Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Toward Defining The Universal In Religion, State, And Evolution

Bede Griffiths wrote about how in order to unite religions we might return to something like the organization of the five patriarchates of the fifth century, where Rome was considered first among equals (Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria and Constantinople) yet the other patriarchs independently chose their own liturgies, theologies, etc. Into this Universal Church can come the Asian religions, as Asian ministries, with the same perennial philosophy and religion.

In American politics Christianity has affirmed helping with aid the bottom 20 percent of the people, who are inevitable in any system. This is realistic. The classic definition of justice is equality of opportunity under the law, but not equality of final reward. This way “merit” can rightly be the guide. Variation is natural and useful in evolution.

It may seem at first difficult to reconcile Christianity and scientific evolutionary culture, such as Cattell's Beyondism, into a political state, but we can see the implications for enhancing evolution in the U. S. Constitution, which affirms equality of opportunity but not equality of reward. Evolutionary advancement, even positive eugenics, does not seek to guarantee equality of final reward, whereas guaranteeing equality of final reward has been linked with both totalitarian states and with modern liberalism.

The Religious Order Of  The Theoevolutionary Church affirms that we can pursue intelligence, higher consciousness, even beauty, all evolving toward Godhood, lightly guided by a Universal Church, and federal states.

No comments:

Post a Comment