Thinking erodes religious belief. (Main Forum)

Back in those days, the 40s and 50s particularly, would any Aussie male be seen dead in the kitchen, let alone cooking? My father, who is 100., has never cooked a meal in his life; he made tea from the hot water tap as he wouldn't boil the jug (he had grown up with wood stoves); and once rang Mum when she was away to ask why, in the 10 or more cookery books she had, there was no instruction on how to cook fried eggs and sausages.

J A Holznagel

When I was growing up, my mother's method of cooking steak or chops, was to place them under a hot gas griller, and grill all the life-juices out of them, until all that remained was charred flesh.

I had a "wog" boyfriend at age 15, (he was actually Dalmatian, and the word "wog" was not used in NZ, to my knowledge, but they ran all the fish and chip shops), and he showed me how to cook steak correctly - on a lightly oiled pan. (I think we used the scone griddle, which was closest in texture to what was needed).

The taste difference was astounding, and from that moment on, there was no holding me back in the kitchen.

First I learned how to cook, and then taught my mother!

Bravo, bravissimo all Wogs!

Oh yet we trust that somehow good
Will be the final goal of ill

Thanks, Desi. I think that sums it up perfectly. It seems to me the institution's fundamental problem is that it has kicked out all of its "people of vision". There were some around at the time of Vatican II — and to the extent that they excited the majority of the "college of bishops" attending. What everybody today underestimated is the zealotry of the pharisaical element within their ranks. It started with Ottaviani but there have been others since of his mindset and they have left no stone unturned to undo the vision of the Second Vatican Council. All the wise heads became wise to what was going on decades ago and left. Hans Küng was given the bullet over 30 years ago. Those who have taken control offer no apologies. They really do believe they alone know the mind of God and how Jesus is to be interpreted. It is an abysmal tragedy. Jesus himself must weep watching what has happened. I honestly believe the situation is irretrievable today. The future is this smaller, purer, remnant Church that is basically only relevant to one small psychological subset in society who deal with their insecurities and anxieties in a very identifiable way.

The future is not going to come from some hoped for "reform" of the institution; or some return to pick up the major, forward-oriented themes of the Second Vatican Council. It is literally impossible for anyone to engage in any form of dialogue with the element who now control and agenda. The future will emerge in what is going on elsewhere in society where there is continuing deep interest in the big questions of where human civilisation is heading; the quest for ultimate truth as opposed to the quest for emotional security via certitude and authority figures.

I think we are in a time of crisis and change in religion that is as great as the crisis and change brought on by Martin Luther and the Reformation, or the Great Schism between East and West one thousand years ago. There are simply no people left in the upper echelons of the institution with the vision to guide the institution through this time of enormous paradigmatic shift in society.

It will be a rocky time because the wailing of the banshees can be expected to rise in volume the further we move forward in time and the more of the "vast masses" give up participating in the sacraments and listening to bishops and those who believe they alone have the "hot line" to Almighty God.

Brian Coyne
[Editor & Publisher]

All institutions over-claim for themselves and end up believing more in their own existence than in the vision that propelled them into existence in the first place. This is particularly true of religious institutions. Religions may begin as vehicles of longing for mysteries beyond description, but they end up claiming exclusive descriptive rights to them. They segue from the ardour and uncertainty of seeking to the confidence and complacence of possession. They shift from poetry to packaging. Which is what people want. They don’t want to spend years wandering in the wilderness of doubt. They want the promised land of certainty, and religious realists are quick to provide it for them. The erection of infallible systems of is a well-understood device to still humanity’s fear of being lost in life’s dark wood without a compass. ‘Supreme conviction is a self-cure for infestation of doubts.’

Holloway, Richard (2012-03-01). Leaving Alexandria: A Memoir of Faith and Doubt (p. 152). Canongate Books.

Desi, thanks for re-posting this. I did not look at your other post. This is so good. It sheets home the problem to "institutions" as such, which confirms my impression that Jesus did not envisage anything like the RCC, or the Eastern Orthodox, or any of the other Churches. He tried and tried to warn against institutionalising his Way. When he washed their feet he took off his robe and put a towel around his waste and made himself look like what he was, their servant.

If institutions are inevitable, then they need to be pared down continuously. A constant application of the Razor might do the job, cutting away, pruning (Jesus talked about pruning!) everything that can be considered a bit too much growth. I've pruned my own personal 'way' of following the Christ very severely, and still I find other bits that are mere overgrowth. What's more, as soon as I turn my back some new shoot appears and sooner or later that too will need to be pruned. It's the same in the garden: needs constant pruning.

Ockhams Razor says that 'things' - ideas, practices, rituals, customs, laws(!) - are not to be multiplied without necessity. KISS is the modern equivalent. But as gardeners know, it's the hardest discipline of all, cutting away and removing the excess.

My present course is to cut the institution itself in its present form right out of my life. Theoretically I suspect that some form of institution may be necessary or at least inevitable, but its role is very very very small. Life for one who is in Christ is life in the Spirit, not in the church. Some in the church live in the spirit and draw life from the spirit and the life of the spirit is embodied in them. Alleluia. What they draw from the institution is order, authority, orthodoxy and control. Hmmm!

Anyway I'm going to find a place for Holloway's words as a banner somewhere...

'TonyL
"A post is a free gift, and it will go where it pleases."'