Religious Philosophy ~ We Went West ~ Lesson 21

 

Lesson 21 ~ Religious Philosophy ~ Ecclesiasticism ~ We Went West ~ Essay

By:  Rev. Trent Murman, OSM, OSF

 

Critics, and some academics, have sometimes maintained that it is this focus on the internal self that has prevented societies where these religions are predominant that has resulted in their lack of material gain and progress. They accept the notion that it is this psychological focus that has removed any emphasis on scientific, educational, or economic advances. What are your thoughts? Do you think that emphasizing the "inner you" that that necessarily precludes social or scientific advances?  I believe if you or a society take things to an extreme then, being totally in touch with your "inner being" can be disastrous to your own wellbeing. Hence, if a society such as those talked about is focused on each individual's inner being I would think this would be too many whole entities and the society would not be working for the betterment of the entire group.  This may cause a total breakdown in the structural basis.  In conclusion:  the individual/society that remains focused on themselves should restructure its thinking to include everyone in the society as a whole, not a lot of individual wholes.

 

If, as we saw earlier in the course, that it is true that religions have tended to focus on one of Russell's 'three great problems' at the expense of the other two, which of these problems seems to you to be the "most important"? Ignoring for the moment the specific religions this indirectly indicates, do you believe the world would be better off if it adopted the views of the Western Ecclesiastical religions (i.e. the natural problem), the Eastern Ecclesiastical religions (i.e. the social problem), or the Southern Ecclesiastical religions (i.e. the psychological problem)? Why?  Interesting, it would be nice if the world could adopt all three sects, however if I were to choose just one, I believe the world may do better adopting the Eastern Ecclesiastical religions, because these seem to be best suited for putting and keeping society's peoples to work and in a forward moving direction.  However, all three "problems" do have their own merits and this should not be over looked either.  It would be interesting if the ancient leaders would have had the ability to spy, if you will, on other parts of the world like using the internet to see what trials and tribulations they were facing and vice versa.  This would also give the different parts of the world the ability to incorporate into their own society what was working for them.  Far fetched eh?  Maybe not, just think of the historical change that might have taken place. 

GO IN PEACE

Religious Philosophy Lesson 19 - Trent Murman

Lesson 19 ~ Religious Philosophy ~ Ecclesiasticism ~ Essay

By: Rev. Trent Murman, OSM, OSF

 

Cao Dai is the eclectic Vietnamese faith that has shamelessly "borrowed" from other faiths in an attempt to create a faith that is universally unifying. Do you think that selecting rituals from multiple faiths and then merging them together provides a stronger faith than those from which you borrow? Or, do you believe that this dilutes and diminishes the value of the original faith? I believe that this is an attempt to open their doors to many peoples to join the Vietnamese Cao Dai.  This may also bring religion to many Vietnamese that may not otherwise be able to participate in a religious services and in my opinion this does not dilute or diminish any part of the original faith, in fact it may bring it even stronger to those peoples that can recognize parts of their faith in a combined unifying faith.  The Ainu are so socially attuned that they greet strangers with Irankarapte, meaning "let me softly touch your heart". What do you think of this? Are they a sensitive, caring, socially tolerant people? Or, do you think that this is insincere and phony? If it is legitimate, why do you suppose that the dominant Japanese culture has treated them so poorly (the official government position is that they are "noble savages")? I believe they are truly sensitive peoples and are in good position to minister in a sincere way to reach all persons of this particular Japanese culture.  We must also divulge whether the Japanese culture separates government from religion.  Maybe this is why they feel they have no control or are losing control over the religious masses.  I believe the Japanese culture is a very strict one and may have very little tolerance for those that may have opposing views as have participated acts that have occurred in the past when people went against the government.  Just an opinion of mine. 

Go In Peace

Lesson 18 ~ Religious philosophy

Lesson 18 ~ Religious Spirituality ~ Definition ~ Essay

By: Rev. Trent Murman, OSM, OSF

 

If you belonged to a millenarian faith, how would that alter your behavior? If you have lived a life that makes it unlikely that you'll be one of the "chosen few to rule with Christ", would you spend your remaining days "living it up"? Would you repent, and spend your remaining days preaching and trying to lead others to make the "right decision"? Or, would you sit in the corner of your room all depressed, and fret over what was going to happen?  I certainly don't feel or prescribe to the thought of millenarian faith.  I feel we are all put here on this earth for a reason and none is actually labeled the "chosen few"  only Jesus should and can hold that title.  We have learned several things in the past regarding making the "right decisions"….I believe we as clergy should always be available to listen and help guide people to make decisions based on their own faith and what is right and proper to them, remembering there is no right decision that we are to impose on others but give them the right to make that decision for themselves.  If you belonged to an eschatological faith, how would that alter the way you live your life? Expecting the world (or age) to soon end, would it depress you, free you to do whatever you want, or make little difference to you? How would you expect the end to come? In a sudden global catastrophe? As an instantaneous "act of God"? Or, in a slow, gradual decline (i.e. will the world end with a cosmic whimper)? I feel the world will end some day, but will it be in an instantaneous "act of God"  I am not quite convinced this will be the case.  After all, we [the world] have been existing in this universe for millions of years so, at least in our short time of existence, I don't fear this particular act of demise.  This may be the way to go, if we were to go…quick and without time to plan or wonder.  I do feel if it was a gradual decline of our demise it would be almost complete chaos with everyone knowing and trying to put an end to the finality of the world. Finally, what is your view of apocalyptic faiths? Do you believe in prophecy? If you believe there were prophets in some distant past, why are there not any today? Or, are there? If there are, how can you tell a "real prophet of God" from an insane, deluded, mad man? In other words, how could you distinguish between a Moses and a Rasputin (remember, artists conceptions say they both had beards and even looked somewhat alike)?  I believe, as most others, there were prophets in biblical times because from when we were all children we were taught this.  There may very well be prophets in today's social structures.  However, there are also men of extraordinary ways to persuade the masses to bound with them, i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Khan, Christopher Columbus, the Pope's, Then we mention in Moses and Rasputin having beards which made them look somewhat alike….remember Jesus also had a beard.  I feel the authors/artists may have thought the beard symbolizes wisdom, maturity and knowledge.  Isn't it awesome that we all do have the ability and foresight to make our own decisions regarding whom and what we will follow and perceive as our "saviors". 

GO IN PEACE