[MF] faith, hope and love

[david buchanan]

Kevin and y'all:

Kevin said:
As I reflected about what faith, hope, love and relationships mean to me one 
word came into focus, commitment.  It seems to me that it's only through my 
commitments that these other words have any meaning at all.  And 
paradoxically, it's through the faith, hope and love that I express and that 
others express to me that I'm able to make commitments at all.

dmb says:
Except for sociopathic types and those in a coma, I think everyone knows 
what hope and love are. And I think its safe to say that most of us depend 
on all kinds of personal relationships. For the most part, I think this is 
all about social level values. I think you're talking about the sentiments 
that hold society and civilization together, although I'm not sure what 
you're getting at with this talk. But its the term "faith" that has always 
baffled me. I'm quite skeptical about it too. I've asked other people over 
the years, but have never heard an answer that meant anything to me. Maybe 
you can help.

Kevin continued:
For a more eloquent explanation I would refer you to a book by James W. 
Fowler, Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development....

dmb says:
I'm gonna trim your quotes from Fowler just a bit and then make some 
comments so that you might see what sort of trouble I'm having with 
"faith"....

Fowler:
"questions of faith... help us get in touch with the dynamic, patterned 
process by which we find life meaningful... help us reflect on the centers 
of value and power that sustain our lives.  The persons, causes and 
institutions we really love and trust, the images of good and evil, of 
possibility and probability to which we are committed - these form the 
pattern of our faith."

dmb says:
This quote and the questions it refers to only confirm my theory that you're 
talking about social level values, what with all the talk about commitment 
to powers, causes and institutions. It has a certain emotional appeal 
insofar as people desire purpose and meaning in their lives, but there seems 
to be an assumption that meaning and purpose are to be found outside 
ourselves, in some cause or institution. I think that's a recipie for 
spiritual death on a personal level and fascism on the collective level. Its 
all about loyalty and attachments, the good guys and the bad guys and seems 
to construe "faith" as a matter of picking sides in the world of static 
values. And insofar as fear and desire are the cause of all suffering, its 
not very Zen either. Fowlers words are real fine and pretty on the surface, 
but it makes me shudder to see what's under all that talk about purpose and 
meaning. This guy has the talent to be a cult leader...

Fowler:
"...Faith is a person's or group's way of moving into the force field of 
life.  It is our way of finding coherence in and giving meaning to the 
multiple forces and relations that make up our lives.  Faith is a person's 
way of seeing him- or herself in relation to others against the background 
of shared meaning and purpose."

dmb says:
Here the idea is to detach faith from religion and define the term so that 
anyone who has a "way of seeing him or herself" has faith. Anyone who moves 
through "the force field of life", whatever that means, has faith. Seems the 
idea here is that we are all persons of faith in some way and that meaning 
is to be found in the group, that its a shared meaning. I'm not one of those 
Randian Individualists or anything, but that just gives me the willies. And 
then there is my continued bewilderment as to the actual meaning of the term 
"faith". Its our way of moving into life, our way of finding coherence, a 
person's way of seeing himself? Seems like faith is associated with lots and 
lots of personal and emotional issues, but its too vague to see much more 
than that...

Fowler:
"...Faith,.. is a universal concern. ..we are already engaged with issues of 
faith. ..we are concerned with how to put our lives together and with what 
will make life worth living. ..we look for something to honor and respect 
that has the power to sustain our being."

dmb says:
OK. We're all concerned with our lives. Hard to argue with that. But again, 
what's with the idea of "something...that has the power to sustain our 
being"? Something tells me he's not just talking about a nice sandwich or 
any other kind of lunch. Are we talking about God here or what? In that 
case, does "honor and respect" really mean "worship and obey"? And while the 
emotional appeal of a meaningful and purposeful life isn't always a bad 
thing, I think that ultimately, if we're trying to talk about spirituality 
or whatever, even the desire for purpose and meaning is a trap insofar as it 
is a desire. And conversely, as static creatures, we fear meaninglessness. I 
mean, in terms of enlightenment, this sort of quasi-theological talk is 
basically aggrandizing the very thing that is to be overcome. It feeds the 
ego and bolsters the conventional self while enlightenment is said to be 
just about the opposite.

I realize this stuff means something to you, Kevin, and you're just trying 
to spread the joy. But as I understand it, "faith" is not a good thing. At 
least not Fowlers quasi-fascist, spiritually retarded version of it.

Thanks.
dmb

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/