long as you kiss the scapular as often as you wear it. The scapular of St. Dominic must be made of white wool, with strings of any color, and normally bears the picture of St. Dominic kneeling before the crucifix on one piece of cloth and the image of B. Reginald receiving the habit from the hands of the Mother of God on the other. The General of the Dominicans has permitted other priests to bless and invest the faithful with the scapular.

Scapular of the Holy Face

The scapular of the Holy Face does not carry any special indulgences, but is the devout practice of the Archconfraternity of the Holy Face. The scapular of the Holy Face is made of white cloth and bears the image of the Holy Face that is so commonly associated with St. Veronica.

Five-Fold Scapular

The Five-Fold scapular consists of the five most popular scapulars, The Red Scapular of the Passion, The Scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity, The Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, the Black Scapular of the Seven Dolors of Mary, and the Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception. When all five scapulars are joined together they must all be strung on bands of red wool, as is mandatory for the Red Scapular of the Passion. When wearing your Five-Fold scapular the Red Scapular of the Passion should be foremost so that the image of Jesus on the Cross is visible. The fifth scapular should be that of the Most Blessed Trinity with the image of the red and blue cross exposed. Any priest may bless and invest you with the Five-Fold scapular.

Scapular Medals

According to the Holy Office, as of December 16, 1910 a scapular medal is an acceptable substitution for a more traditional cloth scapular and can replace more than one scapular at a time. A scapular medal must consist of the image of the Sacred Heart of Jesus on one side and a representation of the Mother of God on the other. As with all scapulars, a scapular medal must be worn at all times in order to receive the indulgences associated with it. For each small scapular a scapular medal is to replace an authorized priest must perform the appropriate blessing in order to become fully invested.

Sources:

Catholic Encyclopedia. “Scapular” [Online] 11 June 2008. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13508b.htm>.

Fish Eaters. “Scapulars” [Online] 11 june 2008. < http://www.fisheaters.com/scapulars.html>.

http://www.uuism.net/uuwiki/index.php?title=List_of_UU_podcasts

Words for Worship: Meditations and Prayers

* All Meditations and Prayers
o Blessings
o Meditation Manuals
o Meditations
o Prayers
* Search Words for Worship

How To Write Your Own Meditations

Erik Walker Wikstrom

There are, essentially, three ways to offer meditations in a worship setting. The first is to say something while people listen quietly and reflect. It should be filled with sensual images, concrete things people can experience with their senses—sights, sounds, tastes, smells, feelings. The purpose is to invite people to have an experience; to stop thinking and spend some time “out” of their heads.

The second type of meditation in a worship setting is a guided meditation. This involves leading the congregation on a “journey” in their imaginations by narrating where they go and what they do. You invite them to imagine themselves on a beach, for instance, and give them time to experience the sights and sounds of it. Then from the beach they go into the water, and then under the water, at each step pausing to allow people time to experience this new phase of the journey. This kind of meditation has a lot more silence in it, which can be daunting for some people, yet still has direction.

The third kind of meditation is a silent meditation. To do this you offer a few words of invitation and then ask people to sit in silence for a set period of time. You might initiate the silence by ringing a bell or chime. Most people in our culture are not used to silence, so beginning with a minute or two will be hard for some. Despite the difficulty of such silence, we also deeply crave it. Some congregations have found that silent meditations have become beloved moments in their regular services.
How To Write Your Own Prayers

Erik Walker Wikstrom

Few words in the liturgical lexicon are more problematic for Unitarian Universalists than “prayer.” Some suffer near spiritual anaphylactic shock at its mere mention; others find it the right and perfect word to describe their practice. When creating prayers, it’s important to remember that UUs have no doctrinally imposed prayer forms. How, or if, they address anyone or anything, the tone, and how they end all come from the understanding of the person leading the prayer. In a communal setting, such as a worship service, it is assumed that sensitivity to the range of understandings and the traditions and practices of the community will be observed.
How To Write Your Own Blessings

Erik Walker Wikstrom

There are not many occasions in a typical Unitarian Universalist worship that calls for a blessing, and that is perhaps too bad. The simplest definition of a “blessing” is that it is a religious sign of approval. We could do with more of that in this world—both recognizing more things as being blessed, and recognizing ourselves as capable of blessing. A blessing, then, lifts up, honors, someone or something and calls it “good.”

For more information contact worshipweb @ uua.org.

The work of the UUA is made possible by the generosity of individual donors and gifts to the Annual Program Fund. Please consider making a donation today to continue this important work.

Last updated on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

http://www.sksm.edu/research/papers/changingwords.pdf

Unitarian Universalism

Unitarian Universalism (UU for short) is a liberal, "non-creedal" religious movement that welcomes pluralism and diversity in its members' beliefs and practices.

The Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) was formed in 1961 by the merger of the Unitarian and Universalist denominations.

Although historically rooted in Protestant Christianity, Unitarian Universalists do not regard their faith as a Christian denomination. 1
Fast Facts

* Date founded: 1961
* Place founded: Boston, Massachusetts
* Founder: None. The movement was founded by the merger of two liberal Protestant denominations.
* Adherents: 800,000 worldwide, most in the USA 2

"Unitarian Universalism" refers to the movement/religion that a Unitarian Universalist identfies with. Some Unitarian Universalists refer to themselves simply as "Unitarians" for short.

"UUism" and "UUs" are very common abbreviations for the religion with such a long name.

The "Unitarian Universalist Association" is an American association of Unitarian Universalist congregations. It is the largest organization of Unitarian Universalists worldwide. It was formed in 1961 and is has its headquarters in Boston, Massachusetts.

"Unitarian" and "Universalist" are the names of the two liberal Protestant denominations that combined to form the UUA in 1961. These terms are now more historical than descriptive since they are meaningful primarily in a Christian theological context. Many UUs are not Christians or are Christians but may not ascribe to unitarianism or universalism.

"Unitarianism" indicates the rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity. The name refers to the unity, i.e. oneness of God. "Universalism" is the belief that God will save everyone and no one will suffer eternal punishment.
History

The doctrine of universalism has appeared occasionally in Christian theology since the early church. Origen of Alexandria (c.185-c.254) and Gregory of Nyssa (c.335 – after 394) are among its more famous exponents, although both spoke more in terms of hope and possibility than assured doctrine. In 1793, Universalism became a separate Christian denomination in the United States, which was eventually called the Universalist Church of America (UCA).

The doctrine of unitarianism (i.e. rejection of the Trinity) has also appeared occasionally in history, but it has been formally considered heresy since the Council of Nicea in 325. Unitarian churches were formed in the 16th century in Romania and Poland, and in 1553 Michael Servetus was famously burned at the stake for his unitarian views by John Calvin. In the United States, a Unitarian movement arose among Congregational churches in New England in the late 1700s, causing a major dispute with in the denomination. The American Unitarian Association (AUA) was founded as a separate denomination in 1825.

Over the years, both the UCA and AUA evolved into liberal, inclusive religions that shared much in common. In 1961, the American Unitarian Association was consolidated with the Universalist Church of America, forming the Unitarian Universalist Association.

Unitarian Universalists have historically been closely involved with civil rights and social justice movements. John Haynes Holmes, a UU minister, was among the founders of both the NAACP and the ACLU, chairing the latter for a time. Approximately 20% of Unitarian Universalist ministers marched with Martin Luther King, Jr., from Selma, Alabama, to Montgomery. UU ministers have been performing same-sex unions since at least the late 1960s. 3

In 1995 the UUA helped establish the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists (ICUU).
Texts

Unitarian Universalism does not hold one particular religious text to be the most sacred or authoritative. Members use sacred texts from a variety of traditions or none at all, but the Bible is the most commonly used sacred text.

The Unitarian Universalist Association website says the following about sacred texts:

In most of our congregations, our children learn Bible stories as a part of their church school curricula. It is not unusual to find adult study groups in the churches, or in workshops at summer camps and conferences, focusing on the Bible. Allusions to biblical symbols and events are frequent in our sermons. In most of our congregations, the Bible is read as any other sacred text might be-from time to time, but not routinely.

We have especially cherished the prophetic books of the Bible. Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and other prophets dared to speak critical words of love to the powerful, calling for justice for the oppressed...

We do not, however, hold the Bible-or any other account of human experience-to be either an infallible guide or the exclusive source of truth. Much biblical material is mythical or legendary. Not that it should be discarded for that reason! Rather, it should be treasured for what it is. We believe that we should read the Bible as we read other books (or the newspaper)-with imagination and a critical eye.

We also respect the sacred literature of other religions. Contemporary works of science, art, and social commentary are valued as well. We hold, in the words of an old liberal formulation, that "revelation is not sealed." Unitarian Universalists aspire to truth as wide as the world-we look to find truth anywhere, universally. 4

Beliefs

Unitarian Universalism has no set beliefs, and that is its defining characteristic. According to a UUA pamphlet:

With its historical roots in the Jewish and Christian traditions, Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion -- that is, a religion that keeps an open mind to the religious questions people have struggled with in all times and places.

We believe that personal experience, conscience and reason should be the final authorities in religion, and that in the end religious authority lies not in a book or person or institution, but in ourselves. We are a "non-creedal" religion: we do not ask anyone to subscribe to a creed. 5

Unitarian Universalists may therefore identify with Christianity, Buddhism, humanism, atheism, or any tradition that is meaningful to them. Unitarian Universalists commonly draw their beliefs from more than one religious or philosophical tradition.

Several recent surveys of Unitarian Universalists have illustrated the diversity among members as well as some general trends. In 1997, the UUA conducted a nationwide survey of 8,100 of its members. One question asked members to choose only one label that best described their beliefs; the answers were as follows:

* humanist (46%)
* earth/nature centered (19%)
* theist (13%)
* other (13%)
* Christian (9.5%)
* mystic, Buddhist, Jewish, Hindu and Muslim in ever-smaller percentages 6

In 2001, a regional survey of UU members in the Midwest was conducted by Ohio University. This survey allowed respondents to choose more than one label for themselves. The researcher noted that "the typical respondent felt the need to circle three or four terms to describe his or her theological views." The results of this survey were:

* humanist (54%)
* agnostic (33%)
* earth-centered (31%)
* atheist (18%)
* Buddhist (16.5%)
* pagan (13.1%)
* Christian (13.1%) 7

This great diversity within one congregation is perhaps eased by the fact that Unitarian Universalism tends to emphasize the importance of action over belief:

Whatever our theological persuasion, Unitarian Universalists generally agree that the fruits of religious belief matter more than beliefs about religion-even about God. So we usually speak more of the fruits: gratitude for blessings, worthy aspirations, the renewal of hope, and service on behalf of justice. 8

Although Unitarian Universalism has no formal creed or standards of belief, the Unitarian Universalist Association has adopted a set of "Principles, Purposes and Sources" that express values shared by most Unitarian Universalists.

These were originally adopted in 1984 and have been amended once: to add a seventh "principle" relating to environmentalism and a sixth "source" including earth-based traditions. The current statement reads as follows:

"We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote [the following principles]:

1. The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
2. Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
3. Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
4. A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
5. The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
6. The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
7. Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

The living tradition which we share draws from many sources:

1. Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
2. Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
3. Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
4. Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
5. Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit.
6. Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature. 9

The Seven Principles are especially central to Unitarian Universalist self-understanding and are frequently mentioned.
Practices

Unitarian Universalist practices are a combination of Protestant Christian forms and content from a variety of religious traditions.

Religious services are usually held on Sundays and generally resemble Protestant services in outward forms. The service usually includes a sermon (by either a minister or lay leader), singing of hymns, a time of sharing "joys and concerns," and prayer/meditation/silence. UU publishes its own hymnals and songbooks; most songs are original compositions, while others are derived from Christian, Native American, Buddhist or other traditions.

Life events such as child dedication, coming of age, marriage and death are marked with special ceremonies which vary in their content. Baptism is not generally practiced. Coming of age ceremonies often involve the young person developing his or own belief statement.

Holidays from various religions may be celebrated at a Unitarian Universalist church:

Though practices vary in our congregations and change over time, UUs celebrate many of the great religious holidays with enthusiasm. Whether we gather to celebrate Christmas, Passover, or the Hindu holiday Divali, we do so in a universal context, recognizing and honoring religious observances and festivals as innate and needful in all human cultures. 10

Communion (or Eucharist) is also not often found in Unitarian Universalist congregations. Replacing the traditional Christian communion of bread and wine are two original Unitarian Universalist rituals: Flower Communion and Water Communion, each of which is celebrated annually.

Flower Communion is usually held in the spring. Each member of the congregation is asked to bring a fresh flower to the service, which they place it in a large vase upon arriving. The flowers are consecrated by the minister during the service. Upon leaving the church, each person takes a flower other than the one they had brought.

Flower Communion was created by Norbert Capek (1870-1942), who founded the Unitarian Church in Czechoslovakia, and was first celebrated in 1923. The symbolic meaning of the ritual is generally understood as follows (though individuals are, of course, free to find their own meaning in it):

The significance of the flower communion is that as no two flowers are alike, so no two people are alike, yet each has a contribution to make. Together the different flowers form a beautiful bouquet. Our common bouquet would not be the same without the unique addition of each individual flower, and thus it is with our church community, it would not be the same without each and every one of us. Thus this service is a statement of our community.

By exchanging flowers, we show our willingness to walk together in our Search for truth, disregarding all that might divide us. Each person takes home a flower brought by someone else - thus symbolizing our shared celebration in community. This communion of sharing is essential to a free people of a free religion. 11

Water Communion is not as central as Flower Communion, but still common; it was first celebrated in 1980. It is held in the fall and marks the reunion of a congregation that is often scattered over the summer. Throughout the year, members of the congregation collect small amounts of water from various places they have been, including their homes and far-off travel destinations. During the service, there is a time of sharing in which each person adds their small bit of water to a bowl and briefly describes where the water came from.

The resulting bowl of water represents the comingled lives of the congregation, and a small part of it is reserved for ceremonial purposes throughout the year. Another part is saved for next year's Water Communion, symbolizing the connection of lives over the years. 12
References & Sources

1. "Frequently Asked Questions: Are you Christian?" - Unitarian Universalist Association
2. "Major Religions Ranked by Size" - Adherents.com
3. "Unitarian Universalism: Politics" - Wikipedia (accessed August 2006)
4. "Frequently Asked Questions: Bible?" - Unitarian Universalist Association
5. "About Unitarian Universalism" - Unitarian Universalism Association
6. "Surveys: 'UUism' unique" - Christian Century, December 5, 2001
7. Ibid.
8. "Frequently Asked Questions: God" - Unitarian Universalist Association
9. "Unitarian Universalist Association Principles and Purposes" - Unitarian Universalist Assocation
10. "Frequently Asked Questions: Ceremonies" - Unitarian Universalist Association
11. "About UU: Flower Communion" - Unitarian Universalist Assocation
12. "Traditions" - First Parish Church, Plymouth, MA

Links

* Faiths: Unitarian Universalist - Beliefnet
* Learn about Unitarian Universalism - Beliefnet forum in which you can ask questions of Unitarian Universalists
* The Largest Unitarian Universalist Communities - statistics from Adherents.com
* Famous Unitarian Universalists - FamousUUs.com

Books

* Ann Lee Bressler, The Universalist Movement in America, 1770-1880.
* John A. Buehrens, A Chosen Faith: An Introduction to Unitarian Universalism.
* David E. Bumbaugh, Unitarian Universalism: A Narrative History.
* Gwen Foss, The Church Where People Laugh: A Treasury of Jokes, Quotations, Observations, and True Stories About Unitarians, Universalists, and Unitarian Universalists (UUs).
* Dr. Alan W. Gomes, Unitarian Universalism.
* Richard Grigg, To Re-Enchant the World: Philosophy of Unitarian Universalism.
* Kathleen Montgomery, Day of Promise: Selections from Unitarian Universalist Meditation Manuals.
* Paul Rasor, Faith Without Certainty: Liberal Theology In The 21st Century.
* David Robinson, The Unitarians and the Universalists
* John Sias, 100 Questions that Non-members Ask About Unitarian Universalism (Nashua, New Hampshire: Transition Publishing, 1994).
* Robert B. Tapp, Religion Among the Unitarian Universalists: Converts in the Stepfather's House (New York and London: Seminar Press, 1973).

Unitarian Universalism

Unitarian Universalism, UUism, Unitarians, UUA, Unitarian Universalists, beliefs, practices, history, stats, basica, introduction, Unitarian Universalism, UU
Sponsored Links

unc·tion  (ngkshn)
n.
1. The act of anointing as part of a religious, ceremonial, or healing ritual.
2. An ointment or oil; a salve.
3. Something that serves to soothe; a balm.
4. Affected or exaggerated earnestness, especially in choice and use of language.

http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/versions.html



Site Map
Home

Articles
  The Sacred:
    Supernatural & Innate
  [[The Sacred in English Religion|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/sacengrel.html]]
  [[Stanley Spencer,Artist of the Sacred|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/spencer.html]]
  [[Protestant Minimalism|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/defreligion01.html]]
  [[Neurotheology|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/neurotheology01.html]]
  [[Defining Religion|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/defreligion02.html]]
  [[Sacred Time|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/time01.html]]
  [[Human Time Today|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/time02.html]]
  Reinventing Catholicism

William James
  [[VRE Summaries|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/james00.html]]
  [[VRE Issues|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/james/vreproblems.html]]

Emile Durkheim
  [[On the Sacred|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/durkheim1.html]]
  Comments
  Metaphysics

Rudolf Otto
  [[The Idea of the Holy|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/otto1.html]]
    Summary
    Comments

Mircea Eliade
  [[Sacred & Profane|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/eliadesp01.html]]
    Summary
    Comments

Mary Douglas
  [[Purity and Danger|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/douglas00.html]]
    Summaries & Notes

Spinoffs
  [[The Rudolf Otto Virus|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/virus.html]]
  [[Writings on the Sacred|http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/books.html]]
Richard Dawkins
  [[Protestant Atheism|http://www.bytrentplus.co.uk/dawkins00.html]]

[[Ritual and Performance|http://www.bytrentplus.co.uk/ritual00.html]]

http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/index.html

http://www.uua.org/spirituallife/ministersstudy/index.shtml

Lay Ministry Training Curriculum

Lay leaders perform important ministerial functions in both small and large Unitarian Universalist congregations. Small congregations often do not have the financial base to support a professional minister. Yet to attract and keep new people, small congregations must find a way to meet members’ ministerial needs. Hence, lay members of small congregations may be called upon to lead worship services, provide pastoral care in times of illness or crisis, and to officiate at dedications, weddings, and funerals.

Size may also be the impetus for the development of lay ministry within large congregations. With increasing membership it becomes difficult for the professional minister to know personally and intimately more than a fraction of the congregation. Hence, even in congregations served by several professional ministers, size may require that lay leaders assume some aspects of the ministry.

In all size congregations, lay ministry is a way of actively combating the complacency that leads people to attend church as a spectator rather than as an involved and passionate contributor. Lay ministry has the potential to directly involve each member in vital aspects of church life from simply making caring phone calls to the sick to organizing and leading Sunday services. All congregations can benefit from regarding every member as a minister. Throughout our religious movement, lay leaders are rising to the call of ministry, creating a considerable demand for training materials appropriate to the needs of the laity. The UUCA Lay Ministry Training Curriculum (Stringer, Hulse and Burgess-Yakemovic, 2001) is intended to be a foundation for training laity in ministerial skills.

The complete Lay Ministry Curriculum includes an Instructor Guide (35 pages) and Candidates Handbook (179 pages). The curriculum is divided into nine modules, each of which is summarized below.

* Module 1: Answering the Call. The call to lay ministry should not be answered by everyone. Issues pertaining to the selection (or self-selection) of lay ministers are covered.
* Module 2: Mission and Ministry. Module 2 guides lay ministry candidates in developing a sense of mission and ministry based on an assessment of the needs of the professional ministers, the congregation, and the candidates themselves.
* Module 3: Community Building. Skills for building community within the lay ministry program and the congregation as a whole are taught.
* Module 4: Unitarian Universalist History. A brief overview of UU history is presented. Candidates search for recurring themes in our history in order to understand the development of our faith. Candidates also deepen their understanding of UU history through outside reading and study projects.
* Module 5: Unitarian Universalist Spirituality and Belief. The UU Principles, Purposes, and Sources of Inspiration become the foundation for candidates’ attempts to deepen their spirituality and clarify their beliefs.
* Module 6: Worship. Candidates are introduced to the elements of worship and the art of composing and preaching sermons.
* Module 7: Special Services. Material is included to instruct candidates in performing a variety of worship services including weddings, memorials, and child dedications. Special holiday services are also discussed.
* Module 8: Pastoral Care. Candidates are introduced to pastoral care theory and technique. Professional limitations, boundaries, and supervisory requirements are also discussed.
* Module 9: Conflict Resolution. The principles and techniques of conflict resolution are covered.

The UUCA Lay Ministry Training Curriculum (Instructor Guide and Candidate Handbook) is available for purchase from the UUCA Office at 404-634-5134.

http://www.universalclass.com/i/subjects/religious-studies/religion.htm

| !date | !user | !location | !storeUrl | !uploadDir | !toFilename | !backupdir | !origin |
| 11/06/2011 11:47:41 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 11/06/2011 11:49:47 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 11/06/2011 11:57:26 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 11/06/2011 12:01:17 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 11/06/2011 12:02:22 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . |
| 13/06/2011 17:09:36 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 13/06/2011 17:13:03 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . |
| 14/06/2011 12:40:32 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 14/06/2011 16:01:28 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . | ok |
| 14/06/2011 16:14:47 | bc | [[index.html|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | [[store.cgi|http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/store.cgi]] | . | [[index.html | http://religiousstudies.tiddlyspot.com/index.html]] | . |

/***
|''Name:''|UploadPlugin|
|''Description:''|Save to web a TiddlyWiki|
|''Version:''|4.1.3|
|''Date:''|Feb 24, 2008|
|''Source:''|http://tiddlywiki.bidix.info/#UploadPlugin|
|''Documentation:''|http://tiddlywiki.bidix.info/#UploadPluginDoc|
|''Author:''|BidiX (BidiX (at) bidix (dot) info)|
|''License:''|[[BSD open source license|http://tiddlywiki.bidix.info/#%5B%5BBSD%20open%20source%20license%5D%5D ]]|
|''~CoreVersion:''|2.2.0|
|''Requires:''|PasswordOptionPlugin|
***/
//{{{
version.extensions.UploadPlugin = {
	major: 4, minor: 1, revision: 3,
	date: new Date("Feb 24, 2008"),
	source: 'http://tiddlywiki.bidix.info/#UploadPlugin',
	author: 'BidiX (BidiX (at) bidix (dot) info',
	coreVersion: '2.2.0'
};

//
// Environment
//

if (!window.bidix) window.bidix = {}; // bidix namespace
bidix.debugMode = false;	// true to activate both in Plugin and UploadService
	
//
// Upload Macro
//

config.macros.upload = {
// default values
	defaultBackupDir: '',	//no backup
	defaultStoreScript: "store.php",
	defaultToFilename: "index.html",
	defaultUploadDir: ".",
	authenticateUser: true	// UploadService Authenticate User
};
	
config.macros.upload.label = {
	promptOption: "Save and Upload this TiddlyWiki with UploadOptions",
	promptParamMacro: "Save and Upload this TiddlyWiki in %0",
	saveLabel: "save to web", 
	saveToDisk: "save to disk",
	uploadLabel: "upload"	
};

config.macros.upload.messages = {
	noStoreUrl: "No store URL in parmeters or options",
	usernameOrPasswordMissing: "Username or password missing"
};

config.macros.upload.handler = function(place,macroName,params) {
	if (readOnly)
		return;
	var label;
	if (document.location.toString().substr(0,4) == "http") 
		label = this.label.saveLabel;
	else
		label = this.label.uploadLabel;
	var prompt;
	if (params[0]) {
		prompt = this.label.promptParamMacro.toString().format([this.destFile(params[0], 
			(params[1] ? params[1]:bidix.basename(window.location.toString())), params[3])]);
	} else {
		prompt = this.label.promptOption;
	}
	createTiddlyButton(place, label, prompt, function() {config.macros.upload.action(params);}, null, null, this.accessKey);
};

config.macros.upload.action = function(params)
{
		// for missing macro parameter set value from options
		if (!params) params = {};
		var storeUrl = params[0] ? params[0] : config.options.txtUploadStoreUrl;
		var toFilename = params[1] ? params[1] : config.options.txtUploadFilename;
		var backupDir = params[2] ? params[2] : config.options.txtUploadBackupDir;
		var uploadDir = params[3] ? params[3] : config.options.txtUploadDir;
		var username = params[4] ? params[4] : config.options.txtUploadUserName;
		var password = config.options.pasUploadPassword; // for security reason no password as macro parameter	
		// for still missing parameter set default value
		if ((!storeUrl) && (document.location.toString().substr(0,4) == "http")) 
			storeUrl = bidix.dirname(document.location.toString())+'/'+config.macros.upload.defaultStoreScript;
		if (storeUrl.substr(0,4) != "http")
			storeUrl = bidix.dirname(document.location.toString()) +'/'+ storeUrl;
		if (!toFilename)
			toFilename = bidix.basename(window.location.toString());
		if (!toFilename)
			toFilename = config.macros.upload.defaultToFilename;
		if (!uploadDir)
			uploadDir = config.macros.upload.defaultUploadDir;
		if (!backupDir)
			backupDir = config.macros.upload.defaultBackupDir;
		// report error if still missing
		if (!storeUrl) {
			alert(config.macros.upload.messages.noStoreUrl);
			clearMessage();
			return false;
		}
		if (config.macros.upload.authenticateUser && (!username || !password)) {
			alert(config.macros.upload.messages.usernameOrPasswordMissing);
			clearMessage();
			return false;
		}
		bidix.upload.uploadChanges(false,null,storeUrl, toFilename, uploadDir, backupDir, username, password); 
		return false; 
};

config.macros.upload.destFile = function(storeUrl, toFilename, uploadDir) 
{
	if (!storeUrl)
		return null;
		var dest = bidix.dirname(storeUrl);
		if (uploadDir && uploadDir != '.')
			dest = dest + '/' + uploadDir;
		dest = dest + '/' + toFilename;
	return dest;
};

//
// uploadOptions Macro
//

config.macros.uploadOptions = {
	handler: function(place,macroName,params) {
		var wizard = new Wizard();
		wizard.createWizard(place,this.wizardTitle);
		wizard.addStep(this.step1Title,this.step1Html);
		var markList = wizard.getElement("markList");
		var listWrapper = document.createElement("div");
		markList.parentNode.insertBefore(listWrapper,markList);
		wizard.setValue("listWrapper",listWrapper);
		this.refreshOptions(listWrapper,false);
		var uploadCaption;
		if (document.location.toString().substr(0,4) == "http") 
			uploadCaption = config.macros.upload.label.saveLabel;
		else
			uploadCaption = config.macros.upload.label.uploadLabel;
		
		wizard.setButtons([
				{caption: uploadCaption, tooltip: config.macros.upload.label.promptOption, 
					onClick: config.macros.upload.action},
				{caption: this.cancelButton, tooltip: this.cancelButtonPrompt, onClick: this.onCancel}
				
			]);
	},
	options: [
		"txtUploadUserName",
		"pasUploadPassword",
		"txtUploadStoreUrl",
		"txtUploadDir",
		"txtUploadFilename",
		"txtUploadBackupDir",
		"chkUploadLog",
		"txtUploadLogMaxLine"		
	],
	refreshOptions: function(listWrapper) {
		var opts = [];
		for(i=0; i<this.options.length; i++) {
			var opt = {};
			opts.push();
			opt.option = "";
			n = this.options[i];
			opt.name = n;
			opt.lowlight = !config.optionsDesc[n];
			opt.description = opt.lowlight ? this.unknownDescription : config.optionsDesc[n];
			opts.push(opt);
		}
		var listview = ListView.create(listWrapper,opts,this.listViewTemplate);
		for(n=0; n<opts.length; n++) {
			var type = opts[n].name.substr(0,3);
			var h = config.macros.option.types[type];
			if (h && h.create) {
				h.create(opts[n].colElements['option'],type,opts[n].name,opts[n].name,"no");
			}
		}
		
	},
	onCancel: function(e)
	{
		backstage.switchTab(null);
		return false;
	},
	
	wizardTitle: "Upload with options",
	step1Title: "These options are saved in cookies in your browser",
	step1Html: "<input type='hidden' name='markList'></input><br>",
	cancelButton: "Cancel",
	cancelButtonPrompt: "Cancel prompt",
	listViewTemplate: {
		columns: [
			{name: 'Description', field: 'description', title: "Description", type: 'WikiText'},
			{name: 'Option', field: 'option', title: "Option", type: 'String'},
			{name: 'Name', field: 'name', title: "Name", type: 'String'}
			],
		rowClasses: [
			{className: 'lowlight', field: 'lowlight'} 
			]}
};

//
// upload functions
//

if (!bidix.upload) bidix.upload = {};

if (!bidix.upload.messages) bidix.upload.messages = {
	//from saving
	invalidFileError: "The original file '%0' does not appear to be a valid TiddlyWiki",
	backupSaved: "Backup saved",
	backupFailed: "Failed to upload backup file",
	rssSaved: "RSS feed uploaded",
	rssFailed: "Failed to upload RSS feed file",
	emptySaved: "Empty template uploaded",
	emptyFailed: "Failed to upload empty template file",
	mainSaved: "Main TiddlyWiki file uploaded",
	mainFailed: "Failed to upload main TiddlyWiki file. Your changes have not been saved",
	//specific upload
	loadOriginalHttpPostError: "Can't get original file",
	aboutToSaveOnHttpPost: 'About to upload on %0 ...',
	storePhpNotFound: "The store script '%0' was not found."
};

bidix.upload.uploadChanges = function(onlyIfDirty,tiddlers,storeUrl,toFilename,uploadDir,backupDir,username,password)
{
	var callback = function(status,uploadParams,original,url,xhr) {
		if (!status) {
			displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.loadOriginalHttpPostError);
			return;
		}
		if (bidix.debugMode) 
			alert(original.substr(0,500)+"\n...");
		// Locate the storeArea div's 
		var posDiv = locateStoreArea(original);
		if((posDiv[0] == -1) || (posDiv[1] == -1)) {
			alert(config.messages.invalidFileError.format([localPath]));
			return;
		}
		bidix.upload.uploadRss(uploadParams,original,posDiv);
	};
	
	if(onlyIfDirty && !store.isDirty())
		return;
	clearMessage();
	// save on localdisk ?
	if (document.location.toString().substr(0,4) == "file") {
		var path = document.location.toString();
		var localPath = getLocalPath(path);
		saveChanges();
	}
	// get original
	var uploadParams = new Array(storeUrl,toFilename,uploadDir,backupDir,username,password);
	var originalPath = document.location.toString();
	// If url is a directory : add index.html
	if (originalPath.charAt(originalPath.length-1) == "/")
		originalPath = originalPath + "index.html";
	var dest = config.macros.upload.destFile(storeUrl,toFilename,uploadDir);
	var log = new bidix.UploadLog();
	log.startUpload(storeUrl, dest, uploadDir,  backupDir);
	displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.aboutToSaveOnHttpPost.format([dest]));
	if (bidix.debugMode) 
		alert("about to execute Http - GET on "+originalPath);
	var r = doHttp("GET",originalPath,null,null,username,password,callback,uploadParams,null);
	if (typeof r == "string")
		displayMessage(r);
	return r;
};

bidix.upload.uploadRss = function(uploadParams,original,posDiv) 
{
	var callback = function(status,params,responseText,url,xhr) {
		if(status) {
			var destfile = responseText.substring(responseText.indexOf("destfile:")+9,responseText.indexOf("\n", responseText.indexOf("destfile:")));
			displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.rssSaved,bidix.dirname(url)+'/'+destfile);
			bidix.upload.uploadMain(params[0],params[1],params[2]);
		} else {
			displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.rssFailed);			
		}
	};
	// do uploadRss
	if(config.options.chkGenerateAnRssFeed) {
		var rssPath = uploadParams[1].substr(0,uploadParams[1].lastIndexOf(".")) + ".xml";
		var rssUploadParams = new Array(uploadParams[0],rssPath,uploadParams[2],'',uploadParams[4],uploadParams[5]);
		var rssString = generateRss();
		// no UnicodeToUTF8 conversion needed when location is "file" !!!
		if (document.location.toString().substr(0,4) != "file")
			rssString = convertUnicodeToUTF8(rssString);	
		bidix.upload.httpUpload(rssUploadParams,rssString,callback,Array(uploadParams,original,posDiv));
	} else {
		bidix.upload.uploadMain(uploadParams,original,posDiv);
	}
};

bidix.upload.uploadMain = function(uploadParams,original,posDiv) 
{
	var callback = function(status,params,responseText,url,xhr) {
		var log = new bidix.UploadLog();
		if(status) {
			// if backupDir specified
			if ((params[3]) && (responseText.indexOf("backupfile:") > -1))  {
				var backupfile = responseText.substring(responseText.indexOf("backupfile:")+11,responseText.indexOf("\n", responseText.indexOf("backupfile:")));
				displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.backupSaved,bidix.dirname(url)+'/'+backupfile);
			}
			var destfile = responseText.substring(responseText.indexOf("destfile:")+9,responseText.indexOf("\n", responseText.indexOf("destfile:")));
			displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.mainSaved,bidix.dirname(url)+'/'+destfile);
			store.setDirty(false);
			log.endUpload("ok");
		} else {
			alert(bidix.upload.messages.mainFailed);
			displayMessage(bidix.upload.messages.mainFailed);
			log.endUpload("failed");			
		}
	};
	// do uploadMain
	var revised = bidix.upload.updateOriginal(original,posDiv);
	bidix.upload.httpUpload(uploadParams,revised,callback,uploadParams);
};

bidix.upload.httpUpload = function(uploadParams,data,callback,params)
{
	var localCallback = function(status,params,responseText,url,xhr) {
		url = (url.indexOf("nocache=") < 0 ? url : url.substring(0,url.indexOf("nocache=")-1));
		if (xhr.status == 404)
			alert(bidix.upload.messages.storePhpNotFound.format([url]));
		if ((bidix.debugMode) || (responseText.indexOf("Debug mode") >= 0 )) {
			alert(responseText);
			if (responseText.indexOf("Debug mode") >= 0 )
				responseText = responseText.substring(responseText.indexOf("\n\n")+2);
		} else if (responseText.charAt(0) != '0') 
			alert(responseText);
		if (responseText.charAt(0) != '0')
			status = null;
		callback(status,params,responseText,url,xhr);
	};
	// do httpUpload
	var boundary = "---------------------------"+"AaB03x";	
	var uploadFormName = "UploadPlugin";
	// compose headers data
	var sheader = "";
	sheader += "--" + boundary + "\r\nContent-disposition: form-data; name=\"";
	sheader += uploadFormName +"\"\r\n\r\n";
	sheader += "backupDir="+uploadParams[3] +
				";user=" + uploadParams[4] +
				";password=" + uploadParams[5] +
				";uploaddir=" + uploadParams[2];
	if (bidix.debugMode)
		sheader += ";debug=1";
	sheader += ";;\r\n"; 
	sheader += "\r\n" + "--" + boundary + "\r\n";
	sheader += "Content-disposition: form-data; name=\"userfile\"; filename=\""+uploadParams[1]+"\"\r\n";
	sheader += "Content-Type: text/html;charset=UTF-8" + "\r\n";
	sheader += "Content-Length: " + data.length + "\r\n\r\n";
	// compose trailer data
	var strailer = new String();
	strailer = "\r\n--" + boundary + "--\r\n";
	data = sheader + data + strailer;
	if (bidix.debugMode) alert("about to execute Http - POST on "+uploadParams[0]+"\n with \n"+data.substr(0,500)+ " ... ");
	var r = doHttp("POST",uploadParams[0],data,"multipart/form-data; ;charset=UTF-8; boundary="+boundary,uploadParams[4],uploadParams[5],localCallback,params,null);
	if (typeof r == "string")
		displayMessage(r);
	return r;
};

// same as Saving's updateOriginal but without convertUnicodeToUTF8 calls
bidix.upload.updateOriginal = function(original, posDiv)
{
	if (!posDiv)
		posDiv = locateStoreArea(original);
	if((posDiv[0] == -1) || (posDiv[1] == -1)) {
		alert(config.messages.invalidFileError.format([localPath]));
		return;
	}
	var revised = original.substr(0,posDiv[0] + startSaveArea.length) + "\n" +
				store.allTiddlersAsHtml() + "\n" +
				original.substr(posDiv[1]);
	var newSiteTitle = getPageTitle().htmlEncode();
	revised = revised.replaceChunk("<title"+">","</title"+">"," " + newSiteTitle + " ");
	revised = updateMarkupBlock(revised,"PRE-HEAD","MarkupPreHead");
	revised = updateMarkupBlock(revised,"POST-HEAD","MarkupPostHead");
	revised = updateMarkupBlock(revised,"PRE-BODY","MarkupPreBody");
	revised = updateMarkupBlock(revised,"POST-SCRIPT","MarkupPostBody");
	return revised;
};

//
// UploadLog
// 
// config.options.chkUploadLog :
//		false : no logging
//		true : logging
// config.options.txtUploadLogMaxLine :
//		-1 : no limit
//      0 :  no Log lines but UploadLog is still in place
//		n :  the last n lines are only kept
//		NaN : no limit (-1)

bidix.UploadLog = function() {
	if (!config.options.chkUploadLog) 
		return; // this.tiddler = null
	this.tiddler = store.getTiddler("UploadLog");
	if (!this.tiddler) {
		this.tiddler = new Tiddler();
		this.tiddler.title = "UploadLog";
		this.tiddler.text = "| !date | !user | !location | !storeUrl | !uploadDir | !toFilename | !backupdir | !origin |";
		this.tiddler.created = new Date();
		this.tiddler.modifier = config.options.txtUserName;
		this.tiddler.modified = new Date();
		store.addTiddler(this.tiddler);
	}
	return this;
};

bidix.UploadLog.prototype.addText = function(text) {
	if (!this.tiddler)
		return;
	// retrieve maxLine when we need it
	var maxLine = parseInt(config.options.txtUploadLogMaxLine,10);
	if (isNaN(maxLine))
		maxLine = -1;
	// add text
	if (maxLine != 0) 
		this.tiddler.text = this.tiddler.text + text;
	// Trunck to maxLine
	if (maxLine >= 0) {
		var textArray = this.tiddler.text.split('\n');
		if (textArray.length > maxLine + 1)
			textArray.splice(1,textArray.length-1-maxLine);
			this.tiddler.text = textArray.join('\n');		
	}
	// update tiddler fields
	this.tiddler.modifier = config.options.txtUserName;
	this.tiddler.modified = new Date();
	store.addTiddler(this.tiddler);
	// refresh and notifiy for immediate update
	story.refreshTiddler(this.tiddler.title);
	store.notify(this.tiddler.title, true);
};

bidix.UploadLog.prototype.startUpload = function(storeUrl, toFilename, uploadDir,  backupDir) {
	if (!this.tiddler)
		return;
	var now = new Date();
	var text = "\n| ";
	var filename = bidix.basename(document.location.toString());
	if (!filename) filename = '/';
	text += now.formatString("0DD/0MM/YYYY 0hh:0mm:0ss") +" | ";
	text += config.options.txtUserName + " | ";
	text += "[["+filename+"|"+location + "]] |";
	text += " [[" + bidix.basename(storeUrl) + "|" + storeUrl + "]] | ";
	text += uploadDir + " | ";
	text += "[[" + bidix.basename(toFilename) + " | " +toFilename + "]] | ";
	text += backupDir + " |";
	this.addText(text);
};

bidix.UploadLog.prototype.endUpload = function(status) {
	if (!this.tiddler)
		return;
	this.addText(" "+status+" |");
};

//
// Utilities
// 

bidix.checkPlugin = function(plugin, major, minor, revision) {
	var ext = version.extensions[plugin];
	if (!
		(ext  && 
			((ext.major > major) || 
			((ext.major == major) && (ext.minor > minor))  ||
			((ext.major == major) && (ext.minor == minor) && (ext.revision >= revision))))) {
			// write error in PluginManager
			if (pluginInfo)
				pluginInfo.log.push("Requires " + plugin + " " + major + "." + minor + "." + revision);
			eval(plugin); // generate an error : "Error: ReferenceError: xxxx is not defined"
	}
};

bidix.dirname = function(filePath) {
	if (!filePath) 
		return;
	var lastpos;
	if ((lastpos = filePath.lastIndexOf("/")) != -1) {
		return filePath.substring(0, lastpos);
	} else {
		return filePath.substring(0, filePath.lastIndexOf("\\"));
	}
};

bidix.basename = function(filePath) {
	if (!filePath) 
		return;
	var lastpos;
	if ((lastpos = filePath.lastIndexOf("#")) != -1) 
		filePath = filePath.substring(0, lastpos);
	if ((lastpos = filePath.lastIndexOf("/")) != -1) {
		return filePath.substring(lastpos + 1);
	} else
		return filePath.substring(filePath.lastIndexOf("\\")+1);
};

bidix.initOption = function(name,value) {
	if (!config.options[name])
		config.options[name] = value;
};

//
// Initializations
//

// require PasswordOptionPlugin 1.0.1 or better
bidix.checkPlugin("PasswordOptionPlugin", 1, 0, 1);

// styleSheet
setStylesheet('.txtUploadStoreUrl, .txtUploadBackupDir, .txtUploadDir {width: 22em;}',"uploadPluginStyles");

//optionsDesc
merge(config.optionsDesc,{
	txtUploadStoreUrl: "Url of the UploadService script (default: store.php)",
	txtUploadFilename: "Filename of the uploaded file (default: in index.html)",
	txtUploadDir: "Relative Directory where to store the file (default: . (downloadService directory))",
	txtUploadBackupDir: "Relative Directory where to backup the file. If empty no backup. (default: ''(empty))",
	txtUploadUserName: "Upload Username",
	pasUploadPassword: "Upload Password",
	chkUploadLog: "do Logging in UploadLog (default: true)",
	txtUploadLogMaxLine: "Maximum of lines in UploadLog (default: 10)"
});

// Options Initializations
bidix.initOption('txtUploadStoreUrl','');
bidix.initOption('txtUploadFilename','');
bidix.initOption('txtUploadDir','');
bidix.initOption('txtUploadBackupDir','');
bidix.initOption('txtUploadUserName','');
bidix.initOption('pasUploadPassword','');
bidix.initOption('chkUploadLog',true);
bidix.initOption('txtUploadLogMaxLine','10');


// Backstage
merge(config.tasks,{
	uploadOptions: {text: "upload", tooltip: "Change UploadOptions and Upload", content: '<<uploadOptions>>'}
});
config.backstageTasks.push("uploadOptions");


//}}}

What Happened To The Apostles?

by Wayne Blank
Some have commented how wonderful it must have been to have been chosen as one of the apostles, or to have been John the Baptist, or to have been among the earliest of Christians who actually saw and heard Jesus Christ in person. It certainly would have been a great honor and joy to have been among those pioneers of the true church.

A New Day However, with the knowledge and understanding came responsibility. They were expected to go out into the world and be active witnesses of what they saw and heard. That was their purpose. In the political and religious climate of that time, the God-defying hatred that got Jesus Christ killed (which really has not changed at all), many of them lost their lives as well.

The Bible does not record what happened to all of the apostles, however there are other references to their activities. Some are rather fanciful, while some are more trustworthy. From those sources, a general consensus has been established among historians.

From the information that we have, it is very likely that John was the only one of the original Twelve Apostles to escape martyrdom, at least at an early age. After he wrote the book of Revelation, while a prisoner of the Romans (see Ancient Empires - Rome), even he too may then have been killed.

John The Baptist

John The Baptist was beheaded by Herod. (Matthew 14:1-12) (see Herod The Great and The Herods)

Stephen

The account of Stephen is very well documented in the Bible (Acts chapters 6 and 7). He is generally regarded as the first Christian martyr.

It has been estimated that about 2,000 Christians, along with Nicanor, one of the seven deacons (Acts 6:5), also suffered martyrdom during the great persecution that arose after Stephen (Acts 8:1).

James, the brother of John

James was "put to death with the sword" by King Herod (Acts 12:2)

Philip

Reportedly suffered martyrdom at Heliopolis, in Phrygia. He was severely flogged, imprisoned, and later crucified.

Matthew

The former tax collector, he was killed with a halberd (a pike fitted with an ax head) in Nadabah.

James

Stoned and clubbed to death in Jerusalem.

Matthias

He was stoned, then beheaded at Jerusalem.

Andrew, the brother of Peter

He was crucified on an X-shaped cross, two ends of which were in the ground. Hence the origin of the term, "St. Andrew's Cross".

Mark

Mark was reportedly torn to pieces by a mob in Alexandria after he told them that their god, a statue carved from stone, was worthless (see Images and Idols).

Peter

Peter was reportedly crucified, upside down, during the reign of Emperor Nero.

Paul

Beheaded, or torn to pieces by wild animals in the arena, during the time of Nero. See On The Road To Damascus, Paul In Athens, Paul In Rome, Paul's First Missionary Journey, Paul's Journey To Rome, Paul's Second Missionary Journey and Paul's Third Missionary Journey.

Jude

The brother of James, often called Thaddeus. He was crucified at Edessa.

Bartholomew

Tortured and crucified in India.

Thomas

Thomas was reportedly killed with a spear in India.

Luke

Luke was the author of the Gospel which is called by his name, and also probably the Book Of Acts. One account states that he died of old age, while another says that he was hanged in an olive tree in Greece.

Simon the Zealot

He traveled widely, and is believed to have been crucified in what is today Britain.

John

John took care of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ (not the mother of God), after the Crucifixion (John 19:26-27). He went on to write the Book of Revelation while a prisoner on Patmos. He may be the only apostle who escaped a violent death.

Barnabas

Barnabas is believed to have been killed about 10 years after Paul.

Fact Finder: What future positions will the original twelve apostles occupy?
Luke 22:29-30, Revelation 21:10-14

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/whatapos.htm

What is a Mystic?

To dwell in God’s love is an experience that lures and invites us.
We hear of remarkable people—in the Bible and elsewhere—who
pour themselves out for God. But can we be like them? What is
the cost of coming so close to God that we want to give our lives
to him? Will we be willing to pay it?
Prayer
Scripture Reading: Ephesians 3:14-21
Responsive Reading
Grace and peace to you in the name of the Lord our God.
We come together before God, whose vastness is beyond our
knowing but in whom we are fully known.
Grace and peace to you in the name of our savior, Jesus
Christ.
We gather in the name of Christ, who lived and died among
us, imparting life to each of us.
Grace and peace to you, by the living power of the Holy
Spirit.
We open our hearts to this Eternal Spirit, who moved over
the face of the deep and who is with us now.
Reflection
“To speak of mystics today is to risk misunderstanding,” Emilie
Griffin warns. “Many Christians (mistakenly, I think) associate
mystics exclusively with cults and Eastern religions, ignoring our
long Christian centuries of intimate union with God in Jesus
Christ. Such a view is too limited. In biblical history, in the early
Christian communities, in later Christianity, and in the church of
today, mysticism still matters, for it brings us close to God who
whispers and guides.”
Bernard McGinn defines Christian mysticism as a form of
spirituality that “concerns the preparation for, the consciousness
of, and the reaction to…the immediate or direct presence of
God.” Mystics describe their experience in various ways—as
union or communion with God, ecstasy or intimacy, seeing
visions or hearing voices, and so on.
Nevertheless, Griffin suggests, “there are many quiet, unrecognized
mystics, mystics who fly below the radar. They are close
to God, transformed by that relationship, but may never look
like ‘mystics’ in the eyes of others. In fact, being a mystic has
little to do with visions or ecstasies. Instead, a mystic is a person
far advanced in the spiritual life, one who very likely spends
time in prayer and worship with a disciplined regularity.
Wouldn’t such a definition include a large number of people?”
To clarify the nature of Christian mysticism, she emphasizes
three ideas:
􀀗Intimacy with God is a gift. “The mystics do not ask to be mystics,”
and they offer us no spiritual algorithm to manipulate
God’s presence. Mysticism is not magic. Instead, the mystics
wait humbly before God: “They admit their flaws and sinfulness,
their need of God’s redeeming grace. They come as beggars
to the throne, not saying, ‘Lord, please make me a mys-
What do you think?
Was this study guide useful
for your personal or group
study? Please send your
suggestions to
Christian_Reflection@baylor.edu
Christian Reflection
Center for Christian Ethics
Baylor University
One Bear Place #97361
Waco, TX 76798-7361
Phone 1-866-298-2325
www.ChristianEthics.ws
© 2005 The Center for Christian Ethics
Focus Article:
􀀉 Toward a Deeper and
Godlier Love
(Mysticism, pp. 11-19)
Suggested Article:
􀀉 Do You Love Me?
(Mysticism, pp. 63-66)
􀀉 Meeting Christian
Mystics
(Mysticism, pp. 85-88)
Christian Reflection
A Series in Faith and Ethics
3
tic,’ but rather, ‘Lord, I want to know you better.’” The mystics
invite us to open ourselves to the spiritual life, including
Christian forms of meditation and prayer. Yet “we should not
attempt the spiritual life as if we could (under our own steam)
achieve a high level of greatness,” Griffin warns. “Although a
certain discipline is good, spiritual transformation depends
upon the grace of God and comes as pure gift.”
􀀗Our experiences of God are diverse. Many Christians have suggested
a path in the spiritual life, from awakening to purgation,
illumination, and union. “The idea of recognized stages
is reassuring, but it should not be confining,” she writes, for
“the grace of God is highly unpredictable. God’s plan for each
person is unique to that person.”
􀀗Mystics need to “think with the church.” Some Christians are
experimenting with spiritual techniques from other religious
traditions. Griffin finds wisdom in the letter to bishops titled
“Christian Meditation,” which counsels caution in using these
techniques. “From the earliest times, these church fathers
seem to be saying, the church has advised the practice of
sentire cum ecclesia—that is, thinking with the church,” she
writes. “Spiritual masters or guides, following this practice,
warn and caution their pupils against inappropriate teachings
and practices; at the same time, the spiritual master leads his
or her pupil into the life of prayer by example, heart to heart,
seeking always the guidance of the Holy Spirit.”
God proclaims, “I have loved you with an everlasting love”
(Jeremiah 31:3). The mystics, Griffin says, “are experiencing it
and giving witness of that intense love and friendship. They
invite us to come closer to God, to risk experiencing such love,
to be transformed by God’s affections.”
Study Questions
1. The term “mystic” was not used until A.D. 500. However,
which biblical figures encountered God intimately and directly
in what might be called “mystical experience”?
2. Who are some Christian mystics over the ages? Have you
benefited from their writings or experiences?
3. According to Griffin, why are we wary of mysticism? Do you
have other worries about Christian mysticism?
4. What does Thomas Merton mean by “masked contemplation”?
How is it “an ordinary or hidden mysticism”?
5. What aspects of the mystics’ experience do we deeply desire
according to the hymn “Our Deepest Prayer”? Do you agree?
6. Discuss Brent Beasley’s suggestion that Christian ministers
and deacons and teachers should be more like mystics than
prophets. He quotes Henri Nouwen approvingly: “The central
question is, Are [they] truly men and women of God, people
with an ardent desire to dwell in God’s presence, to listen to
God’s voice, to look at God’s beauty, to touch God’s incarnate
Word and to taste fully God’s infinite goodness?”
7. For Beasley, in what sense is Jesus’ question, “Do you love
me?” an invitation to a mystical encounter with God?
Departing Hymn: “Our Deepest Prayer”
Christian Reflection
A Series in Faith and Ethics
Robert B. Kruschwitz, the author of
this study guide, directs The
Center for Christian Ethics at
Baylor University. He serves
as General Editor of Christian
Reflection.
© 2005 The Center for Christian Ethics
15
What is a Mystic?
Lesson Plans
Teaching Goals
1. To clarify the nature and range of Christian mysticism.
2. To discuss both our attraction to and our wariness of this aspect of the Christian tradition.
3. To consider whether or not all disciples, and Christian leaders specifically, should be more like
the mystics.
Before the Group Meeting
Distribute copies of the study guide on pp. 2-3 and ask members to read the Bible passage in the guide.
Distribute copies of Mysticism (Christian Reflection) and ask members to read the focus article and suggested
articles before the group meeting.
Begin with a Story
“What is mysticism, and why are we hearing so much about it lately?” Emilie Griffin was surprised when
a woman raised that question at a United Methodist Church in Natichitoches, Louisiana, where she was
facilitating a Sunday night series on prayer and mysticism. “I had said little or nothing about mystics or
mysticism,” Griffin continues. “‘Mysticism’ is a term I use sparsely. These pleasant, studious women had
been paying closer attention than I realized….
“‘A mystic is a person who is very close to God,’ I began, ‘one who is far advanced in the spiritual
life. But sometimes the word sounds strange to us because it isn’t in the Bible. There are mystics in the
Bible—Abraham, Moses, the prophets, and certainly Paul—but the word “mystic” doesn’t come in until
the year A.D. 500.’
“I did not think they wanted a history of mysticism, but rather an answer to a much more urgent
question: ‘Can I be a mystic? What does mysticism have to do with me?’” (Mysticism, p. 11).
Prayer
Invite members to share their personal celebrations and concerns with the group. Provide time for each
person to pray silently. Conclude by praying that members will be rooted and grounded in love in their
conversation and reflection together.
Scripture Reading
Ask a group member to read Ephesians 3:14-21 from a modern translation.
Responsive Reading
The leader begins and the group reads the lines in bold print.
Reflection
Emilie Griffin connects mysticism to “ordinary” Christian life. She begins with a broad definition of
Christian mysticism, which is generous enough to include “mystics who fly below the radar.” These
quiet, unassuming disciples are transformed by being close to God through prayer and worship and
service to others. She believes that Christian mystics are not spiritual athletes who achieve ecstasies and
visions by their own efforts, but are humble recipients of a gift of grace. They follow no formula—and
Abridged Plan Standard Plan Dual Session (#1) Dual Session (#2)
Prayer Prayer Prayer Prayer
Scripture Reading Scripture Reading Scripture Reading John 21:1-19
Responsive Reading Responsive Reading Responsive Reading Responsive Reading
Reflection (skim all) Reflection (all sections) Reflection (skim all) Discuss Beasley, “Do
You Love Me?
Questions 1, 2, 3, and 5 Questions (selected) Questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 Questions 5, 6, and 7
Departing Hymn Departing Hymn Departing Hymn Departing Hymn
have no spiritual algorithm to teach us—because the working of God’s grace is mysterious and unique in
each disciple’s life. Mystics, like everyone else, are called to “think with the church” and to worship and
serve God communally.
In this introductory study, encourage group members to express their questions and worries about
mysticism, share experiences of reading the mystics’ writings, and discuss the value of mystical experience
in their lives. Later study guides will introduce individual mystics who can show us how to read
Scripture with spiritual discernment and truly love those whom we serve.
Your group may want to extend its discussion of this material. In the first session, you might introduce
the tradition of Christian mysticism. In a second session, use study questions 5, 6, and 7 to discuss
Brent Beasley’s reading of John 21:1-19 as a call for all disciples, and especially Christian leaders, to be
more like mystics.
Study Questions
1. Members might mention Jacob, Moses, Abraham, Elijah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and Daniel. The apostles
Peter, John, and Paul have visions, and John the revelator sees into heaven. Mary (the sister of
Martha) is held up as a model of contemplation and devotion to Christ.
2. Here is a short list of “famous” mystics: Origen, Augustine, Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius the
Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, and Symeon the New Theologian in the early centuries; Bernard
of Clairvaux, Richard of St. Victor, Bonaventure, Clare of Assisi, Francis of Assisi, Mechtilde
of Magdeburg, Catherine of Genoa, Catherine of Siena, the author of The Cloud of Unknowing, Gregory
Palamas, Jan van Ruysbroeck, Meister Eckhart, Henry Suso, John Tauler, the author of Theologia
Germanica, Julian of Norwich, Ignatius of Loyola, John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Jacob
Boehme, Brother Lawrence, George Fox, Francis of Sales, and Jeanne de Chantal in the late middle
ages through the counter reformation; Jeremy Taylor, Thomas Traherne, Jonathan Edwards, William
Law, John Wesley, George McDonald, Vladimir Solvyov, Theresa of Lisieux, Dag Hammarskjold,
Thomas Kelly, Frank Laubach, C. S. Lewis, Thomas Merton, Tielhard de Chardin, and
Evelyn Underhill in the modern era.
3. Griffin suggests we may “find mystics rare and strange because they give themselves completely
to God.” In this, the mystics are countercultural. Members may have other concerns—e.g., that
mystics value unusual experiences, are spiritual “loners,” and so on.
4. “Masked contemplation” occurs when the ordinary routine of daily life is infused with prayer and
contemplation. When this happens, people “find God in active service to the poor, the despised, the
people at the margins of life,” Griffin writes. “They are mystics, perhaps, without knowing it, for
they are fully in touch with the heart of God.”
5. Verses one and two describe an awareness of what is beyond the practical world—”to see beyond
what eyes can see…where heart and soul are unconfined by habit’s rule or reason’s mind.” Verse
three expresses the moral transformation of the mystics’ vision—to “be unleashed to care unselfishly”—
and verse four describes intimacy with God, “Love’s heart.”
6. Following Nouwen, Beasley says “it is not enough for Christian leaders to have well-formed opinions
on the burning issues of our time; their leadership must be rooted in a contemplative love of
God.” He believes this would make Church debates on controversial moral issues such as abortion,
women in ministry, homosexuality, and euthanasia be more like “spiritual searches for truth” and
less like “political battles for power.” Do members agree that a spirituality of waiting silently before
God would change the tone of Church debates?
7. The story about his daughter, Ivy, calling him to tuck her into bed powerfully expresses Beasley’s
point. She asks for his loving presence, which alone can set and confirm the context for his deeds
on her behalf. He hears a similar call in Jesus’ question, “Do you love me?” Feeding Jesus’ sheep, or
caring for our fellow disciples and neighbors, must grow out of and cannot replace our stillness before
the loving presence of our Lord.
Departing Hymn
“Our Deepest Prayer” is on pp. 47-49 of Mysticism. If you choose not to sing the hymn, you may read the
hymn text in unison, or silently and meditatively as a prayer.
16

What is the difference between a disciple and an apostle?

An APOSTLE is an ambassador of the Gospel, basically a teacher.

A DISCIPLE is a pupil, a student, a follower.

Answer

Jesus chose an original 'inner circle' of twelve disciples, who were themselves to 'make disciples' i.e. followers of 'all nations' (see Matthew 28:18-20). Thus there would eventually be many disciples of Jesus.

The term apostollos in the Greek from which we get our word Apostle literally means 'one sent forth.' This is close to the meaning above. Apparently both terms were used while Jesus was on the earth.

Luke 6:13 (King James Version)

13And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;

The term apostle came to be exclusively used after the Ascension of Jesus. Peter in the Christian assembly gave the qualifications for an apostle as a preliminary to the choice of the replacement for Judas.

Acts 1:21-22 (King James Version)

21Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.

The term apostle was also applied to Paul, who, although he did not meet the above qualifications, was personally set apart as an apostle to the Gentiles by Christ himself. The so-called 'apostolic age' ended when the last one died around 100AD and of course, there could be no more as Jesus had left the earth.

The apostles became leaders and teachers as well as evangelists in the early church. They did indeed make many disciples, who were all learners as they had originally been, as indeed is any true Christian today. But, although many are in positions of teaching authority in the Christian church today there are no true apostles in the Biblical sense.

Disciples and Apostles—Part One
By Rev. Sam Harris
Question: What is the difference between a “disciple” and an “apostle?”
This is such a good question that I am going to answer it with two articles, one now and
one in the next article. I will define the terms and then we will take an in-depth look at how
they are used in Scripture.
1. Disciple: Greek—mathetes, a learner or pupil. In the New Testament, it is one who
accepts the instruction given to him and makes it a part of his daily living and conduct.
2. Apostle: Greek—apostolos, someone who is sent, ambassador, messenger. As we will
see, Jesus chose 12 men to be His witnesses with authority.
In general terms, a disciple is a follower of a teacher. Most of us can look back over our
school years and point to one or two teachers who had an impact on our lives and education.
We attempted to absorb all that they had to teach us. This is especially true in our
chosen field of work. There was one professor in Seminary that I admired a great deal. I
wanted to learn as much as possible from him. I became a “disciple” under his teaching
and lifestyle, and he had a profound affect on my ministry throughout the years.
Jesus chose twelve of the most unlikely men to be His disciples: fisherman, tax collectors,
others known for their bad temper. They would sit under his teaching and example for
almost three years before being sent out as “apostles” to be witnesses to the good news of
Jesus Christ. The list of the names of the disciples, chosen by Jesus, can be found in
Matthew 10, Mark 3, and Luke 6. In Luke 10, Jesus appointed seventy others and sent
them out two by two, ahead of Him, in preparation for His visit to that particular area.
In the definition above, we said that a disciple is one who not only learns from a teacher,
but also makes what he learns a part of his daily life. Let me suggest four characteristics of
a disciple, and you could certainly add additional ones.
1. Obedience. Jesus says in John 14:15—”If you love Me, you will keep my commandments.”
You have often heard, “don’t talk the talk, if you don’t walk the walk.” It’s important
for us to live by what we profess. If I say “I love Jesus,” then I should reflect his life
and teachings in my daily walk, talk, attitude, and actions.
2. Faithfulness. Again, the words of Jesus—”By this is My Father glorified, that you bear
much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples.” A disciple, who has learned much under the
teacher, wants to so live his life that others will know that Jesus sits on the throne of his
life and controls his actions.
3. Love. In John 13:35, we read: “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you
have love for one another.” Our relationship with brothers and sisters in Christ, how we
love, treat, and respect one another, indicates to the world whether we are truly followers
of Jesus or not.
4. Guided by the Holy Spirit. Speaking of the work of the Holy Spirit, Jesus proclaims in
John 16:13—”But when He, the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth; for
He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak, and He will
disclose to you what is to come.” The work of the Holy Spirit is to guide the disciple in
learning the truth, then to live it out in our daily lives.
A disciple is one who learns from the Master, Jesus, and then reflects what he has been
taught in his daily life. The next article will help us to understand the role of the “apostle.”

Whats the difference between the 12 Apostles and the 12 Disciples?

Answer

The 12 disciples were Jesus's followers, they followed him everywhere he went and worshiped him. The apostles actually went out of Jerusalem to tell people about Jesus.

There is no difference if you're saying "the 12 disciples." However, a disciple is anyone who follows Jesus' teachings. Including the 12 Apostles. Any who follow after Christ now, under the teaching of the Bible is a disciple.

Anyone who believes the doctrine, teachings, or philosophy of another and follows that teacher is his disciple. He stands as a learner, a devotee of the one whose concepts he accepts.

The word "disciple" means student. The word "apostle" means one who is sent out. The 12 disciples were Jesus' students, then he died, rose from the dead, ascended to Heaven, and empowered them with the Holy Spirit. He then sent them out to preach the gospel to the world; at this point they became both disciples and apostles.

[[What is the Prison Minister Program at Wheaton College|http://www.bgcprisonministries.com/assets/files/SCM_Program_Handbookx.pdf]]


[[Read the Student Booklet here|http://www.bgcprisonministries.com/assets/files/SCM_Student_Handbook.pdf]]

http://www.solitariesofdekoven.org/store.html

Who’s Who

The Biographies section includes brief biographies of some of those thinkers that have contributed most to the philosophy of religion and the debate concerning God’s existence. The biographies are divided into two categories: historic figures and modern authors. Some thinkers, of course, are a little difficult to categorise; all historic thinkers were at one time modern authors, and all modern authors eventually become historic figures (though some less prominent than others).
Historic Figures

The historic figures described here include some big-name philosophers and theologians. St Anselm of Canterbury was the father of scholasticism, and the inventor of the ontological argument. St Thomas Aquinas was without a doubt the greatest of the medieval philosopher-theologians, offering several forms of cosmological argument (and much else besides).

Rene Descartes is remembered for, among other things, his use of the ontological argument to avoid global scepticism; William Paley is best known for his analogical statement of the design argument; Blaise Pascal’s lasting contribution was Pascal’s Wager.

Though Immanuel Kant offered a moral argument for theism, his objection to the ontological argument that existence is not a predicate is probably his most widely studied contribution to the philosophy of religion today. David Hume remains a figurehead for atheism to this day; his criticisms of theism are still powerful and influential.
Modern Authors

Of the modern authors, two stand out: Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne. Plantinga’s work, particularly on reformed epistemology, has done much to galvanise contemporary Christian philosophy; Swinburne’s contribution over the years was monumental.

William Lane Craig has also made waves with his championing of the kalam cosmological argument, and his talent not only as a philosopher but also as a public debater. John Hick has been a great source of controversy; though he remains a theist, he advocates religious pluralism.

On the other side, Richard Dawkins and Michael Martin have presented powerful critiques of religion, Dawkins from a scientific and Martin from a philosophical perspective. Antony Flew, for most of his life an outspoken representative of atheism, recently defected to deism, but still holds to many of his arguments against theism.

Why I Left . . ., essays from brethren stating the reasons they left a number of religious organizations. Complied by David Riggs.

    * Baptist Church
    * Catholic Church
    * Christian Church
    * Institutional Church of Christ
    * Jehovah's Witness
    * Lutheran Church
    * Methodist Church
    * Pentecostal Church

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/davidriggs/why-i-left.PDF

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Wm_james.jpg/200px-Wm_james.jpg]]

[[Read more here|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James]]

Birth January 11, 1842(1842-01-11)
New York City, New York
Death August 26, 1910 (aged 68)
Chocorua, New Hampshire
School/tradition Pragmatism
Main interests Pragmatism, Psychology, Philosophy of Religion, Epistemology, Meaning
Notable ideas The Will to Believe Doctrine, the pragmatic theory of truth, radical empiricism, James-Lange theory of emotion

William James (January 11, 1842 – August 26, 1910) was a pioneering American psychologist and philosopher trained as a medical doctor. He wrote influential books on the young science of psychology, educational psychology, psychology of religious experience and mysticism, and the philosophy of pragmatism. He was the brother of novelist Henry James and of diarist Alice James.

William James was born at the Astor House in New York City. He was the son of Henry James Sr., an independently wealthy and notoriously eccentric Swedenborgian theologian well acquainted with the literary and intellectual elites of his day. The intellectual brilliance of the James family milieu and the remarkable epistolary talents of several of its members have made them a subject of continuing interest to historians, biographers, and critics.

James interacted with a wide array of writers and scholars throughout his life, including his godfather Ralph Waldo Emerson, as well as Bertrand Russell, Horace Greeley, William Cullen Bryant, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Charles Peirce, Josiah Royce, George Santayana, Ernst Mach, John Dewey, W. E. B. Du Bois, Helen Keller, Mark Twain, Horatio Alger, Jr., James George Frazer, Henri Bergson, H. G. Wells, G. K. Chesterton, Sigmund Freud, Gertrude Stein, and Carl Jung.

[img[http://www.rc.net/wcc/kun1.jpg]]




[[Go to website|http://www.rc.net/wcc/words.htm]]

World Religion Overview

[img[http://z.about.com/d/contraception/1/5/m/2/-/-/symbols.gif]]

Interfaith Evangelism
World Religions

Overview
BUDDHISM: Worldwide—est. over 600 million; U.S.—est. 1.5 million
CHRISTIANITY: Worldwide—est. 1.9 billion; U.S.—est. 135 million
HINDUISM: Worldwide—est. 825 million; U.S.—est. 1.5 million
ISLAM: Worldwide—est. 1 billion; U.S.—est. 6 million
JUDAISM: Worldwide—est. 16 million; U.S.—est. 6 million

America has become a symbol of hope for many religious groups. Estimates suggest that there are more than 1,500 religious organizations in America. Some of these religions, such as Christianity and Judaism, have long traditions. Others, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam are more recent manifestations. The twentieth century has witnessed the greatest influx of religious groups into the United States, and many of these “new” religions consider America to be a prime mission field.
World religions have been classified into two categories: Far Eastern and Middle Eastern. Hinduism and Buddhism began in India, while Judaism, Christianity, and Islam originated in the Middle East. The major tenets of each of these faiths are listed below.

HINDUISM began about 2000 B.C. It has no single founder and is the most diverse of all major world religions. Most Hindus are polytheistic. Diversity within Hinduism allows for other concepts, including monotheism, henotheism (one god among many), and monism (only one eternal reality exists and everything comes from it). The most popular gods are Shiva, Brahma, and Vishnu, who have come to earth in various incarnations (avatars) to aid human beings. Hindus do not have one set of scriptures, though many of their beliefs and practices can be found in the Vedas and Upanishads. The former is a collection of oral traditions, while the latter is an appendage and synthesis of the Vedas. The world is an illusion, and the goal of humanity is to free the soul from rebirth and to be absorbed into the ultimate principle, called Brahman. A chief concept in Hindu thought is karma—the idea that deeds, thoughts, and actions have an impact on one’s future fate. The accumulation of negative karma leads to reincarnation. There are three major paths to salvation. Karma Marga is a way of works or ritual. Jnana Marga represents a way of knowledge through mystical intuition. Bhakti Marga, the most popular path, is devotion to one of the Hindu gods or goddesses.

BUDDHISM began as a movement within Hinduism through the efforts of Siddhartha Gautama (b. 563 B.C.), who was dissatisfied with Hinduism’s answers to life’s problems. While sitting under a fig tree one day, he found the answers to life’s problems through enlightenment. Later, he was called Buddha(“Enlightened One”).
The chief problem in life is suffering, and it is caused by desiring worldly things. Suffering is eliminated only by abolishing desire. Adopting a lifestyle of moderation in all things extinguishes desire and helps achieve salvation. Salvation is defined as realizing Nirvana, the extinguishing of continual rebirths. After Buddha’s death, the religion split into two schools of thought. Theravadas, prevalent in Burma and Thailand, acknowledge Buddha as a great teacher but believe that salvation is achieved by living as a monk. Mahayanas, the larger group and predominant in Korea, China, and Japan, elevated Buddha to savior status. Trusting in Buddha as savior allows people to reach salvation. Most Buddhists do not believe in life after death. The Pure Land School asserts that by trusting in the savior, Amitabha, people can go to paradise when they die. Unlike Hinduism, Buddhism is a strong missionary faith. Zen Buddhism, with its emphases on meditation and self-salvation, became popular in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. Currently, it has dozens of centers in the United States.

JUDAISM traces its origin to Abraham, who lived in the Middle East about 2000 B.C. Judaism focuses on worshiping one God. It was the first world religion to adopt the belief that there is only one God. God is seen as loving, personal, and good in His creation of the universe and in His dealings with humanity. Human beings were created in His image and were meant to worship Him. Jews believe they are God’s chosen people who are to spread His truth to the world. The sacred scripture of Judaism is the Torah (Old Testament), which details, in historical context, God’s will. The Ten Commandments are the basis for serving God and for relating to others. Jews also follow the Talmud, a collection of rabbinical interpretations of the Torah. Salvation comes by following God’s will and fulfilling His commandments. Sabbath observance is the foundation for Jewish worship. The 24 hours from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday are designated as a time of worship and rest from work. From the time of Solomon, Jews worshiped at the Temple in Jerusalem. They carried out ritual sacrifices there until the Romans destroyed the Temple in A.D. 70. Contemporary Jews worship at synagogues, where rabbis read and expound the Torah. Major Jewish groups currently include Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform. Two major events in the twentieth century have influenced the Jews: the Holocaust—the Nazis’ destruction of millions of Jews—and Israel’s reconstitution in 1948.

CHRISTIANITY originated with Jesus of Nazareth, called the Christ because He is considered the Messiah—one who would bring salvation to the world. Christians are Trinitarians. They believe there is one God. But they also believe the one God has revealed Himself as three Persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. As in Judaism, creation, history, and humanity have great meaning and were brought into being by a loving God. The Scriptures of Christianity are the Old and New Testaments, which contain God’s will for humanity. Salvation is a gift of God. Because of sin, no one is worthy to have a relationship with God or go to heaven. Jesus gave His life on the cross as a substitute for humanity. One must accept Jesus as Savior and Lord and believe that He experienced death and resurrection. To those who trust in Christ, salvation assures a relationship with God and a place in heaven.

ISLAM is one of the most recent world religions, beginning with the work of Muhammad (A.D. 570-632) in what is currently Saudi Arabia. Islam has parallels with Judaism and Christianity, particularly its belief in monotheism. Differences with Christianity include rejecting the Trinity and denying the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. They believe He was, however, a great prophet.
The scripture of Islam is called the Qur’an, God’s word dictated to Muhammad. Life is to be lived in subordination to God’s will. Devotional life centers on the confession, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” Other activities include fasting during Ramadan, praying five times a day, pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia, and giving alms.

http://www.library.yale.edu/div/xtiangde.htm

Zoroastrianism(IPA: /ˌzɔroʊˈæstriəˌnɪzəm/) is the religion and philosophy based on the teachings ascribed to the prophet Zoroaster, after whom the religion is named. The term 'Zoroastrianism' is in general usage essentially synonymous with Mazdaism, i.e. the worship of Ahura Mazda, exalted by Zoroaster as the supreme divine authority.

Zoroastrianism was once the dominant religion of much of Greater Iran, and was a formative influence on that region's history and traditions. The religion was marginalized following the Islamic conquests of the mid-7th century, after which the number of adherents dwindled significantly, and there are less than 20,000 Zoroastrians left in that region today. Today, the largest indigenous population of Zoroastrians is in India, where they number about 70,000. Eight of the nine principal religious centers are located on the west coast of that country (the ninth is in central Iran).

Basic beliefs

* There is one universal and transcendental God, Ahura Mazda, the one Uncreated Creator to whom all worship is ultimately directed.
* Ahura Mazda's creation — evident as asha, truth and order — is the antithesis of chaos, evident as druj, falsehood and disorder. The resulting conflict involves the entire universe, including humanity, which has an active role to play in the conflict.
* Active participation in life through good thoughts, good words and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep the chaos at bay. This active participation is a central element in Zoroaster's concept of free will, and Zoroastrianism rejects all forms of monasticism.
* Ahura Mazda will ultimately prevail, at which point the universe will undergo a cosmic renovation and time will end (cf: Zoroastrian eschatology). In the final renovation, all of creation — even the souls of the dead that were initially banished to "darkness" — will be reunited in Ahura Mazda. At the end of time a savior-figure [a Saoshyant] will bring about a final renovation of the world, and in which the dead will be revived.[1]
* There will then be a final purgation of evil from the Earth (through a tidal wave of molten metal) and a purgation of evil from the heavens (through a cosmic battle of spiritual forces). In the end good will triumph, and each person will find himself or herself transformed into a spiritualized body and soul. Those who died as adults will be transformed into healthy adults of forty years of age, and those who died young will find themselves permanently youthful, about age fifteen. In these new spiritual bodies, humans will live without food, without hunger or thirst, and without weapons (or possibility of bodily injury). The material substance of the bodies will be so light as to cast no shadow. All humanity will speak a single language and belong to a single nation without borders. All will experience immortality (Ameretat) and will share a single purpose and goal, joining with the divine for a perpetual exaltation of God’s glory.[2]
* In Zoroastrian tradition the malevolent is represented by Angra Mainyu, the "Destructive Principle", while the benevolent is represented through Ahura Mazda's Spenta Mainyu, the instrument or "Bounteous Principle" of the act of creation. It is through Spenta Mainyu that transcendental Ahura Mazda is immanent in humankind, and through which the Creator interacts with the world. According to Zoroastrian cosmology, in articulating the Ahuna Vairya formula Ahura Mazda made His ultimate triumph evident to Angra Mainyu.
* As expressions and aspects of Creation, Ahura Mazda emanated seven "sparks", the Amesha Spentas ("Bounteous Immortals"), that are each the hypostasis and representative of one aspect of that Creation. These Amesha Spenta are in turn assisted by a league of lesser principles, the Yazatas, each "Worthy of Worship" and each again a hypostasis of a moral or physical aspect of creation.

[edit] Other characteristics

* Water and fire: In Zoroastrianism, water (apo, aban) and fire (atar, adar) are agents of ritual purity, and the associated purification ceremonies are considered the basis of ritual life. In Zoroastrian cosmogony, water and fire are respectively the second and last primordial elements to have been created, and scripture considers fire to have its origin in the waters. Both water and fire are considered life-sustaining, and both water and fire are represented within the precinct of a fire temple. Zoroastrians usually pray in the presence of some form of fire (which can be considered evident in any source of light), and the culminating rite of the principal act of worship constitutes a "strengthening of the waters" (see Ab-Zohr). Fire is considered a medium through which spiritual insight and wisdom is gained, and water is considered the source of that wisdom.
* Proselytizing and conversion: Zoroastrians do not proselytize and living Zoroastrianism has no missionaries. There may be historical reasons for this (in Islamic Iran proselytizing was/is a capital crime), but in recent years, and with the exception of the Indian priesthood, Zoroastrian communities are generally supportive of conversion.
* Inter-faith marriages: As in many other faiths, Zoroastrians are strongly encouraged to marry others of the same faith, but this is not a requirement of the religion itself. Some members of the Indian Zoroastrian community (the Parsis) contend that a child must have a Parsi father to be eligible for introduction into the faith, but this assertion is considered by most to be a violation of the Zoroastrian tenets of gender equality, and may be a remnant of an old legal definition (since overruled) of 'Parsi'. This issue is a matter of great debate within the Parsi community, but with the increasingly global nature of modern society and the dwindling number of Zoroastrians, such opinions are less vociferous than they were previously.
* Life, death and reincarnation: In Zoroastrian tradition, life is a temporary state in which a mortal is expected to actively participate in the continuing battle between truth and falsehood. Prior to being born, the soul (urvan) of an individual is still united with its fravashi, of which there are as very many, and which have existed since Mazda created the universe. During life, the fravashi acts as a guardian and protector. On the fourth day after death, the soul is reunited with its fravashi, and in which the experiences of life in the material world are collected for the continuing battle in the spiritual world. In general, Zoroastrianism does not have a notion of reincarnation, at least not until the final renovation of the world.
* Disposal of the dead: In Zoroastrian scripture and tradition, a corpse is a host for decay, i.e. of druj. Consequently, scripture enjoins the "safe" disposal of the dead in a manner such that a corpse does not pollute the "good" creation. These injunctions are the doctrinal basis of the fast-fading traditional practice of ritual exposure, most commonly identified with the so-called "Towers of Silence" for which there is no standard technical term in either scripture or tradition. The practice of ritual exposure is only practiced by Zoroastrian communities of the Indian subcontinent, where it is not illegal, but where alternative disposal methods are desperately sought after diclofenac poisoning has led to the virtual extinction of scavenger birds. Other Zoroastrian communities either cremate their dead, or bury them in graves that are cased with lime mortar.

http://ebooks.biblestudyguide.org/ebooks/index.htm

apophenia

    There is currently a controversial debate concerning whether unusual experiences are symptoms of a mental disorder, if mental disorders are a consequence of such experiences, or if people with mental disorders are especially susceptible to or even looking for these experiences. --Dr. Martina Belz-Merk 

Apophenia is the spontaneous perception of connections and meaningfulness of unrelated phenomena. The term was coined by K. Conrad in 1958 (Brugger).


His great "insight" was that he thought all his patients over 35 suffered from "loss of religion" and he had just the thing to fill up their empty, aimless, senseless lives: his own metaphysical system of archetypes and the collective unconscious.

Synchronicity provides access to the archetypes, which are located in the collective unconscious.

http://www.isreligion.org/

In Christian mysticism, contemplative prayer or contemplation, for which the Greek term theoria (θεωρία) is also used,[1] is a form of prayer distinct from vocal prayer (recitation of words) and from meditation in the strict sense (a form of mental prayer, also called methodical prayer, based on discursive reflection on various considerations).[2]
Contents
[hide]

    * 1 Christian meditation and Christian contemplation
    * 2 Different forms of contemplative prayer
    * 3 Acquired contemplation
    * 4 Infused contemplation or mystical union
    * 5 Stages of infused contemplative prayer
    * 6 See also
    * 7 References
    * 8 Bibliography

[edit] Christian meditation and Christian contemplation
Saint John of the Cross

In discursive meditation, mind and imagination and other faculties are actively employed in an effort to understand our relationship with God.[3][4] In contemplative prayer, this activity is curtailed, so that contemplation has been described as "a gaze of faith", "a silent love".[5]

John of the Cross described the difference between discursive meditation and contemplation by saying: "The difference between these two conditions of the soul is like the difference between working, and enjoyment of the fruit of our work; between receiving a gift, and profiting by it; between the toil of travelling and the rest of our journey's end".[6][7]

An Oriental Orthodox expert on prayer says: "Meditation is an activity of one's spirit by reading or otherwise, while contemplation is a spontaneous activity of that spirit. In meditation, man's imaginative and thinking power exert some effort. Contemplation then follows to relieve man of all effort. Contemplation is the soul's inward vision and the heart's simple repose in God."[8]

There is no clear-cut boundary between Christian meditation and Christian contemplation, and they sometimes overlap. Meditation serves as a foundation on which the contemplative life stands, the practice by which someone begins the state of contemplation.[8]
[edit] Different forms of contemplative prayer

A distinction is made between acquired or natural contemplation and infused or supernatural contemplation.[9]
[edit] Acquired contemplation
Saint Alphonsus Maria de Liguori

Natural or acquired contemplation, which is also called prayer of the heart, has been compared to the attitude of a mother watching over the cradle of her child: she thinks lovingly of the child without reflection and amid interruptions. In the words of Saint Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, acquired contemplation "consists in seeing at a simple glance the truths which could previously be discovered only through prolonged discourse": reasoning is largely replaced by intuition and affections and resolutions, though not absent, are only slightly varied and expressed in a few words. Especially in its higher form, known as the prayer of simplicity or of simple gaze, there is one dominant thought or sentiment which recurs constantly and easily (although with little or no development) amid many other thoughts, beneficial or otherwise. The prayer of simplicity often has a tendency to simplify itself even in respect to its object, leading one to think chiefly of God and of his presence, but in a confused manner.[9]

Definitions similar to that of Saint Alphonsus Maria de Liguori are given by Adolphe Tanquerey ("a simple gaze on God and divine things proceeding from love and tending thereto") and Saint Francis de Sales ("a loving, simple and permanent attentiveness of the mind to divine things").[1]

"Over the centuries, this prayer has been called by various names such as the Prayer of Faith, Prayer of the Heart, Prayer of Simplicity, Prayer of Simple Regard, Active Recollection, Active Quiet and Acquired Contemplation"[10]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "What is contemplative prayer? St. Teresa answers: 'Contemplative prayer [oración mental] in my opinion is nothing else than a close sharing between friends; it means taking time frequently to be alone with him who we know loves us.' Contemplative prayer seeks him 'whom my soul loves'. It is Jesus, and in him, the Father. We seek him, because to desire him is always the beginning of love, and we seek him in that pure faith which causes us to be born of him and to live in him. In this inner prayer we can still meditate, but our attention is fixed on the Lord himself."[11]

A person is known to be called to natural contemplation because of succeeding in it with ease, and benefitting from it. This is especially so, if the person has a persistent attraction to this kind of prayer together with difficulty and distaste for discursive meditation. Accordingly, when, during prayer, one feels neither a relish nor facility for certain acts it is advisable not to force oneself to produce them, but to be content with affective prayer or the prayer of simplicity. If, on the contrary, during prayer, one feels the facility for certain acts, one should yield to this inclination instead of obstinately striving to remain immovable like the Quietists.[9]
[edit] Infused contemplation or mystical union
Russian icon of the Transfiguration

Infused or higher contemplation, also called intuitive, passive or extraordinary, is a supernatural gift by which a person's mind and will become totally centered on God.[12] It is a form of mystical union with God, a union characterized by the fact that it is God, and God only, who manifests himself.[9] Under this influence of God, which assumes the free cooperation of the human will, the intellect receives special insights into things of the spirit, and the affections are extraordinarily animated with divine love.[12] This union that it entails may be linked with manifestations of a created object, as, for example, visions of the humanity of Christ or an angel or revelations of a future event, etc. They include miraculous bodily phenomena sometimes observed in ecstatics.[9]

Bernhard Häring wrote:

    The dialogical character of prayer is most fully realized in the so-called passive or mystical prayer, in which the divine motion is in the foreground of consciousness and divine love stirs the heart, and the loving majesty of God manifests itself in infused contemplation. Though the prayer is called passive, man is not purely passive in it. On the contrary, one is never so completely and utterly active as when God moves him by the graces of mystical prayer. But in this mystical experience the "divine partner in the dialogue" is in the foreground rather than the human response. In mystical prayer, the soul experiences the life in grace and from grace as a gift of divine love. It is the experience of faith in its most exalted realization. [13]

Infused contemplation, described as a "divinely originated, general, non-conceptual, loving awareness of God", is, according to Thomas Dubay, the normal, ordinary development of discursive prayer, which it gradually replaces.[14] He writes:

    It is a wordless awareness and love that we of ourselves cannot initiate or prolong. The beginnings of this contemplation are brief and frequently interrupted by distractions. The reality is so unimposing that one who lacks instruction can fail to appreciate what exactly is taking place. Initial infused prayer is so ordinary and unspectacular in the early stages that many fail to recognize it for what it is. Yet with generous people, that is, with those who try to live the whole Gospel wholeheartedly and who engage in an earnest prayer life, it is common.[14]

Dubay considers infused contemplation as common only among "those who try to live the whole Gospel wholeheartedly and who engage in an earnest prayer life". Other writers view contemplative prayer in its infused supernatural form as far from common. John Baptist Scaramelli, reacting in the 17th century against quietism, taught that asceticism and mysticism are two distinct paths to perfection, the former being the normal, ordinary end of the Christian life, and the latter something extraordinary and very rare.[15] Jordan Aumann considered that this idea of the two paths was "an innovation in spiritual theology and a departure from the traditional Catholic teaching".[16] And Jacques Maritain proposed that one should not say that every mystic necessarily enjoys habitual infused contemplation in the mystical state, since the gifts of the Holy Spirit are not limited to intellectual operations.[17]
[edit] Stages of infused contemplative prayer
Saint Teresa of Ávila

Saint Teresa of Avila described four degrees or stages of mystical union:

   1. incomplete mystical union, or the prayer of quiet or supernatural recollection, when the action of God is not strong enough to prevent distractions, and the imagination still retains a certain liberty;
   2. full or semi-ecstatic union, when the strength of the divine action keeps the person fully occupied but the senses continue to act, so that by making an effort, the person can cease from prayer;
   3. ecstatic union, or ecstasy, when communications with the external world are severed or nearly so, and one can no longer at will move from that state; and
   4. transforming or deifying union, or spiritual marriage (properly) of the soul with God.

The first three are weak, medium, and the energetic states of the same grace. The transforming union differs from them specifically and not merely in intensity. It consists in the habitual consciousness of a mysterious grace which all shall possess in heaven: the anticipation of the Divine nature. The soul is conscious of the Divine assistance in its superior supernatural operations, those of the intellect and the will. Spiritual marriage differs from spiritual espousals inasmuch as the first of these states is permanent and the second only transitory.[9]

In all forms of mystical union God is not merely conceived with the mind but perceived through an experimental knowledge of God and his presence, a knowledge inferior, however, to the way in which God will be manifested to those in heaven. Generally, it can be spoken of as seeing God only when the mystical union reaches the degree of ecstasy. What is common to all degrees is that the presence of God is manifested in the way of an interior something with which the soul is penetrated; a sensation of absorption, of fusion, of immersion. It has been compared with the way that we feel the presence of our body when we remain perfectly immobile and close our eyes. If we know that our body is present, it is not because we see it or have been told of the fact. It is the result of a special sensation, an interior impression, very simple and yet impossible to analyse. Thus it is that in mystical union we feel God within us and in a very simple way. The soul absorbed in mystical union that is not too elevated may be said to resemble a man placed near one of his friends in an impenetrably dark place and in utter silence He neither sees nor hears his friend whose hand he holds within his own, but through means of touch, he feels his presence. He thus remains thinking of his friend and loving him, although amid distractions.[9]

The demiurge is a concept from the Platonic, Neopythagorean, Middle Platonic, and Neoplatonic schools of philosophy for an artisan-like figure responsible for the fashioning and maintenance of the physical universe. The term was subsequently adopted by the Gnostics. Although a fashioner, the demiurge is not quite the creator figure in the familiar monotheistic sense; both the demiurge itself and the material from which the demiurge fashions the universe are considered either uncreated and eternal, or the product of some other being, depending on the system.

The word demiurge is an English word from a Latinized form of the Greek δημιουργός, dēmiourgos, literally "public worker", and which was originally a common noun meaning "craftsman" or "artisan". The philosophical usage and the proper noun derives from Plato's Timaeus, written circa 360 BC, in which the demiurge is the organizer of the universe, rather than the creator of a physical substratum. This is accordingly the definition of the demiurge in the Platonic (ca. 310 BC-90 BC) and Middle Platonic (ca. 90 BC-300 AD) philosophical traditions. In the various branches of the Neoplatonic school (third century onwards), the demiurge is the fashioner of the real, perceptible world, and of the Ideas, but (in most neoplatonic systems) is still not itself "the One". In the arch-dualist ideology of the various Gnostic systems, the material universe is evil while the non-material world is good. Accordingly, the demiurge is malevolent.

A fakir or faqir (Arabic: فقیر‎ (noun of faqr); English pronunciation: /fəˈkɪər/) Derived from faqr (Arabic: فقر‎, "poverty") is a Muslim Sufi ascetic in Middle East and South Asia. The Faqirs were wandering Dervishes teaching Islam and living on alms.[1]

The terms 'faqr' (فقر)and faqir (fakir), in religious parameters, were first used in Islam by Prophet Muhammad. There are revelations of Quran in which this term was used. Many hadiths (quotations) in which Muhammad used terms 'faqr' and 'faqir' are very famous such as "الفقر فخري" (faqr is my pride). Since Muhammad defined 'faqr' Muslim scholars and saints followed it and proud to be called 'Faqir'. 'Faqr' or 'faqir' are mostly used in Sufism or tasawwuf which is the most gallant feature of Islam.[neutrality is disputed]

The term has become a common Urdu, Bengali, and Hindi word for "beggar". The term has also been used to refer to Hindu and Buddhism ascetics (e.g., sadhus, gurus, swamis and yogis). These broader idiomatic usages developed primarily in Mughal era in India. There also a now a distinct caste of Faqir found in North India, descended from communities of faqirs who took up residence at Sufi shrines.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 History
* 2 Attributes
* 3 Gurdjieff
* 4 In Bangladesh and India
* 5 In popular culture
* 6 See also
* 7 References
* 8 External links

[edit] History

Historically, the terms tasawwuf, Sufism, faqr, faqer (noun of faqr) were first used (with full definition) by Husayn ibn Ali who was grand son of Muhammad. He wrote a book "Mirat ul Arfeen" on this topic, which is said to be first book on Sufism and tasawwuf. However, under Ummayad rule, neither could this book be published nor was it allowed to discuss tasawwuf, Sufism or 'Faqr' openly. For a long time, after Husayn ibn Ali, the information and teachings of 'faqr', tasawwuf or Sufism kept on transferring from heart to heart.[2]

In the 10th century, highly reputed Muslim saint Abdul-Qadir Gilani who is founder of Qadiriyya silsila which has the most followers in Muslim Sufism elaborated Sufism, tasawwuf and faqr.

Then in 11th century Ibn Arabi was the first vibrant Muslim Scholar who not only started this discussion publicly but also wrote hundreds of books with the contents Sufism, tasawwuf and faqr.

With the passage of time doctrine of the Sufism had been fading and so the tasawwuf and faqr. During some Mughal Emperors time, in Indian continent, improper terminology were tried to insert in Sufism and Islam and "faqir" was quoted for street beggars and Hindu monks. The term, then, came to India where the term was injected into local idiom through the Persian-speaking courts of Muslim rulers.
photograph of shrine of a Muslim Sufi faqir Sultan Bahoo Punjab, Pakistan

During 17th century another noble and spirited Muslim scholar and saint Sultan Bahoo revolutionized Sufism and reinstated (with fresh properties) the definition of faqr and faqir.

In modern era, there is a Muslim Saint, Najeeb Sultan from Pakistan who is said to have extra ordinary spiritual powers and contending new dimensions in Sufism.

In English, faqir or fakir is originally, a mendicant dervish. In mystical usage, the word fakir refers to man's spiritual need for God, who alone is self-sufficient. Although of Muslim origin, the term has come to be applied in India to Hindus as well, largely replacing gosvamin, sadhu, bhikku, and other designations. Fakirs are generally regarded as holy men who are possessed of miraculous powers. Among Muslims the leading Sufi orders of fakirs are the Chishtiyah, Qadiriyah, Naqshbandiyah, and Suhrawardiyah.[3]

Cambridge English dictionary refers faqir 'as a member of an Islamic religious group, or a holy man'[4]
[edit] Attributes

Although attributes of faqir and faqr have been defining by many Muslim saints and scholars, however, some significant definitions from distinguished personalities of Islam are quoted here.

Muhammad defined faqr as "Reaching at peak, faqr is merged in Allah and his unity"

One of the most respected and heart favorite early Muslim saint Abdul-Qadir Gilani also elaborated Sufism, tasawwuf and faqr in conclusive manner. Explaining attributes of faqir, he says, "faqir is not who can not do anything and is nothing in his self-being. But faqir has all the commanding powers (gifted from Allah) and his orders can not be revoked."[5][6]

Then Ibn Arabi explained Sufism including faqr in more details. He wrote more than 500 books on topics relating to Sufism, tasawwuf and faqr. He was the first Muslim scholar who introduced (first time openly) the idea of Wahdat al-wujud that remained talk of the town for many centuries.[7][8][9][10]

Another dignified Muslim saint Sultan Bahoo states faqir as, "who has been entrusted with full authority from Allah (God)". [11] [12] At another place, in the same book Sultan Bahoo says,"Faqir attains eternity by dissolving himself in oneness of Allah. He, when, eliminates his-self from other than Allah, his soul reaches to divinity."[13] He further says in his other book, "faqir has three steps (stages). First step he takes from eternity (without beginning) to this mortal world, second step from this finite world to hereafter and last step he takes from hereafter to manifestation of Allah".[14]
[edit] Gurdjieff

In the Fourth Way teaching of G. I. Gurdjieff the word "fakir" is used to denote the specifically physical path of development, compared with the word "yogi" (which Gurdjieff used for a path of mental development) and "monk" (which he used for the path of emotional development).[15]
[edit] In Bangladesh and India

The Fakir and Goshai was with the stronger religious influence, and there are even Bauls who would shave off their heads as in their past and kept on practicing and believing in many of the basic creeds of Vaishnava-Sahajiya Buddhism. So all followers of different religions and religious practices came under the nomenclature Baul, which has its etymological origin in the Sanskrit words "Vatula" (madcap), or "Vyakula" (restless) and used for someone who is "possessed" or "crazy". They were known as performers 'mad' in a worshiping trance of joy - transcending above both good and bad. Though fond of both Hinduism and Islam, the Baul evolved into a religion focused on the individual and centered on a spiritual quest for God from within. They believe the soul that lives in all human bodies is God.
[edit] In popular culture

Fakirs are referenced in the song Prince Ali from the 1992 Disney motion picture Aladdin. The line is "With his forty fakirs, his cooks, his bakers"[16] which is played over a scene of 40 apparent fakirs levitating.

In the long running Off-Off-Broadway musical, The Fantasticks (Original 1960 Off-Off Broadway Cast), there is a song in Act II called Round and Round where the female lead Luisa sings " I don’t believe he’s a real fakir. They never complain. He’s a fake fakir." [17]

In the Secret Garden, Original Broadway Cast, Fakir is the name of a dreamer, or a ghost who haunts the main character, Mary. Fakir casts magical charms and helps another main protagonist, Colin, get better from an ongoing illness.

After Mahatma Gandhi met with the Viceroy, Lord Irwin in 1931, Winston Churchill said "It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr. Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace ... to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King."[18]
[edit] See also

* Ghous-e-Azam
* Dervish
* Qalandar
* Mirin Dajo
* Shramana
* Sultan Bahoo
* Ibn Arabi

[edit] References

1. ^ God Speaks, Meher Baba, Dodd Meade, 1955, 2nd Ed. p. 305
2. ^ A brief history of Islam‎ by Tamara Sonn, 2004, p60
3. ^ Online Dictionary / Reference
4. ^ Dictionary of Cambridge
5. ^ Biographical encyclopaedia of Sufis: Central Asia and Middle East by N. Hanif, 2002
6. ^ The Sultan of the saints: mystical life and teaching of Shaikh Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani, Muhammad Riyāz Qādrī, 2000, p24
7. ^ Fusus al-hikam (The Bezels of Wisdom), ed. A. Affifi,Cairo, 1946;trans. R.W.J. Austin, The Bezels of Wisdom, New York: Paulist Press,1980
8. ^ al-Futuhat al-makkiyya (The Meccan Illuminations),Cairo, 1911;partial trans. M. Chodkiewicz et al.,Les Illuminations de la Mecque: The Meccan Illuminations, Textes choisis/Selected Texts, Paris: Sindbad,1988.
9. ^ The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-'Arabi's Metaphysics of Imagination,Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.1981
10. ^ Sufis of Andalusia, London, George Allen & Unwin.1971
11. ^ Bahu, Sultan, List of Books of Sultan Bahoo, retrieved 28 April 2010
12. ^ Sultan Bahoo's book Ameer ul Konain
13. ^ Reference from Sultan Bahoo's book
14. ^ Noor ul Khuda book of Sultan Bahoo
15. ^ The Fourth Way: Teachings of G.I. Gurdjieff, P.D. Ouspensky, Random House USA, 2000
16. ^ http://aladdincentral.org/music/englishpa.html
17. ^ http://www.thefantasticks.com
18. ^ Roy, Amit (2006-01-02). "Churchill was willing to let Gandhi starve". The Telegraph of India. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060102/asp/nation/story_5670718.asp. Retrieved 2010-12-04.

[edit] External links

* List of Books of Sultan Bahoo
* Ibn Arabi Books
* Faqr-i-Qalandar
* Faqr is a Language of God (Reference book Resala Ghosal-Azam

http://www.thatreligiousstudieswebsite.com/Lessons/ppt_quiz_sample.html

Answers.com

The theory and methodology of interpretation, especially of scriptural text.
hermeneutist her'me·neu'tist n.

The art, skill, or theory of understanding and classifying meaning. It is often applied to the interpretation of human actions, utterances, products, and institutions. A hermeneutic interpretation requires the individual to understand and sympathize with another's point of view.

In geography, the hermeneutic approach was used to challenge empiricism and positivism, and to develop the field of humanistic geography, which stressed human meaning and intentionality. Although this approach is now less fashionable, the importance of open-mindedness and varieties of interpretation has not diminished.

In Greek a hermeneus was an interpreter and the word probably originates from the name of Hermes, messenger of the gods and epitome of eloquence. In all its nineteenth-century uses and definitions hermeneutics was agreed to be the art and science of interpretation, primarily, though not exclusively, of religious texts. A more specific implication was that hermeneutics was concerned with real and hidden meanings, quite different from the elucidation and concern with practical application which was the concern of exegesis.

In the twentieth century, hermeneutics has become one of many terms to shift from a primarily religious context into secular social theory. The principal individual responsible for this transition was probably Heidegger. In the study of political theory, hermeneutics has become principally associated with the ‘Cambridge School’, which includes such writers as Quentin Skinner and John Dunn. For hermeneutical scholars the interesting questions about, say, John Locke would not be whether he offers us a coherent set of prescriptions for when we should obey government, but what meaning the text has when it is put in its social context, and we fully understand what Locke understood (for example) by property and by ‘servants’.

Up to a point hermeneutics can be treated simply as a different discipline, with different emphases from the kind of exegesis that looks at a text and asks, ‘Irrespective of its context, what can this tell us now?’ But certain practitioners of hermeneutics stand to be accused of abandoning any possibility of persistent or resoluble argument and treating the kind of meaning that comes from particular contexts and the interests within them as the only form of meaning.

— Lincoln Allison

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hermeneutics/

The term hermeneutics covers both the first order art and the second order theory of understanding and interpretation of linguistic and non-linguistic expressions. As a theory of interpretation, the hermeneutic tradition stretches all the way back to ancient Greek philosophy. In the course of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, hermeneutics emerges as a crucial branch of Biblical studies. Later on, it comes to include the study of ancient and classic cultures.

With the emergence of German romanticism and idealism the status of hermeneutics changes. Hermeneutics turns philosophical. It is no longer conceived as a methodological or didactic aid for other disciplines, but turns to the conditions of possibility for symbolic communication as such. The question “How to read?” is replaced by the question, “How do we communicate at all?” Without such a shift, initiated by Friedrich Schleiermacher, Wilhelm Dilthey, and others, it is impossible to envisage the ontological turn in hermeneutics that, in the mid-1920s, was triggered by Martin Heidegger's Sein und Zeit and carried on by his student Hans-Georg Gadamer. Now hermeneutics is not only about symbolic communication. Its area is even more fundamental: that of human life and existence as such. It is in this form, as an interrogation into the deepest conditions for symbolic interaction and culture in general, that hermeneutics has provided the critical horizon for many of the most intriguing discussions of contemporary philosophy, both within an Anglo-American context (Rorty, McDowell, Davidson) and within a more Continental discourse (Habermas, Apel, Ricoeur, and Derrida).

modus vi·ven·di  (v-vnd, -d)
n. pl. modi vivendi
1. A manner of living; a way of life.
2. A temporary agreement between contending parties pending a final settlement.

A mystagogue (from Greek: μυσταγωγός "person who initiates into mysteries") is a person who initiates others into mystic beliefs, an educator or person who has knowledge of the Sacred Mysteries.

In ancient mystery religions, a mystagogue would be responsible for leading an initiate into the secret teachings and rituals of the cultus. The initiate would often be blindfolded, and the mystagogue would literally "guide" him into the sacred space.

In the early church, this same concept was used to describe the bishop, who was responsible for seeing to it that the catechumens were properly prepared for baptism. Homilies given to those in the last stages of preparation, and which deal with the Sacraments are called "Mystagogical Homilies." Sometimes these mystagogical instructions were not given until after the catechumen had been baptized. The most famous of these mystagogical works are the "Mystagogical Homilies" of St. Cyril of Jerusalem and the work, "On the Mysteries" by St. Ambrose of Milan.

In various organizations, it is the role of the mystagogue to "mystify" pledges. The term is sometimes used to refer to a person who guides people through religious sites, such as churches, and explains the various artifacts. This branch of theology is at times called mystagogy.

Max Weber, considered to be one of the founders of the modern study of sociology, described the mystagogue as part magician, part prophet; and as one who dispersed "magical actions that contain the boons of salvation"[1] According to Roy Wallis, "The primary criterion that Weber had in mind in distinguishing the prophet from the mystagogue was that the latter offers a largely magical means of salvation rather than proclaiming a radical religious ethic or an example to be followed."[2]

The word mysterion (μυστήριον) is used 27 times in the New Testament. It denotes not so much the meaning of the modern English term mystery, but rather something that is mystical. In the biblical Greek, the term refers to "that which, being outside the unassisted natural apprehension, can be made known only by divine revelation.".

[[Holiness]], or sanctity, is the state of being holy or sacred, that is, set apart for the worship or service of gods. It could also mean being set apart to pursue (or to already have achieved) a sacred state or goal, such as Nirvana. It is often ascribed to people, objects, times, or places.

Scapular - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/08/Rosary%26scapular.jpg/400px-Rosary%26scapular.jpg]]

For the shoulder bone, see
Scapula

The
devotional scapular

of Our Lady of Mount Carmel or Brown Scapular.

The term scapular (from Latin scapulae, "shoulders") as used today refers to two specific, yet related, Christian Sacramentals, namely the monastic and devotional scapulars, although both forms may simply be referred to as "scapular".[1][2]

The "monastic scapular" appeared first, perhaps as early as the 7th century in the Order of Saint Benedict.[3] It is a somewhat large length of cloth suspended both front and back from the shoulders of the wearer, often reaching to the knees. It may vary in shape, color, size and style. Monastic scapulars originated as aprons worn by medieval monks, and were later extended to habits for members of religious organizations, orders or confraternities. Monastic scapulars now form part of the habit of monks and nuns in many Christian orders.[4][5]

The "devotional scapular" is a much smaller item and evolved from the monastic scapular. These may also be worn by individuals who are not members of a monastic order and the Roman Catholic Church considers them sacramentals. The devotional scapular typically consists of two small (usually rectangular) pieces of cloth, wood or laminated paper, a few inches in size which may bear religious images or text. These are joined by two bands of cloth and the wearer places one square on the chest, rests the bands one on each shoulder and lets the second square drop down the back.[6][7]

In many cases, both forms of the scapular come with a set of promises for the faithful who wear them. Some of the promises are rooted in tradition, and others have been formally approved by religious leaders. For instance, for Roman Catholics, as for some other sacramentals, over the centuries several popes have approved specific indulgences for scapulars.[8] [9]
History

The exact origin of the scapular as a practical garment continues to be debated by scholars.[10] However, many sources agree that the scapular emerged from an apron-like piece of cloth worn by monks. Item 55 of the Rule of Saint Benedict, dating to the 7th century, clearly refers to the use of the scapular.[4][11][12][13] In the Western Church the key elements of a monk's habit eventually became the tunic, the cincture, the scapular and the hood. A nun's costume included the tunic, the scapular and the head veil.[14] Some authors interpret the scapular as a symbolic apron based on the fact that monks and nuns, when engaged on some manual labor, tend to cover it with a protective apron or carefully tuck it up or throw the front length back over their shoulder to prevent it from getting in the way.[15]

The fact that specific promises and indulgences were attached to the wearing of scapulars helped increase their following, as was seen with the early example of the Brown Scapular, habit of the Carmelites, which included the traditional promise that those wearing it piously would be spared the fires of Hell.[16] This promise was based on the Carmelite tradition that the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to St. Simon Stock at Cambridge, England in 1251 in answer to his appeal for help for his oppressed order and recommended the Brown Scapular of the Our Lady of Mount Carmel to him and promised salvation for the faithful who wore it piously.[17][18][19] However, this issue is subject to debate among scholars. Today historians question whether this Marian apparition took place at all, others argue that it was another Carmelite brother who witnessed the apparition.[20][21] The Carmelite Order states on their website "Although the historicity of the scapular vision is rejected, the scapular itself has remained for all Carmelites a sign of Mary's motherly protection and as a personal commitment to follow Jesus in the footsteps of his Mother, the perfect model of all his disciples." [22]

Regardless of the scholarly debates regarding the exact origin of the Brown Scapular, it is clear that it has been a part of the Carmelite habit since the late 13th century, and the Carmelite Constitution of 1294 considers it a serious fault to sleep without a scapular and the Constitution of 1369 stipulates automatic excommunication for Carmelites who say Mass without a scapular.[23]

A scapular promise historically known as the Sabbatine privilege, was associated with an apocryphal Papal Bull allegedly by Pope John XXII. It states that through her special intercession, on the Saturday following their death, Mary will personally liberate and deliver the souls of devotees out of Purgatory. The Vatican has denied the validity of this document since 1613 and forbade the Carmelites to preach the Sabbatine privilege, an admonition which they did not always adhere to.[24] At the same time however the Church gave the Carmelites permission to preach that Mary's merits and intercession would help those "who have departed this life in charity, have worn in life the scapular, have ever observed chastity, have recited the Little Hours of the Blessed Virgin, or, if they cannot read, have observed the fast days of the Church, and have abstained from flesh meat on Wednesdays and Saturdays." [25]

Today, the Carmelite Orders, while encouraging a belief in Mary's general aid and prayerful assistance for their souls beyond death and commending devotion to Mary especially on Saturdays which are dedicated to her, explicitly state in their official catechetical materials that they do not promulgate the Sabbatine privilege, and are at one with official church teaching on the matter.[26][27]

Historically, however, belief in the Sabbatine Privilege had a positive impact on the popularity of the scapular, and the growth of the Carmelites, and over the centuries helped the devotion to the scapular reach a height that the Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages called it "one of the main Marian devotions of Christendom".[4]

Historical records clearly document the growth of the Brown Scapular devotion during the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries in Europe. The Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception that dates to 1617 was eventually granted a significant number of indulgences, and many graces were promised to those who would honor the Immaculate Conception by wearing the Blue Scapular and live chastely according to their state in life. In 1885 Pope Leo XIII approved the Scapular of the Holy Face, (also known as The Veronica) and elevated the Priests of the Holy Face to an archconfraternity.[28] He also approved the Scapular of Our Lady of Good Counsel and the Scapular of St. Joseph, both in 1893, and the Scapular of the Sacred Heart in 1900.[29]
Varieties
Monastic scapular

Today, the monastic scapular is part of the garb, the habit, of many Christian religious orders, of both monks and nuns. It is an outer garment about the width of the chest, from shoulder to shoulder. It hangs down in the front and back almost to the feet, but is open on the sides (it was originally joined by straps at the waist). It may seem similar to the analavos worn in the Eastern tradition but is unrelated to them.

Historically, the monastic scapular was at times referred to as scutum (i.e. shield), as it was laid over the head, which it originally covered and protected with one portion (from which the hood afterwards developed). A specific aspect of the use of the monastic scapular from its earliest days was obedience and the term jugum Christi, i.e. "yoke of Christ", was used to refer to it. The term "yoke of Christ" signified obedience and removing a scapular was like removing the yoke of Christ, i.e. rebelling against authority. For instance, the Carmelite constitution of 1281 prescribed that the Scapular should be worn to bed under penalty of serious fault. And the constitution of 1369 included automatic excommunication for a Carmelite saying mass without a scapular.[23][30][31]

Over the centuries the religious orders adapted the basic scapular as they considered appropriate for themselves, as a result of which there are now several distinct designs, colors, shapes and lengths in use. For example, the Dominican Order and Carthusians attached a hood to their scapular, rather than keeping the former a separate item of their habit. And the color selection could change over time, for instance prior to 1255 the Augustinian scapulars for novices were black and those of the lay brethren were white, but thereafter all scapulars but those of the lay brethren had to be white.[32]

In some cases the monastic scapular was used to distinguish the rank or level of the wearer within a religious order. For instance in some Byzantine monastic practices two levels of fully professed monk or nun exist: those of the "little habit" and those other of the "great habit", these being more senior and not having to do manual labor. In these cases, the "great habit" was simply distinguished from the "little habit" by the addition of a scapular decorated with the instruments of the Passion.[33]

Just as the stole is the vestment that came to mark the office of a priest, the monastic scapular became the equivalent for those in the monastic life and even today, a long scapular identifies its wearer as a member of a religious order. It is a symbol of the confraternal way, combining in itself the principle of ora et labora (prayer and work); and so the form was later adopted by pious laity who wished to have an open sign of their devotion.
Non-monastic reduced scapular

In the Middle Ages it was common for Christian faithful to join religious orders in an auxiliary sense, sometimes called Third Orders because they were based on the Third Rule of Roman Catholic religious orders. Although these people (called Tertiaries) were permitted to wear the "tertiary habit", because they had not taken all the religious vows, they were not usually permitted to wear the full habit of the order including the veil, Pectoral cross, and the scapular. To grant such to a member of a Third Order was considered a high honor and great privilege.[34]

Some authors suggest that the tradition of wearing a reduced form of a non-monastic scapular started in the 11th century with Saint Peter Damian and the monastic scapular was gradually transformed from an item of clothing that was part of the habit of monks and nuns to a smaller sacramental item that expressed devotion by individuals who were not members of a given order, but wished to be affiliated with it.[35]

It eventually became common that a smaller form of an order's scapular would be bestowed upon the non-monastic. Rather than a full length of cloth, it consisted of two rectangles (several inches wide, and much larger than a modern devotional scapular) of wool joined by bands in some fashion. These are still worn today by the "Third Order" members of the Franciscans, Carmelites, and Dominicans. In order to gain the benefits of the order, the members must wear these scapulae constantly. However, in 1883 in his "Constitution On the Law of the Franciscan Third Order" called Misericors Dei Filius, Pope Leo XIII declared that wearing either these medium-sized scapulae of the "Third Order" or the miniature forms of the smaller devotional scapular entitled the wearer equally to gain the indulgences associated with the order.[36] Some religious orders still give a short version (sometimes called the "reduced scapular", but this usage is archaic) of their large scapular to non-monastics that are spiritually affiliated with them. Such short scapulars are designed to be unobtrusive and can be worn under regular clothing at home and at work.
Devotional scapular

Devotional scapulars are sacramentals, primarily worn by Roman Catholics and some Lutherans, designed to show the wearer's pledge to a confraternity, a saint, or a way of life, as well as reminding the wearer of that promise. Some devotional scapulars bear images, or verses from scripture.

Devotional scapulars typically consist of two rectangular pieces of cloth, wool or other fabric that are connected by bands. One rectangle hangs over the chest of the wearer, while the other rests on the back, with the bands running over the shoulders. Some scapulars have extra bands running under the arms and connecting the rectangles to prevent them from getting dislodged underneath the wearer's top layer of clothes.

The roots of devotional scapulars can be traced to the gathering of laity into confraternities for spiritual direction, whereby the faithful would be assigned some badge or token of affiliation and devotion. The image or message on the scapular usually reflects the order's focus, tradition or favored devotion.[37] Devotional scapulars and the indulgences attached to them grew along with the growth of Catholic confraternities during the 17th and 18th centuries. In 1611, the Servite order's confraternity and their Black Scapular of the Seven Dolours of Mary received indulgences from Pope Paul V.[38]

By the early 20th century the devotional scapular had gained such a strong following among Catholics worldwide that the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1914 stated: "Like the Rosary, the Brown Scapular has become the badge of the devout Catholic."[39] In the 1917 reported apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima the Virgin Mary is said to have appeared "with a Rosary in one hand and a scapular in the other". Lucia Santos (one of the three Fatima children) stated that the Virgin Mary told her: "The Rosary and the Scapular are inseparable".[40][41][42] In the United States "Scapular Magazine" helped enroll one million Americans to pray the Rosary based on the Fatima messages.[43] The Rosary and the devotional scapular continue to be linked in the 21st century.[44]

While a number of scapulars (e.g. the Holy Face Scapular, also known as The Veronica) are entirely Christocentric, the most widespread scapulars such as the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and the Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception relate to Marian devotions and consecrations.[45] The official teachings of the Catholic Church indicate that the Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel is one of the most highly recommended Marian devotions. This has been the case through the centuries, and more recently with popes such as Pius XII, Paul VI and John Paul II, who stated that he received his first Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel at age ten when his Marian devotion was taking shape and he continued to wear it into his papacy.[46]

The Catholic Encyclopedia lists 18 small scapulars approved by the Church:[47]

1. The White Scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity (1193)
2. The White Scapular of Our Lady of Ransom (1218)
3. The Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel (1250)
4. The Black Scapular of the Seven Dolours of Mary (1255)
5. The Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception
6. The Red Scapular of the Most Precious Blood
7. The Black Scapular of the Passion (1720)
8. The Red Scapular of the Passion (1846)
9. The Black Scapular of Help of the Sick (1860)
10. The White Scapular of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (1877)
11. The Blue and Black Scapular of St. Michael the Archangel (1880)
12. The Scapular of St. Benedict (1882)
13. The Scapular of the Holy Face (1885)
14. The White Scapular of the Our Lady of Good Counsel (1893)
15. The White Scapular of St. Joseph (1898)
16. The White Scapular of The Most Sacred Heart of Jesus (1900)
17. The Scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary (1901)
18. The White Scapular of St. Dominic (1903)

Of all the types recognized by the Church the best-known, and perhaps the most popular, is the Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, sometimes referred to as the Brown Scapular from the color of its bands. The brown scapular is associated with the Sabbatine Privilege, which promises that the Virgin Mary will deliver from Purgatory those who wear the scapular piously on the first Saturday after their death.[48]

The wearing of a devotional scapular has been viewed as a constant meditation by Bishop Leo De Goesbriand:[49]:

"Wherever I am, whatever I am doing, Mary never sees me without seeing upon my body an evidence of my devotion to her."

From a spiritual viewpoint, Father Etienne Richer argues that devotional scapular is one of key Roman Catholic sacramentals that harmonize with Catholic Liturgy in the meditative process.[50]
Investment, blessing and rules

Though each scapular has its own particular qualifications and usage, the Church has set down certain rules that pertain to all types, be they monastic or devotional.

A scapular associated with a confraternity must be invested by an ordained representative of that group. A scapular associated with a mystery or devotion may simply be blessed by a priest and given to the wearer.

To receive the benefits or indulgences granted the scapular generally must be worn constantly. It may be placed aside for a time but, during that period, the wearer does not receive the scapular's benefits. Should the wearer take up the wearing of it again, the benefits are again conferred.

A devotional scapular must be in good repair with both bands intact. Multiple scapulae may be worn on the same bands, but the bands must be the color of those prescribed by the scapular with the most preeminence, and that scapular must be foremost with the others behind in order of precedence. If a scapular becomes damaged to the point where it cannot be in good repair, it must be replaced. However, it is not necessary for the wearer to be reinvested as it is the devotion of the wearer, not the object itself, that confers the benefit of the scapular.
See also
References

1. ^ J L Neve, 2007, Churches and Sects of Christendom ISBN 1406758884 page 158
2. ^ Catherine Fournier, 2007, Marian Devotion in the Domestic Church‎ Ignatius Press ISBN 1586170740 page 18
3. ^ Mackenzie Edward Charles Walcott, 2008, Sacred Archaeology Kessinger Publishing ISBN 9780548862353 page 70
4. ^ a b c Andre Vauchez, 2001, Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages, Fitzroy Dearborn Press ISBN 9781579582821 page 1314
5. ^ William Johnston, Encyclopedia of Monasticism ISBN 1579580904 page 310
6. ^ James O'Toole, 2005, Habits of Devotion: Catholic Religious Practice in Twentieth-Century America, Cornell University Press ISBN 9780801472558 page 98
7. ^ Matthew Bunson, 2004, Encyclopedia of Catholic History, OSV Press ISBN 9781592760268 page 804
8. ^ Frances Andrews, 2006, The Other Friars: The Carmelite, Augustinian, Sack and Pied Friars in the Middle Ages, ISBN 9781843832584 page 33
9. ^ Samuel Phillips Day, 2009, Monastic institutions BiblioLife ISBN 1103075349 page 108
10. ^ Robert Maguire, 2008, Papal Indulgences: Two Lectures Kessinger Publishing ISBN 1437029701 page 53
11. ^ Terryl Nancy Kinder, 2002, Cistercian Europe, Eardman Press ISBN 0802838871 page 59
12. ^ Rule of St Benedict (RB) ch. 55.4-6: "… in temperate regions for each monk a "hood(ed cloak)"(? cucullam, cowl) and tunic will suffice – in winter a woolen "hood(ed cloak)"(? cucullam, cowl) is necessary, in summer a thinner or worn one –, and a scapular for work, and footwear: socks (pedules, slip-shoes) and shoes …"
Timothy Fry, "RB 1980", p. 262, comments: "This word (scapulare) is found in antiquity only here in RB and in Vita patr. iuren. 3.5, where it appears as a summer garment. De Vogüé 6.916 thinks it is a modified version of the cuculla specially adapted for work. It clearly derives from the Latin scapula, meaning "shoulders", and it may reasonably be concluded that it was a sleeveless or short-sleeved garment … However, A. Guillaumont, "Évagre le Pontique: Traité Pratique" (SC 171, Paris, Éditions du Cerf 1971, p. 488), suggests that the scapular may be the equivalent to the Greek analabos, which Cassian (inst. 1,5) translates uncertainly by three terms: subcinctoria, redimicula and rebracchiatoria, the purpose of which is to fasten the tunic for work."
13. ^ RB 55.6 has unspecific "work", not "manual work" (in RB 48.1 called "manual labour"), whilst elsewhere there is mention of the "Work of God", arguably not only in connection with prayer (e.g. RB 7.63, 22.6, 58.7). Apparently therefore RB regards both prayer and labour as "work". Thus, whether in the oratory or in the fields, a monk is always at work, and so a "scapular for work" is to be worn always. RB 22.5 supports those who hold that it is meant to be worn even during the night rest. These considerations support the view that St Benedict meant the scapular to be worn not as protective wear but for a symbolic reason, such as with regard to the purpose of the monk in the monastery. The monks purpose is evident from RB's own purpose, which is a compilation of precepts for those who wish by "the labour of obedience to return to him from whom they had drifted through the sloth of disobedience" (RB Prol 2) and therefore, in response to "the Lord seeking his workman in the multitude of people" (RB Prol 14), undergo "teaching" in "a school of the Lord's service" (RB Prol 45-50). The wearing of the scapular therefore seems to signal that the Lord's workman is going about his master's work. A light or minimal item of clothing, as has been suggested on linguistic grounds, would be better suited to a symbolic than a protective use.
14. ^ William Johnston, Encyclopedia of Monasticism ISBN 1579580904 page 309
15. ^ Terrence Kardong, 1996, Benedict's Rule: A Translation and Commentary Liturgical Press ISBN 0814623255 page 444
16. ^ Henry Charles Lea, 2002, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, Adamant Media Corp. ISBN 1402161085 page 263
17. ^ EWTN History of the Scapular [1]
18. ^ Matthew Bunson, 2008, The Catholic Almanac, ISBN 9781592764419 page 155
19. ^ Gerald M. Costello, 2001, Treasury of Catholic Stories, OSV Press, ISBN 9780879739799, page 128
20. ^ Richard Copsey, 1999, Simon Stock and the Scapular Vision, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 50:4:652-683
21. ^ Benedict Zimmerman, O.C.D., The Carmelite Scapular, "The Month", Vol. 150, 1927, pp. 323-237
22. ^ http://www.ocarm.org/pls/ocarm/consultazione.mostra_pagina?id_pagina=648
23. ^ a b EWTN on the History of the Brown Scapular [2]
24. ^ http://carmelitanacollection.com/catechesis.html
25. ^ http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13289b.htm
26. ^ The Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel: Catechesis and Ritual
27. ^ http://carmelitanacollection.com/catechesis.html Online version of the official Carmelite Catechesis on the Brown Scapular
28. ^ Henry Charles Lea, 2002, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, Adamant Media Corp. ISBN 1402161085 page 506
29. ^ Francis de Zulueta, 2008, Early Steps In The Fold, Miller Press, ISBN 9781408660034 page 317
30. ^ John Welch, 1996, The Carmelite Way Paulist Press ISBN 9780809136520 page 58
31. ^ Father Kieran Kavanaugh, 2008, Scapular Devotion
32. ^ Francis de Zulueta, 2008, Early Steps In The Fold, Miller Press, ISBN 9781408660034 page 89
33. ^ Aleksei Pentkovsky, 1999, The Pilgrim's Tale Paulist Press ISBN 0809137097 page 43
34. ^ Ann Ball, 2003 Encyclopedia of Catholic Devotions and Practices ISBN 087973910X page 512
35. ^ Greg Dues, 1992, Catholic Customs and Traditions, Twenty-Third Publications ISBN 0896225151 pages 127 and 185
36. ^ Misericors Dei Filius at the Franciscan Archive [3]
37. ^ Francis de Zulueta, 2008, Early Steps In The Fold: Instructions for Converts, and Enquirers, Miller Press, ISBN 9781408660034 page 300
38. ^ Henry Charles Lea, 2002, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, Adamant Media Corp. ISBN 1402161085 page 469
39. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia
40. ^ Thomas W. Petrisk, 1998, The Fatima Prophecies, St. Andrews Press, ISBN 9781891903304 page 345
41. ^ Lucia Santos, 1976, Fatima in Lucia's Own Words, Ravengate Press ISBN 0911218106
42. ^ Lynette Marie Ordaz, 2008, The Real Mary, Authorhouse Books, ISBN 9781434343321 page 88
43. ^ Eli Lederhendler, 2006 Jews, Catholics, and the Burden of History Oxford University Press ISBN 0195304918 page 98
44. ^ Zenit News 2008 Cardinal Urges Devotion to Rosary and Scapular
45. ^ Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception [4]
46. ^ Pope John Paul II, 1996, Gift And Mystery, Doubleday Books ISBN 9780385409667 page 28
47. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia on Scapular
48. ^ Mark Miravalle, 1993, Introduction to Mary, Queenship Publishing ISBN 9781882972067, page 174
49. ^ L. De Goesbriand 2008, Meditations for the Use of the Secular Clergy ISBN 9781408686553 page 408
50. ^ Raymond Burke, 2008, Mariology: A Guide for Priests, Deacons,seminarians, and Consecrated Persons, Queenship Publishing ISBN 1579183557 page 667

External links

Sources

Articles

This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Herbermann, Charles, ed (1913). Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IMPORTANT NOTE: Most educators and professionals do not consider it appropriate to use tertiary sources such as encyclopedias as a sole source for any information—citing an encyclopedia as an important reference in footnotes or bibliographies may result in censure or a failing grade. Wikipedia articles should be used for background information, as a reference for correct terminology and search terms, and as a starting point for further research.

As with any community-built reference, there is a possibility for error in Wikipedia's content—please check your facts against multiple sources and read our disclaimers for more information.
Bibliographic details for "Scapular"

Please remember to check your manual of style, standards guide or instructor's guidelines for the exact syntax to suit your needs. For more detailed advice, see Citing Wikipedia.
Citation styles for "Scapular"
APA style

Scapular. (2010, December 1). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 21:03, February 21, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724
MLA style

Wikipedia contributors. "Scapular." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 1 Dec. 2010. Web. 21 Feb. 2011.
MHRA style

Wikipedia contributors, 'Scapular', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 1 December 2010, 22:29 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724> [accessed 21 February 2011]
Chicago style

Wikipedia contributors, "Scapular," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724 (accessed February 21, 2011).
CBE/CSE style

Wikipedia contributors. Scapular [Internet]. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia; 2010 Dec 1, 22:29 UTC [cited 2011 Feb 21]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724.
Bluebook style

Scapular, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724 (last visited Feb. 21, 2011).
Bluebook: Harvard JOLT style

Wikipedia, Scapular, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapular (optional description here) (as of Feb. 21, 2011, 21:03 GMT).
AMA style

Wikipedia contributors. Scapular. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. December 1, 2010, 22:29 UTC. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724. Accessed February 21, 2011.
BibTeX entry

@misc{ wiki:xxx,
author = "Wikipedia",
title = "Scapular --- Wikipedia{,} The Free Encyclopedia",
year = "2010",
url = "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724",
note = "[Online; accessed 21-February-2011]"
}

When using the LaTeX package url (\usepackage{url} somewhere in the preamble), which tends to give much more nicely formatted web addresses, the following may be preferred:

@misc{ wiki:xxx,
author = "Wikipedia",
title = "Scapular --- Wikipedia{,} The Free Encyclopedia",
year = "2010",
url = "\url{http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724}",
note = "[Online; accessed 21-February-2011]"
}

Wikipedia talk pages

Markup
[[Scapular]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scapular&oldid=400006724 this version])

Result
Scapular (this version)

here are presently five uses of the term Solidarism:

[img[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/ab/ImamAli.jpg/140px-ImamAli.jpg]]

Within Shi'ite Islamic tradition,[1] the concept of Taqiyya (تقية - 'fear, guard against')[2] refers to a dispensation allowing believers to conceal their faith when under threat, persecution or compulsion.[3]

The word "al-Taqiyya" literally means: "Concealing or disguising one's beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of imminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury." A one-word translation would be "dissimulation." [4]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Definition
* 2 History
* 3 Muslim view
o 3.1 Sunni view
o 3.2 Shi'a view
* 4 Use in politics
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 Further reading
* 8 External links

[edit] Definition

In Shia Islam, taiqyya is the practice of concealing one's faith and forgoing ordinary religious duties under threat of death or injury to oneself or to one's fellow Muslims. It has since been practiced mostly among minority groups, particularly those of the Shi'ite branch. Various rules governing its application are meant to ensure that taqiyyah does not become an excuse for cowardice or for failure to take appropriate action. Consideration of community rather than private welfare is generally stressed.

[edit] History

According to Twelver Shia, the first use of Taqiyya historically took place during the time of Muhammad when the Quraishis began torturing Muslims. Ammar ibn Yasir, a follower of Muhammad, whose parents were tortured in front of him by the Qurashis has renounced Islam & praised the Qurashi God "Hubal" to save his parents' lives. Yasir's parents were killed in front of him in the end, because they didn't renounce Islam. According to a canonical hadith, the prophet Muhammad later gave his permission for him to repeat such an act if he was placed in danger again.[citation needed]

Most Sunnis criticize Ammar for his actions or question the reliability of the story. Sunnis cite the examples of many Muslims who were tortured and murdered merely based on their belief during the time of Muhammad, Umayyad and Abbasids but did not renounce their faith. For example, Ammar's parents had both been tortured and killed in front of Ammar but did not renounce the faith.

Sunnis believe that God decides when someone is going to die. Therefore, they believe it is wrong to deny the faith in order to escape torture or death. By contrast, the Shi'a and some Sunnis believe that life is a gift from God and should be preserved. In a life-threatening emergency, they believe that the preservation of life takes precedence over anything else, in the same way that it is permissible to eat pork during famine.[citation needed]

Sa'id ibn Zayd and Fatimah bint al-Khattab were married and both hid their faith from Umar ibn al-Khattab,[citation needed] until Umar found out they were Muslims. Umar also became a Muslim that same day.

[edit] Muslim view

[edit] Sunni view

Most Sunnis generally assert that the Shi'a doctrine of taqiyya isn't in accordance with its acceptable use (to save one's life). They assert that Shi'as have been using taqiyya as a tool of deception, not to save their own lives, but to cause strife for the Sunni Calipha (which was resented by Shi'as) and to legitimize their own minority faith in the eyes of a majority by whom it is constantly surrounded.[5] They point to the prominent Shi'a work Al Kafi (v9 p116) as evidence to what they call the Shia misuses of taqiyya. It reads, "Mix with them [non-Shi'a] externally but oppose them internally." They say that although taqiyya to save one's life can be considered legitimate at times, the way Shi'as have applied taqiyya by misrepresenting historical occurrences and sayings is forbidden.[6] Allegations such as these are found in many Sunni writings, classical and contemporary.

[edit] Shi'a view

Taqiyya does not constitute a part of either the Shi'a Roots or Branches of Religion, in the same manner as, for example, the Hijab rules do not.

The practice was a method of self-preservation for the Shi'as who historically were the minority and severely persecuted and oppressed by Sunni Muslims.[citation needed] Shi'as say that Sunnis would sometimes force them to curse the House of Ali - believing that no devout Shi'a could commit such an act [7]. As a result, the practice of Taqiyya normalized. In other words, if a Shi'a Muslim's life is in danger, he may lie as long as he holds his faith true in his heart. Ayatollah Sistani, a 21st century Shi'a Islamic scholar states:
“ 1) Taqiyah is done for safety reasons. For example, a person fears that he might be killed or harmed, if he does not observe Taqiyah. In this case, it is obligatory to observe Taqiyah.

2) Reconciliatory Taqiyah. This type of Taqiyah is done when a person intends to reconcile with the other side or when he intends to soften their hearts. This kind of Taqiyah is permissible but not obligatory.
3) Sometimes, Taqiyah may cause a more important obligation to be lost or missed, if so it is forbidden. For example, when I know that silence would cause oppression and infidelity to spread and will make people go astray, in such a situation it is not permissible to be silent and to dissimulate.
4) Sometimes, Taqiyah may lead to the death of an innocent person. If so, it is not permissible. It is therefore haram (forbidden) to kill another person to save your own life.[8]
”

[edit] Use in politics

Graham Allison suggests that the United Staes should be "wary" of the concept when negotiating with Iran regarding its nuclear program.[9

Through theoria, the contemplation of the triune God, human beings come to know and experience what it means to be fully human (the created image of God); through their communion with Jesus Christ, God shares Himself with the human race, in order to conform them to all that He is in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness. As God became human, in all ways except sin, He will also make humans god (Holy or saintly), in all ways except his divine essence (uncaused or uncreatedness). St Irenaeus explained this doctrine in Against Heresies, Book 5, in the Preface, "the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through his transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself."

In Christian theology, Divinization, deification, making divine or theosis is the transforming effect of divine grace.[1] This concept of salvation is historical and fundamental for Christian understanding that is prominent in the Eastern Orthodox Church and also in the Catholic Church.[2][3] Other Christian traditions, such as the Latter-day Saint movement, teach comparable doctrines.[4]