Is anything new?

I know that this post is likely to annoy some people but I think it is important from, at least, a historical point of view.

 

We cannot win all the battles of Life. Life (however defined) will always win in the end. But it helps to remember that we are each an individual and not required or obliged to be totally “conformist”. Certainly one should always help one’s fellow being and do the “right” thing for the greater good and just be kind but this must be an individual determination.

 

As described in a book by Dan Jones, “The Templars”, about the 12th century (and very mercenary) religious army, conformism may lead to unintended consequences. The “chivalry” later associated with Knights was not yet apparent, in fact these early Knights were often considered no better that hired thugs.

 

The “dangers” of extreme conformism, however, may lead to the following:- 

 

One of the Templar “rules” banned the company of women. They were scorned as, “A dangerous thing, for by it the old devil has led a man from the straight path to paradise…. the flower of chastity is always (to be) maintained among you… For this reason none of you may presume to kiss a woman, be it widow, young girl, mother, sister, aunt or any other… The Knighthood of Christ should avoid at all costs the embraces of woman, by which men have perished many times.”

 

One assumes that each of the Templar’s must have had a mother and a father? 

 

The hypocrisy is extraordinary. Blaming, scapegoating, women is easy - “It’s not my fault - see what she made me do!” It’s their fault you see. Leading us pure men astray!

 

The Catholic and other religious clergy today still (try) to believe this. I wonder if anything has really changed in over 1000 years? 

 

And the Templars, followers of the Prince of Peace, fought, pillaged, killed and (sometimes) raped their way across Europe and the Middle East. 

 

Believe it or not the Templars managed to distinguish between “homicide”, the sin of killing a man and “malicide” - the act of killing “evil” itself, which God, apparently, would consider a “noble” deed! 

 

Evil, in their view, resided in Jews (they killed Jesus, you understand) and Muslims, because they weren’t Christian. 

 

An “ingenious” theological distinction!!

 

I know that the Templars were a very disciplined force and were influential in ridding the Iberian Peninsular of the Moors in what is known as the “Reconquista”, the Christian re-conquest of Portugal and Spain – which, of course, for the local inhabitants was an admirable outcome. But then they, the Templars, were told, by the Pope, that fighting the “unbelievers” would remove the need for any penance for sins committed. 

 

Surely an open invitation for the Templars to do whatever they wanted.

 

More hypocrisy!

 

So is anything new?

 

 

 

 

In her own words.

I have a book, “Australian Volunteers at work – 101 stories” sponsored by Volunteering Australia, published in 2000. Magucha’s story as a volunteer is one of those recorded.

This what she said and which I have transposed:- 

“It feels like home”.

I’m Portuguese, born in Mocambique. I also lived in Angola for many years, but because of all the troubles and the war, we left and ended up in Rhodesia, which today is called Zimbabwe, where I met my husband. From Zimbabwe we came to Australia as refugees in 1982, when my son was eight years old and my daughter one year old. 

I worked in the Fremantle Hospital for ten years as a pantry maid. In those days it was for the children’s future which counted rather that a career for myself. During this time I developed a kidney deficiency. My kidneys actually stopped working, and in 1993 I received a transplant. I had to give up work a year later as the work was too heavy.

But when I went home I thought ‘I don’t like this’. The children were at school, everyone had a life, and I didn’t. I found out that the Fremantle Women’s Community Health Centre needed help, so I began volunteering. I did a lot of translations including pamphlets for Portuguese ladies about breast examination and pap smears. It was all about preventative medicine. I was then asked to join the committee of the Centre and I became the secretary for four years. I help where needed – for instance fundraising and general administrative help. I love being here – it feels like home.

Because of my interest in preventative work we invited Portuguese women to come to the Centre, feel comfortable, and become part of the group. There are a large number of Portuguese women in Fremantle. The group meets every Wednesday and we have a ball! The women who come to the group hardly used to go out before. They lived a restricted life, dedicated very much to children and grandchildren. I tell them nothing is wrong with having a bit of fun. Sometimes we go out for a cup of coffee or lunch. They do things like embroidery, knitting, sewing – whatever can be sold at the annual fete, and the money raised goes to the crèche. We started meeting only one day a month, and now we meet every week.

The women give each other support and tell each other little secrets, how to do this and when to do certain things. Some of the women have health problems. Many worked very hard before they came to Australia, and are now suffering the consequences. Apart from the fun side, there is still serious stuff going on – talk of going to doctors, about prevention of disease, pap smears, breast examination and diet.

It is six years since I had my kidney transplant, but now I’m back to square one because I’m rejecting the transplant. So I’m on a waiting list for another kidney. I could be three years. Apart from that, I feel fine!

                                                            ---///---

NB. Magucha was, with love and great generosity, given a kidney by her younger brother, Joao-Miguel, who came out to Perth for the transplant operation. That, as far as I can now remember, was in 2003. Anyway it lasted right through until she died in January 2016. 

A Man or THE MAN? – not such a simple question.

Being an “older” male, it has come to my attention that in many respects men have forgotten, or never learned, what it is to be a man. My understanding and what I have always tried to adhere to, is that men and women compliment each other, in that each should support the other. Each brings to any relationship the strengths, and weaknesses, of their gender; neither should try to dominate the other; that it should always be a partnership of equals – equal but different. The physically stronger male should support and protect the female, while the female should bring to the partnership her intuition and “feminine” strengths (these are indefinable!).

I know that my late wife, Magucha, certainly did that. Her strengths lay in her astonishing insight, her emotional strength and her courage. 

Much is reported about the, unfortunately, extremely high, seemingly worldwide, incidence of domestic violence (principally committed by men against women and children); the revelations of the coercion and sexual abuses in the media industry committed by men in positions of influence and authority; the revelations, worldwide, of appalling priestly paedophilia (if ever there was one this is surely the ultimate oxymoron!!) – almost exclusively committed by male priests, pastors, rabbis and imams, against children.  

And one is left to wonder why. I suggest that this stems from two sources – power and insecurity. 

This is a “power play” by men. The average male is physically larger and stronger that the average female and of course, children. So a male, in a dominant position of influence and authority, such as a priest, has tremendous “leverage” to force those in a dependent situation, to “obey” any instruction or command. His insecurity lies in his need to dominate.

In domestic violence situations my understanding is that much of it is “caused” by jealousy. The male feels he is being “betrayed” and is the “victim” - that his partner should be blamed for any resulting violence. “She made me do it”, is a common refrain. Again, this jealousy and need to dominate, lies in insecurity.

“Boys will be boys” is not an valid response.

So – I now – as usual find that others, more fluently say what I’m trying to express, more pointedly and in far fewer words. 

This, by Atticus:-

“Boys learn too late

that being 

‘The Man’,

is not the same thing

as being

A Man.”  

Different people – so what!

They may have a different colour skin; they may speak a different language; they may have different customs; but they will all scream in pain when tortured (as I am sure I would do); they will all bleed when hurt; they will all die of hunger if not fed; they will all die of thirst with out water.

They are all HUMAN BEINGS, like me and like you.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus all worship God – God, Yahweh, Allah and Vishnu (or Shiva or Brahma) – different names for the same thing. All worship in a different way, according to their tradition, but does it really matter?

The fact is that about 65 million people are displaced at present, in the World. This is the greatest number since World War 2. And many, if not all, have been displaced because of their skin colour, their language, their customs or the manner by which they worship God.

This is nearly twice the population of California. About the population of Great Britain and also about the same as the population of France!

This is appalling. It is outrageous that this displacement and the suffering – almost always the suffering of the most defenceless and vulnerable, women and children - should take place at all.

All because of a perceived “difference”!!

There is much wringing of hands and many words of condemnation, but methinks, too little action. These unfortunate people now have no home, little food and shelter and in many cases, no country. Children are denied education, denied the emotional and physical stability and support that is so necessary for their development to achieve fulfillment as useful citizens of the World.

Religious persecution, and this displacement of millions is, at its root, religious persecution, is a significant relapse of values, a relapse of humanity, a relapse back to Medieval, even primitive times and is a very poor reflection on our current, collective, morality.  How about the “Golden Rule” – treat others the way you would like to be treated? Have we forgotten this? Does it no longer apply?

It was Nietzsche (admittedly not one of my favourate philosophers) who, I believe somewhere said, “Anyone who fights with monsters should take care that he does not in the process become a monster.”

Are we becoming monsters?

Do differences really matter that much?

Over seventy years after the Second World War, I don’t believe this will be looked upon as our “Finest Hour”, by future generations.

Religion, injustice and “honour”.

It was Blaise Pascal (1623- 1662) who wrote the much quoted lines, “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.”

It seems very strange, in fact bizarre, that religion, which should guide followers to behave better often does the reverse. I know that local custom, social mores and tribal “law” often dictate how any person is supposed to act or behave, but many of those who follow entrenched local customs and tribal laws are from ostensibly, deeply religious societies.

There is no indication that any particular faith or belief system is more or less prone to committing “evil” than any other. Catholics, Protestants, Hindus, Muslims, Jews and Buddhists all seem to resort to violence and “evil” in the defence or promotion of their particular brand of religion.

Before I continue I would like to point out that any “evil” perpetrated in the name of God is almost always committed by those who believe totally in the dogma of their faith, in the absolute truth of the written word as printed in their particular “book”, be it the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, the Dharma or the Vedic texts.  

In this regard I wish to state very clearly that I am NOT anti-religion. I am not anti any belief in God – I believe in God.  What I am against is any, repeat any, injustice and all activities or behaviours which cause harm to people, whether or not it is perpetrated in the name of God.  

I was thinking particularly of the recent case in Sudan where a woman (apparently Christian) has been accused of apostasy and sentenced to death unless she recants her Christianity and declares herself a Muslim (her father was apparently Muslim). It seems that a male calling himself her “brother” agrees she should die – he says he cannot say anything else without offending God.

Quite how a belief in God can offend Him, defeats me. Surely a Christian concept of God is no less valid than a Muslim concept of God? As far as I know (please prove me wrong) there is only one God who is called by many names such as Allah, or Krishna or Brahma or the Creator. Does it really matter what name is used? He, She, It is still the same God!

Then there are the many instances of “honour killing” reported in India, Pakistan and the Middle East generally. There are also disturbing reports of such killings or severe injuries including rape from countries as diverse as Australia, the United Kingdom, America and Canada. These crimes, and they are crimes, are almost exclusively committed by either Muslims or Hindus.  These crimes are mainly against women to, purportedly, restore family “honour”.

How “honour” is restored by killing or injuring one of God’s creations (generally a woman) defies my imagination. This is a barbaric tribal practice used to reinforce, or protect, male dominance and power and also as a means of control.

Such practices have no place in any society today.

PS: an update 24/06/14 - the woman I mentioned has been released and will not now be executed. Apparently the authorities bowed to the international outcry. About time too, I say!

Why Fundamentalism holds people back.

Any individual, group, society or culture that claims to be the sole protector of the “truth”, be that truth Scientific, Statistical, Christian, Muslim, Communist or whatever – holds a fundamentalist view. In fact anyone with a fixed belief, is Fundamentalist. Fundamentalism constrains human innovation; fundamentalists want to revert to what the purveyors of the ideology consider a “cleaner’ more “pure” past. Or in the case of science (and my pet aversion, statistics) if it can’t be “proved” it doesn’t exist, it can’t work or else it is a figment of someone’s overactive imagination.

Fundamentalist either forget or ignore the human spirit, which cannot be constrained. The human spirit (however defined) needs to be free to seek, to strive and to find, in its own way - and not everyone is the same or wants the same things. Anyone who tries to hold back the human spirit, or attempts to direct it into one particular path is doomed to ultimate failure. To prove this point just take a look at what is happening in the Middle East and the hundreds of thousands demonstrating against the practices of financial institutions in American cities and it other cities around the world.

The possible exception here, to returning to the past, is the Scientific Fundamentalist who believes totally in the power and purity of scientific exposition and innovation – and there have been some wonderful inventions and discoveries. But the Scientific True Believer, in whatever field of science, has an absolute conviction that scientific “knowledge” is the basis for everything including Life itself. This scientific evidence, it is often claimed, can be proved statistically; that Statistical “facts” trump all else; that scientific concepts which are supported by statistical “proof” must therefore be true, and anyone who does not see this or who voices any opposition, is worthy of nothing but contempt.

Just recall the years of ridicule and isolation suffered by two Australian scientists, Robin Warren and Barry Marshall who in 1982 discovered that the main cause of stomach ulcers is the bacteria Heliobacter pylori. In their original paper, Warren and Marshall contended that most stomach ulcers and gastritis were caused by colonization with this bacterium, not by stress or spicy food as had been assumed before. They did not conform to current scientific thinking and were pilloried for their stand. Had they been scientific fundamentalist they would never have made this discovery and those suffering from stomach ulcers and medicine would have been the poorer. Stomach ulcers are now cured with a short course of antibiotics.

When the subject turns to Religious (or Political) Fundamentalism we delve into murky waters indeed. To my way of thinking religious or political fundamentalism (often considered one and the same when there is no division between “Church” and State) also holds back innovation by demanding (often on pain of death) that all people believe that they (the Leaders) alone know what is best for them – the populace – and that they (the fundamentalist leaders) are following God’s will. And generally fundamentalists of this ilk try to reduce the role of women to virtual slavery and to being totally dependent on the males in the family. Again, look at the Christian fundamentalists in America, the Jewish fundamentalists in Israel and the Islamic fundamentalists in many Muslim countries, particularly Iran and Saudi Arabia and then of course there is the basket case of North Korea.

I may be wrong (the favoured expression always used by someone who believes they are right!!), but by restricting education to learning the Koran and Sharia Law, or applying a strict interpretation of the Torah or the Bible, and by not educating women, these fundamentalists are holding back their citizens.

One needs to ask how fundamentalism, in any form, adds to the material or spiritual well-being of Mankind?

The Catholic Church and women priests

What do they think they are doing? Isn’t it extraordinary that the Catholic Church, in the 21st century, is apparently treating the ‘elevation’ – if that is the term – of women to the priesthood by ordaining them as a “grave delict” that can lead to the immediate excommunication of the people involved. In other words, in the eyes of the Catholic Church this is a ‘wrong’ that ranks with paedophilia and sexual abuse! Really? As far as I know, all priests and Popes, past and present, were all born of a woman in the normal manner. Even Jesus was born of a woman. Most men have a very soft spot and a great affection for their mother and most people had their first life experiences and basic education from their mother. In fact there is an old Roman saying “educate a woman and you educate a family, educate a man and you educate an individual.” All the men in the Catholic Church, including the Pope, as with all men everywhere learned from their mother. So why the antagonism against women as priests? They would just be carrying on where they left off, as it were, and instructing and helping people generally.

The Catholics say that because Jesus had only male apostles, only men can become priests. But then no one knows what was in the mind of Jesus when he chose his apostles or what criteria he used for the choices he made. The present church authorities have no idea what the actual, day by day, social situation was, in Palestine, when Jesus is supposed to have started his ministry in, about, the year 30 of the current era. It was after all a very turbulent time in that part of the world. Possibly the situation was too dangerous for women to travel on missions, as the apostles had to do. I know that men (and male children) traditionally tended the flocks of sheep and goats because, I suppose, they were better equipped – physically stronger – to protect the animals from predators. Maybe women had not the time – looking after children and keeping the home for their menfolk as they did.

Women (and the female of the species everywhere) are the traditional nurturers and carers of the young and are better equipped physically and emotionally for the role, than men. After all God created men and women didn’t He? The Catholic Church cannot ignore 50% of the population because of something that is supposed to have happened two thousand years ago. Men and women together would give a far better balance to the priesthood and, I suggest, make it a better organisation. It would also alleviate the current shortage of priests if women were ordained. I also suggest that it is because of this very bias towards males in the Church that the present problems – sexual abuses – are so prevalent. And who knows what happened in the cloisters and monasteries in past centuries before the age of mass media and the internet – men are men and have sexual urges regardless of wherever they are and in what age they lived. Celibacy is unnatural and the effects of trying to enforce it are now very evident.

And what about Mary Magdalene? What was her position in the early Church? She was, after all, very close to Jesus. The Catholic Church needs to rethink its position on women very carefully. Their recently affirmed attitude has certainly upset many women, including my wife.