This morning I saw two programs on TV consecutively that dealt with two very different individuals from very different faiths: one an American evangelist on a mission to recruit every child into his church; the other a Sufi creating bridges between Islam and the West.
There were just a couple of points in each which grabbed my attention and got me to thinking on the issue of religion and spirituality. One was about the Christian missionary tradition and how that has evolved into the very American phenomenon of the Evangelical churches. These people actively go out to ‘convert’ people into Christians, they seek to “save their souls” believing that it is their holy duty to have everyone believe in the same theological ideas, to pray the same way in the same churches. This is not just a policy of accepting whoever chooses to come to them; but an aggressive agenda of building up their numbers. In the words of this particular preacher, “I will do whatever it takes to get these kids.” His school is marketed using cartoon characters and the usual imagery used by advertising companies to grab the youth market. He defends his use of ‘bribes’ - in many cases, candy and money; for he targets the children in the ghettos and projects of New York City - as being “anything it takes”. This individual had also ‘miraculously’ survived near-fatal injuries in his past: bashed with a brick during a break-in, and then shot in the face twice. Of course, there is no coercion involved in all of this; if a child living in poverty doesn’t want money, food, candy, a sense of community and a promise of hope for their future - all the things they don’t have, and desperately crave - then they don’t have to go along…
In contrast, a humble, quietly spoken Imam travels the world talking about the spiritual essence of Islam (which of course is the creed of the Sufi orders), and how one can live within Islamic spiritual law, and the law of the land in which they dwell. He spoke about Islam as being universal law, which is common throughout the world’s population of Moslems - this is in contrast (yet an inter-dependent part of) the culture of their birthright, be it Indonesian, Arab, Turkish, African, etc. He spoke in an inclusive manner about Judaism and Christianity, referring to them as “the other Abrahamic faiths,” because all three religions are viewed in Islam as being merely different denominations of the same faith - that which their forefather Abraham established. Of Terrorism, he speaks bluntly: those who have had a true spiritual experience do not do violence; if one knows The Spirit, onewould not be tempted by violence. He also refers to Terrorism as a political phenomenon, not a religious one. He draws the parallel with the acts of the IRA; it was their socio-political agenda that motivated them, not the fact that they were Catholic. No one suggested the troubles in Ireland were a Holy War between Catholics and Protestant.
Two very different messages, from two very different people, from two very different faiths.
This all triggered in me a memory of the Judaeo-Christian mythology of the Angelic Wars and the fall of Lucifer. The angels were created by God to minister to Creation, and there are various ranks and hierarchies of these beings, with particular roles to fulfil. They are immortal, but do not have free will - they have no choice but to worship God and all His Glory. Humans on the other hand were not granted the gift of immortality, but were gifted with free will. Lucifer - “Light-bringer” - was said to have been one of God’s most beloved of angels, holding an esteemed position as one of the guardians of His throne (possibly one of the four Cherubim). His pride led him to dislike Humans because of their free will; for he loved God immensely but was so pained that God paid so much attention to Humans even though many of them refused to acknowledge Him and His Creation. This ultimately led to a war in Heaven, where Lucifer and his followers were cast out to Hell - basically, a realm that is far away from God’s presence as is possible, the cruellest punishment for Lucifer, who was so enamoured of His presence. Moreover, this further fuelled Lucifer’s hatred for Humanity, and has always sought to undermine our destiny since. He became the ‘father of lies’ and a ‘deceiver’, manifesting in the mythology as the serpent who tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit which led to the exile out of Eden.
Angels are said to be messengers - from the Greek word angelos, and the Hebrew word ma’lach. They are impelled to worship God (they have no choice), and they are immortal. The Fallen Angels also have to follow God’s Laws, as they have no choice - the difference being is that they are constantly trying to return to Heaven, and will do everything they can to achieve this goal. Would one of the ways to achieve this be to wander around the world, preaching to people about God, about becoming a worshipper of God? Is it possible they could create the idea of a Man being a God? Theologically speaking, this is blasphemous, and Christian Theologists have tried for a Millennium and a half to justify this idea within the realms logic (some would argue, a form of deception itself, as opposed to the Truth of Gnosis, which is not intellectual, nor rational). I ponder on the way these Evangelists (the root of the word is even from the same as ‘angel’) preach, they way they demandthat their way is the only way, that their truth is the only truth, and the way they would do “whatever it takes” to swell their own ranks.
In the sci-fi series Babylon 5, J. Michael Straczynski wove the archetypal struggle between good and evil into the plot; the agents of the Shadows (the ancient evil) always approached people by asking them, “What is it you want?” and then granting them that wish like a genie out of a bottle. From then on, these people became part of the Shadows, their Hearts growing colder and darker and leading them to perform acts that their previous morality would blanch at - but now having no choice but to do what they had to do in order to maintain “that which they wanted.”
On the other hand, there is the faith - that very human faith - that enshrines plurality, diversity, and free will. The very idea of hosts of hierarchies of angels is historically speaking a remnant of the Middle Eastern pagan past, where there is a guardian spirit for all manner of phenomena - from the rocks, rivers, trees, birds, beasts, to the stars, the moon, the sun, light, dark, spirit and matter. The descriptions of the roles of the various angelic orders from the Bible and post-Biblical texts throughout the last 1500 years imply that these beings merely ‘govern’ the myriad aspects of Creation on behalf of their Creator. This is itself quite a pantheistic idea, and quite different from the idea of an Absolute Monotheism which is implied in all three of the Great Religions of the Middle East (i.e., Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). Ultimately, the concept of the plurality of the Divine is volken spirituality, where it is the immediate environment, the experienced world of the ‘average’ person that is mythologised and viewed as something so much more than what it appears to be on the surface. Monotheism is the religion of Kings and Emperors, of the State, which attempts to impose its absolute authority over the people, to justify its own existence, and to legitimise its rule. It should be noted however that Monotheism is not the exclusive domain of political despotism; for the statement “my way or the highway” is used by many people in many circumstances: abusive husbands and fathers, harsh employers, intolerant landlords, and so on and so forth.
I am not suggesting for a moment that the American Evangelical preacher from the first program is a Fallen Angel, or that the Sufi Imam is one of God’s angels. These two very different approaches to faith merely got me to thinking about what I value when it comes to spirituality. Which approach makes me feel that spirit which the Imam claimed would not inspire me to violence? Obviously I have my own biases, based upon my upbringing, education, and experiences. However, for me there is the gnosis that a ‘surrendering to the Divine’ (whatever name and form you choose) involves a little sacrifice - not having your every earthly desires fulfilled.
But that’s just my humble opinion…..
