I hate to boast but whilst you may have been enduring the freezing winter days of the south east of Oz or the debilitating drought of NSW and Queensland,I have been traipsing around Spain being more churchy than thou. Because I am the crappest atheist in Chrisendom, I have an enduring passion for the Passion. There is no hymn I will not sing. There is no Cathedral I will not visit.
The Spanish cathedral movement was an extraordinary phenomenon. Communities that by modern standards were small and impoverished somehow managed to build the soaring gothic structures that bless the landscape throughout the nation. They may have lived in domestic hovels but the gothic cathedrals with flying buttresses, ornate side chapels, dazzling woodwork, some good and some corny art were the communities' jewels. The Spanish cathedrals seem to be the most consistently luminous. Remember, Spain was the super power of the fifteenth century. Enriched by New World gold, the leaders augmented that by sucking an estimated 30% of their people's resources. It led to an outrageous confection of creativity. And it wasn't just the cathedrals. In every tiny hill top village we visted, there were substantial churches with huge ceilings, golden ornamentation and classy carvings and art.
The resources required must have been onerous, particularly given that those funding the ventures knew that they would never live to see the completion of these projects. It was faith writ large.
The rational reaction of an unbeliever when confronted with this apparent excess is to rail against it. Indeed the Reformation was driven by the costs of medieval faith. Surely I must damn the priests as vain parasites and the buildings as wasteful white elephants? But I hesitate for several reasons.
First, it seems that the majority of the community at the time appeared to appreciate the wonder of their creations. Indeed without a blinding faith, I wonder if they would have been built. But they were and were probably the sole high cultural experience for people of that ancient time. Of course the cathedral and church movement exacerbated poverty. But it was the major source of public art. Moreover, the buildings were more than just places of worship and extravagance. They were meeting houses and gathering places. They were social glue.
Secondly, they had other social functions such as communal endeavour and unity through shared purpose.
Finally, these buildings and thei contents were a gift for future generations. The creators knowingly built these things for their progeny. Lives were short and so they looked a future where these wondrous buildings would be.their legacy. And what a legacy they are. They speak of a time when completely different views about faith, death communal obligation and art prevailed. The heritage and the tales they tell are powerful.
So it is no surprise I feel thanks and wonder as my Spanish cathedral crawl proceeds. They literally are awesome.
What do you think?
Am I being too soft on the clergy or did they give their own and future generations a great gift??
Is the art dated corny crap or a luminous lesson for us today?
Is it possible that only faith could have driven such creativity??
Over to you guys...
What if you don't believe, won't believe or simply can't? Whether you're a hard core atheist, heretical apostate or just a wishy-washy doubting Thomas, the big human issues of meaning, ritual, belonging, death and suffering still have to be faced. Dick Gross has written and broadcast on these issues from a godless perspective for over a decade. Join him on his blog as he wanders through the big issues of existence without a god to help him.
The rational reaction of an unbeliever when confronted with this apparent excess is to rail against it.
ReplyDeleteWhat?
Railing against events from past history hardly seems a rational reaction (sorry:unless youre a nobjectivist of course).
Besides: What else were the Spanish going to do with all that gold? Build Submarines?
I can understand protestants getting all bitchy about cathedrals (salvation by faith - not by works and all that), but really at this point in timethat is more of a "my team yaay! - your team booo!" reaction than anything rational
And your concluding questions dont make any sense
Not surprised no one has commented yet old chap
Sorry 'bout that.
"What else were the Spanish going to do with all that gold? Build Submarines[sic]?"
DeleteWell, they could have done what the New World countries did following their "gold rushes."
They could have invested the gold in wealth creating ventures thereby increasing the living standards of all participating citizens.
That's the advantage of capitalism based on individual rights as distinct from the ideology of the humility encrusted, authoritarian, thisworld hating mystics of Spain. Their monuments were not dedicated to thisworld and thislife - they, like the Egyptian pyramids, were dedicated to nonexistence and to death. They were the goons who hosted the Spanish Inquisition.
If it's monuments you want give me the sky-scrapers of New York City any day.
No worries Cat. You final observations appear to be vindicated by the evidence. Dick
DeleteOh Malcolm. You are so utilitarian. D
Delete"You are so utilitarian. D"
DeleteUtilitarian? Yes, they were certainly practical.
Yet, is there some dichotomy between the practical and the ideal?
I don't think so - especially with reference to life on earth.
I love the New York City skyline better than a thousand churches.
"Is it possible that only faith could have driven such creativity??"
ReplyDeleteWhere were they going without ever knowing the way?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3ixIItWzeQ
Never let it be said that bigger isn't better.
Thanks Howl. For a culture to make a big statement, it must have a message that the whole society is happy to contribute funds to promote that message. You would note have had cathedrals of the magnificence of Spain without the whole community getting behind the effort. The Spanish did that because Christianity so captivated them. Secularism or atheism does not captivate us in the same way. Hence we and other secular societies are incapable of producing that sort of product (Sagrada Familia is the one exception but even that will take centuries because the society is unwilling to committ sufficient resources.). Without Christianity we would not have had the output that the builders of the Gothic edifices were able to produce. That would have been bad. Dick
Delete"For a culture to make a big statement, it must have a message that the whole society is happy to contribute funds to promote that message"
DeleteSo, was it really a "contribution"?
No, it's an example of the looting of the natives of the New World. Also the indulgences of the Spanish Christians based on false Church induced guilt.
On the other hand New York City was created by the production of free men and raised the living standards of the participants.
"For a culture to make a big statement, it must have a message that the whole society is happy to contribute funds to promote that message" “So, was it really a "contribution"? No, it's an example of the looting of the natives of the New World. Also the indulgences of the Spanish Christians based on false Church induced guilt. On the other hand New York City was created by the production of free men and raised the living standards of the participants.” (MalcolmS12:26 AM)
DeleteI think, Malcolm, that the New World (America) was built largely by people seeking religious freedom not by people ‘escaping’ from religion. The ‘looting’ done was done by (among others) those calling themselves Christians but not those following the principles of life taught by Christ.
Many of the indigenous peoples of the world have embraced Christianity and adapted it in sinc with their traditional customs and spiritual heritage. It is after all a new picture of the one true God that all people of good-will worship.
RalphH: "I think, Malcolm, that the New World (America) was built largely by people seeking religious freedom not by people ‘escaping’ from religion. The ‘looting’ done was done by (among others) those calling themselves Christians but not those following the principles of life taught by Christ"
DeleteI was referring, Ralph, to the Portuguese/Spanish conquistadors[conquerors] of the Aztec and Inca civilisations of South America. At every stage the looting/pillaging of the gold and silver was done in the name of the Church and the clergy accompanied the troops. I do not propose to 'debate' the issue with you as it is a matter of recorded history. You may not consider that they acted in accordance with a Christian worldview but, when you abandon any pretence at reason in the name of faith, what do you expect?
"Many of the indigenous peoples of the world have embraced Christianity and adapted it in sinc with their traditional customs and spiritual heritage. It is after all a new picture of the one true God that all people of good-will worship"
Thereby arresting any progress into modernity. Many parts of Christian Africa are still equivalent to the living standards of the European Middle Ages. Even down to the plagues as witness the Ebola outbreaks. Cultures which take Christianity seriously are always associated with destitution and earthly misery.
Dick, I share your love of churches so am a bit jealous of your pilgrimage (or whatever you call it). I often, even in country towns, stop off to look at or through the church/churches. I put my interest down to a love of religion and architecture. I started an architectural corse in my youth but never completed it.
ReplyDeleteI find the churches inspirational of the human spirit. The fact that we have people who fail to recognise the nature and purpose of religion and others, including those within religious organisations who disregard and abuse the teachings, does not negate this.
I think there is a mistaken idea by some that the common good, (the true focus of religious belief) can be achieved solely by ‘utilitarian’, social justice/legal action. But Jesus showed in the story about the woman who anointed his feet (his disciples, in particular Judas, were angered that the money was not spent on alleviating the plight of ‘the poor’ - John 12:4-5) that inspiration/elevation of the mind to the truth itself (i.e. recognition and acknowledgement of where true good and power come from) needs to be the first step of such action.
Although this does not directly involve the building of expensive ‘church’ buildings, the church becomes an external expression of the value of the source of goodness and truth and as such is also inspirational in it’s beauty and majesty.
Thanks Ralph. It was a joy seeing some of those amazing buildings. Dick
Delete“I was referring, Ralph, to the Portuguese/Spanish conquistadors[conquerors] of the Aztec and Inca civilisations of South America. At every stage the looting/pillaging of the gold and silver was done in the name of the Church and the clergy accompanied the troops. I do not propose to 'debate' the issue with you as it is a matter of recorded history.” (MalcolmS8:42 AM)
ReplyDeleteMalcolm, doing something “in the name of the church” or even ‘in the name of Christ’ is not the same thing as doing something according to the principles taught and demonstrated by Christ. In the first group you can have all sorts of dissemblers and counterfeits but not in the second.
History alone records that which was done - not the mindset and motivations behind the events. To claim one is acting ‘in the name of Christ/God and perform acts that are at variance with his teaching is to claim and act falsely.
It is not logical reasoning to attribute fault to Christianity (which is properly the philosophy of life as taught by Christ) when the fault lies with individual humans who have falsely interpreted and abused those teachings.
“You may not consider that they acted in accordance with a Christian worldview but, when you abandon any pretence at reason in the name of faith, what do you expect?”
To “abandon … reason in the name of faith” is about as silly as one could get but only those who have a ‘blind’ faith (which, by the way, is not unique to religion) do so. It’s equally debilitating to have a blind faith in human reasoning (alone) as it is to have one in religious teachings.
“Thereby (embracing Christianity) arresting any progress into modernity. Many parts of Christian Africa are still equivalent to the living standards of the European Middle Ages. Even down to the plagues as witness the Ebola outbreaks. Cultures which take Christianity seriously are always associated with destitution and earthly misery.”
How you attribute any of this to “Christianity” is beyond me. The greed, the “looting”, the self-serving of Western nations was not inspired by Christ’s teachings but by human nature obsessed (some of it, but by no means the worst of it, within individuals in developing Christian organisations) with centuries of self-serving and arrogance.
The birth of Christ was the turning point of history with the restatement of age-old truths in a new way for the developing human race. Individuals and organisations (run by humans) have become corrupt but the essential truths are still there (recorded in the written Word), inspiring and re-inspiring each generation that is seeking the truth about life.
If all the greed and selfishness (in human minds) suddenly disappeared there would be no more “destitution and earthly misery” but these are a product of free-will. God did not ‘come’ to wave a magic wand and make everything immediately alright. He had/has to work within the confines of human free-will. If not [He] would destroy the human race rather than save it and that’s not an option. The problem for atheists is that they leave the most important part of life/creation - i.e. the afterlife, out of the picture
RalphH: ".. doing something “in the name of the church” or even ‘in the name of Christ’ is not the same thing as doing something according to the principles taught and demonstrated by Christ"
DeletePersonally I am not aware of one "principle" advocated, let alone "demonstrated," by Christ. In fact His ramblings were wall to wall crap and *that* can be demonstrated.
"It is not logical reasoning to attribute fault to Christianity... when the fault lies with individual humans who have falsely interpreted and abused those teachings"
It most certainly is the fault of Christianity. Why should it need to be "interpreted"? Only because He talks gibberish!
"To “abandon … reason in the name of faith” is about as silly as one could get..."
On the contrary. Man has one means of knowledge: reason. Period. Faith is the method of Christians, Satanists and lunatics. Take your pick as it doesn't work any way.
“The birth of Christ was the turning point of history with the restatement of age-old truths in a new way for the developing human race"
Don't talk rubbish Ralph. It lead to the Christian dark and middle ages - the worst period of Western history.
"If all the greed and selfishness (in human minds) suddenly disappeared there would be no more “destitution and earthly misery”"
It was the love of poverty and selflessness of Christianity that caused the destitution and earthly misery of the Christian era. Poverty is *caused* by the lack of what you call "greed." Greed actually means the virtue of productiveness. In its absence famines and starvation[poverty] were the norm with life expectancy averaging in the 20 years from birth.
What does Christianity mean by advocating selflessness? Your *self* is your reason!! Selflessness *means* the absence of reason. You cannot get to the Christian worldview of *faith* except by abandoning reason.
"The problem for atheists is that they leave the most important part of life/creation - i.e. the afterlife, out of the picture"
Atheists do nothing of the sort. The "afterlife" is fully recognised. It's what is properly called death.
“Personally I am not aware of one "principle" advocated, let alone "demonstrated," by Christ. In fact His ramblings were wall to wall crap and *that* can be demonstrated.” (MalcolmS12:11 PM)
Delete“You obviously haven’t read the gospels (good news) Malcolm with any degree or desire of understanding.”
“It most certainly is the fault of Christianity. Why should it need to be "interpreted"? Only because He talks gibberish!”
I was talking about ‘true’ Christianity which is based on a true understanding of God’s Word not speculative, self-serving interpretations. The Bible/Sacred Scriptures are written in parable/figurative language/allegory and analogy because they speak about the inner world of the mind which is not immediately accessible by the physical senses or physics descriptions. Hence they need to be interpreted to see how the teachings apply to mental states which in turn oversee and rule the actions of the body.
“On the contrary. Man has one means of knowledge: reason. Period. Faith is the method of Christians, Satanists and lunatics. Take your pick as it doesn't work any way.”
Still mistakenly opposing faith and reason Malcolm. They are both necessary functions of every mind. Faith without reason is blind - reason without faith is pedantic, cruel and cold.
“Don't talk rubbish Ralph. It (The birth of Christ) lead to the Christian dark and middle ages - the worst period of Western history.”
The immediate impact of Christ was the Apostolic age, a period of spiritual enlightenment, sharing and care for others. Within a few hundred years Christianity was annexed to Rome as the state religion and became a tool of the state. It was this (political) domination that brought about the dark ages which would have been far darker if some of the light of Christian truth had not found it’s way through the chinks.
“It was the love of poverty and selflessness of Christianity that caused the destitution and earthly misery of the Christian era.”
Many people prefer to live a simple life but who loves poverty or destitution? Being “selfless” does not mean completely ignoring self (if anyone did, they would pretty soon die) but not putting self ahead of others i.e. seeing self as a means of serving others.
“Poverty is *caused* by the lack of what you call "greed." Greed actually means the virtue of productiveness. In its absence famines and starvation[poverty] were the norm with life expectancy averaging in the 20 years from birth.
I think you’re getting your definitions mixed up Malcolm. Dictionary definition of greed : excessive or rapacious desire, especially for wealth or possessions. Synonyms for greed : avarice, avidity, cupidity, covetousness; voracity, ravenousness, rapacity.
Greed may drive some people into action but never in a community oriented, sustaining way. Thieves who want to take the goods of others by avoiding making the effort themselves are driven by greed. ‘Businessmen’ who rape the land and the economy are obsessed with greed. A greedy person eventually destroys themselves as well as all competitors because nonie else wants anything to do with them.
“What does Christianity mean by advocating selflessness? Your *self* is your reason!! Selflessness *means* the absence of reason. You cannot get to the Christian worldview of *faith* except by abandoning reason.”
Your *self* is much more than “your reason”. It is your loves. The things you think and reason about - BECAUSE you love them. On the contrary, selflessness can only be achieved by means of reason because human nature is by nature selfish.
“Atheists do nothing of the sort. The "afterlife" is fully recognised. It's what is properly called death.”
I (not surprisingly) disagree. “Death” is an absence of life, so has nothing in common with the afterlife. The body dies but the person lives on.
Part 1
DeleteRalphH: "I was talking about ‘true’ Christianity which is based on a true understanding of God’s Word not speculative, self-serving interpretations"
No you weren't Ralph. You were regurgitating the usual nonsense you regurgitate interminably.
“Still mistakenly opposing faith and reason Malcolm"
No. Only faith... and the witch doctors who invoke it.
“Christianity was annexed to Rome as the state religion and became a tool of the state"
Yes, it was certainly practised by tools. The pagans were slaughtered, their literature banned and philosophy destroyed. The Christians closed the West's first universities - the Academy and the Lyceum. Hence the "dark" ages as the Christians, by comparison, were ignorant barbarians.
"It was this (political) domination that brought about the Dark Ages which would have been far darker if some of the light of Christian truth had not found it’s way through the chinks"
No, it was the destruction of pagan civilisation by Christian ideas which was the problem. When the only ideas left are Christian people die like flies. In the history of Western civilisation the period known as the Dark Ages, after the fall of the Roman Empire, was a period when Western Europe existed without any social organisation beyond chance local groupings clustered around small villages, large castles, and remnants of various traditions - swept periodically by massive invasions, warring robber bands, and sundry local looters. The rule of Roman law was over. It was as close to a state of pure anarchy as men could come. It wasn't until pagan ideas, especially Aristotelian reason preserved in the Muslim world, re-emerged in Western Europe that recovery commenced after a thousand years of Christian hell on earth.
“Many people prefer to live a simple life but who loves poverty or destitution?"
Christians prior to the Renaissance! Poverty was an emphasised virtue! All serious Christians practised it. It was a prerequisite of sainthood and salvation. Average life expectancy, as a result, fell to 20 odd years from birth during this period. Camels passing through the eye of a needle and all that crap!
"Being “selfless” does not mean completely ignoring self (if anyone did, they would pretty soon die)"
That's exactly what it does mean! Many did "pretty soon die."
Part 2
DeleteRalphH: “Thieves who want to take the goods of others by avoiding making the effort themselves are driven by greed. ‘Businessmen’ who rape the land and the economy are obsessed with greed. A greedy person eventually destroys themselves as well as all competitors because nonie[sic] else wants anything to do with them"
Spoken as the true bigot that you are. You speak, no doubt, of the so called "robber barons" of the 19th century. They were nothing of the sort. Rather, they were productive geniuses who, at least in the US, doubled average living standards and then doubled them again in the course of a mere century! You cannot "steal" such wealth from people who have no wealth. You must *produce* it and that is what they did! All in a century when the protestants and catholics of Europe were busily slaughtering each other by the thousands! You live in such a fantasy world, Ralph, continually evading the consequences of your evil worldview!
"Your *self* is much more than “your reason”. It is your loves. The things you think and reason about - BECAUSE you love them"
Yes, your *self* is the thing which does the "think[ing] and reason[ing]" about your "loves" and other values. Thank you for your enthusiastic agreement.
".. selflessness can only be achieved by means of reason because human nature is by nature selfish"
Is there no end to your stupidity? Your self is your mind. Selflessness is the *absence* of reason, or consciousness, as such. Human beings are *not,* by nature, selfish or selfless. The particular state is *chosen.* Selflessness/selfishness is volitional!
"“Death” is an absence of life, so has nothing in common with the afterlife"
I agree except that the "afterlife" is a contradiction and, therefore, does not exist.
"The body dies but the person lives on"
A "person" without a body is a "spook" and spooks don't exist.