The coming
religious wars
We suggest you read the full
article below by clicking on the link below.
By the beginning of
the 16th century, the medieval Church and all that it
represented, entered a period of profound crisis. By this
time, the Church was nearly fifteen centuries old.
Throughout its history the Church always had to confront
problems both within its organization and from without. But
by 1500, these problems rose to the surface and the Church
would shake at its very foundation. Political philosophers
like
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) had already rejected the
medieval idea that popes were superior to kings (see
Lecture 1). As a citizen of Renaissance Florence,
Machiavelli was a Christian, yet he distrusted and disliked
the clergy. He saw no need to reform the Church and
Christianity because his secular theory of the state was
based on the notion that religion and faith was nothing more
than the cement which held society together. He would
certainly have agreed with Karl Marx who, more than three
centuries later, would argue that:
Religious suffering is,
at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering
and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh
of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world,
and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the
people. [Contribution
to a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, 1844]
A second problem of the
period concerned the merchants, bankers and artisans of
Europe's largest cities and towns who resented the fact that
local bishops of the Church controlled all of their
commercial and economic activities. Although capitalism as a
form of economic organization had not yet infiltrated
Europe, these producers and money-makers knew that more
money and power was theirs if only their lives were less
regulated by the Church. Again, I think what we are
witnessing here is the development of a secular concept of
work and acquisition. Yet another problem facing the Church
was that in the 16th century there were numerous reformers
who were openly criticizing the Church for its numerous
offenses. Priests married and then took mistresses, holy
offices were bought and sold for the highest price,
incompetence among the clergy became the rule, the
congregation of more and more people in towns and cities
perhaps exposed the amorality and immorality of the clergy.
In a word, the problem was corruption.
Meanwhile, peasants in
England, Italy, France, Germany and elsewhere were also on
the move. They began to revolt openly against both the
clergy and the aristocracy. Their grievances were the most
complicated of all -- their revolt was against political,
economic, social and religious authority. And despite the
Inquisition, the work of the Dominicans and Franciscans,
and even a holy crusade, heretics and heresies continue to
grow more numerous and more vocal.
Along comes
Martin Luther (1483-1546), the son of a self-made copper
miner from Saxony (see
Lecture 3). As a Renaissance scholar, humanist,
Augustinian monk and Doctor of Philosophy, Luther led an
open attack on the issue of the sale of indulgences. While
struggling with his own sense of self-doubt, Luther could
not accept that salvation could be won by "good works"
alone. Salvation for Luther could be won, however, by one's
personal relationship with God, through faith ("the just
shall live by faith alone"). This was an important
development in the history of Christianity and the Church.
The Christian had, up to 1517, always found his or her faith
by obeying the Church. Good works were the only path to
salvation -- in other words, there was nothing specifically
individual about this faith. With Luther, on the other hand,
faith was internalized -- it was a matter of heart and
conscience. It was "inner-directed," to borrow an expression
from the American sociologist David Reisman.
Luther's ideas appealed
to those people who resented the worldliness, arrogance,
incompetence, immorality, cynicism and corruption of the
clergy. And, his message fell on ready ears -- in other
words, the German people were ready to listen to a man like
Luther since he seemed to speak their language. These people
resented the wealth of the Church. The nobility resented the
land held by the Church, all free of taxes. And the peasants
saw Luther as a champion of social reform. Luther's
confrontation with the Church, all prompted by the
Ninety-Five Theses, led to a violent conflict between
Catholic and Protestant. Such a conflict was not merely one
of words but of men fighting men. Outside Germany and
Scandinavia, the two places where Luther's ideas had their
greatest impact, the Reformation was guided by the troubled
conscience of
John Calvin (1509-1564). Unlike Luther, Calvin stressed
man's legal relationship with God. God's laws must be obeyed
without question. For the Calvinist, moral righteousness
must be pursued, lusts must be restrained and controlled,
and social life and morality must be carefully regulated.
Such an ethic of self-control was predicated on the notion
that we should all work hard at our calling. By living such
a life, one could be saved. However, for Calvin, 99 out of
100 men are damned. This is God's will and he must be
obeyed.
http://www.historyguide.org/earlymod/lecture6c.html
Perhaps
this will enable you to one day understand why we view
religion as a very dangerous instrument that is used by the
powers to precipitate all sorts of problems.
Remember
Religion is controlled and directed by man and therefore
cannot be fully trusted. However we truly believe that there
is a superior Force out there called God and whatever name
we chose to call him Allah, Yahweh, Krishna,
Jehovah,
Yod - Hay - Vav - Hay ,Adonai,
El,
Elohah ,Elohim,
Shadai,Tzeva'ot
etc; he is the same God. There is no such thing as my God is
better than yours or you are a heathen, if you follow the
basic rules of any religion none of us would ever fight. In
every religion it is sin to kill or rob from your neighbor.
If we just followed these two rules we would never need to
point a finger at anyone again.
Religion
means, "to re-connect” in Latin. Are we really re
connecting with each other or disconnecting?
Someone seems
to have found a very nice way to explain how we fight with
each other because of our different religious beliefs.
How under
one God is it possible to have so many different religions
that cannot tolerate each other?
Religion is a Latin
word that means, "to re-connect." The meaning of this word
is the same as that of mysticism, i.e. "joining of human
soul with God." Readers surely know that the very idea of
possible union with God is in contradiction to many
religious doctrines and not infrequently brings religious
people to confusion and even fury. Modern religions are
mostly a collection of traditions, social conventions (laws)
and beliefs that are not at all connected with the
above-mentioned original meaning and purpose of religion.
That is why the first misconception in your question is the
notion that conventional religion is predominantly related
to the search for God. No. Religion as a rule is essentially
a secular phenomenon with spiritual aspirations.
Every religion in the
name of faith in one God, in reality, encourages belief in
its own deity. (Terrible sacrilege!) God is one, and
although saints and sages call Him by different names, they
mean and point to one and the same. Religionists, however,
imagine that only the name that they chose points to God,
and they fight over names. And thus there appear such
fanatical sectarian notions as True believers (Orthodoxy),
Chosen People, Last Prophet and so on. These ideas at some
time had an important, now essentially lost, spiritual
meaning. That is why the second misconception in your
question is the notion that religion believes in one God.
No. Religions as a rule teach that only their world view is
true, that only their method of worship is correct and that
only their god is the sole God.
People cannot stand
each other for many reasons. The most important one is fear
– fear of the new, incomprehensible and strange for them –
fear of God. Another reason is envy, i.e. dissatisfaction
with their God-given destiny, inability to take pleasure in
the success of others. The third is economic and emotional
insecurity (derivative of fear), i.e. inability to believe
that the omnipresent and omnipotent Lord knows your
situation and already is helping you. People constantly
demand something from God (prayer?), are angered if they do
not receive what they ask for but do not sit down to do
meditation to find out and remove the real reason for their
troubles – spiritual ignorance. That is why the third
possible assumption inherent in your question is that
intolerance and hate come from God via religion. No.
Intolerance comes from the human nature itself – from the
human mind that searches for some sense of control in the
face of the ever-more-powerful-than-human Universe and tries
to alleviate ever-present insecurity by attacking one's
neighbor in hope of survival in spite of inevitable death.
Only a mature mind is capable of seeing the uselessness of
intersectarian animosity and struggle. But the development
of separate religions is a natural chapter in the spiritual
development of human society.
The sole solution to
the problem of animosity between religions is a total change
in consciousness of every single human being. By the grace
of God, this is precisely what is happening today and will
lead to the disappearance of all secular religions in their
present form. After all, people are growing to recognize one
God in deeds, not in words
n
Anatole
(Translated from Russian)
God
is a name given in English to the one supreme being, as
postulated, especially but not exclusively, by the three
major
Abrahamic religions (Judaism,
Christianity, and
Islam) as well as
Hinduism (Brahman),
Sikhism and
Zoroastrianism. When used as a
proper noun, "God" is typically capitalised. The
(lowercase) words "god" and "goddess" are derivative
common nouns, used to refer to one of the
supernatural beings postulated by some
religious systems, such as the
Greek and
Roman
dieties. (See the
list of deities for a list from various religions.)
"God"
is also used to refer to a non-anthropomorphic entity, an
underlying energy or consciousness that pervades the
universe, whose supposed existence makes the universe
possible; the source of all existence; the best and highest
good within all sentient beings; a higher power; or even
that which is beyond all understanding or definition
We would like to end of with this
note. We know that religion is a very dangerous topic and
these are just our views and in no way do we claim to be
right. If you think we are misguided or insane we will
gladly accept those titles because fighting is simply not
the way to win. In any war between two nations or two
individuals, there are always two losers; one of them simply
refuses to acknowledge the loss.
|