Hi! Merla, It seems to be human nature to believe one is right and most others are not. It is much easier to view the cosmos from one's vantage point, than to visit the other's muckel heap, kick the boogities off and put the tootsie's in his compost pit and have a look from where he stands. It takes a very big heart to even consider there may be another valid view point.
It would be asking a great deal expect those of us involved in furthering the work of RS, to learn from the short comings of the corporate Christian Church. The church was given the opportunity of spreading a message of love and good will to all, laced heavily with forgiveness, self improvement and healing. They took that this required going into battle with just about everyone else, in particular other Christians. The the case of the church, it could have spread a message of peace and good will, but in reality it has not done this. Those of us who are drawn to the work of RS, could spread a message of healthy, low impute, modest cost, high quality food. What are we going to do? Scrap among our selves, much to the profit of the multinational chemical companies or get of our butts and make his message a reality for a large proportion of the world's population. Within the World's five billion odd people, our most common needs are for food and water. We can do something about it, or we can engage in destructive infighting over who's God is the real god. Gil Merla wrote: > In reading all the concern about the split between the traditional BD > people and the new BD inventors, I was reminded of the Hixite split in > Quakers around 1872. (Quakers were started by George Fox as a reaction > to the Church of England and William Penn settled Pennsylvania before > the Protestant reformation.) The Reformation was such a strong movement > that many Quakers wanted to change Quaker worship (which is silent > meditation without a minister) to a more Protestant model. There were > many changes. It became a major split. Right now there is a Friends > "Church" in Coeur d'Alene that has a minister and there is the Sandpoint > Friends "Meeting" who are unprogrammed Quakers. Never the twain shall > meet, but there are some activities we have together on the national > level. > > I'm so sorry that people are taking the split personally. Is it > possible for traditional BD people to not to be threatened by strong > people who have a different way of looking at things , but still are > practicing Biodynamics? I'm right in the middle of this. I like being > on this list--the spirituality and getting a lot of information about > BD, but I have spoken with Hugh Courtney for years over the phone and > he's helped me with many things. Do the two groups entirely diavow the > efficacy of each other's methods? If you had as a goal harmonizing the > two groups, how could you go about it? What do the two groups have in > common? Could you use a mediation process, especially around the issue > of using the name "Biodynamic"? Could you have two strains of > Biodynamics recognized by under some kind of larger umbrella? Or does > it take awhile to forgive the hurts and is it proper to establish an > identity with events like the MidAtlantic Conference and helpful > ongoing things like BDNow?
