Conference hydra::dejavu

                                                          
    Welcome to DEJAVU!
    
    Yes, you've definitely come to the right place.
    
    There are a lot of Catholic mystics actually, however they are usually
    out of the mainstream of the church.  Maria Teresa of Avila is one of
    them.  She wrote "Interior Castle", among other books.
    
    I suspect fear plays a big role in how the nuns and others cope with
    the situations you described, so their reaction follows their fear.  
    It is unfortunate.  
    
    Cindy

    I woudn't have thought this was unique to the Catholic church.
    
    Dougie
    

    re: .0
    
         All religions attempt to put "God" in a box, prepackaged for
    understandable consumption.  Meanwhile, those who market the package
    want to maintain user loyalty, along with their standard of living.
    To do so, they must maintain control.  One of the ways of controlling
    people is by making what they say to be good/right/proper while that
    which threatens them to be bad/wrong/sinful/etc.   
         Please notice that most clerics wear black, yet they tell you
    that the dark side is evil.  Please notice the references to billowy
    heavens while at the same time setting up fear of other underworld
    apparitions, etc. (though they don't even give you a clue as to how
    to access either nor of how to differentiate.)  The minute someone
    makes contact, they rush in with their holy water or its equivalent
    and tell you you're seeing demons, yet they cannot tell you how to 
    tell an angel apart from a counselor or a devil in sheep's clothing.
    It's about control.  Let me repeat: it's about control and domination.
    Religions control and dominate and manipulate.  Those who are a part,
    are either controlling, dominating and manipulating or they are being
    controlled, dominated or manipulated.  It's very, very simple.
    Spirituality has nothing to do with religion.
        I have no respect for any religion (as you can likely tell ;-} )
    I have compassion for those involved, I understand what their 
    intention often or usually is, I respect their attempt to bring
    spirituality and "goodness" into the world, but I have no respect
    for the vehicle that they use, and their insistence of it's rightness.
        Notice that those Bible thumpers that come to your door, though
    they may be good, wholesome people, aren't really there to save you.
    They are there to save themselves---and are there out of some sense
    of obligation.  This is an obvious example of the underpinnings of 
    most religions.
        You were cheated out of developing that which came easily to you.
    You are in a position, now, however, of being able to reconnect with
    that part of yourself.   Many of us were never encouraged to develop
    that part and bought into physicality so much that it takes lots of
    practicing and work to re-establish that aspect of ourselves.  
    Now you need to learn how to process that information, that is, how
    to separate that which is helpful from that which isn't, that which
    is lower astral, e.g., from that which goes far beyond.  There is
    nothing in there that can hurt you unless you want it to.
    
    Frederick
    

    
    Dougie,
    
    >unique to the Catholic church
    
    You're right of course.  However there are religions out there that do
    not attempt to suppress one's own spiritual and moral development -
    Unitarian Universalism being one of them (and one that has been around
    for many centuries now...it's just that the members don't prosetylize,
    so it remains a well-kept secret for the most part..(;^)
    
    Re.0 - additional on suppression
    
    Back many decades ago, Leo Tolstoy wrote a book entitled "The Kingdom
    of God is Within You", based on the Biblical verse of the same.  
    Naturally it was banned by both the Church (capital 'C') AND the
    Russian government...the reason being that if people knew that they 
    already had access to the Kingdom of God within their own selves, then 
    they would not have any need for the Church or State.  Or as Alex
    Haley said so well, "You can't enslave a man who knows who he is." 
    
    Gandhi was most inspired by Tolstoy's book - and even had a
    longstanding friendship with Tolstoy himself - and between that book, 
    the Bible (as it is, not as the Church interprets it), and another work 
    which escapes me right now, he led the most successful nonviolent
    revolution and freed India.  Tolstoy's work is a fascinating work if 
    you ever get the opportunity to read it.
    
    Cindy       
                                     

RE: -1

I agree. Forget "The Church". Spit on dogma and doctrine, find your own way, 
you'll know what's right. There's plenty of non-Satanic help (unless you
listen to members of an ailing breed clutching for those they see as so frail
as to become blind sheep).

Marcos,
	I agree about "Life After Life", excellent (although I've only read
extracts in Reader's Digest [ahem!] ). Also, (it's that book again! :-D),
"What Dreams May Come". It really is a must!

<Basenoter>,
	You are one of the gifted, not one of the possessed... feel priveledged,
but bear in mind to never use your gifts for evil ends, make the most to help
others, and be happy!

								- JIM CAD*

 .   <<< Note 1681.4 by WLDWST::WARD_FR "Seeking more mystical adventure" >>>
 .                -< "I am religious" (means, "I am special") >-

I am special, I am not religious. I am not the exception to the rule. I
doubt very much you would find a statistically significant correlation in
favour of religious people proclaiming that they are special over agnostics
and athiests.

.         All religions attempt to put "God" in a box, prepackaged for
.    understandable consumption.  

Do they, by Jove! ALL religions? Pre-packaged? Whatever do you mean? Could
you perhaps elaborte, with examples, on how all religions do this?

.    One of the ways of controlling
.    people is by making what they say to be good/right/proper while that
.    which threatens them to be bad/wrong/sinful/etc.   
 
what's this all about?

.     Please notice that most clerics wear black, yet they tell you
.    that the dark side is evil.  

yep. happens to me all the time. Clerics come up to me and say "Dougie old
chap, the dark side is evil".


.			  Please notice the references to billowy
.    heavens 

which references?

.                                                    The minute someone
.    makes contact, they rush in with their holy water or its equivalent
.    and tell you you're seeing demons, yet they cannot tell you how to 
.    tell an angel apart from a counselor or a devil in sheep's clothing.

Oh I know. Happens all the time. There I am with my weedgie board and some
guy with a black frock rushes in and throws holy water all over me. Get's
right on my wick.

.    It's about control.  Let me repeat: it's about control and domination.

You're beginning to sound, ahem, evangelical.

.    Religions control and dominate and manipulate.  Those who are a part,
.    are either controlling, dominating and manipulating or they are being
.    controlled, dominated or manipulated.

What Wuthering Height! 

.   It's very, very simple.
.   Spirituality has nothing to do with religion.

I'm lost now. What would you call spirituality, and why does it have
nothing to do with religion? 

    I have no respect for any religion (as you can likely tell ;-} )
    I have compassion for those involved, I understand what their 
    intention often or usually is, I respect their attempt to bring
    spirituality and "goodness" into the world, but I have no respect
    for the vehicle that they use, and their insistence of it's rightness.

The poor misguided fools, eh? My My how we pity them. In my experience, I
find that many athiests are extremely antagonisic towards people with
religious belief. Of all the religious people I know, none have tried to
convert me, or insist on the rightness of there belief.

.        Notice that those Bible thumpers that come to your door, though
.    they may be good, wholesome people, aren't really there to save you.
.    They are there to save themselves---and are there out of some sense
.    of obligation. 

You seem to speak with great authority on the personal motivation of
others. Have you been inside their heads to speak with such conviction?

.    You were cheated out of developing that which came easily to you.
.    You are in a position, now, however, of being able to reconnect with
.    that part of yourself.   Many of us were never encouraged to develop
.    that part and bought into physicality so much that it takes lots of
.    practicing and work to re-establish that aspect of ourselves.  
.    Now you need to learn how to process that information, that is, how
.    to separate that which is helpful from that which isn't, that which
.    is lower astral, e.g., from that which goes far beyond.  There is
.    nothing in there that can hurt you unless you want it to.
 
Lower Astral? Dunno what that means. My understanding of your text is that
you are condemning religion but remain of an open mind towards the
paranormal. Perhaps you could summarise the point you are trying to make.    

toodle pip

dougie

              

    re: .9 (Marcos)
    
          Ah, that's the nice thing about individuality...I'm free to 
    determine for myself.  I do not have to follow any particular teaching
    or dogma.  This reality is left to my "imagination."  As things
    work, I incorporate them; as they fail, I discard them.  Don't 
    project your interpretation of me elsewhere.
    
    re: .7, .8
    
         Time for you to do some "homework," it appears to me.  
         Note .0 spoke in a couple of generalities and a couple of 
    specifics.  I responded in kind.  If you don't agree or don't buy
    it, fine.  Incidentally, most generalities have a way of not being
    true in all instances.  The ones I listed are no exceptions, and I
    won't argue with that.  A point I was attempting to get across is
    that most of the people in my world that I have known have been 
    heavily, heavily influenced/impacted/brainwashed with ideas/concepts/
    beliefs/etc. based on misguided religious tenets.  Further, based on 
    my awareness of the "psychological" makeup of those same people,
    (and by looking at my own therapies) I have come to see that what
    people say or believe about themselves is very, very often not true,
    or at least not completely true.   In other words, too often (to
    put it in round numbers I'll guess 50% of the time) motivations are
    based on payoffs or other "negatives."  So, while one side of the mouth
    might be saying "Do this, it's good for you" the other side is saying
    "I don't want to mess with your independence anymore...do it my way,
    so that I can get you out of the way."  Religions, to me, do precisely
    this.  All religions?  Yes, because it is almost impossible for anyone
    to step away from their negative ego in a hierarchical setting.
    In any religion, there is a minister of some type.  There is a vast
    opportunity for that individual to abuse their power, to be seen as
    "the last word."
         For a related reading, read Richard Bach's "One."  The passage
    wherein Richard and Leslie meet with Jean LeClerc describes (in it's
    own fictionalized way) what I'm trying to talk about.  Once anything
    becomes a teaching, it loses it's creativity.  Spirituality has nothing
    to do with doing what everyone else is doing.  It is doing and being
    what one is and how one relates to all that exists beyond the self.
    Spirituality has to do with the integration of masculine and feminine
    energies.  Religions have to do with the bastardization of one or the
    other:  they abuse the energy of will and action (masculine, "God"
    energy) or they turn to the energy of imagination and feeling---usually
    in retaliation or as an escape from the punishing "God"---(the energies
    of the Goddess, or feminine energies.)  I know of no religion that 
    promotes both which also doesn't have established rules or hierarchies.
        Be angry with me and my categorizations if you choose.  My 
    beliefs are mine.   It is not my intent to hurt you or anyone else,
    but hurt isn't the emotion you are expressing.  If I were in your
    shoes, I'd look for the sources of my anger.  In any case, I've
    been presenting alternative thoughts for the five years I've been 
    in here.  I'm not saying anything new or anything I haven't said 
    before.  The world has changed a great deal in the interim.  I'd 
    like to think it has changed because it needs to.  I want to believe
    that more and more positive changes are due...including the 
    de-integration of most religious foundations.  Isn't it nice that
    you are free to hold onto the consensus viewpoint and that only
    a few strange radicals such as myself exist?  ;-}
    
    Frederick
    

    I do see auras when i try to it is usually easy to see it with a dark
    color background ,it's like a white glow around the persons body but
    i don't think this is the actually aura itself I can't remember what it
    is call.
    
    re: 1681.4  I totally agree with you but not with that mutch anger.
    
    re: 1681.7 I think it's quit easy to understand what was wrote in note
               .4 and i think you are playing blind here! what you wrote is
        something i would hear if i was listening to a preacher's show
        talking	 about the atheists.
    
    

    
    
    
        Beleive in what you feel.Don,t hide behind someone elses ideas of
    life.This will only confuse you more in looking for where you might fit
    in with life.

    
    	Religion = spirituality + politics
    
    

  Re .13

  I think I know why my old Hindu colleague used to smile so much :-)

  With regard to the topic, religions are just another set of human
  organisations and, as such, are subject to the same chance of being "led"
  by the weaker types (ruled by greed or lust for power) as any other group
  (eg., politicians, companies, unions, etc.).  They also have the same chance
  of being led by people with vision, open minds & hearts, honesty and genuine
  concern. 

  Sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.  The thing is to recognise
  which is which and take the appropriate action.  I was also raised as a
  Catholic and have since changed my views but one of the first things that
  made me realise the world is not clear cut [shades of grey rather than black
  _or_ white] was finding a Catholic priest who was prepared to listen and talk
  about the existance of attitudes beyond his particular belief.  He showed
  me that tolerance was far more important than dogma and that the words in
  the Bible *could* be interpreted in different ways, each with their own
  validity.

  Frank

    
    .13-.15 are now deleted.
    
    Bummer.
    
    Can someone summarize?
    
    Cindy

    Wow!  Didn't mean to hit on such a touchy subject here...religion. 
    Thank you all for the input.
    
    As anyone, I can only ddraw on my own experiences with the Catholic
    church, which aren't the best.  I "left" the Catholic church shortly
    after that incident.  I am still baptized and confirmed, but I haven't
    attended mass (unless a funeral) in years.
    
    ANYWAY...
    
    Thanks for the books.  I did read, "Buried Alive" which is also a book
    written about after life experiences.  I noted some similarities and a
    few differences...
    
    The similarity...God telling me it wasn't my time and that He'd be with
    me through my struggles.  Also, seeing a previously deceased family
    member.
    
    Difference:  There was no lighted tunnel or lighted stairway, I was all
    of a sudden in a white room.
    
    How did I know I was talking to God and not myself?  I do know that for
    a fact!
    
    1)  10 year olds don't lie...and I didn't describe God as some old man
    with a white beard as I'd been taught He looked like in grade school.
    
    2)  I described the dress my aunt was wearing.  Turned out to be a
    dress I'd never seen before but she had.
    
    3)  God came to me a few times after that.
    
    It was really a frightening experience to have at ten when the only
    grownups who believe you are family, but the church doesn't?
    
    I spoke with a Methodist minister as an adult who didn't even believe
    me!  I was amazed!
    
    As for the spirituality.  I agree that it is different than something a
    church can give or teach.  
    
    The attitude has not hurt my own personal faith, but I am confused
    about some things as yet, mostly the differences between what I was
    taught (through dogma, Catholic tradition, etc) and what I found to be
    reality.
    
    Again, I can only speak from my own experiences here, and none of this
    is meant to offend anyone of any creed or belief!  I would not like to
    see this get into an argument!
    
    Also, I'm disappointed about the deleted notes but guess that they
    became too heated and argumentative to leave in?
    
    Elizabeth
    
    

RE: -1

Your personal experience says it all.

There is a "higher power" that oversees us/guides us, but it doesn't have a
mighty rulebook whereby if you don't do 17 Hail Mary's per week you get torched
in Hell. Religious dogma is here to crush and control us... that is the work of
Man, not God. Your experience should have been of the ultimate interest to the
"highly religious" mentors of yours, but by that time they'd become so
indoctrinated by the strictures of Man, not word of God that you incurred their
wrath and rebuke...

I believe what I believe from what I have seen, researched. That's all. No 
Holy Water and ceremony, thanks.

								- JIM CAD*

     <<< Note 1681.21 by FORTY2::CADWALLADER "Reaping time has come..." >>>
                -< Religion is spurned from the dogma of Man. >-

>> Religious dogma is here to crush and control us...
    
When people stop coming out with tedious sweeping generalisations about
other people's beliefs, I'll start taking this topic a bit more seriously.

paco man

When people stop coming out with tedious sweeping generalisations about
other people's beliefs, I'll start taking this topic a bit more seriously.


Gah! Anyone called Dougie would have said that!

								- JIM CAD*

    <<< Note 1681.10 by WLDWST::WARD_FR "Seeking more mystical adventure" >>>
                             -< Free radicals... >-

>    won't argue with that.  A point I was attempting to get across is
>    that most of the people in my world that I have known have been 
>    heavily, heavily influenced/impacted/brainwashed with ideas/concepts/
>    beliefs/etc. based on misguided religious tenets.  

Indeed. But why blame it all on religion? And is it only religion which is
misguided? The writers and promoters of works on the paranormal
indoctrinate their 'clients' given half a chance. People ultimately choose
to believe in something, whether it be God, Astrology, witchcraft,
numerology or whatever takes your fancy.

>     Further, based on my awareness of the "psychological" makeup of those same
>     people, (and by looking at my own therapies) I have come to see that what
>     people say or believe about themselves is very, very often not true, or at
>     least not completely true.

A statement which, in my opinion, could be levelled at most people,
regardless of belief. 

   
 
>    In any religion, there is a minister of some type.  There is a vast
>    opportunity for that individual to abuse their power, to be seen as
>    "the last word."
 
Hmmm ... Quakers?  Opportunity to abuse power does not implicitly imply
that power will be abused.

>    Once anything
>    becomes a teaching, it loses it's creativity.  

why?

>    Spirituality has nothing
>    to do with doing what everyone else is doing.  It is doing and being
>    what one is and how one relates to all that exists beyond the self.
>    Spirituality has to do with the integration of masculine and feminine
>    energies. 

You are stating a belief system as if it were fact. What is the difference
between your beliefs, and the way you express them, and that of a
'conventional' religion?  
                

>    My beliefs are mine. 

Which you appear to be presenting as truth, or fact. Since I do not share
your belief, I find it difficult to differentiate between the presentation
of your beliefs, and the presentation of traditional Catholic beliefs.

>    like to think it has changed because it needs to.  I want to believe
>    that more and more positive changes are due...including the 
>    de-integration of most religious foundations.  

What do you mean by the "de-integration of most religious foundations"?

Dougie

>    re: 1681.7 I think it's quit easy to understand what was wrote in note
>               .4 and i think you are playing blind here! what you wrote is
>        something i would hear if i was listening to a preacher's show
>        talking	 about the atheists.
 
A somewhat fascinating interpretation given my public agnostism

dougie
   
    

         <<< Note 1681.5 by TNPUBS::PAINTER "Mark Russell for pres" >>>
                              -< add'l thoughts >-

>    You're right of course.  However there are religions out there that do
>    not attempt to suppress one's own spiritual and moral development -
>    Unitarian Universalism being one of them (and one that has been around
>    for many centuries now...it's just that the members don't prosetylize,
>    so it remains a well-kept secret for the most part..(;^)

You're interesting observation seems to have been carefully neglected by
some noters who would rather contemptously dismiss all religions, rather
than consider the facts.

Dougie

      
    Re.26
    
    Dougie,
    
    No comment.  (;^)
    
    Anyway...
    
    Anybody that is interested in UUism can check out the notes file on 
    NOTED::UU.  Topic 16 tells what it's all about.
    
    Cindy

re: .24 (Nisbet)
    
        You are not incorrect to assign "blame" on lots of things.  Certainly
    religion is only an excuse much of the time; however, it *is* an
    excuse too often.  As the earlier deleted notes pointed out,
    most if not all wars are "holy" wars.  Each side claims "God."
        The point is, what are we living for?  Why are we alive?  Why
    are we human?  If it's just for the four f's (for those who missed
    it in WOMANNOTES, that's "fight, flight, feed and 'reproduce' [ ;-)" ])
    then all doesn't seem to matter much.  Then I'd say, sure, go ahead
    and blame the rain or blame the Huns or the sun or whatever...
    But for those among us who are looking not only for *quality* in
    our lives but for understanding and knowingness, too, there is far
    beyond simple "physicality" (being of the physical--chemistry, etc.)
    This reaches beyond simple human potential into what is more 
    properly called the spiritual potential.  There have been scores of
    humans who have reached for this relationship with the
    "all-knowingness" (God/Goddess/All-That-Is) and have never quite
    put it into its perspective.  Many of these same humans have 
    abused or misused their wisdom in an effort to teach others.  Much
    of that comes under the heading of "control."  You will note that
    most of the political leaders of recorded history have been 
    influenced or guided or held in check by their religions or their
    religious leaders.  You can't tell me that the most powerful actions
    that humans have exhibited haven't been either directly or indirectly
    sanctioned, commissioned, guided or otherwise impacted by the 
    religious morality of their times.  Whether this be the killing of
    medieval witches or various purges or wars or holocausts or whatever...
    the heaviest impact on humanity has been by other humans---who in
    turn have used strongly held religious convictions as their basis
    and their excusability.
         Incidentally, wasn't Richard Nixon a Quaker?  If so, I rest
    my case.
    
>    Once anything
>    becomes a teaching, it loses it's creativity.  

why?

     ...because anything that is created destroys its creator.  Because
    once something is created it cannot be created again.  Because 
    perfection is the antithesis of creativity.  Because the original words
    were a spurt of creativity and when they are repeated they become
    an attempt at perfection.  New ideas, new thoughts, new anything is
    creativity.  Attempts at packaging them become repetitive attempts
    at perfection.  

You are stating a belief system as if it were fact. What is the difference
between your beliefs, and the way you express them, and that of a
'conventional' religion?  
               
          All belief systems eventually fail.  Truths lead to greater
    truths which lead to yet greater truths.  Eventually there are systems
    which contain no systems.  I, and my beliefs, are no exception.  
    The difference between me and most religions are pretty clear, aren't
    they?  I'm making no money at this (well, my DEC-life indirectly
    supports this,) I have no "followers" as far as I can tell, I
    have no control over anyone and I work hard to avoid that controlling
    mindset which is an otherwise integral part of my negative ego, 
    though I fall into the trap of wanting people to do things I believe,
    I work hard to understand that my way isn't the way for others.
    What I *do* strive for, however, is an attempt to point out the
    fallacies that those who attempt to control others via their "God"
    are living with.  Sure, they can believe that the only way to 
    forgive one's sins is via a priest in a confessional, but I can 
    point out to them that their sin isn't really forgiven unless they've
    forgiven themselves, for no matter how much forgiveness "God" has,
    if one still hasn't forgiven him/herself then nothing is gained.
    And on and on and on...
         EVERYTHING about religion is not bad.  As I've stated before,
    they are "misguided."  Not bad intentioned, not necessarily guilty
    out of their ignorance, but simply lacking in comprehensive 
    understanding.  And too sanctimonious to understand their lack.
        
What do you mean by the "de-integration of most religious foundations"?
      What I think I meant when I wrote that is that the world needs to
    undo those beliefs which don't help us...and too many beliefs are
    entrenched in religious origins.  
        Have you read "Mists of Avalon" by any chance?  Well, to me it's
    like the characters in the book who were swept up by the tide of
    Christianity.  Those who followed the prefects and the others who
    couldn't hold back their onslaught.  There was a "sinking feeling"
    for me as I 'watched' (read) the Goddess worshippers being
    conquered and subjugated by the Roman Christians.  Neither side was
    able to see their righteousness or their failings.
         If I could do it my way as much as I think I'd like, I'd expunge
    an overwhelming amount of what accounts for religious "baggage."
    
You're interesting observation seems to have been carefully neglected by
some noters who would rather contemptously dismiss all religions, rather
than consider the facts.
         What are you calling a fact?  What are facts?  Careful distortions
    or manipulation of data don't make facts.  Facts, in fact, are 
    rather unfactual and subject to whim and can be faxed anywhere
    to please anyone.  Rather, your reply supports a contempuous
    and arrogant condescension towards those who don't support your
    particular slant or twist on "reality."  Cindy's comments don't 
    have to be acknowledged in order to be noted.  Fishing for comments
    simply reveals the need for outside validation--a common weakness
    of humans lacking self-esteem (and most are, before anyone jumps
    on this.)  Are you fishing for responses?
    
    Frederick
    

    re: .30 (Doug)
    
         I forgive you your stubborness.  ;-)
    
         Think again, please.  While "God" isn't used as an excuse overtly,
    "God" *is* used as an excuse--if it were outside of a man's (woman's)
    moral indoctrination to go to war, he wouldn't.  Where does the 
    morality come from?  From his/her religion, mostly.  When it's a 
    country, it's the country's collective or consensus religion that
    guides it.  Here in the U.S.A. it's "under God" or "in God we trust."
    This isn't for just a few of us, it's a representation of *all* of
    us, by default.  In other words, God is sanctioning the battle, God
    is standing by our side, God is saying that we are in the right
    (not unlike the Catholic Church in setting up the Pope as the 
    mouthpiece of God.)  Therefore, when a country or a nation such as
    the U.S.A. declares war, it is implicity assumed that God has 
    okayed the action.  Though I'm not a historian by any stretch, based
    on my awarenesses of history I would venture to say that God has
    stood behind any collective action by that particular nation.
    Anyway, I'm sure there are books out there or maybe someone will
    write one---someone other than me---and this can be substantiated.
    I don't wish to discuss it further, for I am convinced that moral
    underpinnings are formed out of the synthesis of prevalent religious
    constaints.
        As to God, you have made an erroneous assumption or deduction.
    I very, very much believe in God/Goddess/All-That-Is; I have had
    my supporting evidences, most of which are too personal to convey
    in this forum and I will not cheapen the experience by attempting
    to do that.  I do *NOT*, however, believe in a singular, male,
    anthropomorphized being at whose right hand I will sit upon death
    if I've been a good little underdeveloped adult and have asked for
    forgiveness for all of my pecadillos large or small.  Since most
    of the religions of the world promote that concept, whether by
    admission or implication or tacit allowance, then I reject those
    severely limited views of their reason for existence.  God is not
    here to serve us, nor are we here to serve "him."  We are here to
    learn to serve ourselves.
        To that end, you again would benefit from some more thought
    concerning forgiveness.  I could "sin" (whatever that might mean)
    and you could forgive me, the person whom I've sinned against could
    forgive me, Digital could forgive me, the U.S. Government could
    forgive me, the psychiatric community could forgive me, the Turkish
    people could forgive me, the Ayatollah could forgive me, the 
    Pope could forgive me AND, AND, AND---*NONE* of it would be worth
    the price of a single, used sheet of toilet paper if *I* (that's 
    *I*) haven't forgiven myself!  If *I* am still tearing at my own
    heart strings, I've I'm still torturing myself, beating myself up,
    blaming myself, self-martyred or self-pitied or whatever, then 
    all I'd say to you or to DEC or to his "Holiness" or to the emperor
    or the doctor or whoever is "Thank you for forgiving me, but no
    thanks.  I am still in control here; I'm still in charge and I
    Still haven't decided to let go!  I still haven't decided to forgive
    myself.  By the way, God, it's nice to know you forgive me, but the
    same goes for you."
         Insults?  I suspect you know what you are talking about.
    
    Frederick
    

    
    RE .30 Dougie,
    
    >My feeling is that religion, at least in Britain, has a more positive
    >effect than negative...
    
    I have to disagree with you here, Dougie. My husband is English, and we
    have many other friends from all the other parts of Britain. One thing
    we know about all of them is their religion. Many of them grew up
    making judgements (negative) of other people from their hometowns
    simply because their religion did not coincide. In fact, my husband 
    feels at a a distinct disadvantage because of all his fellow scousers
    here, he is the only Protestant. On the other hand, I have many
    American friends whom I've known for years without knowing or caring
    what religion they are.
    
    In Britain, don't some people even align themselves to football teams
    based on their religious affiliation? I cite Celtics and Rangers and 
    Liverpool and Everton as examples. I won't even mention Northern
    Ireland, although I recognize that their problems are much deeper than
    religion although they claim it as the fundamental problem.
    
    While I was in England during the March/April timeframe there was a 
    documentary which stated that Britain is only nominally Christian,
    meaning that only about 5% of the population goes to Church. That is 
    probably why many vicars are losing their homes. In America, there 
    are, admittedly, many fraud artists hiding under the guise of people of
    God, but the majority to give to these and other congregation, do it 
    out of a sincere belief in God. I don't see anything negative in that.
    
    
    Marilyn 

       <<< Note 1681.33 by SWAM1::MILLS_MA "To Thine own self be True" >>>
                          -< Let's not be too hasty >-

>    >My feeling is that religion, at least in Britain, has a more positive
>    >effect than negative...
>    
>    I have to disagree with you here, Dougie. My husband is English,
    
Since both our experiences are at best anectdotal, I don't really know if
your husbands experiences are typical. Perhaps things will change; perhaps
they are changing. In my limited experience of the church, there seems to
be a much more tolerant approach nowadays towards other religions.
    
>    In Britain, don't some people even align themselves to football teams
>    based on their religious affiliation? I cite Celtics and Rangers and 
>    Liverpool and Everton as examples.

Sad, but true. There is a joke in Liverpool; the definition of a mixed
marriage is one where the couple support different football teams.
(Liverpool or Everton).

Dougie

    

RE: .35

    This might be based on the story in 1639.0.  Then again, it might be
    completely independent.

				    Topher

    I think the statue is crying because of the DECfrance layoffs...
    
    /bruce

    ...or maybe due to the new DisneyWorld...
    
    
    Frederick
    

Frederick,

	It seems I agree with most of what you are saying about religion...

Dougie,
	I think you have been "lucky" in your limited experience. I've perceive
things from a "lucky" viewpoint too (externally). I d believe it's not as
Rosy (Cross ? :-D) as you think it is. Look at the base of the problems in 
Ireland as an obvious example.
								- JIM CAD*

    re: .40 (Marcos)
    
        Okay, point well made.  Clearly, I have a bias towards 
    "Western religions" since that is the largest part of my reality.
    I would like to ask, however, what, in *your* opinion, is the 
    "Big Reward, the big enchilada, the final 'goal'" of those
    religions you cited?  Aren't many, if not most of those, at least
    partly fear-oriented religions?  Don't some (especially Hindu)
    offer the suggestion that life on Earth sucks while the big
    reward comes later?  Certainly the dieties that they speak of
    have always been depicted as anthropomorphized, haven't they?
        Let me ask another question, instead.  How would you characterize
    the world's collective concept of "beyond life?"  And, of those
    who are not atheistic, how do you think these people collectively
    envision that "greater being/power/energy?"
    
    Frederick
    

                   
    Re.41
    
   > Don't some (especially Hindu)
   > offer the suggestion that life on Earth sucks while the big
   > reward comes later?  
    
    No.  There are Hindus who believe this, just as there are Christians
    who believe this, however this is not what the core of Hinduism is (or 
    Christianity is) about.  
    
    Should you be interested in more information, read "Autobiography Of A 
    Yogi", by Yogananda.
    
    Cindy

    
    Kind of getting back to the original topic (psychic phenomenon and the
    Catholic church).
    
    I feel obligated to respond because, if the orignal author (sorry, I've
    become confused after reading so many responses) still feels strongly
    positive about Catholicism, then try other parishes.  I have seen
    several parishes that would probably be more open about psychic
    abilities than others.  AND, the Sunday sermons are aimed at providing
    assistance to the members at coping with the problems of today while
    not loosing their spirituality, and possibly expanding it.
    
    I have  personally come to believe that each religion describes "God"
    and "His wishes" in terms that they feel best fits their perceptions,
    which, of course, aren't 100% accurate.  Each interprets the
    revelations differently, and it is these interpretations that get
    argued, rather than a truth being argued.
    
    I know the history of the Catholic church, I know that the Pope and
    others up high in the administrative heirarchy have been corrupt, and
    that their actions still affect decisions of today's leaders.  But I
    don't believe the strong descriptions of Catholic oppressiveness is as
    true today as some believe.  I have felt more intolerance from
    evangelical and protestant ministers than from Catholic.  Just as
    others have stated, there are good and bad reverends in all religions.
    
    My Catholic upbringing taught me that Love was what was most important;
    Tolerance comes with Love.  This concept of Love involves treating ALL
    decently.  And, in a parish where the priests are true to the christian
    teachings, I always feel "God's" presence, His love for all present.  I
    have not abandoned Catholicism, but I have added to it (like others, I
    can't perceive God as strictly male).  And I don't talk to the priests
    or nuns about psychic phenomenon (psychic does NOT equal spiritual,
    IMHO, by the way), even when a priest's blessing truly does invoke Gods
    spirit.
    
    I hope the author of .0 finds what she needs.  Ignore those who call
    your talents evil.  They are just too narrow minded to accept that God
    grants different gifts (but equal) to different people, at different
    times.  I too have encountered that attitude, and it is saddest when
    this intolerance comes from supposed followers of Christ.
    
    Peace,
    Beth

    Incidently, I don't know if anyone's interested, but Dr.Raymond Moody
    has written a sequel to "Life after Life'. It's called 'The Light
    Beyond'.
    
    Basically, it goes into more depth and tries to explain what these Near
    Death Experiences mean. I haven't read 'Life after Life', but I got
    deeply into the other book. Definately worth a read if you've either
    had an NDE or are interested in the subject, as I am.
    
    It's also good if someone you know has had an NDE, as they are often
    changed people after. They tend to make the most of life, and lose all
    fear of death. One of the problems they suffer, is that although they
    can describe to someone what has happened to them, it's very difficult
    for someone who HASN'T had one to fully appreciate the impact it's had
    on the person.
    
    Anyway, read the book. I'm not sure if it's available in England
    though, I've not seen it, I bought mine in the US.
    
    Ian

    TO base noter.
    
    Dont let them get you down, YOU know what you seen and that is that.
    Dont forget nuns, priests are only HUMAN. That is why I dont beleive in
    confessionals, I dial direct and cut out the middle man ;-). They were
    just afraid of the unknown.

    ...I had an out of the body experience once that blew my mind, and it
    was scary especially when I found out what it was. I was about 17 at
    the time. I know some people thought I was crazy when I told them BUT I
    know it really happened!! Dont listen what others think, I consider you
    LUCKY to have such an incredible experience!!!