At Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:56:50 -0500, you wrote:
>
>>Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 14:21:53 -0700
>>From: David McFadzean <david@lucifer.com>
>>Subject: Re: virus: The Alleged Virtues of Faith (was: The Energizer Bunny)
>>
>>At 11:08 AM 3/16/99 -0800, Deron Stewart wrote:
>>>David McFadzean wrote:
>>>> I guess I'm still looking for a clear, unambiguous
>>>> statement about the alleged virtues of faith.
>>>
>>>Imagine talking to a person wearing a Mexican sombrero who says to you:
>>>"Show me the benefits of wearing a hat and I will. But until then I'll stay
>>>just the way I am."
>>
>>I don't think this is a fair characterization. Most of us admit to
>>having faith right now in the form of unexamined and possibly
>>inconsistent beliefs. The question is whether this is something
>>to be sought after or avoided. Is faith something that is simply
>>unavoidable, as Reed sometimes seem to suggest? If so, should it
>>be accepted, even cherished? That, to me, is akin to celebrating
>>our most primal instincts over more thoughtful courses of action.
>>
>>Maybe that suggests where the conflict lies: some of us suggest
>>that we can and should be more than animals while others say
>>that we *are* animals and it is great to be animals. My use of
>>the word "animal" in this context is not meant to be derogatory
>>in any sense, and I don't think it really conveys what I'm
>>trying to say. Hopefully it provides enough clues for subscribers
>>willing to give it a charitable reading.
>
>That was beautiful!
>
>What I'm saying is that we must each be who we are..we
>have to revel in being. I had three years of Catholic school,
>which was enough to infect me with faith..innoculation?
>But not long enough to do me in. I live in symbiosis with
>a mild faith. That is who I am and being that has served
>me well. I would question faith, but I wouldn't destroy it.
>
>We can't. If we try, the result is simply a naked mind
>ready to be infected with whatever trash the media has
>to offer today.
>
Who was it who said (unfairly) that the danger for those who reject Christianity is not that they'll end up believing in nothing, but that they'll end up believing in anything? My answer to that is that if they'll believe in Christianity, we already may state that their gullibility and uncritical acceptance knows no bounds. Those wgo reject Christianity are at least demonstrating the beginnings of some discerning discrimination.
>
>
Sure, you can TRY and train people to
>weed the garden of their mind..but the rational person
>would admit that this will never be a complete process.
>Furthermore, by the time any of us will get near it, we
>will already be dozens of years older than innocence.
>
>We can strive, though. And when I fold the delicate paper
>umbrella of my consciouness closed the last pieces will be
><faith>, <reason>, <God>, and <I> in, more or less, that
>order. I know this in my soul. But, David, I have miles
>to go before I sleep.
>
>
>Reed
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Reed Konsler konsler@ascat.harvard.edu
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
Joe E. Dees
Poet, Pagan, Philosopher