Alternative ethics

[Andrew D]

Some feel they have spirits that need nurturing; that that aids in their self-improvement/affirmation/enlightenment. Some find it music, some find family, some find it in nature; things that nourish the soul. However, it's a choice to seek to feel it; it does takes more effort to do so. The choices are up to the individual; everyone's needs are not exactly the same.

Which just goes to show that the term "spirituality," at least when used in a non-technical sense (as it almost always is), is too nebulous to be useful.

It differentiates dogmatic religion from real faith.

Huh? A feeling that some people get from listening to music differentiates dogmatic religion from real faith? What does that even mean?

[Big RR]

Oh and I'll give you Stalin.

But I think you'll find that his case was an anomaly...

And Mao, and Hitler, and Pol Pot, ... not all mass murderers are religious.

Not neccessarily CP... I'm not sure how the people of Salem profited.

Well, many profited in getting the lands and goods of those condemned, and the church profited in a renewed commitment among the populace, along with a renewed commitment of resources. And those who could condemn people to death clearly profited in having their own will done by those who were legitimately afraid of them.

[Sean]

And Mao, and Hitler, and Pol Pot, ... not all mass murderers are religious

Not disputing that Big RR but the only one of those three whose atrocities were in any way religiouly inspired (by his anti-semitism) was Hitler... and he was a Christian!

There are many Christians who would prefer to believe that Hitler was an atheist but his words do not support this...

Stuttgart, February 15, 1933: "Today they say that Christianity is in danger, that the Catholic faith is threatened. My reply to them is: for the time being, Christians and not international atheists are now standing at Germany’s fore. I am not merely talking about Christianity; I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties which aim to destroy Christianity. Fourteen years they have gone arm in arm with atheism. At no time was greater damage ever done to Christianity than in those years when the Christian parties ruled side by side with those who denied the very existence of God. Germany's entire cultural life was shattered and contaminated in this period. It shall be our task to burn out these manifestations of degeneracy in literature, theater, schools, and the press—that is, in our entire culture—and to eliminate the poison which has been permeating every facet of our lives for these past fourteen years."

Berlin, October 24, 1933: "We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."

Radio address, October 14, 1933: "For eight months we have been waging a heroic battle against the Communist threat to our Volk, the decomposition of our culture, the subversion of our art, and the poisoning of our public morality. We have put an end to denial of God and abuse of religion. We owe Providence humble gratitude for not allowing us to lose our battle against the misery of unemployment and for the salvation of the German peasant."

Koblenz, August 26, 1934: "There may have been a time when even parties founded on the ecclesiastical basis were a necessity. At that time Liberalism was opposed to the Church, while Marxism was anti-religious. But that time is past. National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary, it stands on the ground of a real Christianity. The Church's interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against the Bolshevist culture, against an atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for the consciousness of a community in our national life, for the conquest of hatred and disunion between the classes, for the conquest of civil war and unrest, of strife and discord. These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles."

[Crackpot]

THe salem witch trials wer both a land grab and a chance to stifle (or crush) dissenting voices.
THe Crusades were political in that it was an attempt by the western (Catholic) church to gain power over the eastern (orthodox) church. (As well as the "holy land")

Basically it worked like this: Costantonople asks for assistance in combating the Islamic threat. Rome sends an occupying army. Constantonople See this and says Screw that you're not getting in here the Muslims are across the isthmus THe army crosses fights some battles does alot of winning and quickly loses most of their gains but not before THe pope gets a taste of the spoils so he keeps sending more and more. All are eventually beaten back t great lost of wealth and manpower. So they send one last Crusade to sack Constantonople.

THe inquisitions were big for a while but they rapidly lost favor (even amidst the other rampant the abuses of the middle ages) due to the obvious ease of corruption. The Spanish Church refused to stop and even stepped up their prosecutions and brutality (the spanish church was getting way to rich on confiscated property)

There are many groups out there who commit atrocites for no other reason than their victims believe in a different Celestial Teapot and have different values.

People reverse engineer their justifications for their hate. Religion is handy in that it is easy to:
A) quote mine and take out of context
B) a convenient tool to recruit others that do not have the inclination to actually fact check their claims and have similar beliefs.

P.S. Pol Pot

[Crackpot]

While you can't say Hitler was irreligious he wasn't Christian either. He was more of a "pagan" (I use the term because the proper one isn't coning to mind) THat is not to say that he didn't use Christians (Most notably Catholics) to suit his ends.

[Sean]

THe salem witch trials wer both a land grab and a chance to stifle (or crush) dissenting voices.

And yet witches nowhere were persecuted until the Pope gave the all clear...

THe Crusades were political in that it was an attempt by the western (Catholic) church to gain power over the eastern (orthodox) church. (As well as the "holy land")

One church trying to gain power over another church sounds vaguely religious to me...

There are many groups out there who commit atrocites for no other reason than their victims believe in a different Celestial Teapot and have different values.

People reverse engineer their justifications for their hate. Religion is handy in that it is easy to:
A) quote mine and take out of context
B) a convenient tool to recruit others that do not have the inclination to actually fact check their claims and have similar beliefs.

Much as I agree with both A) and B) I disagree with the notion that there are no atrocities with purely religious motives. Religion is too powerful a force in this world for that to be the case.

P.S. Pol Pot

The Khmer Rouge were motivated by political not religious dogma. The two are very often confused when fanatiscism rears its head.

[Sean]

While you can't say Hitler was irreligious he wasn't Christian either. He was more of a "pagan" (I use the term because the proper one isn't coning to mind) THat is not to say that he didn't use Christians (Most notably Catholics) to suit his ends.

I'm happy to take your word for that CP.

My main point still remains though, Hitler was not an atheist.

[Crackpot]

the Pope had nothing to do with salem.

One church trying to gain power over another church sounds vaguely religious to me...

political as well

Much as I agree with both A) and B) I disagree with the notion that there are no atrocities with purely religious motives. Religion is too powerful a force in this world for that to be the case.

that depends on how you look at it. I would argue that none of the Large scale atrocities usually bandies about aren't but the small scale ones? Like say Warren Jeffs? I could give you that one. Fred Phelps? Definitely. (though I would argue that his "religion" doesn't reflact any major world I've heard of) But, I ask what about other factors such as Megalomania? What about other psychological factors on the part of the perpetrators? How much can anything be said to be the "pure" motive?

PS. Pol Pot was an answer to Stalin being an anomaly.

[Gob]

Stalin/Hitler/Pol Pot were not acting on the the basis of an athiest belief system though, their disbelief in god had nothing to do with the way they acted.

They were not driven by athiesm in the way maleus magnificarum/the crusades/the bible/Koran has driven religious murder.

Edited to catch up with discussions.

[Sean]

the Pope had nothing to do with salem.

I humbly beg to differ...
Not just Salem but witch-hunting in general.

Stalin/Hitler/Pol Pot were not acting on the the basis of an athiest belief system though, their disbelief in god had nothing to do with the way they acted.

To be fair Strop, Stalin did tend to get a bit iffy with people who professed faith.

[Gob]

Serves 'em right

[loCAtek]

And what bred that fanaticism?
Their faith, that's what!

Nah, the semantics can be confusing.


Your faith(spirituality) can come from your religion, which is practice and ritual.

Practicing religion can lead to spiritual faith,

Or;

Following religion can lead to fanatical dogma.

The difference is in your individual sincerity and humility; do you practice to serve the divine, or yourself?


BTW I agree with you that Serving yourself by way of fanatical dogma is a bad thing.

[Sean]

And what bred that fanaticism?
Their faith, that's what!

Nah, the semantics can be confusing.


Your faith(spirituality) can come from your religion, which is practice and ritual.

Practicing religion can lead to spiritual faith,

Or;

Following religion can lead to fanatical dogma.

The difference is in your individual sincerity and humility; do you practice to serve the divine, or yourself?


BTW I agree with you that Serving yourself by way of fanatical dogma is a bad thing.

Trust me, as someone who was brought up as a Catholic I am in no way confused by the semantics. Did you realise that Catholics describe their religion as the 'Catholic Faith'?

Religion is about a system of beliefs. Belief = faith.
In other words without spiritual faith you do not have religion. I of course am using the word 'spiritual' in it's religious sense rather than its hippy-dippy one...
Ask any practising Catholic if they are a spiritual person and they will give you a wholehearted yes.
My point is that the concepts of 'religion' and 'spirituality' can not be separated so easily. They are often very entwined.

On the matter of self-serving as opposed to serving the divine, both will often work hand in hand. The puppeteer may or may not be self-serving but the puppet who pilots a plane into a building believes that he is serving the divine.

Edited to add: Serving yourself by way of fanatical dogma is indeed a bad thing... but so is serving the divine through fanatical dogma.

[Crackpot]

How can the pope be blamed for the actions of non Catholics Sean?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Parris

[Sean]

Fair enough CP but you will notice that I wasn't letting you tie me down to talking about just Salem... you may have noticed that I used the words "witch-hunting in general'.
Salem is by far the most famous of the witch trials but certainly not the only one. And yes, I am aware that it was the Puritans who ran those particular trials.

Would the Salem trials have happened if the practice hadn't been popularised and officially recognised by one of the dominant religious figures in the world many years earlier?

Perhaps we'll never know...

[Big RR]

Would the Salem trials have happened if the practice hadn't been popularised and officially recognised by one of the dominant religious figures in the world many years earlier?

Perhaps we'll never know...

Maybe, but then how many protestant christians embraced the Inquisition just because the pope did? Damn few, I'd bet.

[Crackpot]

Not many RR People like to think that Jews and Pagans were the main target of the inquisitions when in reality it was the entire protestant movement.

[loCAtek]

Trust me, as someone who was brought up as a Catholic I am in no way confused by the semantics. Did you realise that Catholics describe their religion as the 'Catholic Faith'?

Yup, Most Mexicans are Catholics, my mother and father were raised as such, but decided to forgo the RCC when I was very young.

There is indeed a Catholic way to faith. As there is a Buddhist way to faith; a Muslim way to faith, etc.
I agree that many individual churches of Catholicism are dogmatic, although not as many to point of fanaticism in recent times.

Religion is about a system of beliefs. Belief = faith.
In other words without spiritual faith you do not have religion. I of course am using the word 'spiritual' in it's religious sense rather than its hippy-dippy one...
Ask any practising Catholic if they are a spiritual person and they will give you a wholehearted yes.
My point is that the concepts of 'religion' and 'spirituality' can not be separated so easily. They are often very entwined.

True, everyone meets their own needs in ways that suit them best. Many agnostics will say they are spiritual persons just not religious ones, because they don't wish to subscribe to any one 'system' (particularly not a dogmatic one) but would like to seek faith in their own way and time. That was me, BTW.

On the matter of self-serving as opposed to serving the divine, both will often work hand in hand. The puppeteer may or may not be self-serving but the puppet who pilots a plane into a building believes that he is serving the divine.
.

Exactly, that was point about the extremely unethical. However, that boils down to human psychology, the social pull to follow the leader. IMHO It's the unethical who will create fanaticism from religion.

Edited to add: Serving yourself by way of fanatical dogma is indeed a bad thing... but so is serving the divine through fanatical dogma

Yup, run, do not walk, from fanatics.

[rubato]

Not many RR People like to think that Jews and Pagans were the main target of the inquisitions when in reality it was the entire protestant movement.

The inquisition in Spain was principally concerned with Jews and Moslems. I don't recall that Protestantism even existed there when it began in 1492.

There was a 'Crusade' against the Cathars but they pre-dated 'Protestantism' by centuries although they did not recognise the Pope, and they were exterminated before 1300 AD.

Almost every one of the crusades began with the slaughter of Jews in a European city. So the devout could get their minds into the whole 'killin for Jesus' type of mood.

yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

Tell that to British who feared both Spain and the Inquisition after the country's "conversion".

Edited to add: Indeed, as i recall, the Inquisition remained alive in Spain through the 19th century.