Another day has passed.

Some things, like memories, are not easy to write about. I know that memory is a wonderful thing yet it can be quite frightening in its scope. My memories seem to be activated at random, as I presume happens to others. All of a sudden a memory is there without seemingly being called. While others have to be dragged from wherever they reside. 

While the time spent without Magucha has not been easy, time can be kind. It dulls the pain. Sort of. But the ache remains, as do the memories. They always will. 

But the curious in me wants to know so many things. One thing has bothered me, even though I think I have worked it out – why we/I grieve. Grief hurts in many ways but it’s all about me! It’s about my hurt; my loss; my feelings. 

I should be glad that Magucha no longer suffers; I should be glad that she is no longer burdened by the trappings and necessities of life, as we live it. I am - but it is not easy!

That her love; that her emotional strength; that her mischievous sense of humour; that her deep and sensitive knowledge of the needs of others; that all this has just disappeared into "nothing" is beyond my understanding. 

Of course it is a given that I have absolutely no idea what has "happened" to her. I have the strong conviction though, that when we die we still “exist”, obviously without the bodily form we used when “alive”. The essence that was/is us continues. That essence, that “Life”, has returned to wherever it came from.

All I know is that (in the words of the song) “Loving her was easier than anything I’ll ever do again”.

Am I faithless?

Now important questions for me are, “Where is God? Is God “up there”? Only in a House of God – Church, Temple or Mosque? Or is God (as I strongly suspect) everywhere?”

If God is everywhere why do I need a priest (in my case – I was baptized into the Anglican church), or Rabbi or Imam, to tell me what to do and how to behave? Most of these people would have received “instruction” about the dogma and the form of their belief system from their specific scriptures or Holy Books. This is religion.

But religion, in my understanding, is not the same as knowledge of God. Certainly not the same as spirituality, which, I have always presumed is the aim of worshipping God.

It may be taken as a given that I have a belief in a Higher Power, or source of Life. Call this God, or by whatever name you may choose. It doesn’t really matter. I really don’t think that God would care.

But have I “Faith”? According to Hebrews 11.1 (King James English Bible):-

“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen”.  

I may hope for things, or events to happen or not happen, but does God “look” at me or “listen” to me and agree or disagree? Really?

As the poet William Ernest Henley wrote:

            “I am the master of my fate;

             I am captain of my soul”.

The bit I just fail to understand is this.  Why do we humans, why do we need to reduce God the level of being human? Why call God a “Him”? Why a male? Then, of course being a male and “human” we imbue “Him” with human traits and the need to propitiate “Him”; try to cajole “Him”; ask “Him” for favours; bribe “Him” with sacrifices, often burnt so that the smoke will rise to “His” nostrils (and presumably please “Him”). If God is everywhere why would he need this - how would this please him? Anyway, how would anyone know?

God, in my understanding is Love. Pure love. Now this does not fit with the public image of greed and lust for power and control prevalent in various, most probably all  religious orders, uncovered by various investigations in many countries. Lust – in its most virulent form – sexual lust for minor children; control, through physical and emotional abuse – is now known to be perpetrated by some preachers of “faith” in all religions.

And this is done in the name of God?

It has been truly said that, “no soul was ever saved by hate. No truth was ever proved by violence. No redemption was ever brought by a holy war. No religion ever won the administration of the world by its capacity to inflict suffering on it enemies (re: Rabbi Jonathan Sacks).”

If Jews, Muslims and Christians worship the same God; if these “believers” read from Holy Books that espouse the same principles of Love, Justice and Tolerance; if these “believers” each invoke God’s aid against the other; if these “believers” cannot resolve their differences without the most extreme violence, then religion (any religion) cannot form the basis for a sustainable social order.

To be truly humanitarian it is essential for any person or group to involve themselves in that most difficult of imaginative exercises – role reversal. Put yourself  (or your group) in the place of the person (or group) that you despise, denigrate or simply do not understand.

It is a human failing, I believe, when people (particularly politicians and religious orders) are threatened with internal discord, to focus on, even invent, some external threat. This is the history of the “scapegoat”. Projecting all your failings onto someone else – and then blame them for your troubles. Killing the scapegoat is then seen, in the eyes of those involved, as justified. It is a form of “sacrifice” and deflects attention away from any internal violence that may destroy the group or people concerned. For centuries the Jews have suffered under this “scapegoat” label. Blame the Jews for everything – the most horrendous example occurred in the 1930s in Nazi Germany. But Jews are not the only scapegoats. Currently, in the eyes of some, anyone who is not a “true believer” is “not worthy in the eyes of God”. Apparently. 

According to the history of the three religions – Christianity, Judaism and Islam – all people are children of Abraham. By whose understanding then does God want his followers to kill for His sake; to engage in “Holy” war for His sake; to engage in human “sacrifice” for His sake; to hate and terrorise “unbelievers” for His sake? Such activity is an obscene distortion of everything that I, for one, was ever taught. 

It is the requirement of all, or so I believe, to overcome any “evil” tendencies within us and learn that love is the greatest power of all. This, in my understanding, is the only “message” that is worth listening to. That and the Golden Rule – “only do to others what you would like done to you”. There are no viable alternatives.

But if I know this – that I am not perfect and that I have a negative (or bad) side to my character as well as a good side, why do I need a priest, or imam or rabbi reading from a “Holy” book to tell me? Anyway how would this person know what troubles I’ve experienced or what my shortcomings are, or how to redress them? 

It seems to me that the priests, rabbis or imams should confront their own shortcomings. To quote from the Bible (it has its uses!):  “First, remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye”(Matthew 7:5). 

So am I faithless?