Presumably not whilst sharing a bed with a young boy or girl Molly. No surrender here of course, I was dragged up a Proddy. In more serious mode Molly, I often feel Einstein surrendered in formulating the relativity principle. This is not a popular line amongst colleagues, but most of them couldn't bake a cake, let alone do some simple undergraduate experiments. Relativity is little understood and I don't grok it as I might some chemistry. Einstein didn't invent or discover it. He found himself working amongst the contradictions of experimental evidence - all the experiments to detect the motion of the earth through the ether, including Michelson-Morley had failed. In Lorentz's ether the definition is of a rigid reference frame, assumed to be inertial. In such a frame Maxwell's equations hold; in others the Galilei-transformed form of these equations hold (a relativity principle was already suspected). Einstein may have 'embraced the paradox'.
Instead of regarding the failure of electromagnetic and optical experiments as 'failure' he regarded it this as a 'success' for the validity of the principle of relativity in electrodynamics and optics - even asserting the universal validity of the principle and requiring physical laws only to be accepted where they met the criterion of relativity. I can explain how he did this, but it perhaps isn't relevant here. I assert he surrendered to the paradox between Maxwell- Lorentz electrodynamics and the principle of relativity. He didn't invent a constant speed of light, but took this from Maxwell-Lorentz. The conclusion is apparently paradoxical - the velocity of light must be constant in all inertial frames - conflicting with the Newtonian law of addition of velocities - so forcing a revision of the kinematical foundations of all physics. He (and others) succeeded. The resurrection is a lie for all kinds of reasons, but the thought of it does not need to be. We can surrender to the thought we can step away, resolve paradoxes and move to new ways of being and thinking. It remains questionable what might drive surrender. Sleeping with young boys and girls in order to master abstinence as one's wife is no longer attractive enough to provide the challenge is not a good candidate. More experience of fellowship, alternate being and so on might be - Mach was quite keen on this to demonstrate how set our notions of perception-reality are to one frame. People need to be safe from manipulators to make such discovery. Much might be possible if we could do away with the manipulators. On 2 Dec, 19:57, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > We don't have to be physically nailed to a cross to realize the > resurrection. We do need to surrender. > > On Dec 2, 2:01 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I think we know we can't get inside another's head - though some act > > as though they can. I'm amazed at what others have claimed about what > > I think. We do have statistics as some kind of guide. This is > > largely ignored as people don't understand what they mean. We convict > > on DNA evidence that the chances of anyone sharing the same profile > > are millions to one. This should not translate as man wearing RC > > priests skirts = paedophile, though it does in the innuendo jokes. In > > fact most people are not good at critical reason - one reason we have > > so many rules in our legal systems. Rigsby is about right until his > > ending. > > We draw a lot of lines to have society. We can't have creatives and > > holy cow-men excusing breach. Gandhi is sadly a case in point. If we > > take Rigsby at face value we should be no more surprised that our > > daughters lose their 'virtue' (mine would laugh) to a priest rather > > than casting director. I generally see a bit more in priests. The > > key issue is that we do have to give up some freedoms to > > administrative control or nothing works - this is not as true now as > > it once was as we could have much more open sharing of information. > > Molly is fine trying to tell us of the wonders of her visions; but how > > different is this from some nurd telling us to find the reasons in > > faith for killing Muslims (vice versa ad nauseum)? Gandhi wanted to > > help us all by sleeping with young children in a state of abstinence. > > The correct way is to find a cross and nail yourself to it. > > Rationalisation is a horrible thing. We should have no truck with it. > > > On 2 Dec, 16:40, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The system will protect itself versus the those of an individual- > > > that's universal. Perhaps the vow of chastity enlarges the scowl but I > > > fail to see the sins of the RCC as any different from the casting > > > couch, incest, rape as a reward of conquest, the cabin boy, the sex > > > slave trade, etc. The upshot is that the RCC lost a great deal of > > > respect, money and valuable real estate plus now has a rep for > > > attracting derelicts into Holy Orders- nuns were considered spinsters. > > > Read Chaucer (let off a rape charge- thank heavens, for the sake of > > > the English language!) > > > > On Dec 2, 9:01 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I think that this is much to the point of what is "true", Francis. > > > > Because we are not in the head or heart of Murray, Moriarty etc., we > > > > cannot know if they are acting on what they know to be true, > > > > justifying their position with what they think can cover up what is > > > > true, or formulating a relative truth based on personality disorder. > > > > Because we can see the destructive results of the actions of these > > > > priests, those that abused children and those that abused public > > > > trust, we feel they cannot be true to what we know as loving > > > > behavior. They may be true examples of how viewpoints limited to > > > > selfish and material aspects also have limited experience of absolute > > > > truths. Unfortunately, these are the folks that we expect to lead us > > > > in our spiritual journeys if we are Roman Catholic, yet they cannot > > > > really, because they are so limited they have no real experience of > > > > the unity consciousness that Christ leads us into. If they really > > > > believe that they acted correctly, they have not yet found the > > > > intrinsic moral system that leads to truthful action, (When you have > > > > lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do > > > > nothing on my own authority. Instead, I speak only what the Father has > > > > taught me.) This cannot include following orders from the Vatican > > > > that allow harm to others. > > > > > Understanding what others find to be "true" necessitates understanding > > > > their viewpoint and arrival at the truth. Each state and stage of > > > > consciousness represents a different viewpoint. Some of those > > > > viewpoints are survival level, self serving, and far from universal. > > > > > On Dec 2, 9:14 am, fran the man <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 2 Dez., 13:48, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I felt the deep, abiding, heart pang while reading Francis' post. > > > > > > It > > > > > > reminded me of the movie the Mission, with Robert De Niro, which I > > > > > > think beautifully portrayed the moral conflict of decent men in the > > > > > > RC > > > > > > church that are following instruction of authority. The fact that > > > > > > the > > > > > > story of Francis involves children makes the damage unimaginable in > > > > > > terms of shattered lives. Knowing some of the people involved, > > > > > > whether they were pedophiles or simply turned away from the truth of > > > > > > the terrible acts, must make that guilt we all feel about the > > > > > > injustice we cannot influence all the more real. In the end, we can > > > > > > only do what we are called to do in the moment, and give voice > > > > > > immediately to what we find true. The Logos is more powerful than > > > > > > we > > > > > > can imagine. There is limitless humility in that part of us that > > > > > > connects us all brings us to the reckoning that we cannot judge if > > > > > > we > > > > > > are to accept ourselves in the whole of mankind, and the god within. > > > > > > Perhaps slightly off topic, but as a reaction to your post, Molly, a > > > > > small example, of what you describe as as "do[ing] what we are called > > > > > to do in the moment and giv[ing] voice immediately to what we find > > > > > true..." I posted this elsewhere on the web, on the blog of an Irish > > > > > friend of mine who has reasons to be more immediately concerned with > > > > > what is going on in the Irish Catholic Church. It concerns the bishops > > > > > whose handling of paedophile abuse was criticized specifically by the > > > > > commission: > > > > > > "Men like Murray, Moriarty, et al. - and I would include Des Connell > > > > > in this group - are, most probably, very sure that they acted > > > > > correctly, acording to their own lights. For them, their loyalty to > > > > > the institutional church is genuinely primary. The Catholic Church, > > > > > including indivisibly its institutional component, is the infallible > > > > > voice of God on earth. They serve it, and that is their whole > > > > > justification. > > > > > > Des Connell taught me philosophy at UCD and I feel I know a bit about > > > > > what makes him tick. He can use the artifice of the "mental > > > > > reservation" and believe that this is morally correct, because he can > > > > > justify it in the edifice of scholastic theology, the truth of which > > > > > he is convinced. For this reason he can simultaneously be horrified at > > > > > the abuse of children by churchmen, and at the same time subjugate it > > > > > to the supremacy of his duty, as he sees it, to serve the church and > > > > > protect it from harm. > > > > > > Donal Murray seems to think similarly. If I understand his reaction to > > > > > the criticism of him in the Murphy report correctly, he wants to wait > > > > > for feedback from the priests and people of his diocese. If he gets > > > > > the impression they think he should resign, he may even do so. > > > > > > But both Connell and Murray, as well as the others, have got it > > > > > basically wrong. This is not a question of their responsibility to the > > > > > Church, or their obedience to the pope (I'm expecting that there will > > > > > be smokescreens raised about the so-called Holy Father not accepting > > > > > some offered resignations), or their own theological justifications. > > > > > It is a question of their moral responsibility to the victims of the > > > > > abusers. > > > > > > As a result of their positions, they were faced with difficult but > > > > > ultimately clear moral decisions and they chose wrongly. All the > > > > > extenuating arguments regarding damage to the church, loyalty to the > > > > > pope, the prospect of horrifying scandals do not change this (and the > > > > > truth - at least some of it - has come out anyway). > > > > > > It happened on their watch and they let the victims down. No > > > > > theological arguments, no opinions of the priests and laity of the > > > > > Limerick diocese, no wishes of the pope can change this. And this is > > > > > why Murray and the others must resign and Connell must go much further > > > > > than he has in terms of unreserved apology. Apart from any > > > > > considerations of the victims and their feelings, it is a question of > > > > > their own moral integrity. In this sense, to use the terminology they > > > > > (not I) would use, it's a question of saving their own souls. > > > > > > I fear most of them do not seem capable of discovering the basic > > > > > backbone within themselves to save themselves morally - spiritually, > > > > > if you like. And this is, perhaps, the most damning judgement of all > > > > > on the system which produced them, formed them and which they have > > > > > served. > > > > > > I am relieved and glad not to be in any way associated with that > > > > > system any more. And, at the same time (thinking also of my idealistic > > > > > young self who entered the Dominican Order 32 years ago and spent nine > > > > > fruitful and formative years there) saddened that the institutional > > > > > Catholic Church has so managed to corrupt and pervert what was, > > > > > potentially, a beautiful ideal." > > > > > > With regard to the Vatican and the pope, Lee, the silence has - up to > > > > > now - been deafening. Worse, requests for Vatican co-operation from > > > > > the investigating commission, through the papal nunciature in Dublin, > > > > > were ignored because, according to the > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
