27.4.13

Victorian Priest 'abused victim with pool cue' | The Australian

Salesian priest 'abused victim with pool cue' | The Australian
A CATHOLIC priest charged with child sex offences has been accused of assaulting one of his victims with a pool cue. 

Salesian priest and former school principal Julian Fox, 67, today faced court for the first time since the Catholic church negotiated with Victoria Police to see him returned from Rome.

He has been charged with 10 offences, including committing three counts of buggery against a boy under the age of 14 in 1980.

It is alleged he indecently assaulted another victim with a shortened pool cue in 1981, and indecently assaulted another three times between 1976 and 1978.

The fourth complainant was allegedly indecently assaulted in 1985.

The Salesian Order has been accused of knowingly allowing Father Fox relocate to Rome after accusations were made against him by former students.

The order is due to face the Victorian parliamentary inquiry into how non-government groups have handled child sex allegations on Monday, along with other Catholic officials.

Father Fox is out on bail and was ordered to report to a suburban police station once a week.
He will face court again for a committal mention in July.

Monday, April 22, 2013

Catholic principal Julian Fox charged with child sex crimes spanning for 2 decades


SUNBURY - The Catholic Church is being exposed for what it is. The most criminal organization in existence, responsible for over 9.9 million crimes worldwide.

The former principal of a notorious Catholic school in Sunbury has been charged with child-sex offences stretching back almost 40 years after police negotiated the man’s return from Rome with the Catholic Church.

Police have hailed the arrest of Father Julian Fox as ‘‘a breakthrough in co-operation between the Victoria Police and the Catholic Church’’.

The 67-year-old went to the police crime command headquarters at St Kilda Road and was charged with 10 offences, including buggery, indecent assault, and common-law assault, committed in Sunbury and Ferntree Gully between 1976 and 1985.

Police said they had been negotiating with the Catholic Church since July over the priest’s return from Rome. He has been bailed to appear in the Melbourne Magistrates Court on Friday.

Father Fox was moved by the Salesians to Fiji in 1999 after allegations of sexual abuse were made against him by former students of the school.

He was then moved to the order’s headquarters in Rome, but was banned from having contact with children.

Several priests connected to the former Salesian College at the Rupertswood property, in Sunbury, have been questioned by detectives over historical child-sex offences.


Frank Klep, 69, the former principal at Rupertswood has been charged with six counts of indecent assault between 1974 and 1984.


Former Rupertswood vice-principal David Rapson, 59, is due to stand trial at the County Court this year charged with abusing five boys at the school between 1973 and 1990.

26.4.13

A Muslim Convert's Letter to Her Mother

A Muslim Convert's Letter to Her Mother

"I admitted to myself for the first time in a long time that I did believe there is one God, but I also knew that I did not believe that God was Jesus. Which lead me to Islam.

I asked my friends for more in depth information about their faith, they recommended several books. I studied them intently, looking to find the flaw, the part I didn’t agree with, like I had with Buddhism, neo-pagan religions, Hinduism, Catholicism, Christianity, Taoism, and all the other religions I’d ever read up on. I sought out other books, historical books, books about the life of the Prophet, books about the philosophies of Sunni and S’hia sects, Sufis, all kinds of material. From the library, from the book store, on my Kindle. 

I got into another argument with you where you claimed I didn’t know anything about modern-day Islam and only knew about the past, so I read about modern Islamic countries too. And I went back to the Qur’an, I bought a translation with commentary, I read about the historical context that it was written it. I also read a little bit about S’haria law (which is not a legal code in the way that law exists in the West, I don’t think, but I need to learn more about it because it’s really interesting). 

The history of Islam is not perfect, just like no one human being is perfect either. There has been violence, as there’s been in every major religion. To me, that doesn’t take anything away from the tenets of the faith any more than the crusades take away from Christianity."

25.4.13

The Life Of The Buddha - BBC Documentary



Uploaded on 11 Dec 2011
The Life Of The Buddha Full BBC Documentary

Jesus was a Buddhist Monk - BBC Documentary



Uploaded on 6 Oct 2011
http://goodnews.ws/

This BBC 4 documentary examines the question "Did Jesus Die?". It looks at a bunch of ideas around this question until minute 25, where this examination of ideas takes a very logical and grounded turn with surprising conclusions that demonstrate...The three wise men were Buddhist monks who found Jesus and came back for him around puberty. After being trained in a Buddhist Monastery he spread the Buddhist philosophy, survived the crucifixion, and escaped to Kashmir, Afghanistan where he died an old man at the age of 80.




The Muslim Jesus - ITV Documentary



Uploaded on 29 Dec 2011
A Brief Illustrated Guide To Understanding Islam:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/91540928/A-...

Nietzsche - Human, All Too Human (Full BBC Documentary)



Top Comments

  • Mickey Moo
    “I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.… This is a somewhat new kind of religion.”
    “I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism.”  A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death".
    Einstein

13.4.13

Jonathan Swift - Arguments Against Abolishing Christianity - Wikipedia

An Argument Against Abolishing Christianity - Wikipedia

An Argument to Prove that the Abolishing of Christianity in England May, as Things Now Stand Today, be Attended with Some Inconveniences, and Perhaps not Produce Those Many Good Effects Proposed Thereby . . . . . . . . . .commonly referred to as An Argument Against Abolishing Christianity, is an essay by Jonathan Swift defending Christianity, and in particular, Anglicanism, against contemporary assaults by its various opponents, including freethinkers, deists, Antitrinitarians, atheists, Socinians, and other so-called "Dissenters."



The essay was written in 1708 and, as was common at the time, was distributed widely as a pamphlet.[1] The essay is well known for its sophisticated, multi-layered irony, and is widely regarded as one of the prime examples of political satire.

Overview

In the essay, Swift answers several real and rhetorical arguments against Christianity. First, he responds to the argument that the abolition of Christianity would expand the liberty of conscience by arguing that if great wits could not denounce the Church, they might instead turn to the denunciation of the government, causing political unrest. Swift then addresses the argument that the Church, then supported by government funds, was a drain on resources that might be better spent elsewhere.

Swift responds that if the funds used to support the clergy were used instead to fund freethinking young gentlemen, the money would, in short time, be squandered away on vices, and divided by disagreeable marriages.

Next, Swift counters the argument that the abolition of Christianity would open up another day of the week (the Sabbath) to commercial activities for the benefit of the nation by arguing that the Sabbath provides benefits by allowing lawyers time to write their briefs, merchants to tally their books, and others to exercise, go to coffeehouses, and otherwise enjoy themselves, ironically implying that the argument is specious because the Sabbath was not kept as intended in any case.

Swift then counters the argument that abolishing Christianity would remove arbitrary sectarian distinctions between Whig and Tory, High Church and Low Church, etc. that arguably damaged civil discourse and politics, by arguing that Christianity merely stands in as a convenient and arbitrary source of such distinctions and that abolishing it would only allow other equally arbitrary distinctions, essentially arguing that the problem is merely semantic and that such distinctions are a part of human nature.

The irony becomes more explicit as Swift next addresses the argument that it is ridiculous to employ a class of people to wail on one day a week against behavior that is the constant practice of all men alive on the other six by arguing that such vices, including wine and fine silks, were made all the more pleasurable by virtue of their being forbidden by the Christian mores of the era.

In response to the facetious rhetorical argument that the abolition of Christianity would lead to the abolition of all religion, and with it such "grievous prejudices of education" as virtue, honor, conscience and justice, Swift argues that such concepts had already been banished from contemporary education, and that this argument was, therefore, moot.

Answering the argument that the abolition of the gospel would benefit the vulgar, and that religion was put in force to keep the "lower part of the world in awe by fear of invisible powers," Swift points out that the vast majority of people were already unbelievers who only employed religion to quiet "peevish" children and provide topics for amusing discussion.

Swift addresses the argument that abolishing Christianity will contribute to the uniting of a people divided by various sects of by arguing that humanity has an inborn "spirit of opposition" such that if Christianity were not extant to provide a context for such natural oppositions among men, this natural tendency would instead be spent in contravention of the laws and disturbance of the public peace.

Finally, Swift points out potential negative consequences to the abolition of Christianity. First, Swift points out that reformers do not appreciate the advantage to them of having such an easy target upon which to practice their criticism and wit with such little risk to their persons in response as the Church and clergy; and rhetorically asks what institution could adequately replace religion in this role.

Next, Swift warns that the abolition of Christianity (specifically the Anglican church) could lead to a rise in Presbyterianism, or worse in his mind, Catholicism.

Swift's ironic defense of Christianity becomes more earnest and apparent as he finally proposes that if Christianity were to be abolished, all religion should be so banned, so as to fully free men from all bounds on their thinking and behavior, in order that they may be allowed to freely engage in such vices as prostitution and drunkenness.

In conclusion, Swift proposes that if Christianity is to be abolished, it ought not be done until the conclusion of wars in which England was then involved, as many of the country's allies were devoutly Christian, or at least, in the case of Turkey, religious.

In a final ironic flourish, Swift warns that if Christianity were abolished, the stock market would fall, costing Great Britain more than the country had ever spent for Christianity's preservation, and that there would be no reason to lose that much money merely for the sake of destroying the faith.

References

  1. ^ Levine, George R (1995), "Introduction", A Modest Proposal and Other Satires, Prometheus Books, p. 18, ISBN 0-87975-919-4.

External links

"....don't want 4 different versions of this"

religion

7.4.13

hicks, cross and carlin - on religion



Uploaded on 16 Oct 2008
Another good one featuring clips from Bill Hicks, David Cross, and George Carlin. Hick and Cross on Christians, and Carlin on Religion.

6.4.13

Dr Robert M. Price, Professor of biblical criticism - Wikipedia

Robert M. Price - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Price was formerly a Baptist minister in New Jersey, with doctorates in theology (Drew University 1981), and New Testament (Drew 1993).[9]

Robert Price
Robert M. Price 1.jpg
Born July 7, 1954
Jackson, Mississippi[1]
Residence North Carolina
Education BA, MTS (1978)
PhD in Systematic Theology (1981)
PhD in New Testament (1993)[1]
Alma mater Montclair State University
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
Drew University
Occupation Theologian
Employer Professor of biblical criticism for the Council for Secular Humanism's Center for Inquiry Institute[2]
Known for Research into the historicity of Jesus
Spouse(s) Carol Selby Price[3]
Children Victoria and Veronica[1]
Website
robertmprice.mindvendor.com
The Bible Geek
Robert McNair Price (born July 7, 1954) is an American theologian and writer. He teaches philosophy and religion at the Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary,[4] is professor of biblical criticism at the Center for Inquiry Institute, and the author of a number of books on theology and the historicity of Jesus, including Deconstructing Jesus (2000), The Reason Driven Life (2006), Jesus is Dead (2007), Inerrant the Wind: The Evangelical Crisis in Biblical Authority (2009), The Case Against the Case for Christ (2010), and The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (2012).[5]

A former Baptist minister, he was the editor of the Journal of Higher Criticism from 1994 until it ceased publication in 2003, and has written extensively about the Cthulhu Mythos, a "shared universe" created by the writer H. P. Lovecraft.[6] He also co-wrote a book with his wife, Carol Selby Price, Mystic Rhythms: The Philosophical Vision of Rush (1999), on the rock band Rush.

Price is a fellow of the Jesus Seminar, a group of 150 writers and scholars who study the historicity of Jesus, the organizer of a Web community for those interested in the history of Christianity,[7] and sits on the advisory board of the Secular Student Alliance.[3] He is a religious skeptic, especially of orthodox Christian beliefs, occasionally describing himself as a Christian atheist. He is known in particular for his skepticism about the existence of Jesus as an historical figure, arguing in 2009 that Jesus may have existed but "unless someone discovers his diary or his skeleton, we'll never know."[8]

Contents

Religious writings

In books like The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man and Deconstructing Jesus, Price challenges biblical literalism and argues for a more skeptical and humanistic approach to Christianity. He questions the idea of a historical Jesus; in the documentary The God Who Wasn't There, Price supports a version of the Jesus myth hypothesis, suggesting that the early Christians adopted the model for the figure of Jesus from the popular Mediterranean dying-rising saviour myths of the time, such as that of Dionysus.

He argues that the comparisons were known at the time, as early church father, Justin Martyr had admitted the similarities. Price suggests that Christianity simply adopted themes from the dying-rising god stories of the day and supplemented them with themes (escaping crosses, empty tombs, children being persecuted by tyrants, etc.) from the popular stories of the day in order to come up with the narratives about Christ.[citation needed] He has argued that there was an almost complete fleshing out of the details of the gospels by a Midrash (haggadah) rewriting of the Septuagint, Homer, Euripides' Bacchae, and Josephus.[10]

Catholic vs. Protestant Theology - Comparison Chart: ReligionFacts

Comparison Chart: Catholic vs. Protestant Theology - ReligionFacts


 
Authority Scripture and tradition Sola Scriptura - Scripture alone
Bible Includes apocrypha Excludes apocrypha
Results of Fall Corruption and tendency to sin Total depravity and guilt
Free will Free to do good or evil Free only to do evil
Predestination Related to God's foreknowledge Related to God's decrees
Atonement Death of Christ created merit that is shared with sinners through sacraments Death of Christ was a substitutionary sacrifice that satisfied God's justice
Divine grace Prevenient grace helps one believe; efficacious grace cooperates with the human will to do good Common grace enabling good works given to all; sufficient grace for salvation given to elect only
Good works Meritorious Results of divine grace and unworthy of merit
Salvation Received at baptism; may be lost by mortal sin; regained by penance. Those who have never heard of Christ may be saved. (Catech 847) Result of divine grace; unconditional. Those who have never heard of Christ may be saved.
The Church The Catholic Church is "the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation" (Catech 845) but those baptized in other Christian denominations are in communion with the Church (Catech 838). There is a distinction between the visible and invisible church. God saves anyone he chooses, or anyone with proper faith, regardless of church membership.
Sacraments Convey grace by their operation (ex opere operato). Means of grace only if received with faith.
Priests A special vocation for some believers; mediators between God and man Priesthood of all believers.
Transubstantiation Affirmed Rejected
Purgatory Affirmed Denied
Prayer to saints Accepted Rejected

Comparison Chart of Beliefs of Christian Denominations - ReligionFacts

Comparison Chart of Beliefs of Christian Denominations - ReligionFacts

The following chart compares the similarities and differences between the beliefs, doctrine and theology of major Christian denominations. Please note that the brief summaries and excerpts provided here do not reflect all individuals or churches in each denomination, but they are believed to represent the majority view and taken from official statements where available. For an excellent printed comparison chart similar to this one, click here.


Religious Authority
Methodist/ Wesleyan

1.4.13

Christianity vs Hinduism - Difference and Comparison | CHART

~
~

Reification (fallacy of misplaced concreteness) - Wikipedia

Reification (also known as concretism, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event, or physical entity.[1][2]

In other words, it is the error of treating as a concrete thing something which is not concrete, but merely an idea. For example: if the phrase "fighting for justice" is taken literally, justice would be reified.

Contents

Another common manifestation is the confusion of a model with reality. Mathematical or simulation models may help understand a system or situation but real life may differ from the model.
Note that reification is generally accepted in literature and other forms of discourse where reified abstractions are understood to be intended metaphorically,[2] but the use of reification in logical arguments is usually regarded as a fallacy. In rhetoric, it may be sometimes difficult to determine if reification was used correctly or incorrectly.

Etymology

From Latin res thing + facere to make, reification can be loosely translated as thing-making; the turning of something abstract into a concrete thing or object.

Theory

Reification often takes place when natural or social processes are misunderstood and/or simplified; for example when human creations are described as "facts of nature, results of cosmic laws, or manifestations of divine will".[3] Reification can also occur when a word with a normal usage is given an invalid usage, with mental constructs or concepts referred to as live beings. When human-like qualities are attributed as well, it is a special case of reification, known as pathetic fallacy (or anthropomorphic fallacy).
Nature provides empathy that we may have insight into the mind of others.
Reification may derive from an inborn tendency to simplify experience by assuming constancy as much as possible.[4]

Difference between reification and hypostatization

Sometimes a distinction is drawn between reification and hypostatization based on the kinds of abstractions involved. In reification they are usually philosophical or ideological, such as existence, good, and justice.[2]

Fallacy of misplaced concreteness

In the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead, one commits the fallacy of misplaced concreteness when one mistakes an abstract belief, opinion or concept about the way things are for a physical or "concrete" reality.
There is an error; but it is merely the accidental error of mistaking the abstract for the concrete. It is an example of what I will call the ‘Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness.’[5]
Whitehead proposed the fallacy in a discussion of the relation of spatial and temporal location of objects. He rejects the notion that a concrete physical object in the universe can be ascribed a simple spatial or temporal extension, that is, without reference of its relations to other spatial or temporal extensions.
...among the primary elements of nature as apprehended in our immediate experience, there is no element whatever which possesses this character of simple location. ... [Instead,] I hold that by a process of constructive abstraction we can arrive at abstractions which are the simply located bits of material, and at other abstractions which are the minds included in the scientific scheme. Accordingly, the real error is an example of what I have termed: The Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness.[6]

The use of constructs in science

The concept of a "construct" has a long history in science; it is used in many, if not most, areas of science. A construct is a hypothetical explanatory variable that is not directly observable. For example, the concepts of motivation in psychology and center of gravity in physics are constructs -- they are not directly observable. The degree to which a construct is useful and accepted in the scientific community depends on empirical research that has demonstrated that a scientific construct has construct validity (especially, predictive validity).[7] Thus, if properly understood and empirically corroborated, the "reification fallacy" applied to scientific constructs is not a fallacy at all—it is one part of theory creation and evaluation in normal science.

Relation to other fallacies

Pathetic fallacy (also known as anthropomorphic fallacy or anthropomorphization) is a specific type of reification. Just as reification is the attribution of concrete characteristics to an abstract idea, a pathetic fallacy is committed when those characteristics are specifically human characteristics, especially thoughts or feelings.[8] Pathetic fallacy is also related to personification, which is a direct and explicit ascription of life and sentience to the thing in question, whereas the pathetic fallacy is much broader and more allusive.
The animistic fallacy involves attributing personal intention to an event or situation.
Reification fallacy should not be confused with other fallacies of ambiguity:
  • Accentus, where the ambiguity arises from the emphasis (accent) placed on a word or phrase
  • Amphiboly, a verbal fallacy arising from ambiguity in the grammatical structure of a sentence
  • Composition, when one assumes that a whole has a property solely because its various parts have that property
  • Division, when one assumes that various parts have a property solely because the whole has that same property
  • Equivocation, the misleading use of a word with more than one meaning

As a rhetorical device

Reification is commonly found in rhetorical devices such as metaphor and personification. In those cases we are usually not dealing with a fallacy but with rhetorical applications of language. The distinction is that the fallacy occurs during an argument that results in false conclusions. This distinction is often difficult to make, particularly when the fallacious use is intentional.[2]

Concrete abstractions in philosophy

Many philosophers considered abstract concepts to be concrete entities. For example, Hegel wrote "Truth is its own self–movement.…" and "Science exists solely in the self–movement of the Notion.…"[9]

See also

References

  1. ^ Reification, Encyclopedia Brittannica
  2. ^ a b c d Logical Fallacies, Formal and Informal
  3. ^ David K. Naugle, Worldview: the history of a concept, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2002, ISBN 0-8028-4761-7, Google Print, p.178
  4. ^ David Galin in B. Alan Wallace, editor, Buddhism & Science: Breaking New Ground. Columbia University Press, 2003, page 132.
  5. ^ Whitehead, Alfred North (1997) [1925]. Science and the Modern World. Free Press (Simon & Schuster). p. 51. ISBN 0-684-83639-4.
  6. ^ Whitehead, Alfred North (1925) [1919]. An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Natural Knowledge (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  7. ^ Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (1997). Psychological Testing. Chapter 5. Pacific Grove: Brooks-Cole.
  8. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/446415/pathetic-fallacy pathetic fallacy. Retrieved on: October 9, 2012
  9. ^ The Phenomenology of Spirit, Preface, 48 and 71

Christianity's Similarities with Hinduism - by Stephen Knapp

Christianity's Similarities with Hinduism
Stephen Knapp's Book
You may find it surprising that much of Christianity originated from India. Indeed, over the centuries, numerous historians and sages have pointed out that not only has Hinduism had a predominant influence on Christianity, but that many of the Christian rites could be directly borrowed from Hindu (Vedic) India.

French historian Alain Danielou had noticed as early as 1950 that "a great number of events which surround the birth of Christ - as it is related in the Gospels - strangely reminded us of Buddha's and Krishna's legends." Danielou quotes as examples the structure of the Christian Church, which resembles that of the Buddhist Chaitya; the rigorous asceticism of certain early Christian sects, which reminds one of the asceticism of Jain and Buddhist saints; the veneration of relics, the usage of holy water, which is an Indian practice, and the word "Amen," which comes from the Hindu (Sanskrit) "OM."

Another historian, Belgium's Konraad Elst, also remarks "that many early Christian saints, such as Hippolytus of Rome, possessed an intimate knowledge of Brahmanism." Elst even quotes the famous Saint Augustine who wrote: "We never cease to look towards India, where many things are proposed to our admiration."

Unfortunately, remarks American Indianist David Frawley, "from the second century onwards, Christian leaders decided to break away from the Hindu influence and show that Christianity only started with the birth of Christ." Hence, many later saints began branding Brahmins as "heretics," and Saint Gregory set a future trend by publicly destroying the "pagan" idols of the Hindus.
Great Indian sages, such as Sri Aurobindu and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, the founder of the Art of Living, have often remarked that the stories recounting how Jesus came to India to be initiated are probably true. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar notes, for instance, that Jesus sometimes wore an orange robe, the Hindu symbol of renunciation of the world, which was not a usual practice in Judaism. "In the same way," he continues, "the worshiping of Virgin Mary in Catholicism is probably borrowed from the Hindu cult of Devi." Bells too, which cannot be found today in Synagogues, the surviving form of Judaism, are used in church-and we all know their importance in Buddhism and Hinduism for thousands of years, even up to the present day.

There are many other similarities between Hinduism and Christianity, including the use of incense, sacred bread (prasadam), the different altars around churches (which recall the manifold deities in their niches inside Hindu temples), reciting prayers on the rosary (Vedic japamala), the Christian Trinity (the ancient Vedic trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva as the creator, maintainer and destroyer respectively, as well as Lord Krishna as the Supreme Lord, the all-pervading Brahman as the holy ghost, and Paramatma as the expansion or son of the Lord), Christian processions, and the use of the sign of the cross (anganyasa), and so many others.

In fact, Hinduism's pervading influence seems to go much earlier than Christianity. American mathematician, A. Seindenberg, has, for example, shown that the Shulbasutras, the ancient Vedic science of mathematics, constitute the source of mathematics in the antique world of Babylon to Greece: "The arithmetic equations of the Shulbasutras were used in the observation of the triangle by the Babylonians as well as in the edification of Egyptian pyramids, in particular the funeral altar in the form of pyramid known in the Vedic world as smasana-cit."

In astronomy too, the "Indus" (from the valley of the Indus) have left a universal legacy, determining for instance the dates of solstices, as noted by 18th century French astronomer Jean Sylvain Bailly: "The movement of stars which was calculated by Hindus 4,500 years ago, does not differ even by a minute from the tables which we are using today." And he concludes: "The Hindu systems of astronomy are much more ancient than those of the Egyptians-even the Jews derive from the Hindus their knowledge."

There is also no doubt that the Greeks heavily borrowed from the "Indus." Danielou notes that the Greek cult of Dionysus, which later became Bacchus with the Romans, is a branch of Shaivism: "Greeks spoke of India as the sacred territory of Dionysus, and even historians of Alexander the Great identified the Indian Shiva with Dionysus and mention the dates and legends of the Puranas." French philosopher and Le Monde journalist Jean-Paul Droit recently wrote in his book, The Forgetfulness of India, that "the Greeks loved so much Indian philosophy that Demetrios Galianos had even translated the Bhagavad-gita."

Many Western and Christian historians have tried to nullify this India influence on Christians and ancient Greece by saying that it is the West through the Aryan invasion, and later the onslaught of Alexander the Great of India, which influenced Indian astronomy, mathematics, architecture, philosophy-and not vice versa. But new archeological and linguistic discoveries have proved that there never was an Aryan invasion and that there is a continuity from the ancient Vedic civilization to the Saraswati culture.

The Vedas, for instance, which constitute the soul of present day Hinduism, have not been composed in 1500 B.C., as Max Muller arbitrarily decided, but may go back to 7000 years before Christ, giving Hinduism plenty of time to influence Christianity and older civilizations which preceded Christianity.
Thus, we should be aware of and point out the close links which exist between Christianity and Hinduism (ancient Vedic culture), which bind them into a sacred brotherhood. Conscientious Christian and Western scholars can realize how the world humanity's basic culture is Vedic through proper research.

Visit Stephen Knapp’s website at www.stephen-knapp.com

Cult of Reason, a replacement for Christianity during the French Revolution - Wikipedia

The Cult of Reason (French: Culte de la Raison)a was an atheistic belief system established in France and intended as a replacement for Christianity during the French Revolution.[1]

Contents

Origins

Opposition to the Roman Catholic Church was integral among the causes of the French Revolution, and this anti-clericalism solidified into official government policy in 1792 after the First French Republic was declared. Most of the dechristianisation of France was motivated by political and economic concerns, but philosophical alternatives to the Church developed gradually as well. Among the growing heterodoxy, the structural concepts of the Culte de la Raison became defined by Jacques Hébert, Antoine-François Momoro, Pierre-Gaspard Chaumette, Joseph Fouché, and other radical revolutionaries.

Philosophy

The Cult of Reason was explicitly humanocentric. Its goal was the perfection of mankind through the attainment of Truth and Liberty, and its guiding principle to this goal was the exercise of the human faculty of Reason. Though atheism was at the core of the cult, it defined itself as more than a mere rejection of gods: in the manner of conventional religion, it encouraged acts of congregational worship.[2]
The cult fostered frequent devotional displays to the ideal of Reason. A careful distinction was always drawn between the rational respect of Reason and the veneration of an idol: "There is one thing that one must not tire telling people," Momoro explained, "Liberty, reason, truth are only abstract beings. They are not gods, for properly speaking, they are part of ourselves."[2]

Revolutionary impact

Adherence to the Cult of Reason became a defining attribute of the Hébertist faction. It was also pervasive among the ranks of the sans-culottes. Numerous political factions, anti-clerical groups and events only loosely connected to the cult have come to be amalgamated with its name.[3] The earliest atheistic public demonstrations ranged from "wild masquerades" redolent of earlier spring festivals to outright persecutions, including ransackings of churches and synagogues in which religious and royal images were defaced.[4]
Joseph Fouché (1759–1820)

Joseph Fouché

As a military commander dispatched by the Jacobins to enforce their new laws, Fouché led a particularly zealous campaign of dechristianisation. His methods were brutal but efficient, and helped spread the developing creed through many parts of France. In his jurisdictions, Fouché ordered all crosses and statues removed from graveyards, and he gave the cult one of its elemental tenets when he decreed that all cemetery gates must bear only one inscription – "Death is an eternal sleep."[5] Fouché went so far as to declare a new civic religion of his own, virtually interchangeable with what would become known as the Cult of Reason, at a ceremony he dubbed the "Feast of Brutus" on 22 September 1793.[6]
Fête de la Raison ("Festival of Reason"), Notre Dame, Paris.

Festival of Reason

The official nationwide Fête de la Raison, supervised by Hébert and Momoro on 20 Brumaire, Year II (10 November 1793) came to epitomize the new republican way of religion. In ceremonies devised and organised by Chaumette, churches across France were transformed into modern Temples of Reason. At Notre Dame in Paris was the largest ceremony of them all. The Christian altar was dismantled and an altar to Liberty was installed; the inscription "To Philosophy" was carved in stone over the cathedral's doors. The proceedings took several hours and concluded with the appearance of a Goddess of Reason who, to avoid idolatry, was portrayed by a living woman.[7] The overarching theme of the ceremony was aptly summarized by Anacharsis Clootz who claimed that henceforward there would be "one God only, Le Peuple."[8]
Many contemporary accounts reported the Festival of Reason as a "lurid", "licentious" affair of scandalous "depravities",[9] although some scholars have disputed their veracity.[10] These accounts, real or embellished, galvanized anti-revolutionary forces and even caused many dedicated Jacobins like Maximilien Robespierre to publicly separate themselves from the radical faction.[11]

Legacy

Inscription on church at Ivry-la-Bataille.
 
In the spring of 1794, the Cult of Reason was faced with official repudiation when Robespierre, nearing complete dictatorial power, announced his own establishment of a new, deistic religion for the Republic, the Cult of the Supreme Being.[12] Robespierre denounced the Hébertistes on various philosophical and political grounds, specifically rejecting their atheism. When Hébert, Momoro, Ronsin, Vincent and others were sent to the guillotine on 4 Germinal, Year II (24 March 1794), the cult lost its most influential leadership; when Chaumette and other Hébertistes followed them four days later, the Cult of Reason effectively ceased to exist. Both cults were officially banned by Napoleon Bonaparte with his Law on Cults of 18 Germinal, Year X.[13]

See also

Notes

  • ^ a: The word "cult" in French means "a form of worship", without any of its negative or exclusivist implications in English; its proponents intended it to be a universal congregation.

Dechristianisation of France during the French Revolution - Wikipedia

The de-christianization of France during the French Revolution is a conventional description of the results of a number of separate policies, conducted by various governments of France between the start of the French Revolution in 1789 and the Concordat of 1801, forming the basis of the later and less radical Laïcité movement.

The goal of the campaign was the destruction of Catholic religious practice and of the religion itself.[1] There has been much scholarly debate over whether the movement was popularly motivated or something forced upon the people by those in power.[1]

Contents

The Church under the Ancien Régime

In 18th-century France, ninety-five percent of the population were adherents of the Catholic Church; most of the rest were Protestant Huguenots, who, although greatly outnumbered by the Catholics, nonetheless retained powerful positions in French local governments. (A small population of Jews, amounting to around 40,000, also existed, and very small numbers of Muslims may also have lived in the kingdom; in a country whose total population was at least 27 million, however, these groups remained numerically negligible.) The Ancien Régime institutionalised the authority of the clergy in its status as the First Estate of the realm. As the largest landowner in the country, the Catholic Church controlled properties which provided massive revenues from its tenants; the Church also had an enormous income from the collection of tithes. Since the Church kept the registry of births, deaths, and marriages and was the only institution that provided primary and secondary education and hospitals, it influenced all citizens.

New policies of the Revolution

The programme of dechristianization waged against Catholicism, and eventually against all forms of Christianity, included:[1][2][3]
  • confiscation of church lands, which were to be the security for the new Assignat currency
  • removal of statues, plates and other iconography from places of worship
  • destruction of crosses, bells and other external signs of worship
  • the institution of revolutionary and civic cults, including the Cult of Reason and subsequently the Cult of the Supreme Being,
  • the enactment of a law on October 21, 1793 making all nonjuring priests and all persons who harboured them liable to death on sight.
The climax was reached with the celebration of the Goddess "Reason" in Notre Dame Cathedral on 10 November 1793.
The dechristianization campaign can be seen as the logical extension of the materialist philosophies of some leaders of the enlightenment, while for others with more prosaic concerns it was an opportunity to unleash resentments against the Church and clergy.[4]

The Revolution and the Church

In August, 1789, the State cancelled the taxing power of the Church. The issue of church property became central to the policies of the new revolutionary government. Declaring that all church property in France belonged to the nation, confiscations were ordered and church properties were sold at public auction. In July 1790, the National Constituent Assembly published the Civil Constitution of the Clergy that stripped clerics of their special rights — the clergy were to be made employees of the state, elected by their parish or bishopric, and the number of bishoprics was to be reduced — and required all priests and bishops to swear an oath of fidelity to the new order or face dismissal, deportation or death.
French priests had to receive Papal approval to sign such an oath, and Pius VI spent almost eight months deliberating on the issue. On April 13, 1791, the Pope denounced the Constitution resulting in a split in the French Catholic church. Abjuring priests ("jurors") became known as "constitutional clergy", and nonjuring priests as "refractory clergy".

Map (in French) of the percentage of jurors among French priests.
In September 1792, the Legislative Assembly legalized divorce, contrary to Catholic doctrine. At the same time, the State took control of the birth, death, and marriage registers away from the Church. An ever increasing view that the Church was a counter-revolutionary force exacerbated the social and economic grievances and violence erupted in towns and cities across France.

In Paris, over a forty-eight hour period beginning on September 2, 1792, as the Legislative Assembly (successor to the National Constituent Assembly) dissolved into chaos, three Church bishops and more than two hundred priests were massacred by angry mobs; this constituted part of what would become known as the September Massacres. Priests were among those drowned in mass executions (noyades) for treason under the direction of Jean-Baptiste Carrier; priests and nuns were among the mass executions at Lyon, for separatism, on the orders of Joseph Fouché and Collot d'Herbois. Hundreds more priests were imprisoned and made to suffer in abominable conditions in the port of Rochefort.
Anti-church laws were passed by the Legislative Assembly and its successor, the National Convention, as well as by département councils throughout the country. Many of the acts of dechristianization in 1793 were motivated by the seizure of church gold and silver to finance the war effort,[5] though exceptions weren't uncommon. In November 1793, the département council of Indre-et-Loire abolished the word dimanche (English: Sunday).[citation needed] The Gregorian calendar, an instrument decreed by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, was replaced by the French Republican Calendar which abolished the sabbath, Saints' days and any references to the Church.

Anti-clerical parades were held, and the Archbishop of Paris was forced to resign his duties and made to replace his mitre with the red "Cap of Liberty." Street and place names with any sort of religious connotation were changed, such as the town of St. Tropez which became Héraclée. Religious holidays were banned and replaced with holidays to celebrate the harvest and other non-religious symbols. Robespierre and his colleagues decided to supplant both Catholicism and the rival, atheistic Cult of Reason with the Cult of the Supreme Being. Just six weeks before his arrest, on June 8, 1794 the still-powerful Robespierre personally led a vast procession through Paris to the Tuileries garden in a ceremony to inaugurate the new faith.

The dechristianisation of France reached its zenith around the middle of 1794 with the fall of Robespierre. By early 1795 a return to some form of religion-based faith was beginning to take shape and a law passed on February 21, 1795 legalised public worship, albeit with strict limitations. The ringing of church bells, religious processions and displays of the Christian cross were still forbidden.
As late as 1799, priests were still being imprisoned or deported to penal colonies and persecution only worsened after the French army led by General Louis Alexandre Berthier captured Rome and imprisoned Pope Pius VI, who would die in captivity in Valence, France in August 1799. Ultimately, with Napoleon now in ascendancy in France, year-long negotiations between government officials and the new Pope, Pius VII, led to the Concordat of 1801, formally ending the dechristianisation period and establishing the rules for a relationship between the Roman Church and the French State.
Victims of the Reign of Terror totaled somewhere between 20,000 and 40,000. According to one estimate, among those condemned by the revolutionary tribunals, about 8 percent were aristocrats, 6 percent clergy, 14 percent middle class, and 70 percent were workers or peasants accused of hoarding, evading the draft, desertion, rebellion, and other purported crimes.[6] Of these social groupings, the clergy of the Roman Catholic Church suffered proportionately the greatest loss.[6]

While persecution of certain Roman Catholic clerics and monastic orders occurred during the Third Republic, the Concordat of 1801 endured for more than a century until it was abrogated by the government of the Third Republic, which established a policy of laïcité on December 11, 1905.

Toll on the Church

Under threat of death, imprisonment, military conscription, and loss of income, about twenty thousand constitutional priests were forced to abdicate and hand over their letters of ordination, and six thousand to nine thousand of them were coerced to marry. Many abandoned their pastoral duties altogether.[1] Nonetheless, some of those who had abdicated continued covertly to minister to the people.[1]
By the end of the decade, approximately thirty thousand priests had been forced to leave France, and others who did not leave were executed.[4] Most French parishes were left without the services of a priest and deprived of the sacraments. Any non-juring priest faced the guillotine or deportation to French Guiana.[1] By Easter 1794, few of France's forty thousand churches remained open; many had been closed, sold, destroyed, or converted to other uses.[1]

Victims of revolutionary violence, whether religious or not, were popularly treated as Christian martyrs, and the places where they were killed became pilgrimage destinations.[1] Catechising in the home, folk religion, syncretic and heterodox practices all became more common.[1] The longterm effects on religious practice in France were significant. Many who were dissuaded from their traditional religious practices never resumed them.[1]

Gallery

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Tallet, Frank Religion, Society and Politics in France Since 1789 pp. 1-17 1991 Continuum International Publishing
  2. ^ Latreille, A. FRENCH REVOLUTION, New Catholic Encyclopedia v. 5, pp. 972–973 (Second Ed. 2002 Thompson/Gale) ISBN 0-7876-4004-2
  3. ^ SPIELVOGEL, Jackson Western Civilization: Combined Volume p. 549, 2005 Thomson Wadsworth
  4. ^ a b Lewis, Gwynne The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate p.96, 1993 Routledge, ISBN 0-415-05466-4 "Many of the Parisian Sections eagerly joined in the priest-hunt...."
  5. ^ Lewis, Gwynne The French Revolution: Rethinking the Debate p.45 1993 Routledge, ISBN 0-415-05466-4
  6. ^ a b Harvey, Donald Joseph FRENCH REVOLUTION, History.com 2006 (Accessed April 27, 2007)