CONSTRICTION

[joe sz]

david, robair virginia and moderators

thanks for coming to a decision re the scary CC thread
I notice that it is now locked.

but seriously, the last long post I lost in cyberspace concentrated on the idea of constriction and why that is not only at the heart of what I was getting at when comparing a large world/global religion with small newer sects, but also at the heart of the harm caused by totalistic cult activity to its members.

when I have time I will elaborate without mentioning the RCC---no need to---but I think I can clear up for some at least why someone can choose a relatively unconstricted participation in a world religion as opposed to the difficulty of avoiding psychological, financial, spiritual, social, intellectual, legal, medical, scientific and humor constriction in a cult like RSE or the one i most compare with experientially, CUT.

I would also caution all ex-members that passively or actively use the EMF forum to keep in mind that nearly all ex-members of totalist cults tend to react with suspicion, with a guarded sense and constriction, to almost any dynamic social group or religion upon exiting a cult--this guarded attitude can last for many years and often for life---but it does not have to. My CC thread was perhaps a test of the EMF waters---and myself. I learned a few things and am reminded that some discussions are best left on a person to person basis.

[WofthesunEofthemoon]

Testing the waters can always be a hazardous enterprise, Joe.

However, I know from personal experience, how hard it can be to heal from the constrictions and sub-conscious messages which we have been given when we have been members of an abusive sect, or cult.

Also, when one has suffered from everything that appertains to that, once one has made one's escape, why on earth would one be in any frame of mind to hear what any traditional religion has to offer? I am speaking in very general terms here, not from a personal perspective. It has been over 30 years since I made my escape from the Knights Templars of Aquarius.

It has to be said that I had few arguments with the faith of my upbringing, (Anglican) except that I viewed that it did not go far enough. (In those days I had a firm belief in reincarnation, and some other aspects), so it would have been very easy for me, personally, to escape back there, especially as I was in a state of terrible fear, thinking myself to be under some kind of psychic attack.

I chose not to; however, I have never closed my mind to the idea of an essential Truth/Wisdom lying at the heart of every great religion.

W.E

,

[David McCarthy]

david, robair virginia and moderators
thanks for coming to a decision re the scary CC thread

You are welcome - watch out those scary cult de-programmers though!! -

I would also caution all ex-members that passively or actively use the EMF forum to keep in mind that nearly all ex-members of totalist cults tend to react with suspicion, with a guarded sense and constriction, to almost any dynamic social group or religion upon exiting a cult--this guarded attitude can last for many years and often for life---but it does not have to.

Thank you Joe,
-this guarded attitude can last for many years and often for life---but it does not have to "
No of course 'it does not have to' .
The fact is some of those suspicions are wholly justified and essential to help stop cult victims from hopping into another cult or a constricted religion/organization.
'Any port in a storm.. may be the only 'refuge' to be found. It is a destructive syndrome I am sure you have seen many times.
The moderators of EMF have a personal responsibility with navigating EMF through these troubled waters that many EMF members are not aware of and some are quick to shout 'constriction, censorship, dictator..these accusations can get vicious.
But this comes with the territory and as painful as it is to deal with such 'constricted' thinking.
I am glad for the opportunity to look deeper into the fertilizers that feeds cults.
And we do endeavor to keep that S#@-t off EMF.

My CC thread was perhaps a test of the EMF waters---and myself.
I learned a few things and am reminded that some discussions are best left on a person to person basis.

I agree Joe, thank you...
lets all explore this subject in more depth in the coming weeks

David.

[joe sz]

to keep this thread on track re my point about constriction....now moved to another thread
why RSE is different than RCC
or
a constricted cult different than a major world religion

this interdenominational meeting was started 25 years ago by a pope. who would/could JZ invite to her powwows?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/2 ... 62649.html


Quote:
Benedict, who had been critical of John Paul's 1986 event, welcomed a small group of agnostics and, in a bid to avoid the impression that all religions are identical, made prayer private and optional.

Benedict traveled the 100 miles from Rome by train, bringing with him delegates representing faiths from Anglicanism to Zoroastrianism.

There were reminders of the color and variety that distinguished the 1986 landmark gathering. Bald Buddhist monks in saffron robes mingled with turbaned Sikhs and Orthodox prelates in black veils. Wande Abimbola, a Nigerian scholar representing indigenous African religions, invoked the Yoruba deity Olokun and chanted to the accompaniment of a rattle.

But the ceremonies were far more generic than at the 1986 event, whose photogenic highlights included Zoroastrians tending a sacred fire and an American Indian medicine man in traditional headdress smoking a peace pipe.

At a morning ceremony in Assisi's Basilica of Santa Maria degli Angeli, 11 of the visiting leaders joined the pope in giving short speeches calling for peace among nations and religions, as well as an end to poverty and environmental pollution.


again. I am not selling anything here but a fact of history. In my experience most ex-members of cults like RSE, esp the New Agey ones that "hate" churchianity, would find such gatherings very very uncomfortable, but the larger political implication in light of the history of these churches and other world religious styles prior to 1965 is that progress has occurred...thus a loosening of the constricting, often suffocating attitudes between otherwise good people.

[joe sz]

Given Joe’s standpoint as a devout Catholic it is understandable his reluctance to personally explore cults and abuse within the RCC on EMF.
However, as stated in our EMF posting guidelines:

I reread this note that reveals a severe misunderstanding by moderator(s).

I have NO reluctance to explore cults or abuse within the RCC..I have been doing this for over 30 years...where in my posts have you determined that?

Also, I never use "devout" when I identify myself as Catholic. What does that mean in your addled minds?
Please describe what you mean by a devout Catholic...
What I sense here is exactly what I began with this thread on constriction.

When I approach anyone in exit counseling about their cult, my first goal is to gain rapport with the concerned family or spouse present. My role at that stage is to explore the positive reasons why someone is in the group, explore the nature and history of a group without going into a plethora of negative aspects---kind of like a neutral sociologist might. This can take many hours and even an entire first day. It lays out the
scene and it gives the cult member/client the ability to trust that I am at least very familiar with their group and their experience, and that I can be fair.
Criticism comes in when we agree that some ex-members left for various reasons. We explore that stuff. We also look at other cults and models for what a cult is. Then the client makes their own decision. I do not decide for them, nor do I make them feel they have no "right" to belong to said cult.

What I see happening here on EMF, especially with the laundry list of questions challenging me ad hominem, is perhaps a subconscious attempt to exit counsel me from the RCC, or at least the implication that I am like any other cult member.

Let me advise you all how ineffective that approach is with anyone in any cult, to go at the jugular based on a number of emotional stereotypes or crime reports one has from the news and a cursory grasp of the history of the group.

[David McCarthy]

Hi Joe, everyone..
I will speak as an EMF moderator. This is from my perspective.
We have a huge thread and debate on our moderator forum regarding your thread Catholic church cult and gleaning from our heated debate several main issues have surfaced.

I have NO reluctance to explore cults or abuse within the RCC..I have been doing this for over 30 years...where in my posts have you determined that?

From the fact that you have not done so is self evident in your thread.
Your thread is a religious debate framed in defense of the RCC.
EMF is not the place for religious debate; it is just too divisive a topic that drowns and sidesteps our EMF purpose and posting guidelines.
Joe, your ‘Catholic Church Cult’ is ‘off topic’ to your original topic page thread and breaches our EMF guidelines.
Yes this is ‘constricting’ and I may appear as a dictator for that reason but nevertheless this is my opinion.
When you first posted your thread I thought WONDERFUL..Joe is willing to share his concerns.
I directed EE members to read your post to allay concerns that you may have a conflict of interest as a roman catholic and a cult exit councilor and I think its a fair concern and worth exploring.
From then on.. all is history.
I have asked you to address the "dark side" of your church and faith, "What concrete and meaningful changes [governance] and doctrines would you like to see abolished or set in place by the RCC hierarchy system to help stop such abuses continuing in the RCC?
as I strongly feel this is the most important issue and in line with the title of your thread.
You posted..

"since this Catholic cult idea comes up so often with both RSE and LARSE, perhaps we should take a look at the debate:

"I purposely started this thread to ferret out the quality of anti-catholic bias

Then a more accurate/honest title would be to ferret out the quality of anti-catholic bias.
EMF is not for religious debate Joe, of all people I understood you to know this.
You did acknowledge abuse in the RCC with

"Hell Yes"

"Yes, the cover-up by CC officials re abusive priests exposed the insular nature of the CC hierarchy. There is no defense for that kind of criminal activity

and then moved on.
I don't believe RSE is salvageable in any way shape and form, but the RCC will be around for many years to come. You insist (and I totally agree) that r-establishing critical thinking from cultic abuse is essential in our recovery. Abuse within the RCC is no exception, yet you are not holding the same standards to your own religion on EMF. Other Catholics are speaking out... so it’s not unreasonable to expect you to do the same on EMF given you are an exit councilor for religious cultic abuse, the RCC is not free of cultic abuse as my links painfully point out.
Joe…the crux of the matter is you have not explored that very issue of cultic abuse within the RCC, past or present,
but more importantly you offer No solutions to those abuse problems within the RCC,
these abuses are not about to go way.
This is why your thread was moved to our off topic page with the moderator comment.

-Moderator Comment-
Given Joe’s standpoint as a devout Catholic it is understandable his reluctance to personally explore cults and abuse within the RCC on EMF.

This 'CONSTRICTION'....I think is for good "reason", but a hard call to make, given all the brilliant information and contribution to EMF you have provided over the years.

My CC thread was perhaps a test of the EMF waters---and myself.

Please no more of your tests on EMF!
This has proved to be an exhaustive and destructive topic for EMF and the moderators.

David.

[joe sz]

Please no more of these tests!
This has proved to be an exhaustive and destructive topic for EMF and the moderators

OK....if you want to drop this. I found it to be more than necessary as a certain rigidity remains in many ex-members re religion in general. I found that that rigidity is partially what got me and them into cult trouble in the first place--a need for "certainty" in an uncertain world, in a world that offers suffering and a need for control of that world "to make it better" and "to be all that we can be."

CUT baited me with ancient wisdom of the Masters of all religions, and "decrees" or a spiritual way to make a change in myself and the world. TM does it with mantras and misuse of Hindu rituals. Scientology does it with auditing, reincarnational narratives, and a quasi-fascist mental ATTITUDE. RSE offered you the very source of an ancient knowledge coming from 35,000 years ago, and an ancient psi-power and a way to tap that occult potential.

I found that the RCC and the modernist Skeptics had already addressed all those issues mentioned above: the cult of confession as in auditing in Scientology, the misuse of prayer as in CUT, and the bizarre idea that a repeated chant can "scientifically" change things in myself or the world [TM], and the misuse of the "cult of saints" when certain unscrupulous Catholics create constricted groups around their narcissistic selves. The RCC has been in constant states of reform throughout its history. Modern cults or NRMs rarely are. Mormonism is a case in point---the LDS struggles with internal reforms and thus has reached a modicum of respectability---like RCC it has long way to go...it is the quality of the struggle that i am interested in. There have been great reformers in the RCC throughout its history.

To ask me to go at the RCC to please your sensibilities on this forum is naive and patently absurd--others are doing it as we speak far better than I could. Note the organization of nuns at war with the Vatican today.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/1 ... 66852.html
Or the theologian Hans Kung.
This list is long.

It is not my chosen dharma [life duty]. I have enough on my plate with these piss-ant cults I chose to deal with over 30 years ago.

Let me throw you 2 bones, my dear brothers an sisters:
In 1968 when I was at University of Dayton, a fine Catholic learning center, some of my liberal "hippy" colleagues started a news-zine called Uranus with all puns intended.
It quickly became an underground hit in the then post Vatican 2 late Sixties spirit of the times. The Uranus publishers once asked me to illustrate some articles. One was a poignant piece about the controversy over birth control and the hard line the current and prior popes took on contraception. My rather good pen and ink cartoon showed a 'pope' with a toilet seat around his neck spilling birth control pills down the commode. Of course, my intent was to show the "burden" that the pope carried, so one could see this cartoon both as a commentary and as a slight on hierarchy.

Copies of that issue of Uranus were sent anonymously to our parents with a letter saying this is the kind of activity your son or daughter engages in. There was a threat of expulsion!
Naturally my folks, hard working, relatively uneducated and simple Hungarian Catholics were upset.

fast forward:
In 1985 I attended a conference on "cults and the occult" in Santa Fe, NM organized by a former Carmelite nun and a protestant cleric. They wanted to address this problem as harmed ex-members and confused seekers [Santa Fe was full of them] kept coming to their doors. At the time I was about to be married again and i was going to put all my cult research behind me..I spent an enormous amount of time already and had written a long research paper in 1983 called "Mad B's Myth" [re Blavatsky, the I AM, and CUT] that i felt put the matter to rest for me. That 50 page essay made the rounds nationally via snail mail in the early 1980s--it stimulated the Paolinis to put CUT in perspective and later to write "400 Years of Imaginary Friends" in 2000. I wanted to get my art career and coming marriage on track..I was FED UP with thinking about the cult problem after 5 years

But, I like a fool at that conference kept putting up my hand and correcting things the speakers were saying about cults and the occult. It was put on by the Center for Christian Information or ICC. At their next meeting, they elected me "Chairman" and I was not at that meeting. They called me and I acccepted the challenge for the next 7 years. I took the task on and guided that group for 7 years, giving the lion's share of lectures all over the state of NM including at Indian tribes and at police depts and colleges. I was making NO money at this, so i decided to help other exit counselors and deprogrammers that had been calling me to at least be able to keep up the volunteer work.

Most of the people on the ICC board were Catholics with NO AGENDA to sell or advertise the RCC. We even had a public debate once with a local Wicca coven led by a lesbian and we all ended up in a circle offering a common prayer.
One ICC member was the had of a Benedictine monastery, the other a Dominican brother who was head of the philosophy dept at the College of Santa Fe, another a former priest and editor for amy publications. One member who became a dear friend of mine was a former Zen cult member who converted to Evangelical Christianity. At the same time i helped organize and lecture for the Skeptics group in Albuquerque.

the upshot of my story:
If it had not been for this courageous former nun and her ICC i 1985, I may have never dealt with Ramtha and exited in person maybe 20 people from that cult in the late 1980s before most of you on EMF joined RSE. FYI: That nun and the others were released by her bishop from that Carmelite order in Texas, she after spending ten years of her life in it, from age 16-26. The nunnery was under the authoritarian control of an abusive mother superior, one bitch of a nun that even made the sisters eat in total silence [it is a silent order] with the skull of a dead sister on the table to remind them of their mortality. The bishop dissolved the nunnery. She knew intimately the difference between a cult and the RCC as a religion. She knew the abuses surrounding aberrant priests, very well. She knows the theology and history and does not ignore the side of the RCC that bothers David/Virginia/etc so much. Her participation in RCC is clearly INFORMED
She married an ex-priest, they raised 2 fine sons who are doing well, and they as a couple to this day remain "devout" in the true sense, unlike me, Catholics. She is yet teaching theology at a high school. I just illustrated a new book she wrote for St Paul's press re mysticism in the RCC.

You want more bones? I have a bag full....

No one else has taken on RSE as I have among my peers. Not one of you on this forum has written a coherent essay yet or rebuttle to say scholars like Melton as i have....I have no idea what drives me--perhaps a form of madness...but I do know that Jeff Knight, after i got to kow him, has something to do with my presence here.

So, if any of you think the RCC needs a lesson, go speak out, carry your own g'damn banners. Do NOT point at me with your bony shaky finger....I might chew it off....just kidding..I do not bite despite my tone in this post

For my part I will cease from posting on this thread. There sems to be an impass as others have now shrunk away..or so I feel.

It has stimulated me to write a long blog about this issue. In the future, when it comes to the RCC and cult behavior, I can say, "read my blog."

[joe sz]

PS:

Abuse within the RCC is no exception, yet you are not holding the same standards to your own religion on EMF.

I hold the RCC to higher standards than I do for RSE-like cults. There are much larger, ongoing historical and theological problems. The comment is way off base.

Define your standards and we may have something more to talk about:

I have already posted mine, especially in a published essay called A Razor's Edge Indeed: http://www.icsahome.com/logon/elibdocvi ... t+Activity


btw, I am not posting here to win.....this is not a battle...merely a discussion from my pov. but then, I am not in charge on EMF...

[David McCarthy]

Hello Joe, everyone...
Thank you for your posts and insights Joe.

OK....if you want to drop this.

It has stimulated me to write a long blog about this issue. In the future, when it comes to the RCC and cult behavior, I can say, "read my blog."

Yes...excellent suggestions.

I came across this wonderful quote posted on the Rick Ross website:

"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers"
-Carl Sagan-

David.

The Ross Institute link:
http://www.rickross.com/

[Kensho]

Quote:
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers"
-Carl Sagan-

It's not a question, but what I am about to discuss may very well may raise the sort which takes the most courage to ask; those we ask of ourselves. It is hoped that there is at least enough courage to hear me out and allow others to do the same. Maybe then we can all peacefully arrive at some answers and avoid disharmony in the future.
Now that would be significant, wouldn't it?

Although I will use the word religion in this discussion and suspect that already some hackles have been raised at the mere suggestion, I wish to make clear that it is understood that religion is not up for discussion on EMF. Be assured that this discussion is not about the pro/con or in defense of religion, nor does it address the topic of whether EMF should host such discussions. Yet if this particular discussion is to have meaning and avoid confusion, using the word 'religion' is unavoidable.

We have been through some rough patches over the past few days and many people succumbed to anger. The nature of that emotion had us lashing out at each other and some of us said and did things that we may now regret.
After reviewing the many posts and also asking some hard questions of myself, I believe that differences of perception and view with respect to those who follow religion is what brought many of us to the point of disharmony on EMF.
That is what this discussion is about.

There is a perception that true, or devout if you want to use that term, practitioners of most world religions, are somehow different than everyone else. Each religion seems to have its own particular perceived stereotype, but in addition to that there does seem to be commonly held perceptions that are shared amongst all of them.

Characteristics such as being honest, generous, patient, understanding, forgiving and compassionate etc, seem to fit into the generalized grouping of what is most commonly accepted as religious practice; and while these may aspired to through religious practice, so too are they strived for and practiced by many who choose not to follow a religious path.

The difference comes when a failure to live up to these aspirations by religious practitioners becomes apparent through their behaviour. Unacceptable behaviour is all too often judged as being in contravention of a person's religion and they are often excused or chastised for it by others.
"And he is calls himself a Christian!" has been heard and repeated enough times to make the phrase recognizable as judgment of a religious practitioner who has behaved in a less than acceptable manner. Similar phrases such as "What do you expect, she is a.....?" can be heard the world over.

Such judgments imply that there is an expectation, almost by way of some magic, that a religious practitioner has possession of some greater moral compass, self discipline or awareness. The reality remains that despite belonging to any group, whether it is one of religion or not, each person is an individual and interprets their world while exercising their mind according to that individuality.

I think that it is safe to say that we are all able to recognize and feel compassion for this individuality of perception, experience and behaviour in those who have followed a group like RSE, and are able to do so not only because we experienced RSE for ourselves. It is puzzling however, why some choose not to exercise that same ability to feel compassion toward everyone equally, whether they follow a religion or not.

Enough emails have been received now for me to realize that my recent behaviour on EMF was so out of character, that it created some concern over my wellbeing. Thank you to those who felt compelled to ask when they noticed the change in me; rest assured that all will be well.

I find it interesting that some attribute my otherwise steady nature as being due to a long religious affiliation, because that perception ignores the reality that it has also been the result of life's experiences blunting the ability to over-react or to get excited about much. Many of those experiences were beyond my control, and to name only a few, included a dominating parental influence, experiencing prejudice and teasing in my youth, experiencing beatings, abuse and betrayal, watching helplessly as sickness and death took those that I loved, and a host of many similar factors that have contributed to making every single person the person that they are, through being similarly influenced.

To identify someone solely by their religious practice, reveals something about those who make that identification, but more importantly, at least in their in their minds, it denies the same level of understanding and compassion that they may extend to the non-religious. This seems to be especially so when faults fail to be controlled or corrected preemptively and are expressed through behaviour or action. Any form of judgement and lack of understanding are source of great suffering and we only need to look at the wars that have been fought over such prejudicial views to see the truth in that.

When generalized views are promoted and accepted with respect to religious practice, many may suffer as a result; even when the main aspiration of religious practitioners may only be to emulate what is perceived to be the desirable characteristics of the their religion's central focus or what it represents.
Whole masses of people throughout history have lost their lives because they were looked upon with a prejudicial view or were judged by the behaviours and actions of a few who happened to have been affiliated with the same particular religion that they too were affiliated with.

That this sort of prejudicial view still exists in humanity is shameful, but to find that it exists in here, I find even more disturbing.
To also find that some EMF members hold the view that all religious practitioners are incapable of critical thinking or independent choice, and that they behave in certain predictable ways because of their religious practice, is...well, it leaves me at a loss to find a word to express that...and that says a lot.

So what happened to my 'Buddhist' nature these past few days?
When this prejudicial view appeared in a moderators comment, I was so deeply hurt and embarrassed that I simply 'lost it'. So urgent was the need to immediately distance myself from those who held that view, that I did so publicly. It did not go unnoticed that by doing so I was also making a judgement with respect to the views of others, but seeing as the first such judgement had been made publicly, I thought it best to keep the potential for discussion there.
Not only did I object to the judgement of a named EMF member, as being 'understandably reluctant to personally explore specific topics because of an alignment with religious practice'; it was realized that this same view also applied to me, because of mine.
It angered me to realize that those who I was led to believe valued my opinions as coming from careful independent analysis, held that view; and had likely been patronizing me because of it. I felt betrayed and that made it personal; so I said so.

Admittedly I did bow out of acting as a moderator for EMF around two years ago because I wished to avoid the potential perception of my having a conflict of interest or of being influenced by my religious practice in that task. I openly disclosed this on EMF when I resigned, yet I was invited to remain as a contributor to the moderator team.
Had I known that others on that team held this view, I would have declined that invitation and perhaps by knowing each others views sooner, a lot of the personal aspect of this mess could have been avoided.

In retrospect I could have handled voicing my own views in a less upsetting manner for all concerned, and I am sorry for the unsavory way in which it was done; but as I have suggested, I am just as prone to human emotion as anyone else...especially when my good nature is taken for that of a fool.
So too am I sorry that the moderators reacted to a post that replied to one of Joe's comments. Although it was on topic and did answer Joe's question, it was also designed to reveal hypocrisy to the moderators should they react to it and remove it. They did in short order, but in reading their moderator's warning which it earned, it seems that they did not realize that it was not only designed to reveal their hypocrisy, but mine also.

Such is the blinding nature of anger.

Here again, by making such a statement, I am not suggesting that I am above being blinded by that, but rather am disclosing that I am just as much subject to it as anyone else. As I was still caught up in that emotion, I did not see the potential for the resulting harm and additional work my double-speak post caused them. Had I stopped long enough to dispel that anger and then thought about it, as a previous moderator who has spent countless hours dealing with just such posts, I never would have posted it.
My point is this; emotional influence removes the ability to exercise critical thought more than religious practice or belief ever will.
It is after all, knowing about that emotional influence, which has RSE and similar cults taking advantage of it.

Once my emotions were brought under control, I accepted once again that views and perceptions as well as those that hold them, was just how things were. Even so, the fact that I struggle with continuing to expect something more from people on EMF, reveals that I am just as much subject to prejudicial view as someone who expects more upstanding behaviour from religious practitioners.
I say this to once again reveal that my own hypocrisy has been recognized, and by admitting to that, to hopefully drive home the realization that all of us are subject to similar influences, prejudices and emotions; despite being disturbed by them or aspiring to be free of them.

So now what remains is the recognition that my actions served to fuel more anger and also dissolved the trust which once seemed so enduring.
I do regret adding to such anger and sincerely apologize for doing so, but I still feel that the sacrifice of trust was worth it.
Posting my feelings openly and publicly seemed to be the only way to stand up against what I perceive to be an unfounded judgement of a person who is both respected for his knowledge of issues that we have all faced, and who has been thanked many times for his contribution to EMF.

In closing, I find it sad that my actions have probably been dismissed and judged by some, as having been due to a need to defend a religion or to defend my choices with respect to it. That sadness deepens as I accept that it has also probably been determined by some that I am incapable of appreciating any view that is not alignment with my religious choice.
While I don't believe that holding these views is beneficial, or believe that they are applicable to me, or are necessarily applicable to anyone who chooses to practice a religion, I do understand why that perception may be held by some and sincerely wish that no more suffering comes as a result of differing points of view for anyone.

I will be returning to hermitage shortly as it is time to once again be alone with my thoughts and analyze what I am doing about my own anger, my judgements, my attachments, my....

I will be gone for a while, but I feel that being away from EMF for a time is a good thing.
The PM I received from the moderators in response to the post that was removed, expressed that if I truly believed the view that I had put forward, that I am no longer welcome on EMF.
Contemplation of that view will be the deciding factor on whether or not I return to EMF...unless of course by posting this discussion it is determined to be reason enough to ban me from EMF, in which case no further contemplation is necessary.

I wish you all well on your path.
May it be broad and straight rather than twisted and narrow.

With love, Kensho

[Sad Grandfather]

Just one outsider's opinion about all the bickering about the RCC thread and general religious stuff - - - -

[Virginia]

Hi Kensho,

I found much of what you were saying prior to this post was out of having buttons pushed, I didn't completely understand which buttons. I knew it was more than about defending religion, it was about feeling attacked. We all hold embarrassment of how stupid we could have been to have gotten involved in RSE. My very supportive partner tried to ask how we could have seen these things and not realized, he was asking me something to the effect of "what is going on in our minds that allowed us to justify so much?" I went off on him. How dare he ask me basically "how could you have been such fools" -and in that hurt and embarrassment I lashed out telling him he was in a cult too so ask himself these questions. I felt defensive of my choices. I said well if religion had offered me anything believable I would have been in one, that is why so many found RSE in the first place. I felt judged. I know you felt judged. You are still on a journey, we all are and whether it be a Landmark forum that seems so benign (until you get to know the organization), to self help books, to religion I believe most people that are seeking are to be admired. Because of the nature of this particular support group however it is exceedingly difficult to be able to discuss what inspires people in this regard. We are trying to simply raise red flags to try and help people maintain their critical thinking regardless of where they travel. Most support groups can inspire people with their beliefs, and their prayers,..some days I wish we could go there and explore some new things instead of always being "anti" something I would like that we could be "pro something". All we can do here is be pro caring, pro love, pro understanding and try to be as allowing as we can without shooting ourselves in the foot by doing so. You are an excellent writer, you make your points beautifully. This letter was very sincere. I never thought your attacks on David were sincere..I realized we were dealing with some strong emotion. The other odd thing about running asupport groups for ex cult members is we also understand there is still pain and anger and embarrassment running around that will rear it's ugly head once in a while from all of us. David and Robair and all here are recovering cult member as well and doing the very best job they can to have a safe place for everyone to get this information. I have real compassion for everyone here. It has been a tough road at times and all of us are in some type of recovery and probably still dealing with whatever issues left us vulnerable to be roped in by JZ in the first place. I too felt emotion when reading Joe's post. I felt he was using his intellectual theo-babble to tell us why his religion is okay, yet mine was corrupt. This pushed every button in me. When one of us goes of the reservation we need to have some trust here that the others will let us know and signal us as lovingly as they can. Then at the end of the day, protect the site and hope the one having the moment appreciates that it needed to be done. I hope as with any family we can whether the hurt feelings and I think that is possible. Even in David's most upset moment of being compared to "she who will be nameless" he still had concern for you. He was still hoping he could figure out what was going on to have such strong reactions. David has his own strong emotions being triggered by his past dealings with the church and feeling betrayed by a good friend. Let's face it, we all had strong reactions. If we turn on each other we are screwed is how I see it. I am a brass tacks person who isn't into too much airy fairy stuff. I won't let anyone post anything "Rumi" on my wall but I do feel love for everyone here, even when they are lashing out on me on EE. (oops I think Sad Grandfather fell asleep). lol.

[Robair]

Hello Everyone

To Kensho Thank you for your honesty and all in all a very good post, I do not see the need to respond to it, points has been made, thoughts have been proposed and emotions are still to close, time to listen is upon my door step.
Thank you Virginia.

David for the next few days is not going to participate in this debate, He is working on a very very important project that is requiring his total focus, this situation came right in the middle of it. He like most of us also need to re-evaluate.

So please keep posting on this very important discussion, for myself I will keep my options open, Looking forward to read what everyone have to say, I will suggest that you keep your comment on the issue, knowing that EMF is not the problem or the issue. Cults is.
Thank you everyone
Please feel free to contact me anytime
Robair

[joe sz]

excellent posts...even the one who is bored by all this

On the closing ceremony of the Olympics last night it featured a giant white face of John Lennon in the mid point of the theater floor with his trademark wire rimmed lenses, staring at the sky
"above us only sky" a line from his now iconic song "Imagine" was playing..
"...imagine there's no countries, no religion tooo..."

imagine that. Lennon was a dreamer in many ways, and he was also a very flawed person with deep emotional scars. In the early 70s he did something called Primal Scream [alternative] therapy that appeared to flatten out his personality for some time--wiped him out, as such. He struggled for peace.

we can imagine "no religion" as a solution to the world probelms too, but the reality on the ground, not in the sky, is that human biodiversity through evolution has many components, esp when it comes to social diversity--social evolution. One simple breakdown for human evolution regards
reason, aesthetics and devotion
or
science, art, and religion from the dawn of human existence. These have been inextricably linked to make us who we are.

If you cut one of these elements out or restrict any one too much [as in Marxism with religion, art when the Taliban blew up the giant Buddhas in Afghanistan, science when the ultra-orthodox in any religion ban modern technology, i-pads, electricty, higher education] we find a constricted social order.

RSE manages to "Ban" all 3 components by influencing members to rely on one central source that "reveals" the truth about dance/music, quantum physics, a devotional path. My point again is that to recover from a cult like RSE [or the Carmelite cult that my friend/former nun was in above] the ex-member will at some time or another have to come to some peace with all 3--reason, aesthetics and devotion. This has been my struggle too.