A PERSONAL EXPLORATION OF THE CREATIVE EXPERIENCE - HTTP://GIOVANNIANDFRANCO.INFO -
We consider ideas that people often think about but seldom explore - ideas on how to remain authentic and be your real self. We define success as the realization of what you need to be and having the courage to become that person - this is what creativity is about.
It is hard not to notice it. It is everywhere – it is pervasive – simply, virtually everyone’s’ addiction to social media. You cannot go anywhere without seeing it. It is not only strangers, but just as likely the person you’re with – their incessant and compulsive perusing of the digital screen.
The other day when with some friends, all suffering from this social dilemma, I found myself needing to excuse myself to go to the restroom, not for the obvious reasons, but to find a mirror. I thought for a minute I had become invisible and needed reassurance that I could still be seen.
What a relief – I was visible – small comfort, but nonetheless reassuring.
While there are at least four definitions of faith in Merriam Webster, the one that sums up all of them is: “Faith: a firm belief in something for which there is no proof: complete trust
If there is a profound effect modern science has on the thinking process of the average person; it is the notion that you must have proof to define reality. Since so much of what we believe that determines how we conduct our lives is based on assumptions, where does that leave us?
For one, I hope less dogmatic in our opinions.
Perhaps, the most important act of faith many of us make is to believe in God. Then we take our belief in God one more step. We choose to believe in a specific religion. In my case, I chose Christianity.
I am sure all of us have definitive ideas of how religious faith affects our individual lives. I would like my faith to be unconditional; however, I often do not live up to its ideals. To complicate the issue, I have always suffered doubts about my beliefs, but choose to continue to believe. Why?
For one, what Jesus was and preached makes sense to me. When I divorce religion and a belief in a loving God from his message, and keep only the moral, ethical message - it is difficult to reject the intrinsic goodness of his philosophy.
It also makes sense as a practical approach to life – in much the same way as our existential philosophers do. Existentialism can find no meaning or reality in existence other than the obvious suffering that all living things must endure. This is clear through our daily observation. We witness every day the obvious fact that we will die - and that all other living things share the same fate.
Our only recourse is to find meaning in suffering. Is this not what Christianity does? For me, it reinforces what I learn from my experience. Every day I observe the process that all life travels – life, death and resurrection.
And in the resurrection and newborn beginnings of life, we find hope and meaning that suffering created.
In life, we all travel different roads with various destinations. That is life, pure and simple. Why then are these choices so difficult? For one, to make the point, we have choices. And, if you have choices, you have to be able to afford them financially. This point seems lost on so many people.
If you are struggling with alternatives, consider yourself fortunate. You are already better off than thousands of other people who are simple struggling to stay alive. How many souls on this mortal coil must do whatever is attainable just to survive? For them, there is no choice – do what is obtainable or die.
So the next time you are unhappy with who and what you are – and you have real choices as to what you may become – count your blessings. You are truly one of the fortunate human beings.
Conjectures of a recovering dilettante traveling the road to Utopia
How do we know our faith is based on the love of God, or the need for God in our lives?
I wonder how many of us actually ask this question? If we don’t, we should and often. It seems a realistic assumption that by nature most of us are selfish. I don’t mean in the obvious ways. That would be easy to figure out. This type of selfishness is more insidious - mainly because it disguises itself as altruistic even though it is very self-serving.
What do we really mean when we say: "Keep us from temptation."
When we say the Lord’s Prayer we say, “And keep us from temptation. I have always felt we should add to that – particularly that temptation which disguises itself as virtuous. What makes this so difficult to clarify is that most of us reach the point where we lead reasonably decent lives. It would probably be considered by most standards as a “good Christian life.”
There are the saints and the rest of us
Here is the point where we separate the saints from the rest of us. Clearly, the saints have managed through prayer and desire to place their egos on hold and put the Lord’s will in its place. When we say ‘Let your will be done” they in fact not only have the good intention of doing it, they actually do it.
Do we really mean - "Your will be done" or has this become a "catch phrase" that we use often?
Consider how difficult this is. All we have to do is see how few of us achieve this, even though it is the goal we all aspire to reach.
So how do we reach the goal – to imitate and be like the saints - For one - not alone? Prayer and meditation are not only necessary but inseparable. Prayer builds our personal relationship with our God. If that does not make you whole, it certainly gets you thinking about it in a more realistic way.
What is your answer going to be?
So where are you in this journey? What would be your answer be when the Lord asks you “to sell everything and follow me?" Our answer clarifies where we are on our spiritual journey.
As for me – I would rather not answer the question right now.
Faith is a word that is thrown around a lot. I wonder how many of us take it seriously. If we think about it, it seems that we live and plan our lives by having faith. For one, we have to have faith that there will be a life to look forward to – we really don’t know that, it is an act of faith that there will even be a tomorrow.
I know we have probability on our side. The odds are there will be a tomorrow. That doesn’t change the fact that for many of us that will not be true. However, that is not going to stop us from doing what we have to do to get ready for the next day.
Unspoken faith dominates our lives. We couldn’t function without it. The question has to be asked: “Why is it that faith is so often questionable as a concept?” I suspect it is because we live in the “age of science.”
Hardly a day goes by when the new “high priests” of science proclaim with bursting pride that they deal with facts not faith. “The technology now available makes it possible to know everything.” I might add they always add the caveat, “that what we don’t know now, we will know in the future.” It is just a matter of time.
This is not just uttered as a statement of fact, but virtually as dogma, with a bit of anger thrown in for good measure. I think religion has always been the boogie man for both people of science and religion. While they don’t always admit it, they have waged a war for supremacy from the beginning of recorded civilization.
For years the churches dominated the argument. They had more people on their side. However, as the world modernized and more people drifted away from organized religion science began to make its move. After all they had facts, not faith on their side.
Unfortunately, when you look at the early history of science its record is not much better than religion. We are now led to believe that is no longer the case. I need to add my personal caveat here. I am not anti-science. I am not advocating for religious faith. What I am advocating is an end to the arrogance of both religion and science toward each other.
Sooner or later both sides come to the need for a “first cause.” I know it is no longer fashionable to use that term. But for the sake of our discussion it still works. One could reasonably conclude that science has not removed causality as a concept; they have simply changed its name.
For the religious and people of faith it is inconceivable that there is not a creator or "spiritual force" that sustains the whole process of life. Science now argues that beyond infinity there is nothing, and they can produce theoretical equations to suggest that a universe from nothing is possible.
However, if you look closely it seems to some of us that they have simply changed the name of nothing, and their nothing is really something.
Which brings us back to the subject of faith – and the beat goes on.
Relationships remain the core every fulfilled life. Volumes are written about what makes a viable relationship. A relationship can take all forms, good friends, members of family; however, the most important relationship is with your spouse or significant other. This defines your life.
Here’s one way to make a relationship work. Take two sheets of paper - on one paper list all the good things your partner offers you. On the second sheet of paper write all the bad things that keep your relationship from working.
You should spend considerable time on both lists and try to limit it to no more than five of the most important things, for good or for bad. I think it might work better if you actually spend some time thinking about it before you considered writing anything down. Once you have a sense of what you would like to say or list, begin.
You can start with the positive or the negative, whichever suits you. Once you have completed your task study your listings carefully. Make sure that you are comfortable with them, and they are authentic and meaningful. Once you are sure your lists are accurate spend a little more time thinking about them.
Consider your negative and positive lists for the next three days.
At the end of three days of careful consideration, take the list of positive remarks - the key to what makes your relationship work and put it in a safe place and make sure you review it at least once a day for the next month. Take the list of negative remark’s tear it up, and throw it away.
Now you’re on your way to making your relationship fulfilling and meaningful for the rest of your life.
If you can grow comfortable with the acceptance of death, at least to the degree you can contemplate the experience of dying without running for cover, than possibly one can legitimately speculate on transcendence as both a created human need and a reality beyond simple need.
There is little doubt that knowing intuitively that life goes on after your physical death is comforting when confronted with the existential reality of suffering and eventual nothingness. From the beginning, religion has been considered the panacea, the snake oil of meaning and comfort, to a world that often seems to have neither.
And that thought alone is enough to allow one to rationalize the belief in the existence of a God. And no religious or spiritual person who has spent any introspective time can deny that the thought of needing to believe in God has not occurred to them.
The question remains: does the psychological need for a God to exist for comfort and meaning conflict with the fact that the human need for transcendence goes beyond selfish need and is a legitimate reality that eventually defines authentic humanness? The two thoughts seem to be considered by many as mutually exclusive when they may very well coexist.
The two extremes that are always in conflict are atheism and religious fundamentalism. If you accept the notion that what is measurable and observable is the only reality, you are an atheist. If you accept that all religious folklore is literally true, you are a fundamentalist. Both positions are condemned to be extremist.
Than we have the extreme of religious fundamentalism. At some point, the need to literally believe absolutely, no matter how it defies the faculties of logic and reason, becomes necessary to deal with existential angst. The path is clear. You are accepted by your God, unconditionally, as long as you follow the dogma of the faith. From that point everything else falls into place.
The easiest position, and by far the safest, is to be an agnostic. The problem with being an agnostic is that you have none of the fervor and enthusiasm of the atheist or fundamentalist, but are still left with the existential angst of the non-believer. Certainly this is not a very good deal.
What then is left for the rest of us? We are the ones who through spiritual insight gained through our life experiences have concluded that there is a reality beyond observation and measurability. That intangible truth does exist the same way common sense exists.
We have based our belief in God on the wisdom of our experience and the ability to find a basis for the infinite. This position does allow us certain flexibility for tolerance, which seems to be contrary to most religious dogma.
As a result, for us the infinite becomes a sweet mystery of expectations that allows us to spiritually move beyond our physical reality. Sooner or later we have to make a choice based on faith. And where ever we land on this issue, they are all decisions based on faith. Does this answer all the questions? I certainly hope not.
So you are person of religious faith – do you ever wonder what that means – I do. For starters, what faith? Do you believe in one of the many orthodox religions? Or is your faith a generalization about life and God in general? If so, I must confess that seems pretty vague to me.
In the assorted definitions of faith you find in various dictionaries, Merriam-Webster has one that intrigues me: “Faith: a firm belief in something for which there is no proof, complete trust.” Wow, that’s pretty strong. Do you know anyone who does this?
I can hear the answers now – “Of course, I do, not only do I know people like this; I am a person of faith myself.” This of course begs the same question, what does that mean?
It seems that to feel that strongly about “your faith” you should have a very clear and concise concept of what your faith is about. We are not talking about vague generalities here; I mean a concept that can be stated simply and clearly understood.
Most of us will, sooner or later, survive this first step. The next step may be more difficult. Faith bestows on us some benefit. It gives us something we need and want. This is why so many atheists accuse us, who proclaim a faith in a loving God, as something we made up to suit our personal needs.
If we leave it at that, they would have a strong point. However, there is another part of faith that we all need to embrace and that is the necessary, deeply personal obligation that faith asks us to accept as our calling. This can bring with it some troubling revelations.
For one it requires sacrifice, a word that forces us to accept many uncomfortable contradictions about ourselves that have to be confronted and resolved. This is a troubling process because it tends to reveal our hypocrisy.
Most of us do not see ourselves as hypocrites, and in the general sense, we are not. However, when we deal with the deepest meaning of our faith and the personal sacrifice it requires, we are forced to reflect and accept a much deeper course of action than we may have anticipated.
For those of you who have achieved this level of commitment and understanding there is little to offer you from this point, but for the rest of us who still struggle with this dilemma, the problem is real and the contradictions that we are forced to reconcile deeply felt.
What level of sacrifice are we willing to accept? Is there a more telling question than this to test the real level of our faith commitment? When asked in the abstract, it is an easy question. However, it is the very nature of religious faith to eventually present the existential situation or crises that will tell you where you stand.
For most of us we will then learn if our belief in God is an implied contract or a covenant. As you know, a contract has conditions; a covenant is unconditional - without conditions. The distinction between these two realities is so vast it defies description.
For Christians, it is inevitable to realize your God is asking for a convent – love and with sacrifice without conditions. Perhaps this is what divides the rest of us from the saints. They accepted the covenant as an act of love. The rest of us will always have to depend to mercy as our last resort.
Again, this still begs the last question. Is the acceptance of divine mercy nothing more than a last resort, a rationalization that allows us to continue to live a life of “cheap grace” - a term Dietrich Bonhoeffer gave us that will never allow the truth to be anything else but the authentic path we are all called to follow?
In a recent conversation with Brother Franco, he reminded me that we are living in a very exciting and fascinating time as we see the evolution of Christian thought expanding exponentially. For many, this is troubling. However, I agree with Brother Franco that we are standing at the doorway of a new threshold of understanding
We have all had to come to understand faith through the haze of doubt that has always plagued human existence. Faith in God, or for that matter, not believing in God, are assumptions we make from the sum total of our intuitive and actual experiences.
I should make it clear these comments are not intended for those who have decided not to believe in a God. The concern here is why so many believers, "people of “faith,” accept the concept that the God they believe in also chooses to hand down immutable rules that remain forever unalterable.
For them, to question the concept of "immutable" is considered sacrilege. They would be quick to point out that if what we believe is subject to our own interpretation and nothing else; virtually everything is up for grabs.
From a more cosmic perspective, the word of God does not need to change. But why is it assumed that the way we interpret that word does not evolve as we evolve? Is it not equally relevant to assume that our personal knowledge is also evolving as we learn more about the world we inhabit? It seems contrary to our direct experience to think otherwise. And yet, this is what many of our fellow believers would have us think. *
How do we resolve these differences with each other and still remain consistent with our individual realities? - Never, if we concentrate on the differences. As long as each side prefers to view all those who don’t share their reality as suspect, anger and determination to resist so-called contamination rules the day. This does not seem consistent with Christian values.
Why is it that our human nature seems to want to focus on what separates us rather than on what could bring us together? I suspect it is deeply tribal in nature, and is part of our instinctive reality - the same reality that allowed many of our ancestors to survive.
Our ancestors knew people that were like them were less likely to be dangerous. It became critical to human survival to sense differences quickly. Being aware of our enemies became vitally important. As a result, we created “territories” that were safe. Obviously, we still do this physically, emotionally and spiritually.
Is it reasonable to assume that we have mentally evolved to the extent that we can now understand that many of our legal, moral and cultural norms are merely codifications of our very real primal and instinctive natures?
Judging how much of the world reacts, and the turmoil and suffering humans bring on themselves, apparently not. Nevertheless, that is little excuse to avoid being aware that evolutionary change is happening continually around us, and will shape the physical and spiritual environment we chose to call our own.
As difficult as it is to accept, the meaning of the concept of tradition is changing. Tradition is often confused in meaning with the word "conventional." Traditional has always meant values. How these values are interpreted may change, but the meaning of the values being applied does not.
Take family as an example. While the values of the family have not changed, the convention of what constitutes “family” has. For generations, family meant “blood relations.” It has been obvious for years that concept no longer applies in all cases. The same could be said for the institution of marriage. How these institutions are defined evolves, but what they represent in human values and traditions do not.
From a Christian faith perspective, we could not live in more exciting times. As we see our knowledge of the cosmos evolving it provides us with more understanding of the dynamics of a living, personal God in all things. As many have said before, we are now witnessing the evolution of “The Cosmic Christ.”
It is indeed a most exciting time to be alive!
Brother Giovanni
*Should this concept not apply to our interpretation of law as well?
It occurs to us here in Pizzaonia that much of what we write about is obvious. What is strange is how the obvious eludes us. I guess that's because it's so obvious we no longer pay attention to it. That seems to be the trap that gets us every time.
It takes a certain amount of discipline to pay attention to what is in front of us. What a shame since most of the answers we seek are always there -- right in front of us, waiting, waiting.
Maybe if we paid more attention, life would cease being a series of interruptions from birth to death.