Posted by timethief in By Guest Author Geoffrey
First, I am not a Christian, although I would support Christian values as they are espoused by the New Testament. I feel uneasy about religion generally. I was born to a Jewish Mother and a Catholic Father! Perhaps, that’s a little like a Woody Allen joke I once heard, “It means I get guilt and anxiety in equal measure!”
I profess to not knowing what good religion has ever done for mankind. What I see in the world is a mass of prejudice and hatred being enacted in religion’s name.
I wrote about the concept of projection recently in my “Love’s Passage” blog. There seems to be good grounds to suggest that religion has underpinned (what Jung might have described as) much ’shadow projection’ in our recent history. Shadow projection is a process whereby one expresses those dark parts of oneself by its attribution to another. It is a little like unconscious blame, blaming someone else for something that one cannot face about oneself.
The Nazis did shadow projection en masse to the Jews. There might be some justification to argue that the Iraq war is underpinned by the same dynamic. I believe that we may be facing unparalleled social, political and economic problems in our western world. They are as difficult to face and accept, as they are to deal with! Rather than accept that the problems are our own, not God’s, but our very own, I suspect we seek to look for causes outside ourselves and the Iraqis were an easy target. Next, it may be the potential (nuclear) threat posed by Iran. I will need some convincing of that one too.
First, the justification for the Iraqi war was the existence of WMD. There were none. So the focus changed. Next, it was Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda and the so-called “war against terror” that fuelled the conflict after the WMD fiasco. So where are they? Prove it! I’ll take a very unpopular position now. I suspect there are as many links to Al Qaeda in the USA or the UK as there are in Iraq.
Whatever the truth might be, religions, that seek to expound their own veracity and that deny the validity of the beliefs of others, produce conflict.
I am not wholly sure if religion is necessarily the root cause of our difficulties, or if it is some other kind of symptomatic, largely ethnocentric, false justification of social and political wrongdoing. I regard killing, mass slaughter and genocide as fundamentally wrong in common with Christian beliefs.
Christianity, at least, Christianity as I understand it, teaches tolerance and acceptance of difference. Therein, lies an innate contradiction, since it also seeks, in common with Islam and one might argue Judaism, to establish its primacy among religions as the only truth. It was after all, St Augustine, who said, “I take all gods prisoners of Christ.” This was the justification for the “holy crusades”. It may be worth emphasising that St Augustine was talking about Mohammed, Jahweh and Buddha too! If one is a Muslim, then similarly one might believe that one’s own religion has primacy over others. Inevitably if one sees the religious truth of others as false, then conflict will result.
Your assertion that “by the twentieth century Christian churches were advocating war as long as it served to stop the Nazis, the Fascists and the Communists.” is incorrect.
Hitler was a Catholic and he maintained that he was fighting a Christian cause. The Nazis entered a “concordat” with the Vatican. Here are some words from the man himself:
“My feeling as a Christian beads me to be a fighter for my Lord and Saviour. It leads me to the man who, at one time lonely and with only a few followers, recognised the Jews for what they were, and called on men to fight against them… As a Christian, I owe something to my own people.” — Adolf Hitler
“The (Nazi) party stands for positive Christianity” — Adolf Hitler
So the attempted genocide of the Jews was a valid, “Christian” cause in Hitler’s eyes. How frightening is that? Just a reminder…the Nazis killed six million Jewish people during the holocaust in a cause bolstered by so-called Christian beliefs.
I know this is uncomfortable to think about, it’s uncomfortable to talk about, as it is difficult to accept. But then I’m not out to make converts either! Nor would I criticise or condemn those who had a different viewpoint.
Even in the war of terror, both the Christian west and Al Qaeda would maintain that they have God on their side: Two different gods, but God, nevertheless. Al Qaeda also claims religious justification for their abominable acts of killing that included 911.
Let’s put the question another way. In the context of conflict, what exactly does religion express? Why did Hitler choose to victimise the Jews? Most German Jews I have known were completely integrated within German society. So why them? What fuelled the Nigerian conflict between the Ibos, the Yorubas, and the Hausa in which millions of Biafran people died? What sustained the UK conflict in Northern Ireland and on the mainland for so many years? To say it was religion might be a little glib, although many would be quick to seize upon it.
There are, of course, all sorts of factors offered up by history books, some of which are honest enough to acknowledge the role of religion in causing conflict. Ethnic and religious groups provide easy targets. The Jews were different, both culturally and socially, as were the Irish Catholics and the Biafrans. In times of economic and social difficulty, people look outside of their own, usually dominant social group to attribute blame. It’s been happening for a long time, and now we can do it globally. We can pick on those less close to home.
By the way, if you are still sceptical, whatever happened to the global threat posed by the Vietcong? Remember them? That particular problem went away when the United States ceased the Vietnam War. I wonder why?
I’ve never regarded Jung as a political theorist although I am coming to believe he had more to say than most! Perhaps in wars and conflicts, he might have talked about “pseudo-speciation”, a process whereby we take human social and cultural differences including religion to differentiate ourselves as a, usually superior, species. It was exactly what Hitler did to the Jews. Similarly, it might be what Al Qaeda does to Christians and vice versa.
Given economic and social difficulties (that are present in the German / Jewish, Nigeria / Biafran, and Anglo-Irish conflicts), it might be argued that we seek to attribute the blame for our difficulties elsewhere through “shadow projection”. The Iraqis become the big, bad, evil bogeymen, as did the Jews in Nazi Germany.
I struggle with knowing what so-called bad Iraqis have done to most in the western world, although I know about their slaughter of the Turkish Kurds. I am a friend of a man high up in the Kurdish government. But no one is seeking justice for the Kurdish people in this conflict. Saddam was undoubtedly a ruthless, murdering politician. I also believe that in time the Iraqi people would have seen that and dealt with him too. Neither the USA nor the allied forces will solve the internecine strife within Iraq that is again based on social, cultural and religious differences. But we go on. So why?
My conclusion? First, I’m not sure if I buy into this “God on our side (against others)” bit at all. There is nothing Christian or holy about war or killing people. I’m not sure I buy into the justification for the Iraqi war either. Please can someone give me a good rationale for it that is not couched in jingoistic patriotism or paranoia for this war? Sorry for my naïveté, but what outcome are we seeking here? Ah, there is one point I missed. Our economies are totally screwed up as is our energy supply and Iraq can produce an incredible amount of oil. There were all those pipelines that America helped lay across Afghanistan after the war there too. Mmm I wonder…
Second, it’s time Christians lived by their own words: Words of tolerance, love and inclusion. Jesus never said, “I take all gods prisoners of me”. He said, “I suffer (permit) little children to come unto me,” meaning in my non-Christian understanding, I welcome the innocents and the non-believers into my view of goodness. Jesus never spurned people because they were different either.
A poem just crossed my mind about Jesus. It’s by Antonio Machado:
I love Jesus, who said to us:
Heaven and earth will pass away.
When heaven and earth have passed away,
my word will remain.
What was your word, Jesus?
Love? Affection? Forgiveness?
All your words were
one word: Wakeup!
So Wake up!
Last point now: Please will all you Christians read that darned book of yours and seek to understand how we have changed it! You’ll need to go back to scriptures that were translated from Greek. I’ve done that too. Two things stood out to me. The new bible talks about “righteousness” that was translated from words meaning “loving kindness”. How different those words are. Then there is a definition of sin too that changes the world. Sin is translated from the Greek word, “hammartia”, meaning missing the mark or getting it wrong. The thing about missing the mark is that you can try again and get it right! It’s not some judgement for confession; it’s a lesson for life.
I’m an Englishman living in France, and my favourite words about sin are these. It’s a French proverb:
“Qui ne tente rien, n’a rien” I’m not sure if that’s quite correct, I wanted to say, “Only he who does nothing makes no mistakes”.
For me, that’s wisdom to live by. So let’s all sin lots and learn from our mistakes. God knows! There are many of them.
Related post: Wake up America: God is not on your side
I wanted to thank you from this good article, and I would like to say that you are right.. we all do mistakes, no body’s perfect, but only God is perfect!
I wanted to continue with the great historical article you wrote, I have posted recently about what they call it “Gaza Holocaust Museum”, I am not sure you have heard about it or not, so I will share this with you to give another way of thinking about all of that again, maybe someone will get a better way of understanding the confusing things, or a better look to the whole situation, I am sorry if I have to post the link to the article here, but it’s photos that people should see, I can not describe them by words, all exist in that page!
http://mylifethinking.com/life/?p=313
All the best!
Excellent article. That’s all I can think of to say, you said the rest so well!
The fundamentalist wings of the muslim and christian faiths are the main problem in the east vs west conflict. The right wing muslims don’t know the meaning of the word tolerance and the right wing christians think it’s their way or the highway. Throw in a bunch of political and economic intrigues and you’ve got a real mess. God help us all if the U. S. election doesn’t produce a leader who understands these complex issues.
This is a very good post!
My take is this: Religion is used by evil people as a tool to justify their actions. All religious books were written by wise men but it was 1) relevant only to their time 2) they were not evil and had no idea how their words could be misinterpreted or misused.
Hinduism does not try to convert anyone though. This became a disadvantage for Hindus as those of other religions invaded India, conquered and forcibly converted people.
Umm, my comment disappeared!
@ Hisham
Thank you for sharing that with me.
Someone else had pointed it out at to me at Islam online. The pictures there of damaged and injured children are horrific. They would bring tears to the eyes of any feeling being.
I have no partisan or biased feelings in these matters beyond that I feel that killing and war is wrong, whoever does it to whom, whether it be Jews, Muslims or Western Christians. I do not feel qualified to comment on the political dynamics of the so-called Middle-Eastern conflict either, although I am a little wary of plaudits to look at the “whole situation” nor do I agree necessarily that it is confusing.
The dynamics of war in the middle east are similar to wars everywhere. The same false justifications seem to apply wherever one looks, and alarmingly, and the whole point of what TT and I wrote about, the nations and groups involved in war claim that “God is on their side” as some sort of immutable justification for doing harm to and killing others. If one looks at those horrific pictures of damaged children, one needs to remember that men did that harm. It had nothing to do with God! There’s a scripture reference I’m struggling to find…perhaps it will come to me later.
The point is about humans taking responsibility for their own lives and their own actions. Excusing atrocities by saying they were committed in “the name of God” doesn’t cut it! Being fully *conscious* of and responsible for one’s actions is perhaps the only way that we will stop doing this repugnant harm to others. Who could look at one of those pictures and admit they were the product of their own actions? Who could feel good or proud about having done that damage to innocent children? Who?
No one.
No one could ever live with or face up to doing that. It doesn’t matter where it is, not whether it’s in Auschwitz, Palestine, Iraq, Belfast or somewhere else in the USA or Europe. People *cope* with conscience or wrongdoing by unconscious psychological ploys like projection, transference, blame or denial. That’s also my point.
I am a little off-subject here. That piece was not something I usually write about although TT’s excellent article moved me to do so. Normally I write about the value of developing responsibility in all aspects of our lives, consciousness and love. In my heart, I believe that it is only by developing those aspects of oneself that one can find a way out of misery, war, slaughter and social unease. Writing what I did, I found difficult at the time…very difficult. But it has reaffirmed my faith in my own beliefs and for that I am grateful.
Thank you, Hisham.
@ searchingwithin
Thank you so much. It’s good to find you here! I notice two of my new online friends left comments.
I really appreciate your positive feedback. It encourages me to keep writing!
Best wishes,
Geoffrey
Hi Laura
Great to see you here too!
Whoever that new leader is has one hell of a job. I do hope, he, whoever he is, has a great deal of moral courage, as he will need it. Also I hope it is someone who is brave enough to see and tell it like it is. Would you fancy that job? I’m not sure that I would.
You are probably right about the right wing and intolerance. It seems that it is frequently the right wing that claims blind adherence to the religious high ground. I’m unsure if it’s an entirely right-wing phenomena per se, however.
There has been a very strong growth in Christian fundamentalism throughout the United States that is not always associated with the social groups one might ordinarily link with the right wing. I do believe that this growth in fundamentalism is probably connected with feelings of alienation, powerlessness and latent social unrest. People, who feel unable to change the world they live in, start to look outside themselves for solace, comfort and for meaning in their lives. Unable to find it, they begin to believe power and responsibility resides elsewhere and turn to God. To a fundamentalist, there is an almost fatalistic dependence on “the will of God” that abnegates social and personal responsibility. They become reliant on a deity to “show them the way”. Perhaps, what it is more frightening is the politician, the one who lays claim to the godhead, who maintains that their own actions follow the “will of God” and in whose name they purport to act.
Sound familiar?
Best wishes
Geoffrey
Religion looked at through a political prism is never going to produce spectacular results. Jung and psychiatry are a little bit better but not much.
How do you get away from it though? Religion essentially involves a gathering of people together. And when you have people interacting you are going to have politics.
The Catholic church has been around for a long time now and it has done some awful things in the name of religion. If it was not a religion it would have been destroyed a long time ago.
But it is still here along with many other religions. It’s not too difficult to see them all as horrid affairs.
But that’s because it’s not too difficult to see human beings as rather horrid too. Cruel, insane and petty depending on the phases of the moon.
Still people persist. Religions persist. Why? Something holds all of this up. And the thing that does this does not respond to logic or intellectual analysis.
It responds to love that is pure. Somehow people can get together and express this too from time to time. Although it is easy too forget and doesn’t get the big headlines.
This is why religions persist while governments fall down through the centuries. Love is stronger than logic.
Unfortunately it is not very pushy. It writes few editorials. It is too busy seeking the way into our hearts.
There is very little I can add to this as you have said it all so very powerfully and wisely. I will say this though, that I am so proud of you for tackling these often controversial issues with a strong voice filled with conviction. You did the same with when talking about gay rights. I applaud you and agree. You are a very strong spokesperson not only for the underdog, but the repressed. You are very compassionate and yet you won’t stand for nonsense. I like that. I admire you Time Thief. I REALLY admire you. Thank you from my heart. Love, RainforestRobin
@David
I apologize for not responding to your comment earlier. There was a change of name servers via domain mapping that went wonky and I couldn’t get into this blog to reply to your well thought out comment. Thanks so much for making it.
I was particular touched by this statement you made.
“This is why religions persist while governments fall down through the centuries. Love is stronger than logic. ”
AMEN
Thanks for your admiration Robin. I’m honored by it. I didn’t write this last post my guest blogger Geoffrey did. Also I could n’t your comment because there was a change of name servers via domain mapping and I couldn’t sign into the blog for the last 2 days. Luckily I can now.
Love you too
The misuse of religion is the problem, not religion itself. And you are 100% correct. Hitler used Christianity to justify the killing and imprisonment of Jews. The Germans accepted it because at the time, Germany suffered so much due to the harsh terms that ended WWI. It was easy to find a scapegoat with a connection (Jews and banking) whether right or wrong.
Nearly every armed conflict had some economic reason behind it. Most people are not willing to go to war for currency, but fighting for god, that is another situation altogether. The masses can get behind it.
Few would die for cheaper food or oil for their family, but throw in the promise of 72 virgins and eternal bliss, and the sign up sheet gets filled right in.
I don’t blame religion, but rather the sheeple world-wide who adhere to the “Good Book,” but have never read it with any understanding.
This is a test comment. I had sent two comments on your previous post but they did not appear, I think they went into spam. I wrote you but no reply. Maybe I had the wrong email id. Anyway, I am just testing.
Oh I do admire your attitude … but I’m such a curmudgeon. I think it’s genetic. But I’ve always thought of myself as an optimistic curmudgeon.
@Nita
I’ve sent you email to explain what happened. I can only find your test comments and not the original one.
@joe
Thanks for commenting. I do agree that the sheeple who have no clear understanding of the tenets of the faith they profess are legion. I dropped a message into Geoffrey’s shoutbox so he knows your comment is here. Please read the comment above yours so you know why there was a delayed response from me.
@drowseymonkey
I’m looking to the future with some optimism as well. I think that we are all much more aware than we have been in the past and I do believe that we don’t want to see repeat performances. Religion and state are a terribly dangerous mix.
Sorry to all for being slow getting back. Weekend was hectic as always! I’m delighted and honoured by your responses.
Geoffrey
@ David
A very interesting perspective, David, although I believe there is nothing inevitable about religion or politics or the effect they have on our lives.
Politics arise from the need to make decisions about the world we live in.
It’s odd, isn’t it, that in language, politics becomes synonymous with manipulative, and often under-hand or devious dynamics; and about the exercise of power by a few people over many.
Frequently I wonder if we are best served by present political systems or whether there might be a better way of governing our lives that is more inclusive.
Whether it is in religion or politics, my belief is that we *all* need to accept and take responsibility for the world in which we live and which we wish to inhabit. Unless we change in that fundamental aspect then we will continue to inhabit lives that are alienated and alienating. If we blindly accept the status quo then the result becomes a sort of inevitable fatalism - “a que sera, sera - what will be, will be”. We are not powerless and we can choose, whether it be religion, politics or anything else. I would support your view and choose love too.
The path of love is not without its difficulties. I wrote elsewhere, “Love requires courage as in a way it’s a sacrifice of what our modern culture believes to be valuable. It means standing up for love, leaving the pack…with something better than what others may see in their blindness. True love is about giving and nothing less. It is about giving love rather than desperately searching to be loved. It’s the only attitude that can begin to carry you through the agony of human limitation and mortality. Love that is based on giving, not receiving, is true and lasting. It is never fleeting and can never fly off into despair and hate.
It is a pity that true love is feared by most of us, and is hardly ever taught to anyone, children or adults.”
Love is at the centre of my personal beliefs too.
Best wishes,
Geoffrey
@Robin
Thank you, Robin. I am delighted that you enjoyed this post.
I share your admiration for Timethief too. I have never made a post on anyone else’s blog before, but I was more than happy to do so here since I share and support many of TT’s values and beliefs, and aspire to her compassion.
Geoffrey
@ Nita
Thank you for your appreciation.
I suspect that the power of all religions is that they all contained wisdom and values that are directed at human goodness. I tried to think of one tenet that is common to all religions. Perhaps it is, “Do to others, as you would have others do to you”. I believe in that one!
Perhaps, in ancient times, religions may have been a way of writing metaphors and stories about better ways to live our lives. Many religions contain myths that are obviously not literal truths, but simply lessons for life. Their claim to moral superiority was a local one. They were an exhortation directed at communities amongst which the religions were established for the good of that community at the time. These bodies of wisdom changed. The development of the Christian Bible took place over something like 3,500 years, I understand. At the time of their origins, there was no comprehension of the different communities and different cultures that existed beyond those to which religions were addressed. I do not believe either that there was any intrinsic notion of national or international political or social domination expressed within religions themselves. Consciousness existed within nations until man sought to extend its economic wealth beyond national boundaries.
It’s at this point in our histories that religions become synonymous with conflict. Part of economic subjugation was about the imposition of social, cultural and religious beliefs by one nation on another. In time, we became blind to our histories, and came to believe that our religions (our way of life, our beliefs, our cultures and our view of the world) were superior to others. This is demonstrated well in the way that Victorian Britain tried to impose its values (and its religion) on the rest of the world with missionary zeal! They believed that their way was the right way and went to any lengths by warfare or economic means to enforce their beliefs. Many other nations did the same. Religion became bound up with economic, political and power structures supported by the notion that “God was on their side”.
I suspect that this period of our historical development may now be in its death throes. Like any ending or major change, it is accompanied by turmoil and conflict. Hanging onto the “God is on my side” argument, is simply another way of saying that whatever I do, I am right and you are wrong (since “God is on *my* side”, not yours!). It’s a sham! The world is changing and changing fast for those who have the courage to see it. Doubtless, there will be more pain and suffering in the wake of that change as power groups refuse to let go of the world as it was.
Best wishes,
Geoffrey
Thanks Drowsey Monkey!
Let’s be optimistic curmudgeons together! Genes may influence our physical makeup but we can still choose how we behave. Here’s hoping…
I like, timethief, am optimistic about what might be possible in the world now. There are only a few of us having this discussion here but I am aware that at least three continents are represented in this dialogue. How wonderful is that? The fact that we are having these discussions is grounds for optimism, I believe.
Geoffrey
From the European contingent…an Englishman living in France!
@ Joe
Thanks Joe. I agree!
“Nearly every armed conflict had some economic reason behind it. Most people are not willing to go to war for currency, but fighting for god, that is another situation altogether. The masses can get behind it.
I don’t blame religion, but rather the sheeple world-wide who adhere to the “Good Book,” but have never read it with any understanding.”
I’m right behind you there, but perhaps it’s time for us to write a different sort of book for our lives, one that is alive, vital, loving and compassionate…one that we choose to live, rather than one that existed in ancient history that we worship!
I don’t believe religion is the problem either. Problems in religion are ultimately problems in society. Religion is not the disease, but merely a symptom of other social difficulties…and they are pervasive.
Geoffrey
Geoffrey. Great thoughts as usual :o)
I especially enjoyed your answer/comment to David.
I also read your comment about the Golden Rule. This one I have struggled with for years. It is bittersweet, for can not this also mean “saving” all non-followers of one’s own religion into one’s religion? The intention being the good thing to do in the behavior of “saving”. Do many not operate on “good intentions” without asking their fellow humans if it is what they wish? As has been stated, “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions”.
With so many struggling to learn to accept/like/love themselves, there are many things they would choose to do for me that they would wish for themselves (in a state of non-acceptance of themselves), and of which I really do not want them doing unto me! hehe. I tend to stick to the more ancient rule stated in various ways, and one version comes from Confucius, about not doing unto others that which one does not wish done unto oneself. For me this represents simplicity, and it cuts out a great deal of unethical behavior through a more general framework. Many claim that the two Rules are similar, yet I find vast differences. However, this is still something that I ponder about…wonder about….and, contemplate in the context of world events. My cognitive “jury” is still out for the vote. :o))
Thank you for a great post, and a wonderful “read”!
Good post. There’s nothing Christian happening when people are killing themselves for the idiots in power.
@ Pentad
Tamera
I don’t know what it is quite about you and me but whenever we exchange thoughts and feelings I always find myself *compelled* to go off and write something! I wasn’t entirely sure what the “Golden Rule” was. In everyday psychology terms, I am opposed to the notion of “saving” and “rescuing” behaviours. They are entirely unhealthy, they don’t work and *hell* is exactly where they may lead! I’ve had a couple of skirmishes with acquaintances who see their mission as rescuing or saving others from unhappiness, brokenness and despair and overall I find them quite scary! I am going to put this one on my ever-growing list of subjects to write about on my “Love’s Passage” blog. I feel the need to explain why I am opposed to rescuing and saving, as many (not you) might regard me as seeking to undermine their *acts of goodness*.
I take your point too about doing and not doing to others. As a person with good self-esteem (most of the time!) I had not considered that wisdom as deeply as I should have done. It is a common thread between religions, however. Your point about the Confucian inversion of that notion is entirely valid, I believe. There is a real cognitive difference too.
I should have learned that particular lesson well by now. So often, have I been on the receiving end of people doing to me as they would wish to be done to them, where what they would wish for themselves might be unhealthy and damaging.
When I wrote that I was considering it as a notion predicated upon love, both for others and for oneself. Even then it is complex as the nature of love is not some innate “given”, but something that resides in our consciousness, both as individuals and in the values, belief systems and cultures of our social world. I am not sure that it represents simplicity necessarily. You say, “it cuts out a great deal of unethical behavior”. This is essentially a value judgment. I have no problem with that but it might require one to examine or state the basis and source of one’s ethical position in the context of one’s own personal and social consciousness. Nevertheless, I vote with Confucius!
Thank you for your interesting and thoughtful words, Tamera.
@Kelly
Thank you, Kelly.
Quite right. “There’s nothing Christian when people are killing.” I enjoyed your post on the connectedness and pervasiveness of ignorance, power and greed. But who put those idiots in power in the first place? (I shuffle about uneasily and look at my feet when I ask myself that question!)
Personally I would avoid joining with your argument since it may be a way of attributing blame for something for which we are all responsible. The appointment of those “idiots” as you call them is down to us too. Following their words without question is also a matter of our responsibility. Saying “*They* made me do it,” takes us back to the age-old problem. They are the words of war criminals everywhere.
Sorry to sound a little harsh there. But if we want a different sort of world without killing, it’s up to us. There is no one else to blame.