GONE VIRAL

The Cathedral House of Good has been sidelined due to COVID 19 and may be coming back now.  I’m happy to say all Bishops, staff, every in-person attendee and all on-line members have weathered the storm, and have practiced the CDC guidelines for pandemics and were vaccinated to good avail.  

Since Nature and the mystery of existence are central to the Cathedral, I have struggled how to respond given the catastrophic, tragic effects throughout the world.  Can I see anything  spiritual in the pandemic?  Or anything uplifting?  I can’t really say the Virus is evil.  It just is. But it’s effects have definitely been tragic from our perspectives.  

Over the last few years—starting before the pandemic—I have been receiving randomly and 5 times daily, reminders through an app that I’m going to die.  Bhutan Buddhist, I’m told, do this so as to engender a greater appreciation of life.  And I can confirm it’s so.  The reminders have helped me be more conscious of the value of life and even stirred more gratitude for everyday happenings that could easily and unmindfully pass.  

Of necessity I have been outdoors more with increased direct and open sharing of existence with animals, plants and fungi. I’ve seen afresh awe inspiring photosynthesis.  With a new puppy, I’ve shared the mystery of relating to another emotional, joyful, and willful being and celebrating the joy of experiencing newness and amazement at every turn, as well as a host of physiological processes underscoring life.  I’ve been grateful for the recovery of friends and family struck with COVID; shared the angst of other friends and family; and even felt a closer bond with everyone (isolated as we were at times) by being thankful for each of their contributions to daily living—from the doctors who treated us, to the person who sold me food, the postman, the grounds keepers where I walked.  Basically I mean everyone.  I could see how everyone contributes.  

So the worse of the pandemic appears to have passed, even if it still threatens at times.  But even before it’s fading I have been able to venture out and about.  I have visited several cathedrals and churches as a part of ecumenical efforts and will share some of this later.  I hope to make more postings but only as I feel prompted by some mysterious force.    

And may Mysterious Forces be with us all!  And keep us safe and secure.

                                                       — the Bishop 

A GOOD BOOK

On the surface Lessons of the Lotus is not a complicated book.  It deals in a straightforward manner with several important topics.  The profundity is grasping these ideas and applying them.

The lotus grows from a muddy layer below water and the flower blossoms beautifully at the surface.  So there already is a lesson:  Wonders can come from unexpected even hidden places.  This is no less true for us than objects.

The author is a Sri Lankan Buddhist Monk,  Bhante Y. Wimala who in his early 20's decided to become a traveling Monk instead of pursuing a more in depth study in a monastery.  He is the man who first taught me meditation about 25 years ago and apparently wrote this book shortly after I had met him.  When I first saw him at the retreat center, I was impressed with his demeanor:  he projected peace and calm with a groundedness.  And these features are reflected in his book.

He forgoes a more scholarly, detailed look at Buddhist teachings and philosophy in order to stress a more practical approach to overcoming suffering and finding happiness.

He speaks of our inner essence as a part of us that transcends our conscious self.  And we can access it by recognizing our connection to nature and others.  Introspection, honesty, curiosity help in the journey.   The practice of loving-kindness to all living beings goes a long way to end suffering.   Of course it is difficult to love people who are harsh or even evil.  He gives advice on approaching such people without ignoring their negative aspects or being victim to them.  And he shares the story of the Buddha converting a mass murderer through loving kindness into a conscientious loving Monk.

Meditation is a key element.  He describes it easily and points to it's usefulness in calming the mind and helping us get beyond the everyday chatter of existence and see life more transcendent.  Living in the present moment is important.

He also looks at Karma.  Karma is not getting what we deserve but more the consequence of our actions be they positive or negative.  And this can and does happen in the current moment even if a Buddhist view is also it can play out over several lifetimes.

What a pleasure to discover Bhante Wilmala's book.  While I haven't seen him since he taught me meditation, I have maintained a respect and gratitude for him.  And now I have more thanks for his straightforward and profound guide to living and transcending suffering.

                                                                       ---the Bishop


Bhante Wilmala

Ex Cathedra

Really from December 2019:  We have been silent lately--I'm not sure who this collective We is, perhaps God and me or more likely just the many important aspects of the Bishopric.  Nevertheless it has been a while since I, no we, have commented.  And this is probably a result of the vow of silence We often take in the Cathedral House of Good.  It's a version of "If you can't say anything good, don't say anything."  But of course there is also a bit of laziness, time crunch and no inspiration.  The latter is important since We have indeed a strong Quaker influence.  We are also influenced by the Procrastination Society.

We have traveled since the last blog and so some sacred spaces even in Singapore and Vietnam not to mention the States.  Perhaps soon I will be moved by Christmas, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa, along with these other sacred spaces. 

                                                              --the Bishop

MY BEEF WITH GRIEF

Slightly more than 50 years ago as a  young medical student I sat in on my first case conference with a skilled attending psychiatrist interviewing a depressed widow.  She was sadden to the point of not eating or sleeping and was contemplating suicide.  And what was the precipitant of this extreme state?  The death of her cherished dog!  I recall in my early 20's thinking how silly to be so attached to a dog.  Oh, I had so much to experience.

The psychoanalytic interpretation that day was that the dog was a displacement from the loss of her husband.  This made sense to me.   I had had only a few losses by that time even if they had been very significant: my father and grandfathers and even a few dogs, with the latter getting little regard.

Now fast forward 50 plus years. My looses have multiplied of course including family, friends, and acquaintances.  I have been able to acknowledge and experience grief repeatedly.

Recently my life partner and I had to euthanize her increasingly debilitated poodle.  She had known the dog 11 years and I had known her 8 years.  Sadness has overwhelmed us both.  Sadness for the loss of Isadora herself!  And in this grief I recall my case conference of 50 years ago.

Isadora was a wonderful, gentle dog, affectionate and ever present.  She was non-intrusive but engaging and ever conscious and accommodating of her master's mood.  We grieve for other losses and our own mortality but we also grieve for Isadora.  She is gone and we will miss her sorely.

                                                                              -- the Bishop

A GOOD BOOK IF ONLY BECAUSE IT'S INTERESTING

James, the Brother of Jesus:  the Key to Understanding the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls by Robert Eiseman.

What a scrupulously researched and detailed book!  The author weaves together an exhaustive list of ancient documents which include canonical and non canonical works (Jewish and Christian), the Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient historians and many more.  It took me months to complete and I think it would really require a PhD for me to fully evaluate it.  Eiseman uses philology, etymology, historical criticism, and deep knowledge of comparative religions and ancient history.  He connects dots in such a remarkable way that I'm not sure he is not creating dots.

But the basic theory as I understand it (and it would have to remain a theory for me) associates the earliest Jesus followers (earliest Christians) in the general apocalyptic milieu of the era.  So the earliest followers would have been more militant, staunchly observant of the Torah, messianic, rebellious, and ritualistic.  It would not have been a turn the other cheek religion.

James is portrayed as the brother of Jesus and his successor as leader of the group on Jesus' crucifixion.  And Eiseman contends James was effectively written out of the cannon by the followers of Paul in a effort to basically allow the Pauline version of Christianity of prosper--a version more in cooperation with the Romans and more identified with love and a heavenly kingdom instead of an Earthly one.  Paul's early persecution of the new sect gave way to his being the major proponent.  Eiseman contends Paul actually was responsible for an attack on James which was rewritten in the New Testament as the stoning of Stephen and even to some extent in suicide description of Judas.

An intriguing aspect of the book for me is that it gives a plausible, even if inaccurate, picture of how early Christianity could have developed in a time of intense religious and political upheaval.  When we read the current cannon, we are perhaps only reading the final victorious version of conflicting and battling ideas, beliefs and practices.

                                                                          --the Bishop

WHAT TO BELIEVE?

 Reading through a religious insert in my local newspaper I came across many intriguing articles.  It was a little unclear what group was sponsoring these viewpoints, but at least some of the authors were  from a local group affiliated with a movement that has split from a national church over doctrinal issues.  One such article delved into history of our identities and ultimately focused on the sacrifice of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.  Quoted was his poem that vouchsafed him as belonging to God, in face of Nazism even while fearing execution.  Of course being the cynic I am, I also saw support for the breakaway group to maintain courage and recognition that they truly belonged to God unlike the National Church.  Of course this is unspoken since the locals are not really in Bonhoeffer's circumstances and the National Church is not Nazism, no matter how much they're seen unorthodox.

Another fascinating article admonished against fighting poverty by taking from some and giving to others.  To underscore this absurdity an example was to take all of Bill Gates wealth and distribute it to everyone with each getting only $300.  And this would be just a one time event.  Of course this idea of taking from some (the wealthy) and giving to others (poor, non-workers, derelicts) is often a code phrase for lamenting taxes, even a progressive system, and is an easy strawman.    Taxes contribute to general benefits and I'm sure each of us can find some objections to the spending of some tax dollars.  Nevertheless, the Common Good is a far cry from taking from some to give to others even if there are some efforts to provide a safety net--or health care, disability benefits, education, prevent  hunger.   

But the most catching article for me was the one dealing with "Focusing on Basics" with supertitle of "Prodigal Son"--recall there are two diocesan congregations apart at the moment and who might be symbolically the Prodigal Son I couldn't say except for perhaps both.  Aren't we all?

The author laments how minor details can obscure the really important messages of the church.  Gay marriage, abortion, women priests, adult versus childhood baptism, type of music--and I'll add more: the day to the week of worship, handling snakes, speaking in tongues, dancing, alcohol, caffeine, and countless more.  I concur with the author that such matters are not very important as denominational determinants.  He does believe however that "cultural" wars are important.  It's just you don't want to overwhelm a new convert too quickly.

My biggest disappointment came after the author had trumpeted the value of transcending minor beliefs for a more profound and inclusive experience.  This inclusive experience turns out to be what we must say as we stand before "God in judgement."  For him this is where the rubber hits the road.  It's a test.  And the correct answer "better include" a version of accepting the doctrine of atonement salvation.  I must point out that not even all Christians accept this doctrine and this does not even address the billions who profess Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, forms of what we call Hinduism, and countless other beliefs I can't list for space.

It reminds me of the statement attributed to Jesus about not worrying about the mote in your neighbors eye when there is a beam in your own.   I would write more, but my eyes  hurt.

                                                                --the Bishop

THE NICELY LEAN CREED

IN-CREED-IBLE

Recently I was attending a friend's church--in my usual ecumenical mood--and found I was unable to recite the Nicene Creed because it basically contained so much I did not believe.  The Creed is a centerpiece of this (and many other) churches.  It originated in 4th century when the Emperor Constantine was trying to unify his empire and church authorities had similar ideas of unifying the faith.  It was not universally accepted in its day and was part of much blood shed and suffering before it came into final acceptance.  Many Protestant churches don't use the creed today, not because they don't believe most of its content but because it was Papist.  Today of course I don't have to worry about being tortured by the Catholics although  at times I do worry about the Protestants.  So I decided it was time for us to have our own creed, which of course we would never use since we don't believe in creeds. 


The Nicely Lean Creed:

I believe in God-- mysterious, unfathomable, multifaceted, knowable, ever present yet probably non-existent. 

I believe in Jesus a guide to and spokesman for God.  He was born and remained Jewish and before his death, he was never a Christian.

I believe a Divine Spirit is present in many places and people and in fact permeates all of life.



For debate on the above Creed, a convocation of Bishops was convened at the Cathedral House of Good with a quorum present.  After prolonged debate, the Creed was accepted without opposition.  Conditions for approval were that it would never be part of a service and would not be an article of faith. 

Below is the Nicene Creed (or a version of it) that I was unable to justify reading while on an ecumenical visit. 

                                                the Bishop





Nicene Creed:  

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.