HOME › GENERAL › RELIGION AND POLITICS Religion and Politics BY KAYE LEE on MARCH 24, 2014 • ( 14 ) There is an old adage that warns we should never discuss religion or politics. It’s bizarre that two such influential aspects of our lives should be off-limits. The obvious implication is that, in these two areas, people’s minds are already made up and closed to any information, argument or change. Are we scared that our beliefs, under scrutiny, may be shown to be flawed? Are we unable to explain why we believe something, or hold a certain view, or support a certain religion or political party or policy? Are we unable to be tolerant and civil? Are we unwilling to learn? Is it heresy to question? There is a growing dissatisfaction and feeling of disillusionment and disappointment with both religion and politics. To use the parlance of the day, their business model is broken. This is hardly surprising as they have allowed very little organisational change in hundreds of years. We subsidise these two institutions to the tune of trillions of dollars every year. It’s time we demanded a productivity drive – changes have to be made. An efficiency dividend perhaps, or performance based payment? What is the return to stakeholders? If these were private companies, the entire board and management team would be sacked and new directions taken. Experts warn that we are heading towards an apocalypse driven by climate change, resource depletion, environmental degradation, overpopulation, and income inequity, yet our two greatest institutions seem intent on ignoring these challenges in favour of power and greed. Religions spend an enormous amount of time and money on worship – to what end? Recently, Pope Francis said “We don’t want this globalised economic system which does us so much harm. Men and women have to be at the centre (of an economic system) as God wants, not money. The world has become an idolator of this god called money.” A noble sentiment no doubt, but somewhat hypocritical when, each and every week, some of the poorest Catholics around the world contribute to the church’s unbelievable wealth. The Catholic Church, once all her assets have been put together, is the most formidable stockbroker in the world. The Vatican has large investments with the Rothschilds of Britain, France and America, with the Hambros Bank, with the Credit Suisse in London and Zurich. In the United States it has large investments with the Morgan Bank, the Chase-Manhattan Bank, the First National Bank of New York, the Bankers Trust Company, and others. The Vatican has billions of shares in the most powerful international corporations such as Gulf Oil, Shell, General Motors, Bethlehem Steel, General Electric, International Business Machines, T.W.A., etc. At a conservative estimate, these amount to more than 500 million dollars in the U.S.A. alone. The Vatican’s treasure of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. A large bulk of this is stored in gold ingots with the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, while banks in England and Switzerland hold the rest. But this is just a small portion of the wealth of the Vatican, which in the U.S. alone, is greater than that of the five wealthiest giant corporations of the country. When to that is added all the real estate, property, artworks, stocks and shares worldwide, then the staggering accumulation of the wealth of the Catholic Church becomes so formidable as to defy any rational assessment making it one of the wealthiest institutions on Earth. Avro Manhatten, in his book The Vatican Billions, said “Jesus was the poorest of the poor. Roman Catholicism, which claims to be His church, is the richest of the rich, the wealthiest institution on earth. (…) How come, that such an institution, ruling in the name of this same itinerant preacher, whose want was such that he had not even a pillow upon which to rest his head, is now so top-heavy with riches that she can rival – indeed, that she can put to shame – the combined might of the most redoubtable financial trusts, of the most potent industrial super-giants, and of the most prosperous global corporations of the world?” Their wealth is so big that they could create sustainable social programs to end famine on Earth; they have the power and the means to oppose wars; they have the financial resources to create an Eco-friendly planet — the biblical heaven on Earth. But how could they be willing to invest in “green technology” when they have huge investments in fossil fuel industries? In fact, wars perfectly suit their financial investments. The church’s failure to remain relevant to today’s society, with its preoccupation with power and wealth accumulation, its adherence to celibacy, and its refusal to allow women in positions of authority, make it reminiscent of eunuch guards protecting an ancient temple of gold. “And saying, Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!” Revelation 18:16 Government is the other institution with the means and duty to protect us. We collectively invest our money, entrusting them to make decisions in our best interests. This is not a loan to be handed out to big corporations, nor is it to payroll jobs for your mates or to use on private jets and chauffeured limousines to go to “social networking” functions. We should not have to pay more to give Gina Rinehart a tax free zone in which to make billions from developing our resources whilst repealing the mining tax that might give us some return for our patrimony to help pay for the damage her coal will cause to the planet. We should not have to rely on the largesse of big corporations to give us a fair return on our money and assets. We should not have to pay for politicians to use Parliament as a theatrical stage. This isn’t a high school debate we are having. If it was, the behaviour would be far better, the arguments more coherent, the speech far more eloquent, and it would actually address the arguments for and against the specific point. Each side would listen carefully to each other and try to find flaws in the opposition’s proposition. Real flaws, based on facts, not on personalities or spin. “Chamber sitting” is a total waste of time. Speeches are ignored, question time is a debacle, debate is stage-managed or gagged, point-scoring by endless repetition is the mind-numbing methodology, and not one constructive thing is achieved other than voting on legislation, which could be done remotely. Matters Not, an AIMN commenter with parliamentary experience, said “The ‘common sense’ of Parliament is an historical hangover – relic of a past time when face-to-face communications was the only option. At one level it’s now a joke. But while voting can be done from afar the ‘socialising’ and ‘politicking’ cannot.” Is this really what we are paying them for? The amount of time and money that is wasted on polls, advertising, image consultants, spin doctors and message control is staggering. Hundreds of millions are spent by politicians on making themselves popular so they can get re-elected. What a fraudulent waste of our taxpayer money. Tony Abbott’s expense entitlements as Opposition leader were over $1,000,000 each year. These include travel and office costs. When you consider all the parliamentarians, entitlements add up to a huge amount of money. I wonder how much we would save if the Finance Department had to approve all expenses before purchase and have them pay the bill rather than periodically accepting spurious claims for reimbursement from every MP. Perhaps better still, increase an MP’s salary by a specified amount and make them pay for everything from their own pocket. Bet that would put paid to weddings, private jets, trips to sporting events with your daughters, and custom made bookcases. It might also put people like Mark Textor and Peta Credlin out of a job making way for staff with useful expertise. The official Federal Parliament website states that “the most important change (to the Westminster system) since 1867 has been the growth of the party system. Nearly all members of the lower houses are now elected as representatives of political parties. Party discipline in all the parliaments has been greatly strengthened, and in some of the parliaments it is almost unknown for an MP to fail to support the agreed party position-that is, the position agreed by a majority of the parliamentary party. In some of the parties, an MP may be expelled from the party for failing to support the party line.” In the last 150 years the most important change has been to form gangs that stifle debate and disenfranchise their members under threat of excommunication? The party system has become corrupt, susceptible to manipulation by wealthy donors, factional bullying, preselection and preference deals. Imagine if we elected people on merit rather than party affiliation. Wouldn’t it be refreshing if each individual MP voted for what was best on the basis of expert advice and informed debate rather than being told how to vote to best serve your party’s donors. Gina can’t fund everyone’s campaign – well she could, but bribing 145 people is a lot harder than just bribing the leader of one party. Our Parliament is hamstrung by archaic ceremony and tradition. This is very costly and extremely unproductive. In the 21st century surely we can come up with a better system. So I say to our religious and political leaders, lift your game! Religions of the world should remember that their core beliefs are basically the same and there should be interdenominational co-operation to preach and practice charity, tolerance, peace, and love. “O mankind! We made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other).” (The Qur’an 49:13) “But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth. 1 John 3:17-18 “ Politicians need to reminded of their job. They are our guardians given temporary stewardship of our wealth to provide for all Australian citizens and to fulfil our global responsibility as a prosperous nation. It is NOT their job to increase the wealth of a few at the expense of the many while spending every moment campaigning for re-election. “The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.” -Thomas Jefferson “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” - The New Colossus by Emma Lazarus About these ads SHARE THIS ARTICLE: Digg EmailPrintMore ‹ Malaysian Airlines MH370 and HMAS SuccessFreedom to speak badly: one rule for protestors, another for Bolt? › Categories: General, Politics, SocietyTags: Catholic Church, Politics, religion, vatican wealth, westminster system 14 replies Don Winther March 24, 2014 • 6:45 pm Gee Kaye Lee I love the way you think, this could have been a great country but the big boys have stolen it from us and most of us didn’t even notice. There is not much left, 200 years of building and 20 years of selling. Why do we need politicians now that we have the internet, a bit of good software and advance Australia fair. Get rid of the free loaders. Helen Light March 24, 2014 • 6:51 pm I am a female minister of religion, so obviously not a Catholic. While there are some parts of the church that support the status quo, there are other parts of the that are firmly behind action to prevent climate change. One such group that springs to mind is a facebook group called Australian Religious Response to Climate Change. Almost every minister I know appears to vote Green, and thus supports every move to stop climate change. There are churches that have solar panels on them, and many churches have reduced their carbon footprint over the last few years. Another important point: the first Sunday in May is designated Religious Pluralism Sunday, in which churches are invited to help our flocks think about the fact that at the very heart of every religion are exactly the same teachings. Members of the Progressive paths of each religion will acknowledge that they only follow their particular path because it is the path in which they were raised. I have been celebrating this Sunday with guest speakers from other religions or by including readings from other religions, so that my people can learn more about other religions. The groups you should be directing your frustration to are not the progressives from each religion, but the fundamentalists, who have such strange ideas about most things, especially their religion. (The best way to counter them is to have them discover for themselves what their text actually teaches, as most don’t know.) I understand that Pope Francis has been investigating the whole issue of environmentalism, and expect that in the near future he will release a new teaching about climate change. If he doesn’t, he will be inundated by people like me pointing out the error of his ways – not that he would necessarily take any notice of women, let alone non-Catholic women. Kaye Lee March 24, 2014 • 7:16 pm Thank you for your insight Helen. I have met many wonderful people of various different faiths who work hard to help people, and also for change within the church, and I applaud you for your work. Father Rod from the Gosford Anglican Church is also doing some great work welcoming all, atheists included, and asking us to be better and to ask for better. jasonblog March 24, 2014 • 8:12 pm Excellent article & thanks also to Helen Light for her comment. Jesus Christ was famously a socialist and the Catholic Church is but a convenient continuance of the Roman Empire… It was the world’s first trans-national corporation & the Pope Alexander XI remains a favourite of those who seek to manipulate and deceive. I find it amusing that somehow what occurs on the stock-market is considered ‘news’ and features prominently in bulletins. I much prefer the anarchy of Christ storming the temple and turning over the tables of the money changers… I suspect that Pope Frank is mostly genuine and will look to make changes to the church. It will be frightfully embarrassing if the Catholic Church ends up with a more progressive attitude to climate change than Australia’s Abbott-led government! Dare I say the Machiavellian machinations that ruthlessly control the workings of political parties have resulted in a diminished democracy for the rest of us plebs. I truly would like to see more independent voices having the courage to engage with the disparate points of view that reside within the populace at large. mars08 March 24, 2014 • 8:34 pm Spotted this the other day… https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/q71/1601063_595374563866093_1215743974_n.jpg FairGo March 24, 2014 • 8:46 pm How right is this article? Absolutely 100% truth … At present, religion and politics is a debacle … Australia is moving away from what should be a transparent and accountable practice in these 2 separate Entities; instead both parties engage in widening the gap between the poor and rich …. We, as Australians must demand that both religion and politics go back to a grassroots level for what they both are suppose to represent; I.e., equity and a fair go for all people who live in this nation … Stephen Tardrew March 24, 2014 • 9:16 pm This is an awesome article Kay and I totally agree. Truly Machiavelli would smile the silent smile of recognition as prince and church role into one appalling grab for wealth, power and political influence. It becomes more and more difficult to separate the two. I have regularly deferred to my religious ethical and caring fiends who I hold in high regard. However in this century we can no longer adhere to magical and mythical thinking while the military industrial complex is driven by religious ideologues Democrat, Republican; Labor, LNP or whatever else. We are being ruled by a bunch of uneducated primitive troglodytes. If you don’t understand science you know little to nothing. The double edged sword of Damocles hangs over our world as religious acolytes reject science and reason for mythological thinking paying lip service to the poor while accumulating massive amounts of wealth held by the few. Just stand by and wreck the biosphere. Yeah that will work. This is an abomination of epic proportions. Where the hell are the ethics. No more hedging or pretending that religions have not been responsible for massive amounts of suffering injustice and inequality as well as blind prejudice against minorities. I have clearly expressed how a contemporary understanding of paradoxes and counterintuitives in science can lead to foundational principles of determined origins while setting the grounds for metaphysical hope, awe and wonder. It does no one a service when atheists or any kind of dogmatist make claim to absolute knowledge when there are infinitely many unknowns and unknowables (Godel’s incompleteness theorem; Georg Cantors set theoretical axioms of infinity; Max Tegmark’s modelling of infinite universes and Einsteinium block time etc.). Just follow the axioms of physics and the mathematics of infinity to discover how profoundly vast and mysterious existence is. Yes we can embrace metaphysical hope without religious dogmatism. Most people want happiness, security, goodness, joy, love and some meaningful sense of purpose. There is a wave of disgust at the LNP while our whole culture suffers the dogmatism of fools and ideologues. Yes we can frame a contemporary meta-theory however it means willingly challenging our prejudices of old. People do not create their realities nor do they chose to be born into poverty and hardship. Just to be born in this country is a great privileged. Go to the third world and find out how incredibly lucky we are. There is no choice or personal responsibility here. If you want to keep your religion then learn to love your sisters and brother as yourself; be humble and share the gifts and wealth you are given. The cost of not doing so is incredible hardship suffering and destruction of the biospheres as we know it. What is this self destructive masochism driven by greed? Are we so blind we cannot see we are the nemesis of our own demise. Now this certainly demands personal responsibility. lefturnahead March 24, 2014 • 9:31 pm Reblogged this on The Grovely Gazette. Matters Not March 24, 2014 • 11:41 pm Helen Light said: … thus supports every move to stop climate change. Yes perhaps, but are you suggesting that the all powerful ‘god’ you possibly believe in is simply sitting on the sidelines? Neither an instigator of climate change nor a ‘being’ prepared to prevent same? Or is my ‘binary’ opposite to crude? If so, please explain. As for: There are churches that have solar panels on them, and many churches have reduced their carbon footprint over the last few years. Is that also a lack of ‘faith’ that your god is either not all powerful but seeking some type of ‘revenge’ for some type of ‘slight’. Or will you resort to the often stated mantra, that god helps those who help themselves? Serious question. Then there’s Stephen Tardrew who wrote: .. in this century we can no longer adhere to magical and mythical thinking … Stephen, unfortunately what you’re describing is the ‘is’ rather than the ‘ought’. More’s the pity! Less ‘magical’ and ‘mystical’ nonsense! It’s we who create an intellectual reality, and it’s we who can recreate a different one. Just sayin … trishcorry March 25, 2014 • 12:47 am Reblogged this on polyfeministix. Nuovo Novalis in Terra Australis March 25, 2014 • 1:08 am Reblogged this on nuovonovalis and commented: It is time to think and question once more Maree Elizabeth March 25, 2014 • 1:20 am fantastic article … aimn .. you keep knocking my sox off… Macvag March 25, 2014 • 3:41 am Let Mammon run the show fully! I Fight fire with fire. We should outsource the selection of our politcal leaders to the likes of SERCO – or other similar “service provider” If it is good enough for our governments (nearly all flavours) to outsource the running of our important “public services” to a small cadre of overseas service providers who have unknown owners/ shareholders and don’t need to follow industrial awards and other mucky people friendly stuff, surely outsourcing the polies who have favoured this form of outsourcing is an even better idea? It would save a lot of time & money. No more running elections with all that hot air and masses of wasted paper and we the people could then do something useful, like vote for “selection criteria”, suggested salaries and progression criteria as well as désirable human “qualities” and/or appropriate experience. Vote now: Do you want your elected MP to be; Humanely intelligent Civilised Honest Service oriented Articulate A good listener Experienced in. …. Greedy Easily corrupted/ already corrupt Clueless Has an MBA Shares in coal oil property development gas fracking ….. Put in order of preference. —– Then we might just get a few more good candidates – And we could pay them a whole lot less than we pay the current bunch of whinging bludgers and if the outsource agency itself mucks up and gives us a destructive bunch ( like the bunch we have in charge now -axing jobs, taxing the poor to pay the rich) we the people can sue them for breach of contract. Stephen Tardrew March 25, 2014 • 3:53 am Matters Not We create nothing we simply interpret, with inadequate tools based in primitive biochemistry, a world of rationality, logic, irrationality and paradox. That we feel we have choice subjectively yes. That we have any idea about the foundations of choice generally not really. That the universe is primarily determinate yes. The difficulty is getting around these contradictions. Everything happens as a necessity of its factual existence regardless of human justification. Logic, rationalism and empiricism surely get us closer to the facts however when our magical and mythical desires conflict with the facts and we willingly ignore them, we are acting out of habit not informed deductive analysis. Magic, mythology and religion are born out of confusion and ignorance whereas science and logic are born out of facts within the constraints of complexity and probability. To analyze the “ought” you must have solid rational foundations in the “is” or the “ought” will just mislead and confuse. We generally assume too much in a world that is only partially knowable and explicable to us. The good is self-evident to me and not so to others and that is due to a complex interplay of physical and biological imperatives, genetics, socialization and culture. Things are never that simple. I share the notion of justice and the good not as an “is” or “ought” but as a reflection of my particular biochemistry and life experience and thank heavens I can share it with flow travelers of similar ilk. These are deep and complex issues that require some thought and analysis. By understanding the facts and particular interpretations of science and the profound implications of physics, cosmology and biochemistry, including unresolved paradoxes and counterintuitives, the mind is set on a different path that is not beholden to traditional modes of thinking. Few are given the chance to to have clearly defined exposure to the facts of science and its limitations. It is these paradoxes and counterintuitives that make things really interesting. I hope that is enough to give you a foundation of my particular understanding of the complexity of turning “is” to “ought.” Leave a Reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Name * Email * Website Comment You may use these HTML tags and attributes:
Posted on: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:57:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015