Wednesday, October 17, 2012

TEXAS FAITH 85: With more Americans not identifying with any faith, what’s the future of religion?


Dallas Morning News,
Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

“The number of Americans who do not identify with any religion is growing at a rapid pace. One-fifth of the U.S. public – and a third of adults under 30 –are religiously unaffiliated today, the highest percentages ever in polling by the Pew Research Center. In the last five years alone, the unaffiliated have increased from just over 15% to just under 20% of all U.S. adults. They include self-described atheists and agnostics but increasingly people who say they are spiritual but have no particular religious affiliation. This large and growing group of Americans is less religious than the public at large on many conventional measures, including frequency of attendance at religious services and the degree of importance they attach to religion in their lives.

With few exceptions, they say they are not looking for a religion that would be right for them. Overwhelmingly, they think that religious organizations are too concerned with money and power, too focused on rules and too involved in politics. The growth in the number of religiously unaffiliated Americans – sometimes called the rise of the “nones” –is largely driven by generational replacement, the gradual supplanting of older generations by newer ones.

These findings invite two questions:

What is it that the institutions of religion are not providing a growing number of people? And if this younger generation remains unaffiliated as it ages, what’s the future of religion?”

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Doubt

Doubt is being taught in growing numbers.  Doubt is a sign of intelligence.  But blind doubt, such as rejecting spirituality without an extensive investigation, is a sign of ignorance, as is blind faith. Due to the blind doubt in the minds of populace, people are not apt to accept religious institutions.  This is because most religious institutions present a doubtful presentation of God.  A God who is far from perfect in His own personality and character.  A character that is presented as envious, a being who causes meaningless eternal suffering.  For if hell is eternal there is no meaning to it, for there is no point of correction.

Vague conceptions of the soul where some living things have a soul and for some reason other living things do not.  All to be blindly accepted.


The second cause is that this is the instant gratification fast-food culture, without wisdom for long term gains.  So religion is only seen as to possibly have some long term gain and therefore it is seen to be of little value.
What are the institutions not providing?  Well first of all, philosophically weak religious theologies.  People generally go to a university to study philosophy rather than a religious institution. Because they do not expect to find sound logic and philosophy there, but rather just blind faith.

Faith should be supported by reason and experience.
The second item that is lacking is transcendental experiences. Because people are not experiencing the happiness of spiritual life they are unsure about its relevance to their daily life.

   If the priests who are teaching still rely on cigarettes, alcohol, wealth, adoration, fame, and so on, to satisfy their starving hearts, how then will they be able to feed the hungry souls of their congregation.

Therefore in as much as he is hungry for the temporary we can understand how much he is really tasting of the sweetness of the eternal.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Dangerous paramours of the mind

 

Police say man stabbed ex’s new boyfriend as they slept in her Fort Worth home

Similarly Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam fifth canto chapter six warns the yogi of the dangerous paramours of the mind.

nityaṁ dadāti kāmasya
cchidraṁ tam anu ye ’rayaḥ
yoginaḥ kṛta-maitrasya
patyur jāyeva puṁścalī

4. An unchaste woman is very easily carried away by paramours, and it sometimes happens that her husband is violently killed by her paramours. If the yogī gives his mind a chance and does not restrain it, his mind will give facility to enemies like lust, anger and greed, and they will doubtlessly kill the yogī.

An uncontrolled mind and an unchaste wife are the same. An unchaste wife can kill her husband at any time, and an uncontrolled mind, followed by (paramours) lust, anger, greed, madness, envy and illusion, can certainly kill the yogī. When the yogī is controlled by the mind, he falls down into the material condition. One should be very careful of the mind, just as a husband should be careful of an unchaste wife. – purport by Srila Prabhupada

5. The mind is the root cause of lust, anger, pride, greed, lamentation, illusion and fear. Combined, these constitute bondage to fruitive activity. What learned man would put faith in the mind?

Purport:

The mind is the original cause of material bondage. It is followed by many enemies, such as anger, pride, greed, lamentation, illusion and fear. The best way to control the mind is to engage it always in Kṛṣṇa consciousness (sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayoḥ). Since the followers of the mind bring about material bondage, we should be very careful not to trust the mind.

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

TEXAS FAITH 84: The morality of drone warfare


Dallas Morning News,
Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

“Drone warfare. It’s become a major new way to fight battles. Except those doing the fighting may be in a cubicle in a town here in the United States. In fact, the chances are they will be working here, far from the battlefield.

Of course, the good news is the soldiers operating the drones are not in harm’s way. Nor are they spending months, if not years, away from their families in a distant country.

But they are using the advances in technology to track and kill people halfway around the world. This new form of warfare has raised a number of moral questions. This collection of posts from Andrew Sullivan on the subject provides an insight into some issues in play. And here is another link worth looking at from the Wall Street Journal.

Also, the Journal reported this week in a front-page article that there is not much international law on this subject. That vacuum matters in numerous ways, but especially when it comes to determining whether we are actually declaring war on nations that only tacitly give us approval to use drones in their countries.

I am not looking for applications of international law here, but I would like to hear how your faith informs your thinking about drone
strikes. So, here’s this week’s question:

What moral issues, if any, give you pause about drone warfare?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

In the ancient Vedic culture, a true soldier is brave. The leader stands in front of the battle. Battles happen on battlegrounds, rather than cities. Generals would fight those of similar abilities. No merchants, laborers, or others could become soldiers, rather only those who have the qualities of a soldier and life- long training of a soldier are allowed to fight.

Thus the fighting does not involve anyone but actual brave warriors. Like the ancient samurai, there was a code of honor. Enemies would even dine together during evening as fighting took place only during the day.

Drone warfare is a sign of the times. In this age there is no sense duty but rather only cowardice. Duty means behavior that benefits all. But as selfishness increases, we abandon duty for immediate personal benefit.

The only way members of society can develop behaviors that are dutiful is by becoming spiritually satisfied. As long as there is no spiritual satisfaction, people will abandon higher principles for fleeting personal benefit.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

TEXAS FAITH 83: Is separation of church and state an idea to keep religious people out of the public arena?


Dallas Morning News,
Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

“In a conference call with Christian conservatives, Gov. Rick Perry dismissed the separation of church and state as an idea advanced to drive “people of faith from the public arena.” The governor went on to say Satan is using it to keep Christians from actively engaging in public policy. “The idea that we should be sent to the sidelines I would suggest to you is very driven by those who are not truthful, Satan runs across the world with his doubt and with his untruths and what have you, and one of the untruths out there is driven – is that people of faith should not be involved in the public arena.”

The governor’s take on theology and American history got mixed reviews – at best – from our Texas Faith panel of pastors, teachers, theologians, lay leaders and religious experts. The recent conference call was an effort to motivate conservative Christians to vote their values in November. Perry used language familiar to social conservatives – “spiritual warfare” and “Christian soldiers” and a growing tide of “secularism and atheism” – in warning of those making “efforts to remove any trace of religion from American life.”

The premise of the governor’s comments is that separation of church and state is sometimes invoked simply to discourage people (read it: people whose ideas you don’t like) from getting involved in politics and public policy. Is that true? And, perhaps more to the point, how do we make sure that doesn’t happen? In our political debate this election season, what’s the proper balance between warning against theocracy and encouraging faith in the public square? The Texas Faith panel had some ideas.”

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

I have a musical group and in the past we have been denied venues on the grounds of secularism.  You can sing about anything under the sun.  But you cannot sing about the one who is above the sun.

What is the balance? Religion without philosophy is simply sentiment and sometimes fanaticism, and philosophy and science without religion is simple mental speculation.  Therefore discussions involving religion should be philosophical rather than sensational.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.