[ActionReq]

Personally I don't think segregation is a realistic option - there is a danger that, as has happened in the past, this can lead to right wing behaviour as well.

No it is not a realistic option promising
peace, however why is right-wing upcoming
then? I do not dare to mention that the
lumberman is right wing ruling. Right wing
is upcoming in Germany, Belgium, Australia,
the Netherlands, France, you mentioned
Poland, Austria, Denmark and proximate
who knows, in the United States. Would
you consider brexit, right wingish?
Do you think aversion to secularism is to
blame for this behaviour? Is it possible to
blame secularism for anything at all?

[PeteStarr]

why is right-wing upcoming then?

It isn't - necessarily. I'm concsious that I could be straying into perilous waters here. I think that there is a danger amongst those living under a supreme ruler (and this includes some atheist structures as well) to become intolerant and a bit supremacist in their attitudes towards others. Right-wing may be the wrong expression here. Extremist or fundamentalist might be closer to it. I do not think this is a necessary product of the religion or ideology but of man, that greater diversity e.g. through multi-culturalism can help to temper.

Do you think aversion to secularism is to blame for this behaviour?

No, not really. If it was a contributory factor at all I would expect it to be incidental to, not a consequenc of, aversion to secularism.

Is it possible to blame secularism for anything at all?

Why is it necessary or desirable to? I think any criticisms of it would reflect the imperfections of the people implementing it, as with all governments, it's only as good as the people. The objections / concerns expressed by you, StunnedByIt & Prodigals are all valid...

[Prodigals]

there is a danger amongst those living under a supreme ruler (and this includes some atheist structures as well) to become intolerant and a bit supremacist in their attitudes towards others

"absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton

The depth of the perversion of human morality is measured as the direct inverse to the height of despotic power.

[ActionReq]

there is a danger amongst those living under a supreme ruler (and this includes some atheist structures as well) to become intolerant and a bit supremacist in their attitudes towards others

"absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton

The depth of the perversion of human morality is measured as the direct inverse to the height of despotic power.

The people who can handle power do not
want the positions. So the scam comes floating
to the surface. If you run for president then you
must be extending the truth, if you don't then
your opponent will. So the liars come floating
to the surface. What can be done with such a
negative worldview? Just accept it!

[PeteStarr]

The people who can handle power do not want the positions.

I would put it slightly differently - I think many aspiring leaders have honourable intentions but the reality of leadership perverts their attempts. It takes a wise person to realise this in and avoid the trap. During the filiming of ApparitionHill, and upon my two subsequent visits, I found it amusing to quote Gandalf - particularly to Sean. It was funny how often Gandalf could be pressed into service - although perhaps less so when you consider that Tolkein was a Catholic and The Lord of the Rings was written to be compatible with Christianity, although not an allegory for it. On this subject Tolkein has not let me down as both Gandalf and Galadriel are freely offered the ring of power and refuse it, thereby 'passing the test'.

Gandalf: "Do not tempt me! I dare not take it, not even to keep it safe, unused. The wish to wield it would be too great for my strength."
Galadriel: "All shall love me and despair!"

So the scam comes floating to the surface. If you run for president then you must be extending the truth, if you don't then your opponent will. So the liars come floating to the surface. What can be done with such a negative worldview? Just accept it!

Well, I'd rather have the scum where I can see it & the really wise people still in a position where they can help to moderate it! I think that there is a real problem here with the need to be tactical (i.e. great economy with the truth) to get into power and, as so often happens, actions do not speak louder than words. However, such has it ever been. This is not a new fight and I hope we will prevail - as we have always done. Once again Gandalf nails it with a lovely, essentially secular quote (that is, fully compatible with both our world views) that I think contains more than a grain of hope for the future...

Gandalf:"Saruman believes its only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay...small acts of kindness and love."

I think that is a sentiment that we can all get behind! On the subject of Gandalf & Međugorje did you know that the incumbent English speaking Celebrant at St James, Fr. Leon, wrote his dissertation on Tolkein's Mythology and Catholicism in a dense but extremely well written piece called 'The Gift of Glee'. Just thought I'd share

[ActionReq]

Tolkien edible by Catholics, I feel that
was because of Charles Dickens.
Just a feeling.

[PeteStarr]

Tolkien edible by Catholics, I feel that was because of Charles Dickens. Just a feeling.

i'm sorry, I don't understand…

[Prodigals]

Tolkien edible by Catholics, I feel that was because of Charles Dickens. Just a feeling.

i'm sorry, I don't understand…

Edible = acceptable ???

[ActionReq]

Edible = acceptable ???

By bread alone do ye live then?

Charles Dickens in my view combined
injustice/poverty with an acceptable
spiritual solution where for Catholics
innate awkward spirituality leads
people to the good in stead of to
God. This then developed all the way
until Tolkien and maybe for some, all
the way up to narnia and potter.
In the broader view it is a good thing
that this is happening.
Nothing to worry here just that some
people take all this too serious.

[PeteStarr]

In the broader view it is a good thing that this is happening. Nothing to worry here just that some. people take all this too serious.

I hope you don't count me amongst them - it was just a bit of fun for me and I'm certain that Fr Leon simply enjoyed bringing together two things he was passionate about!

I don't quite see that there is any continuum or progression from Dickens, Tolkein, Lewis to Rowling but then I didn't read them looking for deep spiritual insight - anything meaningful you pick up along the way is a bonus!!!

[ActionReq]

In the broader view it is a good thing that this is happening. Nothing to worry here just that some. people take all this too serious.

I hope you don't count me amongst them - it was just a bit of fun for me and I'm certain that Fr Leon simply enjoyed bringing together two things he was passionate about!

I don't quite see that there is any continuum or progression from Dickens, Tolkein, Lewis to Rowling but then I didn't read them looking for deep spiritual insight - anything meaningful you pick up along the way is a bonus!!!

Taking it too seriously? I am talking
about wicca and creepy rituals.
We had a priest who quoted from
Harry Potter during mass. In that
specific case I felt repulsion.
Here in this forum that is not a
problem.

Why do you stubbornly write
Tolkein? Isn't it Tolkien?

[PeteStarr]

Here in this forum that is not a problem.

Good!

Why do you stubbornly write Tolkein? Isn't it Tolkien?

It's not stubborness - I made a mistake! I'll be happy to get stuck into spelling and grammar with you if you like

[ActionReq]

I'll be happy to get stuck into spelling and grammar with you if you like

Naaah, I learned English at an old age.
So that would be a waste of time.
I can only do my best.

[PeteStarr]

I learned English at an old age. So that would be a waste of time. I can only do my best.

...and you do very well! What's the story there (if you don't mind sharing)?

[ActionReq]

What's the story there (if you don't mind sharing)?

Where am I from? maybe I tell you in a riddle.
And then I hope you can enjoy.
Remember I told you my daughter was troubled
over the philosophy teacher?
Some here on this forum know that she sings.
I said that in another occasion. Now she also
directs a choir. Just guess the country and you
know where I am from. Maybe the music inspires
you to become not unbelieving, but believing..
She is the one who directs the choir and plays
the harp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PruliIoZwZ8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sl97UZxKQ4o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF7sS9SuU8s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tdo7OZ-Pyck

[PeteStarr]

ActionReq,

Well! I see references to multiple languages in your posts, notably Spanish. Your daughters name seems French & yet for all that your English reminds me of a friend from the Netherlands so I'm going to say Dutch & multilingual! This also fits with your clue about your daughters philosophy teacher!

Regardless of whether my guess is right your daughter seems to be a very talented lady and it was lovely watching (and most particularly, listening to) the linked videos! Who knows if some sacred music could move me to believe - I doubt it, I've listened to lots of wonderful sacred music & have been no less moved by it than many other genres! Indeed, I was a chorister in my local Church of England Parish Church choir as a youngster and loved it! I think I would like singing in a gospel choir for the sheer joyful abandon of it!

Pete

[ActionReq]

ActionReq,
yet for all that your English reminds me of a friend from the Netherlands

[leo daly]

I've heard C.S. Lewis was Christian, I can see analogies in his writings.

First Book - The Magician's Nephew, We see the birth of Narnia and the entry of the white witch who eats one of the apples (Genesis). Aslan allows Digory to take one back to Earth for his sick mother which helps her.

Second Book - The Lion, the witch and the wardrobe, (The wardrobe BTW was made from the apple tree that grew from a seed of the apple Digory brought back). The ritual slaying of Aslan by the White Witch and her followers and the subsequent resurrection of Aslan and his defeat of the white witch is analagous to the resurrection and Christ's victory over Evil.

Cheers
Leo.

[PeteStarr]

I've heard C.S. Lewis was Christian, I can see analogies in his writings.

Yes indeed Leo! Tolkien & Lewis were contemporaries & friends with much lively debate between them! I think Lewis intended his work to be an allegory of Christianity whereas Tolkien explicitly says that his work was not. Tolkien drew much inspiration from Celtic & Norse mythology but intended it to be compatible with Christianity. This is something that is endlessly speculated on &, interestingly, Tolkien himself was troubled by some aspects e.g. the thought that Orcs may be irredeemable!

[ActionReq]

Pete,

The hand was designed to grab the apple,
as you stated, it will not convince you
that indeed there was a designer.
moreover why did God made the apple-
trees so high? He could have designed
9 feet legs, so we don't have to invent
a ladder, so we relativize this to nil and
we are back to nought.
I am serious, and I think that kind o
reasoning is absolutely legal.

Now one of Medjugorje's messages
yesterday, it was said:

how much bad is done by those who
must see or interpret in order to come
to believe.

Bad is done?
Insinuation that actually:
relativizing = Doing bad.

No causal relationship is proposed though
in this phrase. But then why say this in
one breath.

Would this saying in your opinion
make somebody believe less?
Would this saying in your opinion
make someone who is not believing,
believing? For what kind of people
would this phrase be productive?
And what if it is true? This saying...
Is the one who is "doing bad"..this
way.. actually guilty of "doing bad"
because he/she is relativizing?

[PeteStarr]

I am serious, and I think that kind o
reasoning is absolutely legal.

I think you're saying that it's understandable that I am not persuaded by the apple reasoning - and indeed I am not. That's not to say that I don't think it's wonderful that we can contrive ways to reach, pick, eat & enjoy apples. I do. I also remind myself that there are as many terrifying, poisonous, predatory and generally dangerous things that seem to be 'designed' with the downfall of others in mind. We've got very good at avoiding them but they're still there! Strychnine in apple pips, lethally poisonous plants and funghi that look exactly like their edible counterparts...

Now one of Medjugorje's messages
yesterday, it was said:

how much bad is done by those who must see or interpret in order to come to believe.

Would this saying in your opinion make somebody believe less?
Would this saying in your opinion make someone who is not believing, believing?

I'm not sure I understand it! It is ambiguous. For the purposes of this discussion I take it to mean this: I assume it is a rhetorical question implying that those who are not prepared to take things on faith are responsible for more bad stuff in the world.

It appears to be an indictment against seeking the truth through evidence and info fled that extraordinary - faithful people of many religions are constantly seeking reassurance through the miraculous. What is a miracle if not a claim for evidence of divine influence. And besides, it's not at all clear to me that people of faith are better behaved! It's my opinion that in any population you're going to get a distribution of behaviour that, given sufficient members, will look pretty similar irrespective of their differences in beliefs.

To answer your question: this kind of statement does not move me one way or the other. It seems like a faith-affirming statement that helps people to feel good about their belief in a world that they perceive to be increasingly hostile to it.

And what if it is true? This saying... Is the one who is "doing bad"..this way.. actually guilty of "doing bad"?

That's a tricky question and depends on where you think we get morality from! I would say yes, we have a (largely) shared view of good & bad and people are accountable for their actions regardless of their world view. The real question is: to whom are they accountable? Their own conscience? Local conventions? State & law? God? All of the above? None? Some?

[ActionReq]

faithful people of many religions are constantly seeking reassurance through the miraculous.

Well that makes this message special,
because a second phrase of this
message relates the following.

My children, do not strive to comprehend everything immediately, because I also did not comprehend everything immediately; but I loved, and I believed in the divine words which my Son spoke

And there is in my eyes the geniality.
This phrase does not ask you to ask
for miracles. This message even
disqualifies miracle orientation.
It asks you to believe. Believe what?
Well the set of moralities and values
that are presented to you through
Medjugorje.
Then you must treat this belief as if
it were a rock. Even if that what you
believe now you do not comprehend.
Stand on this rock live on it! Build a
house on this rock!
Then how do you recognize that what
you believe is a rock and not quick
sand? Because as a rational thinker
and scientist, you want that last step
of verification. Verification provides
assurance of your theories/faith.
Well time is the factor that will tell.
If that what you have faith in is rock
solid. Then if after 30 years your house
that you had built on what you believed
still stands, you can conclude that what
you believed was a rock. Maybe you
started understanding the rock or
aspects of it. Maybe even you will
never understand any aspect of it
because it is too complex.
What is important is that you recognize
the base as being rock-solid. because
the house is still standing.
Before that, you will have to do the
leap of faith. Compromise yourself
with it.
Hope is the key that allows you to
compromise yourself with the unknown.
If you don;t want to make that leap of
faith, then you will never find out if
there is truth in all this.
You have nothing to loose. Only win.
This last phrase reasoning you already
disqualified somewhere in this
discussion, however take a bet. And
the horse is Medjugorje.

[PeteStarr]

My children, do not strive to comprehend everything immediately, because I also did not comprehend everything immediately; but I loved, and I believed in the divine words which my Son spoke

...This phrase does not ask you to ask for miracles. This message even disqualifies miracle orientation.

I don't think it does although I have heard Mirjana speak to that effect,

It asks you to believe. Believe what?
Well the set of moralities and values that are presented to you through Medjugorje. Then you must treat this belief as if it were a rock. Even if that what you believe now you do not comprehend.
Stand on this rock live on it! Build a house on this rock!
Then how do you recognize that what you believe is a rock and not quick sand? Because as a rational thinker and scientist, you want that last step of verification. Verification provides assurance of your theories...Well time is the factor that will tell. If that what you have faith in is rock solid.

I don't think that the rock foundations illustrates your point very well. After all, we find that time spent verifying our foundation, at least when building physical houses, is time well spent and that were we to do this based purely on faith we would have many more structural issues! As the people of Međugorje discovered when they built the original parish church on the only bit of land that didn't have solid rock foundations!

I realise that you don't mean this literally but using an analogy of physical stuff to illustrate metaphysics is problematic! Even following your reasoning it makes no sense to me to assume the truth of something without reason. And so we reach a predictable impasse!

Before that, you will have to do the leap of faith. Compromise yourself with it. Hope is the key that allows you to compromise yourself with the unknown.

If you don;t want to make that leap of faith, then you will never find out if there is truth in all this.

You don't need to take a leap of faith to have hope though. And we will find out if I'm wrong, not if I'm right though, regrettably! It strikes me that with your leap of faith you won't find out if there is truth in it any sooner - you just assert that you know as do many others in myriad different ways & with no less conviction!

So! I'll build my house on what I know to be rock and you build yours on what you hope & have faith is rock!

You have nothing to loose. Only win. This last phrase reasoning you already disqualified somewhere in this discussion, however take a bet. And the horse is Medjugorje.

You're right - I'm scornful of Pascal's wager! As for betting ... You never beat the bookies!

[ActionReq]

Thanks Pete, I needed those answers to
make the point(.)s that I want to make.
One point is that I speak from a reality
where I have divine experiences and so
for me it is easy to speak from that
reality where this God who speaks to me
exists. For me that is like taking an ice
cube, having it in my hands and say:
yeah this is ice.... And you have a reality
where you do not have, or do not notice
those sensorial spiritual experiences,
and this results in an: I believe when I
see, and then what I see must be
re-pete-ble if possible on demand.
Those are the: I see so I believe(rs).
or
it must be something with a logical
explanation. In such a way that maybe I
can't see it, however there is proof it
exists. Like Higgs Bosons where you don;t
see the particle itself, but you can find,
hidden in the noise, statistics of an
expected signature of its interaction with
other particles. And then from hearsay
we believe "they" "found" it. Why should
we doubt?
Those are the: I understand so I believe(rs).
There are the see and interpret people.
Funny thing is that they proof the boson
exists, not because they found it, no, they
believe it exists because they sail on the
probability that whatever result they
found proofs it unlikely, five sigma, that
it doesn't exist. Serious. It is not
uncommon what I described with that
house building on rocks you can't see.
huh. And to us who don't understand they
say: We found it! I tell ye, there is no
such thing as a Higgs Boson! Do you
disbelieve now because I said so?
They call it the god-particle anyways.
CERN has also a signature of religion.
This article explains this.
https://understandinguncertainty.org/ex ... id-they-do
So expensive "houses" like CERN are being
built upon faith. Faith that may one day
result to be quicksand.
Not my problem so much, my problem is
with faith. I know that faith is essential
for a next step that leads to either an I
see experience, or an I understand
experience. And what I see, also from what
you just said proofs my suspicions, is that
people can't get to faith. You have the
people who believe without seeing. And
you have the people who don't and who
will never believe.
There is a faith chasm fixed between those
people and the possible divine experience.
The experience that will make them
become the believer through seeing or
through understanding. Like in the Higgs
boson.
I can clearly see that Medjugorje visions
do not convert anybody who is not already
prone to be a believer. At most the visions
will strengthen what is already there.

My judgement.
To the church: You can prohibit relativism,
call it dictatorship or whatever, but you can
never make people stop thinking.
Relativizing is a strong tool that makes the
essential float to the surface. Why would
you want to stop people from doing that?
Or why would you want people to stop
doing that selectively?
Talking to God. What do you want? Do
you not love these? You will have to come
up with something more that this.
Something that transcends. Or do you
think that the people whom you reach is
the people that you wanted to reach
anyways?
Talking to Mary (Gospa). Do you have any
force left? You showed me in a vision
that the price of these public visions is
incredibly high, and is paid with blood
sacrifice and incredible sufferings. Is it
worth it or are you pressing me?

[PeteStarr]

Thanks Pete, I needed those answers to make the point(.)s that I want to make.

Happy to be of service!

One point is that I speak from a reality where I have divine experiences and so for me it is easy to speak from that reality where this God who speaks to me exists.

I remember & I find it interesting too - we have been talking about the virtues of faith & hope but actually, your belief is founded upon evidence too! Albeit, personal experience.

You have a reality where you do not have, or do not notice those sensorial spiritual experiences, and this results in an: I believe when I see, and then what I see must be re-pete-ble if possible on demand.

I don't agree - I experience many experiences that cannot be repeated on demand. Emotional responses to music and art, beauty, sentiment, conscience, self-sacrifice & love. I can't explain them, they are not all on-tap!!! But I don't need to assume an answer to the questions they pose to have the lived experience of them. It is the explanation that requires evidence more than the thing itself. Why? Because there are many explanations that are compatible with the facts but only one is true. Therefore we have to be smart about discerning the true one amongst the imposters. Science does this magnificently well & has the luxury of being able to change with new evidence.

They call it the god-particle anyways. They know what they say. CERN is has a signature of religion.

I think you have this backwards: it's called the God particle not because it proves God but because it explains more of 'the gaps' that God is assumed to fill.

And what I see, also from what you just said proofs my suspicions, is that people can't get to faith. You have the people who believe without seeing. And you have the people who don't and who will never. There is a chasm fixed between those people and the possible divine experience.

Maybe. Although I hope that I have demonstrated that the non-believer does not deny existence of transcendental experiences themselves, but the explanations for them on insufficient evidence! Besides, are you not an example of someone that has 'got to faith' from being a steadfast non-believer?

My judgement.
To the church: You can prohibit relativism, call it dictatorship or whatever, but you can never make people stop thinking.
Relativizing is a strong tool that makes the essential float to the surface. Why would
you want to stop people from doing that? Or why would you want people to stop
doing that selectively?
Talking to God. What do you want? Do you not love these? You will have to come up with something more that this. Something that transcends. Or do you think that the people whom you reach is the people that you wanted to reach anyways?
Talking to Mary (Gospa). Do you have any force left? You showed me in a vision that the price of these public visions is incredibly high, and is paid with blood and incredible sufferings. Is it worth it or are you pressing me?

I don't pretend to fully understand your reasoning here but you have an intriguing way of putting your ideas across. I think it would be hard to argue that The Gospa has no force left given the impact of Međugorje regardless of whether there is any truth in it or not.

What is your 'judgement' for me? Does my response alter your reasoning at all? For clarity, I don't mean in terms of your own conviction but of the non-believer and the transcendental?