I was recently reading an article and having the strangest experience throughout. Just about every time I share news with you, it’s because I want to draw the macro point or theme down into our micro worlds. So I want to make it very clear at the outset of this post that that is exactly what I am trying to do here.
This is not a political post; I find politics to be a highly complex, Time-spectrum entanglement of peoples and entities that, by no means, fit into neat little boxes. I am not interested in the political perspectives of my readers except to the degree that it influences personal co-creativity. And then it only comes up if you want it to. The various current ‘bedrock themes’ within faiths that fuel political perspectives are, again, something I find to be so intricately and intimately imbedded on the Psyche that it is only a specific factor when the individual deems it must be when defining energy interpretations.
I just like to introduce macro archetypes into personal spheres as a reminder that energy is energy and the rain falls on all, the rich and the poor, as the biblical lesson tells.
So, I am reading an article wherein the author is clearly disappointed with his subjects for reasons that, to me, seem illogical and ironically self-contradictory. I think to myself, how can this person lay out all of the material that supports the supposed stance of his subjects and then say its ‘a train wreck’? I don’t think I am being too literal: words have meanings that are generally understood. When I use the word, ‘progressive’ or ‘evolution’, you don’t immediately plunk that into a political frame but hear these words for their general meaning. Of course, a specific article on a specific subject will align the meaning – but only so far. The mental image/imprint of a word’s meaning has limits, if only for the basic fact that the audience, ranging potentially in the millions, necessitates this.
‘…the progressive tag…: ever evolving, changing, progressing along to something…The evolution across issues is so vast, so unceasing, that no progressive can tell you where they will stand years from now. They merely know they’re progressing…By progressive thinking, (the subjects), say, 5, 10, 15, or 50 years ago were not finished progressing. This should also mean that the (subjects) were in fact wrong at each way-station in their journey to today’s progressive “truth”…But here’s the kicker: How can the (subjects) — or any modern progressive — know they’re right now? How do they know they’ve progressed to the “correct” point on (the issue)? Progress, after all, never stops progressing.
‘(A political icon’s) faithful supporters roared approval, projecting upon his blank screen whatever they had in mind. In (the icon’s) mind, this included bestowing unto himself the monumental ability to literally redefine (the issue), granting himself and his government a power heretofore reserved for the laws of nature and nature’s God.
…they know where conservatives stand: we look to tradition, to Biblical law, to Natural Law, to time-tested things worth conserving. We see (this issue) best as it has been since the Garden of Eden. We can tell you our end-goal, our ideal. Progressives cannot.’
Well. I realize its not comforting to be confronted but reality does that. Concerning the first paragraph of excerpts, I have to remark that I don’t know anyone who has lived a few decades that doesn’t see some truth – maybe a lot!- to these statements. I object to the terms, ‘wrong’, ‘right’ and ‘correct’ being used in explicitly judgmental terms in a context that pre-assumes that the search for the ‘right’ and ‘correct’ is not being genuinely sought; for the average person, it is most definitely in a state of relative awareness. The reader will also conclude that the author seems to feel quite ‘right’ and ‘correct’ on the topic which is in direct contradiction to the archetype Christian and Jewish ‘bedock theme’ of humility and awe at how low human thoughts are compared to God’s thoughts: as far as the sky is from the earth. Why, just consider for a moment the phenomenal changes these very faiths have creakily and often grudgedly made over the millenia as those that they are meant to serve via interpretation of Scriptures have made it all too clear that awareness has increased. And it is virtually unanimous that the changes made in the last 5 decades by the Christian belief system, in reference to civil liberties, are far more firmly rooted in ‘right’ and ‘correct’ than they were previously.
The emphasis in the 2nd paragraph of excerpts are mine. That we all project onto the blank screen of an energy conduit is a universal human trait. This is one of the best points that I think this writer makes. It is a primary ‘bedrock theme’ to co-creative living that we use to gauge whether we are using energy with wisdom. That a particular icon rises to that position brings us back to the complex ball of knots that is politics. Yet it’s still a fact that, whether you personally wanted this particular icon or not at this particular time, somehow he/she is there. The archetype messages are heard by the individual, processed in their micro-world, influencing their thoughts and feelings in relation to a combination of their micro-group and that group’s awareness-trends of the goings on, in this case, within the community of macro-science, -inter-faith dialogue, and –commerce.
Continuing with my emphasis, I just have to say that ‘the laws of nature and nature’s God’ seem to rarely factor into the machinations of the political world, except through contortion. Enough said, easily.
And finally, in response to the last series, Wow. I am a highly conservative person. I come from a highly conservative family, going back generations. I agree with ‘live and let live’ and I choose to live within my means; I owe no debt; I am risk-averse; I expect that if I work hard, I should reap the benefit of it; I have never expected or asked for assistance though I think some persons need assistance at some points in their lives and I have no right to judge those needing assistance. If I can help, I most definitely will.
Sidebar: I think I have needed assistance at times, frankly, but somehow I managed and this is an example of how strongly I am culturally imprinted on this point…I might chuckle now to remember but only because those instances are some time-distance behind me. Another macrotheme that All of us are increasingly aware of is how fragile life can be even if you follow every ‘rule’.
The strain of conservatives that I come from has always placed great value on higher education, expansion of the intellectual mind – indeed, why did God give you a brain? That the cherished archetype, ‘Garden of Eden’, taken by some Christians as literal and by the majority as poetic insight-teachings about their Genesis, enters the writer’s theme here gives me pause. Maybe he is preaching to a select choir? How should I interpret his meaning, given what I have come to learn about the Aramaic and Greek language texts, the evolution of English and the motives/perspectives of ‘perfect translation’? I do know my end-goal, my ideal, fits very cozily within the genuine bedrock themes of Christianity: inclusion rather than exclusion, even if very uncomfy at stages, is the way of Christ. ALL are welcome at ‘his table’, whether we personally like it or not.
What if Paul had not had his Damascene conversion? Or had it, but by pure will, blocked it out? How well do you really know the daily goings on for him at that time and his experiences, both within his microcosm and macrocosm? If that seems a bit of dramatic license, then please do a little research. There was nothing ‘right’ or ‘correct’ for him and his in this new perspective.
The identity of an individual is sacred and as all the major religions insist, it is not the destination but the journey. You are to use your relationship with your Spiritual Authority in conjunction with your relationship to your neighbor and to your Self, thus navigating life by the ‘most important commandment’. Clearly then, identity issues are, by default, the most serious of Being. And that makes struggle valid even if others feel indifferent. Especially in the country that proudly states that all are created equal and thus, within its borders, should pursue equality.
I will close with the repetition that I simply wanted to point out some of the archetypal trends making the rounds these days and encourage you to read and think with a critical eye. This post is not meant to be about this writer’s particular subjects and it is not really meant to be about any particular religion but rather his writing seemed to floor me with its use of language. I took it as an opportunity for me (via my personal journey) to climb up on my soapbox and talk about how we absorb any subjects/themes that cross our view. No one should be hijacking our word-meanings. I am progressive. I am conservative. This is not a contradiction in terms. If we will be making new words and word-meanings, thats fine, too. I am sure that I will become aware.
Know your definitions and why you have them, the importance of word-meanings and how language should be working for you, not against you. When you communicate, what do others hear? When you listen, are you contextually aligned to the point of evaluative disengagement? It is surely not easy, but we can try to be open to edit or enlarge the Self as new information comes – for our own wellbeing. It is not a sign of weakness to Grow into what feels ‘right’ or ‘correct’ in this moment in Time – and your own perspective should not be the only mental fertilizer being used.
Re: Catholic-Muslim Forum & the new Pope. “Political and religious leaders have the duty of ensuring each individual’s freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.” – Pope Benedict XVI
Me, me, me! Following on the themes I discuss above, here is a article concerning how to forge your ‘I Am’plans: A fantastic overview on how to think about your urge to just do it, whatever it may be.
Empathy Video: An exercise is crossing over the divide between ‘you’ and ‘me’.