While this year has brought us all unforeseen challenges, what hasn’t been discussed enough is how unable we are to relate to the way others are perceiving and managing their concerns. It’s not a clear cut divide, but there are two general camps. One group’s paramount concern is about transmission of a virus, and they subscribe to the notion that we––and the government––must do everything possible to prevent it, control it, avoid it, apparently no matter the cost. The other group’s paramount concern is the level of restriction the government has imposed on us to control the virus.
All these folks express themselves and their beliefs in more or less extreme ways. Some demonstrate by example and conduct, and others shout loudly. And while differences in approach to all of life’s concerns are to be expected, most of us are startled by the difference between reactions to the COVID situation.
There’s no point in beating around the bush––in this piece or otherwise. I have been opposed to all the restrictions various governments have imposed to ostensibly control this virus since the beginning. I have already had plenty of experience with the government justifying measures and mandates under cover of the threat of infectious disease. The pharmaceutical industry has been funding legislative efforts in many US states and beyond to remove religious and personal belief exemptions from vaccine mandates for years, and I have been actively involved in opposing such measures. I am very familiar with their tactics and strategies.
I am also probably more knowledgeable than the average person about the history of infectious disease in the developed world, our immune system, the human microbiome, and human health in general. I am not afraid of germs in isolation, and I know that mask wearing, lack of human physical contact and not being allowed to earn a living are diametrically opposed to health and wellness. I also know that hiding from a virus is nonsense––as is much of the prevailing “medical” paradigm and approach to health and wellness. Just check out most of the crap food being served to sick patients in hospitals or children in schools––or all the remarkably fat, unhealthy “health practitioners” and “public health officials” telling the public how to stay “safe.” It would be laughable if it weren’t the reality.
That being said, and my position clearly established, I am writing this piece to and for the folks who see or suspect what I see. I am writing for the folks who thought these lockdowns and masks would be temporary, but who now realize it’s gone on for far too long. I am writing for the folks who understand that putting a mask on to enter a restaurant and walk to the table then removing it to eat is the purview of idiots. And I am writing it for folks who understand that we can’t stop living to prevent dying.
I recently came across this article: What it takes to preserve friendship amid deep divisions over politics and COVID-19. While I appreciate and respect its emphasis on unity and spirit of compassion and “affability” it describes, the piece minimizes the significance of the difference between such fundamental perspectives. Author Brandon McGinley writes, “But when friendship can only withstand the barest of differences, like favorite colors and pizza toppings, then something is wrong. Community isn’t possible when we only tolerate unanimity, when we only want to be friends with slightly altered versions of ourselves.”
When we subscribe to an entirely different model of health than another person––when one person regards another person’s very breath or touch as a bioweapon, while the other person would welcome a hug or maskless conversation with their friend––this is a significantly greater challenge to any sort of relationship between the two people than favoring different colors or pizza toppings. Moreover, when one person supports a government’s authority to shut the other person’s business down and criminalize them for not wearing a mask or getting “too close” to others, how––or why––would they consider themselves “friends?”
Anyone who would support restrictions which would destroy my family’s livelihood is no friend of mine. And anyone who subscribes to this paradigm that legally requires me and my children to perpetually breathe through a piece of cloth and stay 6 feet away from them or their playmates is no one I have any interest in spending time with.
These issues are fundamental, existential and core to who we are. Differences in our approach to health notwithstanding, anyone who would physically and materially impose their beliefs on me and my children has crossed a line. Everyone and anyone should have the freedom to restrict their own breathing and limit their ability to make a living or have their kids attend school––but the advocates of government lockdowns, mask mandates and legally enforced social distancing have demonstrated support for a form of government that the Constitution of the United States seems to have been written to prevent. Support for such broad and sweeping governmental authority offends much more than my political sensibilities. It threatens my and my family’s basic freedoms––and therefore our lives.
How can such fundamental differences co-exist in a friendship, much less a community or country?
In times of ease, differences in politics, spirituality and religious belief, existential understandings, even fundamental principles can be navigated much more easily. Our relationships can go very deep or stay light and superficial, depending on what’s required to maintain the status quo. The old adage, “Never discuss politics or religion in polite company” only applies to times of ease in order to avoid conflict at the dinner table/in social gatherings in order that you don’t alienate your kids’ best friend’s mom, so that you and your drinking buddies can have a laugh without it getting heavy, so that your sister-in-law’s sensibilities aren’t so offended that every Thanksgiving dinner going forward is super awkward.
But a world in crisis is not the time to just make polite small talk. When the cities are shuttered, when people’s livelihoods have been taken away from them, when everyone is waking up to each day in one crisis mode or another (many still terrified of a virus), polite small talk no longer gets us through. And that’s when the way we’ve operated all our lives becomes more starkly revealed.
Moreover, these differences in philosophy of government, principles of basic freedom and understanding of human rights have not recently developed. Nor have folks’ limits changed in terms of what they will and won’t comply with––and what they will and won’t compromise. Your friends and family who suddenly seem to have transformed into residents of Stepford are not different than they were last year. And folks you suddenly find yourselves more aligned with aren’t either.
An old friend of mine and I recently reconnected. She expressed fascination and curiosity about my shift in politics, my support for President Trump and more. Like many Trump supporters these days, I used to be a Democrat. I told her I’d try to put some of my thoughts and experiences down on paper to shed some light on my shift from Left to Right.
I grew up in Democratic campaign headquarters in the Chicago area. My father ran campaigns for local politicians in the area, as well as regional campaigns for national Democratic candidates. Our family photo albums show my dad with Teddy Kennedy, Birch Bayh and other politicians on the campaign trail. My dad was a fierce and loyal supporter of the party and particularly the Kennedy family whom he felt embodied the ideals of the party with Arthurian nobility.
I grew up with the implicit understanding that the ends justified the means. That every politician had to get their hands dirty to stay in power. And that staying in power was critical to making sure the good guys won.
I voted Democrat in every election for every office all my life. The only debate I’d have with friends or family was over which Democrat to choose––until I got involved in the California state legislative process a few years ago to campaign against a series of medical mandates, as well as to protect educational choice.
The experience opened my eyes, as did subsequent Spring Legislative sessions. The Democrat legislators paid lip service to their constituents, then voted against their concerns as if they didn’t exist. This was the case from the local level all the way up to the state, and crony nepotism loyalty was the unwritten code. When it looked like Dem sponsored bills would die in committee, they would postpone the votes, reshuffle the committees to their favor, then reconvene and pass it through.
The more we looked into it, the more we discovered the industry sponsorship behind the legislation––in our state as well as across the US. While most of us know both parties are sponsored by corporate interests, the most powerful industry by far––the Pharmaceutical Industry––sponsors the Dems. One of the ways Big Pharma increases revenue and profits is through state medical mandates, and the Democrat’s platform of Big Government and the Greater Good is the mechanism by which this is achieved.
I have always worked in business in the private sector, and I had always been a fiscal conservative. But like many of my generation, I thought the more meaningful social issues important to me were best represented by the Dems. I was wrong. When I took a closer look and examined what each party stood for, I realized that I was far more aligned with the Republicans. To me, self reliance, self responsibility and sovereignty of the individual are the cornerstones of a functioning and sustainable person, family, society.
The righteous sanctimony of the Left had actually begun to wear on me in 2008. Even though it would be years before I left the Left, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and the rest of MSNBC––at the time my standard go-to for news––started sounding more and more over the top in their sermonizing, virtue signaling, identity politics and celebration of victim culture.
I left the Democratic party before 2016, but it was the 2016 election and all that it revealed about the Left that sent me all the way over to the Right. I’ve liked Donald Trump since I saw him on the Ali G show before America really knew Sacha Baron Cohen’s shtick––when I was living in London in the 90s. Trump saw through it quickly and cut the interview short.
Trump had been publicly critical of the vaccine program for years before entering the race. For anyone who doesn’t know this yet, the vaccine schedule exploded since vaccine manufacturers were released from liability in 1986, and the CDC schedule now recommends 72 doses of vaccines by the time a child is 18 years old.
Auto immune disorders, cancer and autism rates have coincidentally exploded along the same timeline. Despite the relentless propaganda to depict vaccine critics as nutjobs, it doesn’t take a genius to wonder whether there is a connection. Trump has posed such questions, and when Jake Tapper asked about it in the Republican primary debates, Trump confirmed that he had concerns about the schedule and whether it’s connected to the autism epidemic.
His stance on trade, the economy, Common Core, educational choice, the Paris Accord, immigration and more all seemed to make sense to me. Having lived in hyper-regulated Marin County, California for years, I had grown weary of the priority of ENVIRONMENT over business (and I write that as someone who gardens biodynamically and has always been very conscious about living in harmony with the environment as much as reasonably possible.) I find the whole immigration controversy contrived. We’re a country. We have borders. Like any other country’s borders, they need to be crossed legally.
The media and the Left’s demonization of Trump leading up to the election spun way out of control, and in the process, identity politics and victim culture took over the extreme Left like some kind of syndrome. The intolerance of the supposedly tolerant group of Liberal friends I had was off the charts. I’ve lost long time friends and been on the receiving end of a lot of hate and shaming attempts simply because I supported Trump.
We are now terribly grateful to have moved to a particularly Republican stronghold of a Republican state. USA flags wave proudly at almost every house. Veterans like my husband are appreciated and honored with reserved parking spaces and military discounts everywhere we go. Kindness, respect, regard, tolerance, inclusivity and generosity are what we have found in our new community. There is a common sense I find here that is largely missing in the SF Bay Area, and it is the same common sense I found in the minority Conservatives I’d meet back there.
I believe one of the most insidious threats to freedom is political correctness. When folks are afraid to say the wrong thing, they become increasingly afraid to call out absurdity and nonsense––and illogical policies, regulations, and intrusive violations on our basic freedoms can be ushered in and transform our world irreparably. I see this happening on a grand scale in places like the SF Bay Area. And since he entered the race before becoming president, I’ve regarded President Trump’s very politically incorrect manner of speaking and tweeting the necessary antidote.
The folks in my new community are not afraid to speak their truth for fear of being politically incorrect. That doesn’t result in racist, sexist, homophobic epithets, contrary to what the social justice brigade preaches. It results in people calling a spade a spade, speaking up for what they feel to be right, applying their common sense to what they will and won’t accept––and above all, judging a person by their character, and not the color of their skin or the way they look.
That’s probably why Conservatives/Republicans voted for and will vote again for Donald Trump, even though many didn’t and still don’t like his style, his manner, his trappings. In this day and age, I find folks who vote Republican much more accepting of folks’ differences and appearances. I find the Republicans able to get past the superficial aspects and hone in on the core of a person in assessing their character, while the Democrats seem unable to see anything BUT race, gender, sexual orientation and the trappings––or lack thereof––of material wealth.
Which of those groups would you rather spend your time with?
Life is full of risks. And reasonable folks aim to strike a balance by taking prudent measures to reduce the risks without sacrificing life’s rewards.
It’s been a while. Our lives, like everyone else’s have
been pretty up ended and we have had some challenge finding the space and focus
to connect in this way that we did pre lockdown time, but we realized how
important it is to move forward and move this dialogue forward as well and move
our thinking and progress along. So we’ve got to get on with it. And we’ve
talked at length off camera about all of this and we’ve each got our own
opinion about it as does everyone out there. But the time has come I think to
move out of this grand experiment, if we want to call it that. As I was
mentioning, ABC7 News a couple of days ago you know, said “Suicides on the
rise, amid mid stay at home order, Bay area medical professionals say.” So
the doctors at John Muir medical center in Walnut Creek, they’ve seen more
deaths by suicide during this quarantine period than deaths from the virus
itself. And they’re calling to end the shelter in place order because it’s doing
more damage on, really, infinite levels of our lives than any virus really, in
my estimation, ever could. But he said the numbers are unprecedented. We’ve
never seen numbers like this in such a short period of time. We’ve seen a
year’s worth of suicide attempts in the last four weeks. Which is so
heartbreaking, when you just sit with the implications of that and just try to
connect to folks, especially, you know, we were talking––the younger folks in
the world who don’t have the anchor of their family, their kids, a life that
has been somewhat established, an identity, a trajectory that has been somewhat
established in life as we, as older folks have.
It breaks my heart to even try to put myself in their
shoes. Kids in college who are facing the prospect of not going back to campus
and having some virtual reality world where they can’t meet people, you know,
folks who aren’t dating, who can’t go date and can’t go just connect to their
friends, which is such a part of their own discovery and emerging identity
To connect to their teachers, for their teachers to
connect to them. My son who ended up having to do the remaining of his college
year online, he said, “even if we had a pretty decent class,”––which
was challenging in itself just to have dialogue and discourse over zoom––he
said, but then even if that, there wasn’t ever the feeling of completion that
you have when you finish a class and you walk out and you’re chatting with the
classmate or you’re chatting with the teacher to kind of wrap up those threads
that have been inspired. Here it’s just, poof! Now you’re back in your room and
you, you know, how does that get harnessed? You know, those threads of
creation, not to get too abstract in it, but they’re lost. They just go and
they’re done. And people are left sitting still in their place by themselves
going, “Where am I? What is my purpose?”
And “What just happened? What is this
experience?” And I won’t get too much into it either, but some of the
dialogue circulating around on social media right now regarding the CDC’s
recommendations for reopening schools––it sounds like beyond a dystopian
nightmare, right? Social distancing? Staying apart? Being put in this isolation
chair, essentially? As a child? I mean, don’t even get me started. And so, you
know, we won’t make this a real long one, and I’m sure it’s going to provoke
outrage in many folks who will say, But…”
“People are dying.”
People are dying. People ARE dying. People have always
been dying. You know, 600,000 plus annual deaths from heart disease in the U.S.
Alone, 500,000 plus deaths from cancer each year in the U.S. Alone, 250,000
plus deaths attributed to medical errors alone in the U.S. People die.
And those are the ones that are caught. Those are the ones
that are noticed and documented.
Right. And you know, death is a part of life, Folks, first
And saying that doesn’t minimize the suffering and the
hardship and the pain that everyone goes through when there is loss and tragedy
that comes to your family. It is terrible. It’s suffering. It hurts. It’s
It’s inconceivable. It’s inconceivable pain of course,
when, when people die, when we lose people. And yeah, it sounds like I’m saying
it flippantly, but I’m simply stating the fact of life that death is a part of
it. This absurd notion now, you know, after we first start out with
“flattening the curveand making sure that we’ve got the resources to care
for people”––down to “We must prevent…”
“…All Death.” We’ve gone off the deep end
here, Folks, and lost sight of any measured and reasonable approach to life’s
risk benefit analysis. Right?
And just to chime in and flesh that out just a little bit.
So with that flattening the curve, I mean the understanding that was given
with, with these orders was to flatten the curve. Meaning everyone still needs
to come in contact with this, but we don’t want to overwhelm our systems of
care. So right there we are now creating some, there’s some other dialogue
happening. There’s some other directive coming. It’s not about flattening the
curve. It’s just “stay in your house forever? Don’t come in contact with
it because we don’t want to contract it when what we do need to do is contract
it and probably way more people have come in contact with it. There was an
article that said that it’s beennow there’s cases from September in the US,
Right now we think it may have started in September. Yes.
I am sure that much of the population has already gone through it. But just
like anything, the healthy members of a population of course should let it
circulate, develop some resistance, immunity, and then let it move on out.
Let’s protect the vulnerable members of our society. Reasonably though, right?
It doesn’t mean that we should destroy our businesses, lives families and
become destitute so that none of us can take care of anything in order to
prevent that. Anyway.
So we obviously know how I feel about this as I have felt
about it the whole time. But as it’s gone on and become far more extreme and
destructive, it is time to end this madness. And as someone brilliant just said
to me not long ago, we’ve talked about this, we cannot stop living in order to
prevent dying. We must be measured and balanced in everything that we do here
and this virtual reality world isn’t cutting it. And I do not consent to this
bizarre, abstract, disconnected world that some folks seem to be wanting to
create. I absolutely support anyone who wants to walk around with a mask on for
the rest of their lives even or with some six foot bubble in each direction. I
support anyone who wants to stay home as long as they want.
I do not want to do that. That is not the world that I am
bringing my children into. And that is not a future world really, I think that
most people want to be living in.
And it’s not sustainable because we are social beings,
right? And we need to be making connection and our children need to be making
connection to find their way in the world. And the world. What world is that
we’re making? I mean that’s really the thing that has been hitting me intensely
is that this world that we’re making right now for our young people, these
moments are huge. And to normalize the separation of humanity is wrong. It’s a
wrong thing for them to be experiencing and living in. Yeah. And I, we need
contact, real contact––and these gestures of pushing in to create more distance
in a world that’s already so distant and isolated––which is why we have people
making suicide attempts at such a rate because there’s no, the connection is
what keeps us human. Connection and purpose, right? Having meaning in our life
and, and caring for others, being cared for by others is one of the main things
that gives us meaning in this world.
Yes. So end the lockdown and do not reverse course. Let’s
open all this up. Let’s start living our lives again. Fully. Let’s start
hugging. Let’s start hanging out. And many people are. I’m seeing it
everywhere. People are starting to disregard this because it makes no sense. So
we cannot stop living in order to prevent dying, otherwise, there’s no point in
being alive in the first place. Let’s all remember that.
We must eradicate from the soul
All fear and terror of what comes towards man out of the future.
We must acquire serenity
In all feelings and sensations about the future.
We must look forward with absolute equanimity
To everything that may come.
And we must think only that whatever comes
Is given to us by a world-directive full of wisdom.
It is part of what we must learn in this age,
namely, to live out of pure trust,
Without any security in existence.
Trust in the ever present help
Of the spiritual world.
Truly, nothing else will do
If our courage is not to fail us.
And let us seek the awakening from within ourselves
Every morning and every evening.
Hi, Thea and folks who are connecting with us. We wanted to just say a couple of things in a short one today. First off, everyone is impacted by what’s going on in the world, and what I want to make clear is that Thea and I are dramatically impacted by what’s going on in the world. And I’m not saying that for sympathy, but to just make it clear that these recordings are not coming out of a place of comfort and ease, but in spite of some lack of that. In order to also demonstrate that we can meet each moment and each day with courage and hope, no matter how you know, how insecure one may feel given one’s situation. And I won’t go into all the details about that right now. But that being said, I want to also talk about something that is becoming clear to me. Carlos Castaneda wrote of what his teacher taught him were called the flying fish in this world. Rudolph Steiner also speaks of these beings as do many other seers and, and wise folk throughout humanity, and the ancient religions and texts and cultures. And essentially these beings are, for want of a better description, psychic parasites.
And what is clear to me right now is that––whether one’s
fear is of a virus, or one’s fear is of economic instability, or one’s fear is
of descending totalitarianism––or all three, these fears must not be fed if we
are to move things in the right direction. And in order to help with that, I’m
going to ask that you read or recite a Steiner verse, a very short Steiner
verse addressing this.
Okayj. We must eradicate from the soul all fear and terror
of what comes toward us out of the future. We must acquire serenity in all
feelings and sensations about the future. We must look forward with absolute
equanimity to everything that may come. And we must think that whatever comes
is given to us by a world directive full of wisdom. It is part of what we must
learn in this age, namely to live out of pure trust, trust in the ever present
help of the spiritual world. Truly nothing else will do if our courage is not
to fail us. Let us develop our will and let us seek the awakening within
ourselves every morning and every evening.
Thank you. And finally, I’d like to conclude with the fact
that Thea sent me a couple minute video of her yesterday dancing in the rain.
Moving and dancing in the rain. And I was so struck by it and struck by its
demonstration and inhabitation and celebration of our humanity. And it inspired
me. And I want to tag this on the end of this in hopes that it inspires you. In
the face of adversity, in the face of insecurity, in the face of anxiety––we
must embrace our humanity, exercise our humanity, and celebrate our humanity.
It’s important now more than ever, I assure you. Okay. All right. Thanks so
much. Until next time, Folks. I love you.
Okay, well we’ll try this. We’ve got some funky signal
going on, but…So we’ve been talking about the situation here and the
mindfulness we want to bring to our humanity, to remember how critical our
humanity is at this time in the face of measures that might falsely lead us to
believe that we are smaller than we are.
And that that came out of different conversations you and
I have been having and observations that I’ve been having with regards to
working and doing things online whereas normally in my life, I have to do very
little online. And I’ve been blessed in that way to have real human interaction
in my work. But having meetings and such online has given me the experience of
what it’s like to be in that world. And people I know are using this all over
the place. And the experience of being online, my kids are having it now for
the first time, really. And it’s very different, very different than having
real exchange, you know, so we’re all struggling a little bit. And I had been
observing that coming to this, this frame that we are in right now in this
virtual world in a certain way-–though it echoes an aspect of our relationship
or the way we would engage normally––it’s like on one plane of that rather than
the rainbow color of all of those nuances that we can perceive and send out to
one another in real face time, physically together. So on line, it brings our
attention to this small point which I’m experiencing right now and you are,
we’re here in our realm but focusing in this one little space. And that’s not a
bad thing, but it can be something that encourages or supports the idea that we
are smaller than we are rather than the vast beings that we are.
I have been now playing with this idea and the practice of
when I’m out and getting groceries or doing something that I’m able to go do,
rather than looking at this six feet of physical distancing from people as the
separation, I’m looking at it now as a draw to fill my six feet of space around
me and that others can fill their six feet in that––I think of Leonardo da
Vinci’s The Vitruvian Man and expand that farther out into the distance,
because as human beings we are much bigger than we often give ourselves credit
to be. And one more thing to add to that is that when I am experiencing a
fullness of my full space all around me, there is no space for fear. That is
the other part that had come in our conversation that when we come into a small
point and we’re existing in a small field, there’s a lot of room for fear to
fill up those realms around us. And if we, I had the thought in our last
conversation, but a little bit of like the ripples in the water that we are
those and we send those out from ourselves, those ripples. And if we’re filling
up that space, there’s no rippling of fear from me to you, from you to me, from
you to anyone, me to anyone. That instead we’re filling it with this whatever
we picture right? What do we see in that? Is it fear or is it love? And in that
is love. And so if we can, as people, fill our individual spaces with love in a
bigger way than we’ve ever thought to do before, and we picture that in the
entire world around our Earth and into the whole universe, I mean, it’s pretty
powerful. And it reminds me of how powerful we are because we actually get to
do that right now. We can be asked to fill up the space with love, with what it
is to be a human being with light, with love, and with power.
Yes. Thank you. And with that in mind, I’m going to ask
people to be a bit quiet while I’m recording.
But in a loving way. It’s a lot warmer there than it is
here today. I’m in wool socks and a sweater…
It’s so sunny and beautiful and warm. But as we know, the
signal’s a little bit funkier outside there. But yeah, and we should remind
ourselves that sunlight is the path to health, right?
The right amount of sunlight, I will say, I have some rain
right now too.
I get you. So I love all that. And also with that in mind,
I feel as if the work that we’re doing here right now is so critical. How we
respond. How we meet our challenges right now is so critical. Our humanity is
critical to the All and as above, so below. And so it is ever, ever critical
for us to bring that mindfulness to every moment, every gesture, every day we
wake up with the situation as it is. And then also following on that, we
discovered we were going to try to say The Great invocation together. And we
discovered that another limitation of this type of communication is that you
cannot speak at the same time.
Which means you can’t sing or harmonize together either.
Right. Which is something we need to really look at as
there might be a tendency to rely so much on this kind of communication as if
it can serve us instead of our human communication and connection. This must be
temporary. This must be a temporary measure. So with that also comes the conversation
we were having about the work that people do with The Great Invocation and it’s
called Triangles. And there’s a network, a worldwide network of people who have
been saying The Great Invocation daily for many, many, many years since it came
into existence. And the interesting thing about it is that you don’t have to,
you form a triangle with two other people. They might be across the world even.
You don’t need to say it at the same time, you don’t even have to be in the
same place because time and space are transcended. And so you can say it and
then I’ll say it, but we’re still saying it all together and it still brings
that same power to this plane.
And it sure is applicable, you know. I mean, I am so
grateful to have had this in our lives. And as we’re in these moments together,
it just expands. That’s what it feels like.
So I’ll start and then you will as well. Well, add a layer
every day maybe. Hopefully.
From the point of light within the mind of God, let light
stream forth into the minds of men. Let light descend on Earth. From the point
of love within the heart of God, let love stream forth into the hearts of men.
May Christ return to Earth. From the center where the will of God is known, let
purpose guide the little wills of men, the purpose which the masters know and
serve. From the center which we call the race of men, let the plan of love and
light work out and may it seal the door where evil dwells. Let love and light
and power restore the plan on Earth.
Amen. From the point of light within the mind of God, let
light stream forth into the minds of men. Let light descend on Earth. From the
point of love within the heart of God, let love stream forth into the hearts of
men. May Christ return to Earth. From the center where the will of God is
known, let purpose guide the little wills of men, the purpose which the masters
know and serve. From the center which we call the race of men, let the plan of
love and light work out and may it seal the door where evil dwells. Let light
and love and power restore the plan on Earth. Amen. All right. Right on. Let’s
keep this going. And please, anyone who would like to join in, the more we say
this, the more opportunity we have to bring it all forth, to manifest the world
that we want to create.
From the point of Light within the Mind of God Let light stream forth into the minds of men. Let Light descend on Earth.
From the point of Love within the Heart of God Let love stream forth into the hearts of men. May Christ* return to Earth.
From the centre where the Will of God is known Let purpose guide the little wills of men – The purpose which the Masters know and serve.
From the centre which we call the race of men Let the Plan of Love and Light work out And may it seal the door where evil dwells.
Let Light and Love and Power restore the Plan on Earth.
*Many religions believe in a World Teacher, a “Coming One”, knowing him under such names as the Lord Maitreya, the Imam Mahdi, the Kalki Avatar and the Bodhisattva. These terms are sometimes used in versions of the Great Invocation for people of specific faiths.
Hi everyone. It’s been some time since I’ve recorded anything or posted anything. And it’s some time that we are living in right now. I’m going to keep this short, but I’m going to invite you to say this along with me. It’s called The Great Invocation and it’s something that I have incorporated into my own daily routine for a number of years. And I’ll post the words to it along with this recording, as well as a link to explain its history and how it came to be. It’s been around for a long time, and I think it is important and needed now more than ever. And the more of us that say it daily, the more chance we have of bringing it forth and manifesting what can be. And so here goes:
From the point of Light within the Mind of God Let light
stream forth into the minds of men. Let Light descend on Earth. From the point
of Love within the Heart of God Let love stream forth into the hearts of men.
May Christ return to Earth. From the center where the Will of God is known Let
purpose guide the little wills of men – The purpose which the Masters know and
serve. From the center which we call the race of men Let the Plan of Love and
Light work out And may it seal the door where evil dwells. Let Light and Love
and Power restore the Plan on Earth.
Have folks replaced traditional religion with an unquestioning faith in the doctrine they call “Science?”
VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BELOW:
Anne: 00:01 Okay.
Here we are again with Drake on the East coast. Thea down in Southern California,
me, Anne, up here in Northern California. And last time we got together we
talked about organized religion. And again, I want to just briefly preface this
dialogue just like all the others with an explanation of why we’re doing this.
It’s, it’s really just an examination. It’s asking questions. It is an attempt
to find perhaps new language for a growing, ever expanding consciousness as
we––as I understand––are moving into a new age. And so here we are again. We
spoke about organized religion last time and while I have a great deal of
respect for the practice of organized religion, all that it offers, a
foundation of morality and a guideline for growing, positive living. I also see
some downsides to it. And what we discussed last time was the tendency sometimes
to get stuck in a fixed set of beliefs which don’t then promote continued
examination and looking at things from a new perspective, which then in turn
doesn’t support learning. And for us to expand our consciousness, for us to
continue moving forward and grow, we need to keep learning. And so following
that, I’d like to discuss just briefly in this brief conversation what I see as
a kind of new secularist religion called “Scientism.” And it’s a term
that is being bandied about more and more these days. It’s a distinction
between actual science––which is a method of observation and measurement and
theory based on those observations and measurements and experiments––versus a
doctrine. And before we started recording, Drake and I were talking a little bit
about my experience––and I think we’ve all had this experience where, whether
it’s climate change, whether it’s medicine,vaccines or really any area where
science has brought us to an understanding and a practice and a theory––I’m
finding that when people challenge those theories, whether it’s in social
media, online debates, or in person, often, even if I, for example, provide
studies that challenge the consensus, the response will be “It’s science.
Don’t you understand science?” Do either of you have this experience?
Drake: 03:48 Yeah.
Something that came up for me when you were talking, Anne, was the way that
people appeal, not so much to the method of science, but to science as some
sort of credible, accepted institution. Right? That things need to be peer
reviewed and pass through a certain number of tests or examinations before they
are accepted as, you know, science. And in thinking of what it means to
challenge that practice––because really if one’s going to have faith in a
methodology, it seems to me that you need to actually examine what that method
is taking for granted. Like what, what a certain type of methodology is taking
for granted. And something that I’ve been learning over this past year, as my
education has continued, is that every single science has its presuppositions
that it has to take for granted. I wouldn’t pretend to know anything very
complex about any of these sciences like biology or physics or chemistry but I
do know that, or I think I know, that for example, biology takes the existence
of life for granted, right? Like it goes back to very basic presuppositions that
it has to assume that, or the science can’t work. And I think there’s other
suppositions that kind of weave themselves into the method of science.
Drake: 05:33 And
if those aren’t examined then I think science can result in wrong conclusions.
Like, I think of like if you’re, if you’re trying to draw two parallel lines
and it’s a little bit off in the beginning,, then a mile down the road, it’s
going to be way, way off. Well and something I thought of that I learned about
last semester was a guy named William Harvey in England who basically figured
out that the blood was a system of circulation. You know, he figured out that
the blood, that the heart pumps the blood through, you know, that it passes
around the lungs. Then it goes to the other, you know, different ventricles of
the heart, goes through the entire body and then circulates back to be re
oxygenated. And he figured that out by questioning the established doctrine of
the time, which was Galenism. And because Galen said no, the heart does this
specific function only and that was it––and that was the accepted thinking in
the universities––and Harvey started cutting open, he started dissecting
animals and going, actually that doesn’t make sense. Like he had to question
the method of actually, the method of the practice of the anatomical science at
the time to make this breakthrough. And so it seems like that should still
Thea: 06:52 And
we could then take that same gesture or standpoint of not just going with what
you’re given. It’s that you have to continuously be testing and making
observation about your practice of religion, your practice of science or the
method of science.
Anne: 07:15 Drake
just left us for a moment. Okay. He’s back.
Thea: 07:24 So
I was just saying that it seems like that’s the same sort of point that we were
talking about––organized religion––is that, stay awake! Stay awake and pay
attention that you don’t hand over your own seeing to another. And in terms of
the practice of science and observation, that has to continue, you know,
recognizing this is a presupposition, this is where we’re starting from, but
that’s not the whole totality of whatever it is we’re observing or studying
because you’re given this presupposition to start from.
Anne: 08:01 Yes,
absolutely. I agree. I try to constantly question. But even within those
sciences, which are founded on a presupposition, I’m seeing a dangerous lack of
critical thinking when people are working with these theories, discussing these
theories. Let me go on a little bit of a tangent. There is a lawn sign I have
been seeing a lot up here––I don’t know if you guys have something similar down
there––which makes a few, there’s a few statements. I find it absurd. It seems
like a virtue signaling type of thing, but it says something like “women’s
rights are human rights,” “black lives matter,” “love is
love,” whatever that means. And “science is real.” And
“science is real.” What does that mean? And so, you know, that’s what
I’m, I’m focused on right now. It’s beyond the fact that Drake, what you’re
saying is, is absolutely true. We need to constantly question even the
foundations of our working theories. Otherwise we’re going to get stuck in a
more and more narrow framework of theory. So we have to constantly question
even its foundation, re-examine it. But beyond that, we have to recognize that
science itself is simply a method. It is not a truth. I don’t really even know
how to get my head around saying something like, “science is real.” I
don’t understand it when people say to me––in response to me challenging germ
theory even, right? We are developing a new understanding of our immune system
and the human microbiome, virome, and the fact that the environment of our body
is a huge factor in terms of whether or not one person contracts a disease
versus another person who is exposed to the same virus or bacteria. Right? So
that is is shifting, that is growing, that is expanding. We’re developing a new
understanding of this. When I present this information or present studies that
demonstrate, that challenge, the idea that, “Oh, it’s just the germ that
makes someone sick,” someone will say “It’s science. Don’t you get
science?” Without even having to discuss the argument.
Drake: 11:40 Well
that’s funny, for it seems like they’re not even, they’re not even discussing
the science then. Because the science, science is just a chain of reasoning
within a certain set of parameters. Like, to do science is to reason your way
with certain parameters that, you know, at least in modern science, that you’ve
set for yourself and to the conclusion that follows. So, when you’re talking
about these lawn signs that are saying “science is real,” that sounds
to me like putting a sign in your lawn that says, you know, “logic is
real.” Like absolutely, logic is real. But logic can be wrong. You can
have, you can have conclusions that are logically true, but if your premises
are wrong, the logic is false. Like, so same thing. A chain of reasoning is
real. Yes, definitely real. But it can still be wrong.
Thea: 12:29 Well
the combination of statements on the sign is curious to me. What does science
have to do with, you know, rights of human beings having the right to be, and
be safe, you know? But it also then leads to that thought that that’s really
just that “science is real” is a belief. So it is now outside of the
scope of logic or reason. Saying, “science is real” is like, that
sounds like a doctrine.
Drake: 13:00 Not
Anne: 13:00 Yeah,
and I don’t remember now what, I think there was a climate change statement on
that one too. Right? So, you know, and that’s where I’m––for the sake of time
we won’t get too much into it––but that’s where I am wanting to explore what I
do see as kind of a new religion. So Scientism often––it includes the doomsday
prophecy of climate change, right? I’m not on any level suggesting that the
climate isn’t changing. But whereas peak oil theory was Scientism’s doomsday
theory prophecy in the naughts, right? The two thousands. Now it seems like
it’s, “Ah! Climate change! We’ve got to change our ways!” It’s kind
of, it’s the new religion’s Apocalyptic prophecy and warning. So we’ve got that
going on. And then we also have this very fixed set of beliefs that…what I am
seeing you know, I see the priests of Scientism––and not saying the good ones,
the good scientists, the good doctors are always examining, are always
questioning––but I am seeing people grant authority over themselves. I think
they are giving the authority to doctors, to scientists, to the experts to tell
them what is and what isn’t, what they should and shouldn’t do.
Thea: 14:58 Creating
a reality there.
Anne: 14:59 In
a similar way that the downside of organized religion, I think, handed that
over to the priest. So we’re coming up to 15 minutes and I know Drake has to
get going, but I think this is something to examine. I think that for all of
the secularists’ focus on rejection of organized religion, to me it seems as if
they simply replaced it with a new religion.
Drake: 15:40 New
Anne: 15:43 It’s
a new authority. So that’s what it is, Drake. It’s a new authority. Whereas God
and the priests are not their authority. Science as a God, almost? And the
priests of that Scientism is the authority? Is that right?
Drake: 16:08 I
wonder. Yeah. It’s like, it’s just, it seems very comforting to me to think of
people who don’t screw up. You know, like I didn’t grow up in organized
religion so I didn’t, I guess I didn’t grow up with a conception that there’s
always someone watching out for me doing the exact right thing––of a God figure
or a priest figure. But a lot of people that I speak to, just lately, talk
about science as if it’s some group of people somewhere who don’t mess up. And
that’s appealing, right? Like that’s nice to think that there might be people
that don’t mess up, but it’s not true.
Thea: 16:46 Well,
because it’s taking it from the religious realm, where there was faith involved
and the unseen––to the realm of “it’s reason and logic and that is above
all what we can trust. And it’s real.” So it’s interesting because we do
believe in reason and logic and those are good. But like you said, Drake, if
the beginning realm that the reason follows is off, then you have something
that’s false and now you have people believing it, or saying “it’s
real” in particular arenas.
Anne: 17:25 Or
simply if we missed something in our observations, that we then finally pick
up, well that’s going to change the working theory and that’s going to change
the entire model. Right?
Thea: 17:39 Can
I say one more quick thing? The thing that always––and science is not my
practice, I mean observation is though, so I guess in one way it is––the thing
that has always blown my mind learning the scientific method was that you could
only test that which you could conceive of. And so everything is limited there
in terms of creating theories and working theories. It’s only based upon what
you already know or think you know, and that right there is like, what?
Anne: 18:15 Right.
Your own reality. It’s only based on the reality that you can observe at that
moment. And as we all know, even from the time, like we said in the last one,
from the time you’re five years old to the time you’re seventy five years old,
our consciousness, our perceptions, our realities change. We perceive more,
differently. Right? So the same goes every day. So anyway, let’s get going and
pick this up I think next time, as we’re kind of formulating the discussion for
Thea: 18:50 Sounds
good. Thanks so much guys. Nice to see you.
Drake: 18:53 Alright.
Anne: 18:53 Alright,
let me, let me stop recording. You too.
How does consciousness grow if we subscribe to a fixed set of beliefs?
VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BELOW:
Anne: 00:00 Okay. Hello there. We’ve got Drake from the East Coast. Thea down in SoCal. Me up here in Northern Cal. We’re going to try to make this quite a short one because Drake has to leave. So I want to start this out by talking just a little bit about why we’re doing these, this series of discussions, Thea and I often talk like this all the time anyway as do Drake and I when we have a chance to be together and we thought it would be a good idea to just share it with others who might be having some of the same streams of thought or questions and want to join in to the discussion. The tagline on the website, on the Sacred Osiris website is: Into the Age of the Fifth Sun, and that refers to the Mayan calendar, the Mayan elder prophecies that we are in transition and moving into a new age, which corresponds to many other prophecies of ancient texts and religions.
Anne: 01:15 Even
astrologically moving out of the age of Pisces into the age of Aquarius. So I
perceive us––of course, we hopefully are always moving forward in
consciousness. Hopefully we are always growing and developing and expanding our
consciousness. Evolving. But if we are between ages, marked ages, this transition
is likely even more dramatic. And perhaps we could use even a little bit more
attention and effort as we, as we find new language to express this transition
and perhaps new conceptions and new consciousness that we may be emerging into.
So, so it’s a dialogue and it’s, it’s just a lot of questions and obviously we
don’t have the answers and obviously we have some opinions. But the topic I
wanted to talk about is organized religion.
Anne: 02:29 And
I say that having a lot of respect for the practice of organized religion but
not subscribing to one particular set of beliefs that have, has been initiated
by someone else or organized by someone else, but rather kind of an amalgam of
my own study and practice and sense and faith and belief. And 49 years of life
experience. So the question I guess, or my, my issue with organized religion as
relates to what I just said is that––and let me back up for one second.
Something I love about Anthroposophy, Waldorf teaching is the, the approach to
teaching the approach to answering questions, especially when the child is
young. You know, “Why is the sky blue?” Rather than answer with an
explanation of the way light reflects, refracts off molecules in the air. One
might say, “I wonder?”
Thea: 03:46 As
opposed to answering with a finite sort of dead answer that stops the
Anne: 03:55 That
stops the wonder. Right? I think the idea in Waldorf teaching is to just let it
keep going in one way or another. Right? Whether it’s as the children are older
and you are having a discussion that takes you down many pads or not, but if we
answer anything with, with just like a hard and fast fact, well, that’s done,
Drake: 04:25 Yep. Interesting. I remember having a discussion in class this week that left me feeling sort of unsettled. And it’s funny that you’re mentioning Waldorf because Waldorf education has been on my mind a lot this week––because my verse, I think it was my verse in fourth grade, came back to my mind: To wonder at beauty, stand guard over truth. Look up to the noble, resolve in the good. And I think that was the first line that we would say everyday when we, when we left class…When I was getting kind of embroiled in the deep that, you know, the intellectual details of something. I’m getting stressed out about it. You know, I can’t figure out this, this one little thing. And I was like, well, how about I wonder at the beauty of it? Let me just look at––of this mathematical proposition or whatever it was and just kind of sit in that. And sure enough, I understood it a little bit later. Once I stopped the frenzied, you know, logic because it can, you know, when you’re trying to figure out a problem, you can get very stuck and not see what you’re missing or what presupposition you missed.
Drake: 05:35 And Anne, when you’re talking about different ages or people switching the way that they think about things, what came to my mind was presuppositions. Because if you want to have a mode of thought or a doctrine that’s going to allow you to evolve, it seems important that it would be a motive thought or a doctrine or philosophy or whatever it is that urges you to examine the presuppositions of the philosophy itself or the doctrine itself. And maybe that’s what organized religion doesn’t do. Maybe that’s something it really explicitly doesn’t do––is urge you to question why you’d be associated with that particular organized religion. And that’s supposition on my part, I don’t have evidence to back that up right now. I don’t have a lot of life experience with a particular organized religion, but just from my reading of different texts, that seems something that perhaps the actual teachers, you know, like, like Buddha or Krishna from the Bhagavad Gita, Christ. I think they do, they do urge people to actually think about things. But then the customs or laws laid down after those teachers by other people who embrace those religions maybe don’t as much.
Thea: 07:12 It
makes me think a little bit, Drake as you say, that like that the teachers themselves
were teaching, one of it was to maintain interest in things and questions. That
space of wonder. And what seems to be one of the things that people in general,
one of the places where we get tripped up is that wanting to claim something
entirely or, or be secure. I wonder if it comes from a sense of wanting to be
secure in some finite existence that the wondering stops. Like it’s a failing
of humans. Maybe not a failing, but it’s a habit. It’s not necessarily what the
teachings are at all. Right? That the teachings and that thread, stream of
wisdom isn’t finite like that, but that’s what we’ll do to it––like hanging on
to the image of it rather than penetrating to the essence of it.
Drake: 08:20 Yeah.
Or just, I mean, and that seems to be simply like staying in your comfort zone,
right? And that doesn’t have to be something that is totally seen as negative.
Like, yeah, all of us humans are going to do that, want to stay in our comfort
zones, but if we can understand that it applies intellectually or religiously
or spiritually as well. Because I feel like we, at least personally, I don’t
often think about it applying to those areas as well. Like, oh, you know, I
wanna stay in my comfort zone in terms of I don’t know, how hard I’m working at
something or some other aspect of my life that’s maybe more external and easier
to examine and I might not realize, “Oh, wow! It might also be my natural
tendency to stay in my comfort zone religiously or spiritually” or
whatever these other aspects of, of life that are less tangible.
Anne: 09:17 Yeah.
I mean, humans have this kind of dichotomous relationship with change and the
unknown. So we are drawn to it because we are curious and we have an innate
need to grow, as do all beings. But it’s scary too. So we like to find answers
that we can rest upon, I’d imagine. Right? I really like your point, Drake,
that probably the original teachings and teachers we’re conveying a truth and
spirit to others who then took that and fixed it. I mean, when I say fixed, put
it in a fixed organization that can be handed down and worked with as a
framework, always difficult to do. So I guess, since I don’t practice an
organized religion either and my main experience is with Catholicism, but I
didn’t get that deeply involved in it. I can’t speak to the tenets of all the
different religions. I do agree that a foundation of morality is critical to a
society, a family, a religion, anyone. Right? But those can be principles that
are not challenging to understand. But when we get into pedantic details, even
of…I was having a conversation with someone whose religion does not subscribe
to a belief in reincarnation. And the first thing that I think I remember him
saying is we don’t believe in reincarnation. Right? And so that, that just
saying, “we don’t believe,” to me that’s problematic because, I mean,
I’m not a collective. I work with people and I need people, and I I learn from
people, and I also share some beliefs with people, but I don’t like saying
“we believe.” I believe. So far, too. I believe, so far. Best I can
ascertain. Here’s what seems to make sense to me. Sorry, go ahead.
Drake: 12:50 Well,
yeah, that’s just what jumped to my mind when you said, “we don’t
believe,” for some reason, I thought of the “royal we,” how a lot
of a lot of literature when kings are speaking, from like older times, they use
the “royal we” and it like is it from themselves? And I was like, oh,
well, obviously, royalty, authority. You know, like if you’re saying “we
don’t believe,” it’s like this credence of authority that you’re like
interweaving with your opinion. Your opinion is the authority, and an authority
kind of seems like something that’s less likely to be questioned.
Anne: 13:23 Well, yeah, right. Also, you know what I think of though? I think of the Borg from Star Trek, right? The collective, hive mind, “we believe.” Right? Anyway. But back to that topic, for example, reincarnation. Look, I don’t know. For sure. To me, there’s enough evidence out there and certainly enough has been passed on through the hermetic traditions by many that I respect to suggest that reincarnation is something. Does exist. However, as I pointed out to my friend, maybe the ultimate goal is to stop cycling. Perhaps the goal is to stop reincarnating. Perhaps, perhaps that’s the goal for humanity. Perhaps that’s the goal for each individual soul––if you subscribe to that belief that there’s a soul––and perhaps it was interpreted somewhere along the way that because the goal is to not cycle, it doesn’t exist. But, but doesn’t want one need to leave room for the possibility that it does? Doesn’t one need to leave room for the possibility that there is something contained in every religion––every current modern religion being practiced, and every ancient religion that we have learned about, and every future one going forward––that there is some, some piece of the puzzle there that cannot be ruled out?
Thea: 15:17 What it draws to my mind a bit is there’s certain stories––and I know Drake can relate and probably you––that I like to reread every few years, even novels or whatever, to come back to a story. And every time I read it, as I live more life, I see more in the story that was always there, but I couldn’t, I didn’t have the experience within myself to reflect it and see it. And so it makes me think a little bit of the teachings of these different lines, these different religions, that that’s why there has to be a continuous study and penetration of the wisdom that’s passed to us. Because if we take it at face value, we see it in the way we saw something when we were five or ten or fifteen or twenty five or whatever it is. Instead of allowing it to just continue to work on us and for us to work with it in that expanding depth of anything that’s true or you know, that has that seed in it.
Drake: 16:36 That’s
funny. That makes me think a couple people last night were talking about a
certain Homer translator that is disliked in my dorm. And part of the reason
for that, and this is debatable, is that part of her philosophy of translating
is that when Homer repeats these epithets that he did because it was an oral
poem and he was remembering he needed to remember what came between. So he
would have these easily repeatable lines “dawn with rose red fingertips”
or the “wine dark sea”, like things that he would draw on––the sea,
it’s the wine dark sea. Dawn, it was this dawn. But this one translator, she
translates it completely differently every single time, because she wants the
reader in English to be struck with the image as if it was a new image every
single time. So she’s giving different words to it.
Drake: 17:33 And
I think I, I get, I think I understand why she’s doing that because it’s more
impactful for the reader. But the flip side is it seems like that takes some of
the work of the person reading the book away, right? You really try, you can read
it and get something different out of that image or be struck by that image,
equally, if you’re actively (inaudible) every single time in one of them
lesions. And so this seems to get into, like, if you’re going back and
rereading a text, whether it’s a religious text or some other thing that’s
helping guide your morality or your spirituality or anything it takes effort to
read it differently, right? Like it naturally happens if you let years, if
years go by and then you go back and read a book you’re probably gonna get
something out of it just cause you’ve changed as a person in that time. But if
you’re, if you’re a practicer of a religion and you’re doing it every single
day or every week or something like that, it’s hard. Like, it’s hard to read the
same things over and over again and have it, you know, hit you like have it
really stir something in you every single time. Like it seems to be a
difficulty of prayers too. Like if you have a prayer you repeat, it’s a really
good practice and I, and I admire it. But to feel it every single time instead
of having it be habit. And maybe, maybe the habit’s not bad as well, but it
came up when I was hearing you guys talk about that.
Anne: 19:04 Yeah,
and that’s also why the, the curriculum, the Waldorf curriculum, there’s,
there’s a new verse every year for the growing, the changing consciousness of
the child to say. A new prayer. Right? So we’re going to wrap this up so that
Drake, you can go on to practice and we can make this shorter for people as
well. I think that something that’s always been very helpful to me is, I mean,
this is not a new concept. That’s why comparative religion, comparative
religious studies is something that people do in university. I hope they still
do. I don’t know. But I think that doing whatever one can, to stimulate thought
and reconsideration so that we can continue looking at things from a slightly
new perspective, a fresh perspective, whether it’s engaging with new people,
other people reading the texts of other religions that are different than the
one that you practice, and allowing for possibility. To me that would temper
the problem that I have with a strict dogmatic practice that organized religion
often becomes. And dead. A deadened one, I found that with Catholicism, and I’m
sure that that was my experience with it. And it’s not many people’s, because I
know some Catholics who blow my mind with their connection to so many
dimensions of realms and spirit and God and faith. Like blow me away. So it’s
not Catholicism that is the problem, but certainly how I came to it or how it
was introduced to me or the priest that was heading things up, I guess. Butso
anyway, I guess that’s the conclusion for now and we can continue this
discussion in another, we can continue this dialogue in another discussion.
What does a priest provide that we can’t provide ourselves?
VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BELOW:
Anne: 00:01 Okay.
Here we are again, we’re going to dive into some possibly controversial topics.
I want to ask the question, can we be our own priests?
Drake: 00:18 Yeah.
Remembering what we were talking about last time where we, we sort of discussed
different spiritual paths that people might have, whether they, I believe in
God, whether they don’t believe in God whether they’re agnostic and whatever
they’re sort of moral guidelines or a spiritual path might be. And coming back
to this question of whether we could be our own priest, I feel like that leads
me to think about what are the things that I would want a priest to do. ‘Cause
I’ve never been a part of an organized religion. I’ve never had a priest. I’ve
gone to church a couple of times, I’ve talked with a couple different priests,
and it seems like a very important thing is that you would confide, right? And
I know that that’s different in Christianity depending on whether you’re
Protestant or Catholic in terms of things that confession and stuff like that.
But that kind of leads to this difficulty of building up a relationship with
yourself where you actually confide things or dialogue about things with
yourself, whatever that would look like. Would it be a journal? Would it be a
prayer? Would it be a conversation with a loved one? I feel like these are all
different spaces that you could sort of hold that confidence with.
Anne: 01:45 So
in that’s the context of a counselor almost. Right? So a priest serves as a
counselor and a guide to people. And we all need that sometimes. The reason the
question comes up for me is that I have a difficulty with the idea of a
middleman between me and my source. And maybe I have it wrong. Maybe the priest
doesn’t get in the way of that. I don’t know. But Drake has gotten me reading
The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky, and I’m only about halfway through. Drake
has read it and there’s a particular chapter that came to mind when we were
talking about this before we started recording. Drake, could you describe it
Drake: 02:59 Yeah.
Well, we were talking about about The Grand Inquisitor (chapter), and I
remember I first read that book in high school and then re-read it recently.
And it’s pretty life changing. But I do remember that chapter where one of the
brothers presents a poem to his younger brother. And in the poem––it’s set in
the Inquisition in Spain where many heretics have been burnt––and Jesus
appears. And the Inquisitor instead of celebrating or kneeling down or anything
like that, sends Jesus off to prison. And then comes down later, I think it’s
later that evening, to interrogate him and tell him how in refusing the
temptations of the devil––which is in I think Matthew and Luke section four or
something like that––how they damned mankind to be free and who they choose to
worship, to have freedom of conscience and have to try to be their own
conscience. And he, the Inquisitor talks about how the church has stepped in to
be that authority and to be what he thinks Jesus couldn’t be. Keep in mind, I
mean I have to keep in mind this is all Dostoevsky’s view of the church. But
what the Inquisitor lists off that he thinks that the church has provided for
people, that Jesus refused to give, is miracle, mystery and authority. And so I
feel like in Anne’s question of, “Can we be our own priests?”, well
then we have to ask like, is that necessary? Like do we want the authority of a
priest? Do we want miracle to come from, cause that’s another thing when you’re
talking about, you know, not wanting a priest. I feel like, I mean I know human
beings can be incredible, but I don’t look at them as exalted in that way. And
I feel like that’s something that rubs me the wrong way. If someone was to tell
me I needed a priest to have a relationship with God, I’d be like, well, I know
he’s studied the text more than I have, but what makes what makes them special?
Thea: 04:54 We’re
all creations of the, out of some divine.
Anne: 04:58 Right.
If we all have a divine spark in us, if we are all God’s children, why should
one have more authority over that relationship than another?
Thea: 05:14 And
I mean, and that’s wherewe were talking a little bit about the priest or
whatever the Holy person is in a tradition that they do provide that quality of
being a wise person, an elder or some sort of a guide like we just spoke of.
And then there’s also that these are people who are dedicating their lives to
this practice of this religion, of this tradition. And so therefore they’re
giving their time and energy and efforts in a daily practice that maybe
strengthens…The reason I’m saying this is because when you were saying that,
it’s like, yeah, do they have a direct line to God? Is it like their channel’s
a little clearer? And maybe that is what it is a little bit. Maybe their
channel and frequency is tuned in a little bit more clearly, and in a stronger
path to it because it’s been practiced.
Anne: 06:30 Well,
and because they are devoting themselves to that. Right? Whereas we’re raising
kids, we’re doing the work in the worldly world that is not giving us that time
or allowing that, allowing us to become as learned first off in that way so
that we have so many resources to draw upon, but also that we are not spending
as much time in prayer, in meditation, and perhaps in direct connection with
Thea: 07:05 I
mean that’s a question. That’s a possibility.
Drake: 07:09 I
think at least on the moral side of things. And in speaking to that sort of
like need for authority, like if we do have a need for authority, because it
seems especially like today, it seems a big claim to say that people have a
need for religious authority. It’s like you can just look around and be like,
plenty of people don’t seem to have that need. Right? But it seems fair to say
that we at least have some sort of tendency to want to, to look to a moral
authority when it comes to things. And we might want to escape it. But we so
often, like at least I know I so often want to appeal to something, to be able
to judge actions. To be able to look at myself, you know, have I treated these
people right? Like what am I going to compare that to? And when you’re talking
about people who’ve dedicated their life to something, it seems like that’s an
easy way to, to feel trust. Like this person is going to hopefully tell me the
right thing to do. They’ve dedicated their life to being able to tell me the
right thing to do.
Anne: 08:10 Yeah,
yeah. They’ve been studying this so much. They intimately understand it. They
have dissected it, they have contemplated it.
Thea: 08:19 And
they’ve observed, right? And had experience. And seen others.
Drake: 08:25 Well,
people are busy, right? Like, yeah, it’s hard. It’s hard to be able to do your
whole day at work or do whatever it is you’re doing. Take care of your kids and
then check in with yourself and be like, you know, how am I holding up to this
moral standard? That’s a whole extra level of work to do and trust in yourself.
Thea: 08:44 And
that takes us a little bit too, and I don’t know if I segue too much right
here, but the need of, what was it you said? Magic, mystery, authority?
Miracle, mystery and authority. But that we were talking about a little bit in
terms of this idea of being our own priest or priestess is having ritual,
having a practice of some sort that brings us back to that space of reflection
or meditation or whatever it is. Something that is part of our daily rhythm
that brings us to a space of that observation really, or contemplation in some
way. And I was saying that that’s what, you know, Hatha yoga came out as, I
mean that’s a practice for the householder to attain self-realization. You
know, because you are busy with life works of managing a household and children
and all of that. But then ritual, magic, when you were saying the need for a
moral authority, that, I mean our sense of that checking in with ourselves, but
also, I mean, we look at our world, we have a need for mystery and miracle, you
know, that is huge. And we see it in people’s excitement of tech, technological
advances. We see it in all sorts of these things that show a little bit of
mystery that we go Ooh. And miracle. Okay. So anyway, I went all over.
Drake: 10:42 So
that’s a funny thing looking at the, at the modern world, like I mean, so few
of the people that I know are a part of organized religion, and I know they’re
still so many people that are and have that as a part of their daily life. But
it seems like generally, or in many cases, we don’t want the miracle, mystery
and authority all in the same place. Like we still want those things, but to
have them all in one figure, it seems like, I mean, so when you’re talking
about us being our own priests, it brings back the conversation to like, well
would I want a priest to do that if I was going to have a priest, I don’t know.
Anne: 11:33 Well
so correct me if I’m wrong. I think where you’re going is that so the miracle
and mystery, well we can perceive certainly the mystery, right? We can perceive
that there is the mystery, and we might be able to bear witness to the miracle.
Right? But do we also then want to answer the question? Do we want to then
appeal to our own authority in making sense of all of it? Is that kind of what
Drake: 12:06 Right.
Yeah. Cause I mean that, that at times that seems impossible. Right? To, you
know, at the end of the day, come back and have yourself as the authority.
Thea: 12:20 Yeah.
Well, I wonder if there’s something else in that authority is that that’s a
thread to community and not being alone. When there is an authority and you, if
there are many that link to an authority figure in some way, that builds
Drake: 12:43 Right.
I feel like elders that I’ve known, you know who I’m thinking of. But like they
can be that figure in a community to some extent. I mean in a different way,
but still someone that another young person and I can look to and, and go, you
know, we’re going to be reverent to this person because look how much he’s
lived and look what he has to say. Let’s listen. Because if we’re both doing
that, it’s somehow affirming both of us, both of our experience in the moment,
right? Like if we’re both, we’re both hushing down when this older man is
talking or we’re both, you know, offering to help this older person. Like it’s
a shared reverence that shows we’re both kind of on the same wavelength.
Thea: 13:27 And
that’s one of the things that I think is so important. And I think maybe that’s
one of the things that comes out of the need for something outside of
ourselves. Is that sense of togetherness that we feel with others when we are
having something shared, something profound that we share.
Anne: 13:51 Well
so makes me think of a couple of things. Number oneI suppose this might seem
obvious, but the priest is channeling, presumably channeling communication with
God, connection to source and representing in some ways. A representative. The
priest is a representative in the same way, you know, you might say parents are
also representative to the child of the divine. We are an earthly manifestation
to channel that perhaps. And speaking to your point, Thea, and yours, Drake,
that, together we all revere, rightfully revere our elders, first of all. Our
elders and those who have experienced and become wise. And so even in revering
them, they do become elevated, right? And so…go ahead.
Drake: 15:13 Well,
right. And in that sense, they seem like a representative too, right? Like if
someone has made it to 80 years old and they look happy, they’re healthy. And
they’re talking about, you know, whatever it is, some experience or you know,
they’re telling their grandchild that was the wrong thing to do. And explaining
something to them. It seems that they’re representative of living a good moral
life. Right? And I’m sure there’s immoral old people…
Thea: 15:43 Well,
not all old people are wise. I mean, not all old people shine.
Drake: 15:50 Well
and not for everyone would you hush your voice as they, when they start
talking, because you have some sort of reverence., And I feel like with many,
many elderly people, that’s my initial reaction because they at least seem like
a representative of that. So when Anne’s talking about the priest being a
representatives and parents being representative, like you were thinking about
parents also as a representative of wisdom, too. Right?
Thea: 16:16 And
that’s what I was saying––or is it the same thing really like that not
necessarily only that vessel of communication from the divine or the source,
but the wisdom that comes through experience and observation, but from my
experience so far in the moments where I feel like I’m exercising wisdom, when
other things fall away and what’s left is that wisdom or that experience or
that compassion of truth, when the other things fall away, that to me there is
something in that that that is a channeling of what is good and true and, and
Drake: 17:05 Well,
it’s like, I mean to look, I feel to look at something similar to that in a
different way is like, it’s almost just like giving different things different
weight, right? Like seeing what’s really most important or what’s truly
relevant. Right. The other things falling away and being left with a single
thing in a given moment, in any given moment that this is the most relevant
thing right now. Even being in any dire situation and your wisdom or your past
experience is telling you, okay, this is exactly what we need to do right now.
And nothing else is important. It’s kind of going to one thing by itself all of
Anne: 17:41 Well
and so I would like to not go a whole lot longer this time. So I also am
hearing that the priest serves as one we can dialogue our experiences with. So
that we can find some objectivity to our subjective experiences. And I
explained, one of the reasons that I felt that having a priest, having a
middleman there to me is problematic––the other reason ismaybe this is too long
a conversation right now, but going back to The Grand Inquisitor the Grand
Inquisitor who was actually also the Cardinal, right? The Cardinal, the Bishop?
We find out later as he relates to Jesus that actually about 800 years ago they
started working with the other guy, right? And they are basically, they are,
they are working with Satan. And, and the people are none the wiser. So having
a priest in that capacity, in that role––it is ripe for corruption. Right? So,
you know, maybe this is something to explore beyond this conversation, but so I
see ideally now, and I understand even better ideally why we have a priest
outside of us to help us dialogue and relate to our source. But I do see some
problems with it. We have all seen the corruption around us and how that power
and authority can be and has been misused.
Drake: 19:47 Right.
And I feel like that that highlights again, looking for ways to be your own
authority because you can follow, you can, you know, through every chain of
like of authority, you can find someone for this authority to be accountable to
and someone for this authority to be accountable to and so on forever. And it’s
never going to be infallible, right? No person is going to be infallable.
Right? So it seems like, I don’t know, I feel like my takeaway right now is
that I’m my best shot in some ways.
Thea: 20:21 Well,
I think so. I mean, even when we have someone who we revere, we can hear that,
but then we still have to be coming to our own process.
Drake: 20:34 It’s
hard though. It’s hard to revere someone and not sort of fall into a blindness
regarding their faults.
Thea: 20:40 Well,
we have a tendency to that. But I think if, I mean, when I think of the
teachers I have who are doing it well, they don’t allow people to put them up
there and worship them. You know, they remember and remind of their humanity
and failings. Not that they have to lay their failings out, but there is, it
takes a real something to not let people worship you if you’re doing some
powerful work. And so I think in that, in ourselves as people who are looking
towards having elders and wise leaders among us, we have to remember that we
still have to bring it into our own process. I mean we’re talking about, at the
end of the day, that part of the practice of becoming our best self and being
of service to the world in a right way is to be able to have that checking in.
And strengthening that, that compass, I guess, of ourself, of our own
Anne: 21:54 And
perhaps to remember that it’s a relationship that we are required to
participate in fully, at least equally with any authority that we have granted.
And so that we have to continually be checking them and making sure that they
are also doing the work to deserve that authority.
Thea: 22:24 Right.
That we don’t hand it over blindly.
Anne: 22:27 Yeah.
Or get lazy after we’ve handed it over consciously, but then over time it’s
very easy to get lazy. So, I’m not sure what we’ve concluded on this one, but
it was a good exploration.
Thea: 22:47 Well,
it is. And I think that the one other thing I’d love to add to it though is
that in order for us to be our own guides and authorities or then even in equal
relationship to those that can offer that to us, is to have those spaces just
being in nature too. Because we were talking a little bit, and I won’t go into
it, but talking about creating places of worship or places that are Holy, and
nature is one of those that we all have. To make an effort when we’re living in
cities to be in that because it gives us that sense of connection, like a
direct line. I mean, that’s my experience of it anyway. You know, and it
charges that, it strengthens that current in us as people.
Anne: 23:47 Yes,
it is very grounding. It is the grounding, I think.
Thea: 23:51 And
uplifting. It’s grounding. I mean, it’s the whole thing. It’s like we become
clearer to be able to perceive what is there.
Anne: 24:00 Truth.
Truth. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I like that. Okay. Let’s end on that. I mean, you
know, you can’t go wrong with advising that people spend more time in nature.
That is, there is the quiet, there is the reverence automatically or just laid
out there for us. Right? It is creation.
Thea: 24:25 Creation.
Observation. I mean, when I think of the things I want to practice more, it’s
that, that quiet observation and I mean, observing anything in its natural
state is a good exercise.
Anne: 24:40 Yeah.
It’s a good reference point. Going back to references, right? Drake, it’s
resetting in nature and seeing this unadulterated creation gives us some
perspective to bring back into our manmade world to check it, to see if it kind
of stands up to truth.
Drake: 25:06 Right.
And when you were talking about representatives too, right? Like in nature, if
you can look at a natural, any little scene, right? Like a little pocket of
trees in a brook somewhere, it’s kind of in a harmony, right? So you can, you
can look at it as representative of things. Yeah. It does seem like nature
seems to work.
Thea: 25:27 It
does seem to work!
Drake: 25:29 When
left to its own devices. So when you were talking about priests as
representatives, and then we were talking about elders as representatives, to
just kind of look at these things as examples or exemplary of something good
that we might want to emulate, that seems like a path that it can take as well.
Anne: 25:45 Yes,
what, and that, that nature and being there in nature and witnessing all of
that perfection we can see that pattern and want to find that particular
beautiful, perfect pattern in at least the ideals of those that we grant
Thea: 26:17 And
even then in relationship, right? In the dynamics of relationship and the way
relating is happening, those dynamics of nature, the balance. Am I losing
something here? Maybe?
Anne: 26:31 We’re
just, we’re just getting very abstract here, but yeah. Okay. All right. All
right. Let’s cut it here and we’ll continue this dialogue in another one at
some point. Thanks you guys.
Thea: 26:45 Thanks.
Anne: 26:46 Hold
on one sec. Love you. Hang on one minute.
To move beyond the limited options of agnostic spirituality, atheism, or fundamentalist religion––we need to talk about it. And before we can talk about it, we need to think about it.
VIDEO TRANSCRIPT BELOW:
Anne: 00:01 Okay. Here we are with a new guest Drake Mason-Koehler, my nephew, first and foremost Thea’s son. He’s home on break and he’s going to join the discussion. We’ve been having chats, discussions as we always do about some of the subjects that we’ve been talking about. And today we’re going to talk about God. And we’ve had a few discussions about this already, so we’re going to try to kind of just hit a couple of the points and go from there. I have lamented to these guys that––I live up in the Bay area in California and I don’t think people talk enough about God. I think that God, discussions about God, is met kind of with derision and suspicion. There is an atheist tendency up here and an emphasis on secularism that I think is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Anne: 01:10 And
I say this as someone who has gone through myriad perspectives and explorations
and examinations. I was not raised in any particular clear tradition really.
And I’ve come to my own faith very experientially. And as anyone who is
familiar with Anthroposophy––I’m a homeschooler who follows a Waldorf
Anthroposophic curriculum and Drake was raised in the Waldorf schools, Thea
teaches in the Waldorf schools––we understand that religion, from the
Anthroposophic perspective, all religions are valid and are a manifestation and
expression of the consciousness of the time, the evolution of humanity. And no
religion is regarded as––even the ancient myths––they’re not regarded as fables
or misunderstandings, but an understanding of our connection to our source at
the time. So that being said you know, both Drake and Thea brought some
interesting points up. Drake, can you talk a little about your experience being
raised in Southern California?
Drake: 02:37 Yeah.
Well, and this is because we’ve spoken about this a couple of times now. Just
recalling that when you, initially were talking about the atheism that you’ve
run into up in the Bay area, just in your experience, my immediate sort of
complement to that growing up in Southern California ––and although I went to a
school where we learned old Testament myths or old Testament stories in third
grade, along with all the Greek and Norse and other myths that were part of the
curriculum––I still have grown up with so much agnosticism and not even just
agnosticism, but spiritual tendencies in the adults around me and gradually in
many of my peers as well. And not that I think that’s necessarily a bad thing,
but when it comes to discussions about God, I think that that led me to not
even really start thinking about God until just towards the end of high school.
And more lately.
Anne: 03:45 Can
I interrupt you just so that you can make it clear? I think what you’re saying
is when you, when you talk about this kind of agnostic spiritualism or
spirituality, sorry, you’re referring to a kind of nebulous spirituality that
doesn’t follow any, certainly any organized religion or firm tradition. Yeah?
Drake: 04:11 I
feel like I’ve run into a lot of that. And then also a lot of, “well, I
just don’t know. And I’m also not really interested in having a discussion
about what I don’t know or what I do know.” So it’s kind of maybe, I don’t
know what the, what the split would look like in terms of people who are going,
you know, “I’m spiritual. This is my belief which is kind of hard to put
your finger on exactly what it is. But they might, you know, hold it very
precious and that might be very good for them. But I think the emphasis of my
point would be that there hasn’t really been much on either end of the
spectrum. I haven’t known a lot of people who are very religious and I haven’t
known a lot of people who are very clear cut in their atheism. It’s all been
somewhere in between. And the majority of that in between has also seen an
unwillingness to stop and talk about it or to think about it because I think
the thinking about before the talking about it. So, yeah, that was, that’s kind
of where I came into this discussion.
Thea: 05:10 And
that came after also you articulating that we grew up in the Midwest where
there were a lot of very fundamental religions around us. And while that was
around us, we didn’t grow up with that in our home. Ours was sort of a
nondescript sense of God and faith, but not any clear delineated path within
that I guess.
Anne: 05:35 Yes.
We were raised by liberal academics so who were as you point out, I’ll let you
speak to this, but I think who were, as many people from that generation,
turned off to the hypocrisy of the organized religion that they had grown up
around or even with.
Thea: 06:02 Like,
like a lack of breathing within it. I think, you know, I mean, and that was
mirrored in a lot of aspects of the culture, too. I mean, the religious aspect
kind of, and the structure and strictures of life in this country. I mean, just
thinking of the social changes that were occurring in the fifties, sixties, you
know, so all of that was a reflection of all of it in a way, too. And so there
was this pushing away from that hard and fast structure and form because of the
many injustices that were seen and condoned by religious practices one way or
another. And that’s throughout all of history.
Drake: 06:47 I
remember, Anne, yesterday you were talking a little bit about sort of pendulum
swings, like going all the way to the other end of an extreme. So wherever you
might grow up you might go the other way, like both of you guys growing up in
the Midwest and then coming out to California where it’s a very different
consciousness than what you grew up in when it comes to spirituality and God.
And my follow up thought to that has been, well, what if you grow up where it’s
all agnostic? What if you grow up where there’s no, you’re not at any extreme
to swing from. Right? You don’t have that, like, trajectory to go look for.
Right? ‘Cause I think, needless to say, we live in a world where, you know, if
you’re so blessed that you have the opportunity to, to go to college or to go
and work in our world you get to forge your own path and you’re talking about
this kind of like forging your own religion or your own outlook on religion or
spirituality, whatever that might be.
Anne: 07:51 Okay.
We had a little technical difficulty. So Drake, would you just start from, you
were talking about, you know, for those of us who are blessed to forge our own
path I mean blessed to go to college, to forge our own path, that allows us
Drake: 08:09 Well,
I was thinking even just looking back at the beginning of this discussion, you
said your approach to religion or spirituality has been very experiential,
right? Like throughout your life, it’s changed or you’ve done work with it
based on your own experiences and what you’ve read, who you’ve talked to and
where you’ve been. And I think similar for you. So those are kind of like
individual trajectories that you guys have had and you’ve been able to come out
from your upbringing growing up in a more religious place, a different type of
environment, and then sort of forge your own way. So it almost, it seems like
that upbringing gave you a momentum, and I know it wasn’t like, you didn’t grow
up like super strict Catholic or anything like that. Also people don’t have to
escape it, like they don’t have to swing away from it, but it seems like when
it comes to coming to your own understanding of something or your own beliefs
where do you get that movement that would make you want to establish beliefs in
the first place? Is it just life happening to you that makes you want to,
“okay, I need to figure out, you know, what I believe is right and wrong?
How I think about children, marriage, grief, like all these other things and
scriptures and religion has a lot to say on that. And it’s not necessarily all you
need to be followed, but there’s a lot of good in it too.
Thea: 09:34 Yeah.
Well I don’t know if my thought quite follows precisely. I mean it still is in
there, but it gives me a picture of, you know, he was speaking about the
pendulum, that swinging and you were talking about earlier the streams. And
with that pendulum swing you have this momentum kind of like you’re shot out of
something, you know, so you have this force carrying you one way or another.
And then I was thinking that when there’s this sort of work that’s coming from
your individual experiences, it’s a little bit more like picking up a shovel
and digging, and you don’t want to be too far from the stream ’cause you still
need the current if you’re trying to create a channel. But it just gave me the
picture, ’cause today we went for a walk and it rained a lot last night. So
this path was just flooded and there were so many streams flowing. And I’m just
thinking that sometimes to forge a new stream, you know, you do have to pick up
a shovel for a bit and then it can kind of be filled in and have some of that
carrying from, not the pendulum, but just from the movement of the stream
itself. So that you can kind of, I don’t know, it’s not quite there, but a
picture that came with that.
Anne: 10:51 Well
so drawing both on our conversation from yesterday and what you just, you both
just said. So we talked a little bit about the fact that like, for example, especially
the last couple of generations in this country, given the nature of the economy
and the world more and more often people leave the places they grew up in,
leave the traditions, the families intermarry, live abroad, live on the other
side of the country. Meet, mingle and marry people who have come from widely
different backgrounds. And so one is exposed to many different streams and
traditions. At the same time, like Drake brings up scripture and these
traditions that have come up throughout humanity’s development, understanding
and need to figure out ways, codes guidelines and guideposts, those are also
valuable. And the flip side of us all moving away and finding new streams is,
the downside is that we also sometimes lose and abandon that which came before
us. So I think that we kind of concluded when we were talking yesterday that
what we’re starting to realize is that there needs to be––so we’re, we’re
entering the age of Aquarius. I think I brought up the fact that, you know, as
I see it, each epoch is about 2000 years long. And so we’ve come to that end of
our current form of Christianity––do we need, I mean, I’m talking about in the
Western tradition because we’ve all grown up in the Western tradition, so
that’s all I can really speak to, right? So is what we’re seeing around us is
that indicating a need to create a new stream, a new path that perhaps for the
first time in recent human history is informed by our individualism as equally,
if not more than our group…What’s, what’s the word I’m looking for, Drake?
Drake: 13:53 I
don’t know. Like our need for community or something like that?
Anne: 13:57 Well,
you know, we need, we need community, right? But, well, Thea and I had done a
talk a while back on claiming our authority and we emphasized the fact
that––certainly for us, we see the need to we have lived and, and strived to,
be our own authority, rather than look to the experts, rather than look to the
doctors the lawyers, the teachers, the priests. Not that that means we reject
what they have to offer, but I will put my authority above them all in my final
decisions about anything. And I think that this, there is a lot of that, there
is a lot of that impulse in people and they’re finding that groove in different
ways. Maybe one of them is simply and embrace of atheism, because they are
rejecting everything that came before them. Because they’re saying, no, that
didn’t work. But perhaps what needs to happen is we need to find something that
doesn’t then throw the baby out with the bath water. Because we are spiritual
beans, which I will say again only for my own personal, my own experience, but
I believe we are spiritual beings or we have a spiritual impulse, a
spirituality and we do need to speak to that. And materialism, reductivist
materialism, doesn’t answer that need in us.
Thea: 15:48 Well
it doesn’t hold the space for that mystery that is always present in some way.
But I’d like to go back just a moment, ’cause I think there was something you
said yesterday in our conversation that was really important to distinguish
when we’re talking about this sort of age of coming into this individual sense
of seeing. I want to find a better way to say it. It is reclaiming our
authority or claiming our authority, but also really the honoring of our own
seeing is part of that. But what you said yesterday, was there’s a difference
between individualism that is just self-serving and sort of narcissistic, as
opposed to a group of individuals coming together––I mean maybe you want to say
it––as opposed to a group of people who are all thinking the same or don’t have
their own responsibility of self quite there. But when everyone is an
individual and their work has been done through themselves to come to where
they are, there’s more power in that group of people working together towards a
shared goal than there is in a group of people following someone with a
somewhat shared goal.
Anne: 17:13 So,
basically that, you know, there’s a difference between a group of individuals
bringing their own unique skills, talents, perspectives, experience to the
table toward a, a shared goal––the evolution of humanity, let’s say
that––versus a collective of group think that is following one idea and path.
And so I think the way we concluded, and we want to wrap it up just to keep
this short, but we want to keep this going, I think, this is a good start. I
think what we determined perhaps is that there’s gotta be, there has to be
another path now. And so, you know, there’s, there’s a path beyond just the
choices of atheism, fundamental religion, nebulous, agnostic, spirituality.
Something else maybe needs to emerge and be formed. And new language must be
found for a new, experiential understanding of God, or our connection to source,
whatever that is for you. And the way to do that is to start talking about it
Thea: 18:28 Thinking
Anne: 18:29 Well
exactly. Like Drake says, you have to first want to even think about it before
you can want to start talking about it.
Thea: 18:36 Well,
and then that’s where the conversations come ’cause you have to show up, you
have to show up for the––now I’m thinking of baseball––show up for the game.
You know, you have to be able to stand at the plate and be like, yeah, let’s
bring this discussion up. Let’s bring this topic.
Drake: 18:50 Yeah,
’cause I was going to say, if you don’t––and it can be totally reasonable to
not want to be thinking about these things at certain times. But if you’re not
wanting to think about it and people start, you know, asking you questions,
pointed questions about your beliefs or what you think and presenting you with
what they think and all of that. It can feel like an attack or sort of like a
barrage of something coming in at you. And if you haven’t even wanted to start
thinking about it, I mean it’s going to feel weird. It feels like people are
trying to get you to think like them. Which is I think why discussions about
this stuff can be like…it’s so vulnerable. It’s so vulnerable for people to
say what they believe or that they don’t know what they believe and they’re
like, it feels like it’s a difficult thing to get past that before you say, I
want to figure out something for myself, whatever that might be. Because when
you were talking about materialists, I mean, I feel like, there’s so many
different types of people and there’s so much out there in terms of what people
have thought about these things. Like, I know there are ancient authors that I
haven’t read yet that don’t believe in God, but have a system of morals and
ways of thinking about things that is beautiful and can totally work for
someone to read and think about and be inspired and not necessarily adopted as
a sort of creed, but to feed into their own understanding of what their work in
the world is. So it’s like, yeah, starting to think about it.
Thea: 20:27 Yeah,
and if this ties in just a little bit. Yesterday we had briefly spoken about
this, which led to that reflection you had about the normalcy of leaving one’s,
place of birth and upbringing. And that came after us speaking about Arjuna and
his quest towards his seeing…
Anne: 20:52 For
anyone who doesn’t know what you’re referring to. Arjuna from the Mahabharata
epic tale of ancient India, right. As Krishna’s talking to him too, right?
Drake: 21:04 Yeah.
He’s about to, if I recall correctly, I think he’s about to fight his own
family, he’s about to fight, you know, half of his family members and he’s
like, how, how am I supposed to reconcile myself to this? Then I was
remembering from, I think it’s Matthew in the Bible where Jesus says that he’s
coming to take, you know, son from father and daughter from mother or something
along those lines.
Thea: 21:30 So
those pictures of having to let go of that which is familiar, to forge one’s
own path with honor and truth and dignity. And that is, you know, there’s a
part that’s necessary to throw off these things so you can see what’s sort of
left standing. And I feel like maybe that’s what epoch we are stepping into
now. It’s like, what, what’s left standing? What is there, something that we
can really protect and nurture and grow for humanity from this point? And what is
that relationship with God, source, a structure of morals.
Drake: 22:12 Well
also all these situations that we keep bringing up, it seems like there’s
something to do with, when you run into like, contradictions, like very
irreconcilable things like Arjuna having to fight his family and wanting to be
a virtuous person. Those seem to be impossible to reconcile those two things.
So it’s like, what does he do in that situation? And whether you want to do
exactly what he does is beside the point, but just getting to see what other
people do in these stories? And if that leads to conversation too, with other
people like, “Oh, what did they do when they ran into a super sticky moral
scenario? Where did they turn? How did they get through it in a way that they
thought benefited themselves and others?
Thea: 23:01 Where
the seemingly obvious gentle, compassionate route is actually the cowardly,
unhonorable or dishonorable route. Not to not have compassion. That’s not what
I’m trying to say, but what seems to be a general kindness may not truly be a
Anne: 23:20 Absolutely.
And, and the only way to really kind of push through those kind of black and
white choices, and push through to, to understand, embrace the complexity, but
still take action, one has to examine and explore that. And I think what Drake
has brought up to some degree speaks to the fact that we should not throw all
of that out in forging our new path, but take that, benefit from everyone’s
experience from history, humanity’s experience. Take it, examine it, discuss
it, discard, try it, try something different. And then form something new.
Drake: 24:17 Yeah.
I mean, it just seems like we’re going to have to take action, no matter what.
Right? We can’t just hide in our rooms forever. We’re going to have to go do
things. And so it seems like it might help us make better decisions as opposed
to just going, “I don’t know.” ‘Cause if you just say, “I don’t
know,” you’re going to find yourself in situations where you have to do
things, anyway. So, at least trying to know might…
Anne: 24:48 Because
you can sit in your room or you can sit in your community, and you can say it’s
all good and you know, and decide to not make a decision toward judgment, which
leads to action. But if you do that, the world is going to eventually exert its
influence on you and you’re going to have to then react. So let’s get out in
front of it. Let’s start talking about this more in a new way and find some new
language and new concepts to examine and discuss and go from there.
Thea: 25:31 And
I would even just say maybe they’re not new concepts, right? But maybe we do
need to find a new language so that those old concepts that are probably
timeless and ever present just need to be understood and digested and reused in
a way that we can understand now more easily.
Anne: 25:54 Because
truth is eternal, right? So truth is eternal, but our consciousness is ever
changing. And so we need to develop some new understandings, I think, in order
to incorporate those truths and most beautifully, powerfully, and positively
manifest them going forward into this new age. Into the Age of the Fifth Sun.
So let’s wrap this up. It’s getting too long, but let’s keep going. Okay? All
right. Thanks you guys.