Earthpages.ca

Think Free


Leave a comment

Gregory the Great – Doctor of the Church, Saint and Pope

English: Gregory I became pope in 590 and effe...

Gregory I became pope in 590 and effected great changes in the Roman Catholic church. He used the office to govern and provide pastoral care to a large area during a time of little civil administration. He also reformed church liturgy, introducing Gregorian chant. Gregory’s writings about saints, including Saint Benedict, helped the growth of Benedictine monasteries in the Middle Ages. (Photo credit and text for this image: Wikipedia)

St. Gregory (540 – 604 CE) was a learned politician who became a monk, then Pope. He came from a wealthy patrician family, well connected to the Church in Rome. His father was a senator and Gregory became the Prefect of Rome at the young age of 30.

He reluctantly became Pope from 590 to 604, writing letters after his election indicating that he really didn’t want to do it, but would assume office out of divine duty.

An interesting anecdote tells us that Gregory so believed in the afterlife that he punished a dying man and even abused his dead body.

It seems to some that Gregory was not always forgiving, or pleasant for that matter, even in his monastic years. For example, a monk lying on his death bed confessed to stealing three gold pieces. Gregory forced the monk to die friendless and alone, then threw his body and coins on a manure heap to rot with a curse, “Take your money with you to perdition”. Gregory believed that punishment of sins can begin, even on one’s deathbed.[26] However, at the monk’s death Gregory offered 30 Masses in his remembrance to assist his soul before the final judgment

Today, most would see behaviour like this as indicative of a disturbed psyche, and definitely illegal.

Also interesting is that, although Gregory was learned, he came to dislike erudition in favor of what many would see as fanatical superstition.

Opinions of the writings of Gregory vary. “His character strikes us as an ambiguous and enigmatic one,” Cantor observed. “On the one hand he was an able and determined administrator, a skilled and clever diplomat, a leader of the greatest sophistication and vision; but on the other hand, he appears in his writings as a superstitious and credulous monk, hostile to learning, crudely limited as a theologian, and excessively devoted to saints, miracles, and relics“.²

Vintage colour engraving from 1864 showing Gregory and the English slaves at Rome. Pope Gregory I (c. 540 – 12 March 604), better known in English as Gregory the Great, was pope from 3 September 590 until his death. Gregory is well known for his writings, which were more prolific than those of any of his predecessors as pope.

According to the Protestant reformer Martin Luther, Gregory was “the last good Pope.” And many see him as a bridge between the ancient and medieval worlds.³

I originally mentioned Gregory in this blog mostly because he’s the one whom the term “Gregorian Chant” is named after. But like many legends, Catholic or otherwise, attributing Gregorian Chants to Pope Gregory is probably not historically accurate.

Most scholars believe that the so-called Gregorian Chant came into existence during the 9th and 10th centuries due to a blend of social, political and musical forces that mostly did not exist when Gregory was alive.4

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Gregory_I

² Ibid.

³ Ibid.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_chant

 


Leave a comment

Charles Hartshorne – Does God Grow With Experience?

Charles Hartshorne (1897-2000) – Image via Wikipedia

Charles Hartshorne  (1897-2000) was an American theologian who developed Alfred North Whitehead‘s idea of an organic, interactive process into a version of Process Theology.

Wikipedia traces his views to the ancient Greek Heraclitus, who emphasized change with his famous line, “you cannot step into the same river twice.” Heraclitus also believed that religious signs could be received through the oracle at Delphi. But Hartshorne’s theological system arguably adds a bit more to the picture than mere change and signs (we don’t know what Heraclitus fully believed in because only fragments of his work survive).

Hartshorne upholds the idea that God has a separate existence but is also present in the world. To me this is explained by the already existing ideas of transcendence and immanence (not imminence). Wikipedia explains Hartshorne’s view:

One of the technical terms Hartshorne used is pan-en-theism, originally coined by Karl Christian Friedrich Krause in 1828. Panentheism (all is in God) must be differentiated from Classical pantheism (all is God). In Hartshorne’s theology God is not identical with the world, but God is also not completely independent from the world. God has his self-identity that transcends the earth, but the world is also contained within God. A rough analogy is the relationship between a mother and a fetus. The mother has her own identity and is different from the unborn, yet is intimately connected to the unborn. The unborn is within the womb and attached to the mother via the umbilical cord.¹

However, Hartshorne took on classical theologians by taking a more Jungian approach to God. For both Jung and Hartshorne, God is not omniscient but learns as s/he goes along. Unlike classical definitions of God’s perfection, Hartshorne believes that being perfect does not entail knowing everything. Rather, it means knowing and feeling more through experience.

God is capable of surpassing himself by growing and changing in his knowledge and feeling for the world.²

Myself, I think this is a flawed view, one born of a lack of intellectual humility. It’s fine to try to understand God and the workings of God. But whenever a human being makes some kind of definitive statement about knowing God, that’s where I draw the line.

However, if someone says they believe that God has certain qualities and behaves in such a way, I can take them far more seriously. In my view, everything comes down to belief in one way or another. But not everyone appreciates this idea. The human mind is easily hoodwinked into confusing belief with knowledge.

The statue of Plato in front of the Academy of Athens

The distinction between belief and knowledge goes back to another ancient Greek, Plato. Plato, however, held a different view than mine. He believed that knowledge (as justified true belief – episteme)³ was superior to:

  • an opinion that seems to be or may be true but is accepted on the basis of a weak argument (dogma)
  • popular belief (doxa)

By way of contrast, I maintain that for a rational, reflective mind, everything comes down to belief—true, false or partly true belief. We may say we have reason to believe but, as human beings, we can never really know. We have to believe.4

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Hartshorne

² Ibid.

³ This type of knowledge is differentiated from knowledge of a craft (techne). And some scholars rightly ask, what does full “justification” for episteme require? See a good discussion here: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/

4 To defend this view I’d probably have to go into a lengthy philosophical argument, and this entry is not the place for that. However, if anyone wishes to further discuss in the comments area, I will try to outline my position (providing I felt that the discussion was positive enough to justify the time and energy spent on it). I say this because I tried to explain my position once at the David Bowie site with a bookish “intellectual” hooked on a particular philosopher and found that I was just wasting my time and energy. As with most unproductive internet debates, we don’t always carefully read or reply to things we don’t understand, perhaps cannot understand, or consciously or subconsciously do not wish or believe it necessary to understand. And some apparently just want to win an argument rather than learn and grow from it. I’m not saying I’m immune to this pretty common situation. But I don’t waste time and energy if I see myself falling into it.


Leave a comment

Hatha-yoga – Beyond the Spandex

Yoga Class at a Gym

Yoga Class at a Gym (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A lot of people confuse the word yoga with hatha-yoga. When we go to yoga class we are really going to hatha-yoga class.

In the West the deeper meaning of yoga sometimes seems to get lost in spandex outfits and other store-bought paraphernalia.

So hatha-yoga refers to the bodily postures which grew out of the philosphico-religious idea of yoga.


Leave a comment

Helen

Helen

Related Posts » Aphrodite, Projection

This post needs content. Why not help us get it started? Please remember that copying and pasting large amounts of material from Wikipedia (or some other online encyclopedia) is not what Earthpages.ca is about. We want a fresh view, from you… not from your copy and paste editor!

Thanks,

Michael Clark, Ph.D.



Leave a comment

Herod Antipas

Herod Antipas » John the Baptist

This post needs content. Why not help us get it started? Please remember that copying and pasting large amounts of material from Wikipedia (or some other online encyclopedia) is not what Earthpages.ca is about. We want a fresh view, from you… not from your copy and paste editor!

Thanks,

Michael Clark, Ph.D.


Leave a comment

Herod ‘The Great’

Herod ‘The Great’ » Hero

This post needs content. Why not help us get it started? Please remember that copying and pasting large amounts of material from Wikipedia (or some other online encyclopedia) is not what Earthpages.ca is about. We want a fresh view, from you… not from your copy and paste editor!

Thanks,

Michael Clark, Ph.D.

 


1 Comment

Iblis

Iblis » Jinn, Fallen Angels

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 577 other followers