Seraphita wrote: (snip) > Re "You could say I'm sympathetic to religions generally; I've read a good > bit of > theology because it interests me, but that's about it.": > Sounds like me. Except I went to a Moravian school originally founded in > 1753 as a > utopian community.
My parents sent me to Sunday School at a nearby nondenominational Christian church a couple of times when I was around 10 or so, feeling they should at least give me some exposure to religion. I didn't like it, and they didn't make me go again. I had a brief flirtation with Unitarianism in my teens, but it didn't last. Then after starting TM I began to feel a need for a worship context and joined the church where I'd attended Sunday School, stayed a couple of years but wasn't inspired enough to continue, since I really wasn't into the Personal God aspect of the belief system (or Christ as savior). God as Unified Field, the ultimate (and unworshipable) abstraction, is about as far as I can go. > Re "Robin Carlsen converted while he was still adventuring . . . he rejected > Catholicism as well.": > His jumping from MMY to Ayatollahs to Popes suggest someone in search of an > authority figure, no? Could be (but he never "jumped to" the Ayatollah; Islam wasn't his bag--he was really just curious, and then very impressed by the Ayatollah as a presumably enlightened being, but not as a guru or authority figure). Robin's an extraordinarily complicated and unusual fellow with a unique history. I don't think you can apply standard psychological interpretations to his behavior or motivations. I'm not sure he ever "jumped to" the pope either as an authority figure, except nominally as part of Catholic doctrine; and his devotion to Maharishi was more of a spiritual bromance based on his profound experience of TM than a need for authority per se, if you see the distinction I'm making. > Re "He didn't become a priest. Not sure where you got that.": > It was a rumour - I'm sure I saw it mentioned on FFL long, long ago. Oh, I see. Lots of rumors about Robin given that he effectively disappeared after the group collapsed. He was also said to have committed suicide and to have been institutionalized. In fact, he was living with his best friend, with no contact with anyone from his past, including his family, and going through extreme agonies trying to get himself straightened out with his friend's guidance. When he showed up here two years ago, he was--at least from the descriptions of those who knew him in his "enlightened" period--a different person. ---In email@example.com, <authfriend@...> wrote: Seraphita wrote: > Should I assume that you are Roman Catholic? Or at least a fellow traveller? No. I responded to an earlier question from you about my religious leanings a week or so ago; did you miss it? My family heritage is Christian (Presbyterian), but I didn't have a religious upbringing and am not a believer. You could say I'm sympathetic to religions generally; I've read a good bit of theology because it interests me, but that's about it. > I understand Robin Carlsen became a Catholic convert - indeed a Catholic > priest (?) after his > adventures on the new-age circuit. He converted while he was still adventuring, actually. (Not sure I'd call those adventures "New Age," unless you want to put TM in that category.) He convinced many of his followers to convert as well; a number of them are still devout Catholics. At the time, he thought Catholicism could be reconciled with TM. The group collapsed in chaos not long after that, and he went into seclusion for 25 years to sort himself out. He decided shortly after he began this recovery process that TM and Catholicism weren't compatible after all and rejected TM. A few years after that he decided the Church was no longer what it had been and had lost its divine authority with regard to salvation. At that point he rejected Catholicism as well. (Ann, I think I have the chronology straight here; if not, corrections are welcome.) He didn't become a priest. Not sure where you got that. > Are you one of his former acolytes? Nope. I encountered him for the first time here on FFL, summer of 2011. Seraphita wrote: (snip) > Isn't the vulgar notion of Christianity held by most believers radically > dualist? (Which > isn't surprising as western Christianity flows from Augustine.) Your > standard Christian > believes God is good and Satan is evil and History will end with a stand-up > fight > between the angels of light and the demons with the good angels destined to > prevail. Christianity is dualistic, yes, but what you describe above really isn't what the "standard Christian" believes (at least not in the U.S.). It's various fundamentalist-type denominations and sects that are preoccupied with the End Times and Armageddon and the Rapture and so on. Standard or "mainline" Christians don't necessarily disbelieve in the prophecies of Revelation, but they don't tend to take them literally, and they don't focus on them.