![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Building Spiritual Communities
Golly gee! My article on occult evangelization has certainly spawned a lively debate. There seem to be rather high emotions running on this topic from all sides. And you know what that means! That means we need to probe it even more!
There’s really no point in trying to rehash all the various arguments, since you can just go read them for yourself. There’s one item in particular though which I think represents probably one of the more exciting elements for further conversation. That is the idea of the megachurch.
Some people seem to think that pagans and gnostics and people of alternative religion of all shapes and sizes should band together into some kind of super-group to take on the behemoth of Christian Fundamentalism. Since arguing over whether or not this is the right thing to do seems to be taking us nowhere, let’s turn it around a little bit. What would building some kind of national pagan megachurch actually accomplish?
Do we need to destroy Christianity? Or is Fundamentalism the enemy? Are we really against Christ, as they fear, or are we against narrow rigid thinking? If it’s Fundamentalism, then why don’t we all become super-liberal Christians and influence the dialogue in that regard. We can effect change from within. As I’ve proven so many times in the past, real Christians won’t even listen to occultists and pagans and gnostics. Are people trying to say that there’s something inherently wrong with Christianity? If that’s what you believe, then I’d like to hear what you think is wrong with it (in your own words, not in the words of a philosopher from hundreds of years ago).
If it’s merely Fundamentalism that we’re up against, how do we prevent ourselves from becoming fundamentalists after we knock out the other guy? Is a Pagan/Gnostic fundamentalist “fundamentally” any better than a Christian Fundamentalist? Why is fundamentalism even necessarily bad on its own? Doesn’t it allow for greater immersion in and practice of a spiritual path? Isn’t it easier to learn Spanish by living in Spain than by eating at Taco Bell?
One of the commenters in the previous post made the very good point that people crave spiritual communities, and that megachurch-Christianity has been so successful because it provides people with a clear path to join and participate. They don’t have to sit down and weed through archaic texts or read hundreds of thousands of pages of exegesis. All they have to do is let Jesus into their hearts and go sit in a room once a week. Isn’t that a better solution than what all of us are doing? Don’t they get the same benefits of “feeling” religious that we do without all the effort and heartache? Why can’t we just shut up, simplify and be like them? Doesn’t simple mean better?
Shouldn’t those of us with eyes to see and ears to hear spread the message to people who lack those faculties? Wouldn’t it be better if there were more of us? Why shouldn’t everybody think like we do?
I can go on and on with the questions, but that should be enough to seed the conversation. Personally, I’ve always been turned off by formal groups of all kinds. I’ve never been a member of a team. I don’t affiliate myself with a political party or a religion. Hell, when I’m assembled in a group of any kind and somebody addresses the group, I never feel like they are talking to me in particular. I always feel like I’m the one exception to whatever it is they’re saying. That’s my bias and I’m putting it on the table.
- Money & Spirituality: Back In Black
- The Evolution Of Money
- Oh, that dead guy? No no. That’s just a sculpture
- Crypto-anarchism
- Batmangled
- Prev: Sagan on Skepticism
- Next: Serious Education in America
July 19th, 2005 at 12:45 am
Pandering to the lowest common denominator can be accomplished by any group. If you get into competition over that, it’s a race to the bottom. Just stand aside and call the truth as you see it and wait.
July 19th, 2005 at 12:54 am
“One of the commenters in the previous post made the very good point that people crave spiritual communities, and that megachurch-Christianity has been so successful because it provides people with a clear path to join and participate.”
I do not doubt that people crave spiritual communities, but people crave community nonetheless, spiritual or not. Another reason I think these megachurches are so “successful” is that no small amount of people feel like outcasts, if they do not partake of them. They may think to themselves “How can so many others partake of this if it is insincere or unreal?” The same goes with fashion and numerous other things, herd mentality and the need to associate with others kicks in. Not many people want to be outcasts.
As for spreading the message? Sure, if that’s what you say your prophet or messiah told you to do. It seems though, when this happens and is politically influenced, things get extreme and fanatical (Crusades?). Mormons and J’s Witnesses I think have kept the violence non-existent afaik, but again I don’t think they’ve got strong ties to the state. I may be off on this last paragraph however.
July 19th, 2005 at 8:42 am
I think the value of a pagan mega-church is in providing a regular meeting place and infrastructure for those of alternative religious viewpoints.
Yes, I think Christianity is a problem because it denigrates the body and nature. That’s the problem with liberal Christians - they have not been successful despite having significant infrastructure (mainline Protestants=$$$ and real estate) because they are working with a theological paradigm that is at best outdated, at worst, delusional. I don’t claim to know the real teachings of Christ, but the idea of Christ has certainly become associated with denial and a certain rejection of the material world (BTW, traditional gnostics seem to share this suspicion of the world). In our world, people no longer buy into this.
Furthermore, followers of alterative religions have been growing while mainline Protestant denominations and non-immigrant Catholics have been declining. The problem is this growth is limited by the lack of community infrastructure that mega-church organizing could provide.
Furthermore, I think the mega-church format would be successful for pagan/gnostic whatevers because it would provide a large central meeting place where ideas from different groups can be exchanged. Smaller groupings would tend to become insular. MAss meetings can focus on topic (homilies, if you will) that there is a general consensus upon in the alternative community - open-mindedness, diversity, individual empowerment, etc. (keep in mind this is just “general” consensus, not 100%).
Those who wish to pursue a solitary path obviously can continue to do so. Do I really need to state that? I think it goes without saying, but I wanted to make it clear.
Also, there seems to be a misunderstanding of how Christian evangelical movements work:
“All they have to do is let Jesus into their hearts and go sit in a room once a week.” This is not at all the impression I get from my personal experiences with evangelicals or the information I have read about them. In fact, these churches are growing because they offer so much MORE than just sitting in a room once a week. Their main vehicle for growth is the small group, they have a ton of classes, and they generally warn their members not to become “Sunday” only Christians. Furthermore, their clergy is quite educated in their traditions - many actually know Hebrew which most occultists only dabble with. I think they are misguided, but they are by no means spiritual non-seekers. Many of the laity also make it a point of reading and contemplating the Bible and daily devotionals every day (e.g. GW Bush).
It’s not as simple as getting everyone to think like we do. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that. What I am suggesting is that there are a lot of people out there who do think very similarly to the type of person who reads this blog and it is ridiculous that they are not getting together in their respective communities in an organized manner.
No one has, or is suggesting some universalizing “our way is the only way” religious crusade. It is not clear to me where you get this impression. However, it is not unique to you - just about everyone else on the ‘net has that fear too.
Tim, I understand your bias, that is my bias too, but nobody is asking you to join. I am just suggesting that organizing is a good idea for the alternative spiritual community at large. This is in response to the “occult evangelization” entry you posted. Believe me, you woud be the last person I would encourage to become a joiner - it just doesn’t seem to fit you.
BTW, on the issue of not feeling as if a speaker is talking to you in particular - the Christian evangelicals overcome this by encouraging small group discussions. This is one of their keys to successful growth and leadership development. Personally, I think the success of this format is limited by fundamentalist dogma.
July 19th, 2005 at 12:08 pm
i don’t think there’s ever been a question about the value of spiritual communities. i spent a long time practicing on a solitary basis, and now i’m an active member of a spiritual community. i guess the question for me is, how much advertising does one do, and in what terms, and how does one keep the organization from turning into a behemoth?
btw, jason– please accept my sincere apologies for any ill will garnered by the ‘occult evangelizing’ post– none was intended. you seem to have a really good grasp on where you’re coming from. although i disagree on many levels, i can certainly respect that. fwiw, you might be interested in an association that’s recently been established in seattle called casa, the cascadia alternative spirituality association. the priest at my (gnostic) parrish is heavily involved, & they seem to be on the path you’re describing:
http://www.casanw.org/
July 19th, 2005 at 1:04 pm
the highest function of the community is spiritual. it is the responsibility of spiritually minds people to provide leadership wherever they can. if that takes the form of a megachurch or a blog or a career as a therapist then good………… that`s the strength of each of us working at his/her best. continue. criticism is bound to appear but if your feet are solidy planted who cares what shape the opinion of others takes? just keep doing what you believe in. if the whistle doesn`t blow, keep chasing the ball.that`s what i tell the kids playing soccer. it`s true in every facet of our lives. the voice in our ear keeps driving our heel.(to paraphrase golden earring.)
July 19th, 2005 at 5:00 pm
I find this a really compelling question because I feel like at some point in the not-too-distant future, I may actually want to be part of a community. But not until I have a really solid handle on what it is that I want and that I’m doing. So I’ve considered this question from a lot of different angles. And I’ve been appreciating Jason’s view on this (before it was distorted by that other cocksmoker in the previous post). I guess when I hear “let’s build a giant organization” I just feel like “Count me out” instantly. And I think it’s fine on one level, but it’s always been a stumbling block for me on another level. I used to get into big fights with this one boss at my old work and he would say I wasn’t a team player and other dumb sports analogies, and I would be like “Damn straight I’m not!” I’ve often wondered if it has anything to do with the fact that I was never really introduced to team sports by my dad as a kid, and I was a nerd, so I never got into them on my own. Or if the resistance goes deeper than that or what. I can feel it drawing to a close though. This website is sort of my bridge between the two I think.
July 19th, 2005 at 7:23 pm
[…] unified, stripped down message to the world, is that not for the better? (Jason had some other good points on my post about spiritual communitie […]
July 22nd, 2005 at 12:56 am
I don’t want to destroy any religion. But I would like mainstream culture to stop identifying religion and morality with “Christianity”.