Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Spirituality Issues Applied Kinesiology and David Hawkins' Map of ConsciousnessGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Applied Kinesiology and David Hawkins' Map of Consciousness | Login/Join |
Yes Phil AK is a tricky one. I feel if anyone read any of Dr Hawkins books, (especially Power vs. Force) and did not have any prior knowledge or exposure to kinesiology and then did not have any reservations regarding the whole methodology, they would just not be a thinking/enquiring person in my mind. Some of his fans just don�t get that scepticism and criticism is normal and should not shielded from or something to get defensive about. Your reservations and concerns are completely valid and can also provide a path to further and deeper understanding. We are not on opposite sides just people who look at it from different angles, and can share and learn as we go. I was wondering the other day if I had not been exposed to kinesiology prior to reading Dr Hawkins work would have I become interested it further. Most likely not. At best I might think it is an interesting New Age theory and leave it at that. For one to �get �kinesiology on a basic level is quite easy. Just do a one day introductory workshop, and they will show you how easily it is to switch muscles on and off and get the no/yes response. Here in Australia you can even do a government accredited full time course in it To fully embody it so it becomes a part of you and the so called mystery of it just becomes integrated into everyday life takes some time. For me that took 3 years. Friends get delighted and amazed when they ring me up and we locate a misplaced item in half a minute instead of turning an entire house upside down. It�s not a party trick just one useful application of AK. I spent a year as a client and then did a year�s part time studying in kinesiology. It took me another year of diligent practise to self test with accuracy Despite that level of experience I cannot calibrate with confidence and I have much to learn and integrate still. �however the journey is worthwhile.. Michael | ||||
|
I feel if anyone read any of Dr Hawkins books, (especially Power vs. Force) and did not have any prior knowledge or exposure to kinesiology and then did not have any reservations regarding the whole methodology, they would just not be a thinking/enquiring person in my mind. Michael, you encourage me thus . . .  So let me ask you about these calibrations you posted (from Hawkins, I presume?) I'm not clear if some of the calibrations in the bottom half are "Catholic positions on" or whether those groups/movements are being calibrated. Doesn't matter, I guess. I have several sets of questions about this: A. How does one calibrate as diverse a group as "Modern Protestantism"? Is that a mixing together of all groups -- Holiness Churches, Southern Baptist, ELCA Lutherans, etc.? Some of these are radically different from one another. Same goes for "Modern Catholicism" and all the various groups and movements in the Church, some conservative, some liberal. What is being calibrated here? The new Catholic catechism? Is one holding a particular idea in mind when calibrating? B. I know that Hawkins and his fans are into non-judgmentalism, but how can the publication of a list like this NOT contribute to a sense that Modern Protestantism is better than Modern Catholicism? Isn't it just a little unfair to lump all televangelists together? Some are "Modern Protestants" and some even "Modern Catholics." Doesn't this produce judgmental preconceptions about groups? Or ranking the Koran above the Bible -- doesn't that suggest that the impartial, objective Universal Mind considers Islam a higher religion than what the Bible teaches? I realize that you might share this skepticism with me, so I'm not intending these questions as confrontations. I'm just wondering how Hawkins and those who follow this approach would reply to them. Friends get delighted and amazed when they ring me up and we locate a misplaced item in half a minute instead of turning an entire house upside down. It�s not a party trick just one useful application of AK. What's your phone number? Phil | ||||
|
Hi Phil, you answered your own question. "Better than" is a judgement. When there is no judgement, there is no "better than". With all due respect and no judgement, things simply are the way they are. Catagory 5- GRRRATEFUL Love, I | ||||
|
Well, that's another thing that bothers me, then, "I," is this notion that what's being reported is "just the way things are." Until I see a few more studies with controls and corroborating evidence from a wide range of people with diverse backgrounds, I'm not taking these results to be anything other than the unconscious attitude of Hawkins and others who share his beliefs. I also do believe some kind of judgment is inevitable when those numbers are read. I mean, come on . . . if 1,000 is high spirituality/energy, then lower is not as high and not as spiritual. Saying that "Modern Protestantism" is a higher spiritual system than "Modern Catholicism" does imply judgment. Anyone want to reply to my question concerning just what is being evaluated as "Modern Protestantism" or "Modern Catholicism"? I'd be most interested in hearing how that is calibrated. | ||||
|
Hi Phil, As I said before I really don't know about AK or the accuracy thereof. However, I believe that judgment of "better than or worse than" is objective body/mind/ego mish-mash. I'm not "better than nor worse than" you. I defer all judgment to the Creator of all that is. All this is said with maximum respect of you Phil. A short verse below puts judgment in perspective for me. We are likened unto a drop of rain falling towards the ocean. It foresees its own end and is too small to realize that this reunification is no end at all. All fear and judgment is only an illusion. Much love to all, I ps. Thanks for the links to the enlightenment topic on another thread, they are very interesting. I will have to admit that I don't know who this Holy Mother/Mother is. I suppose that is from the Catholic tradition. Love I. | ||||
|
I will have to admit that I don't know who this Holy Mother/Mother is. "I", not sure what you're referring to here either. | ||||
|
I misquoted from Asher's post. It's Blessed Mother/Mother from the enlightenment thread you posted above. I thought it may be Catholic in origin but it may be Hindu. Love, I Btw, I am impressed with your chart above. I can't say that I understand it fully but it certainly is interesting. | ||||
|
The calibrations are all Dr Hawkins. The questions are certainly not confrontations. Well not to me anyway.  I think many people have trouble with the distinction between scepticism which really means I�m not sure please explain further; as opposed to being outright dismissive yet want further explanations to cause more friction. (Which your not doing) Regarding point A/ When calibrating a diverse group it is similar to calibrating a movie or a city. It�s the whole thing. You could calibrate a movie scene by scene and get diverse results or a city suburb by suburb and get different results. It is not an average though. The exact dynamics of calibrating and kinesiology eludes me to be honest, but I use it and it works for me most of the time. The physical aspect alone is easy to show as I mentioned before. When Marconi invented the radio, he easily demonstrated its use and function, but an exact scientific explanation of radio waves came several years later and it wasn�t Marconi who figured it out. A functioning radio was not going to sit on a shelf until someone came along and explained how exactly and scientifically it worked. Regarding point B/ I think there are plenty of closet judgers amongst Hawkins devotees. They are also the same people who dismiss any calibration not to their liking. Eg George Bush at 465 and, Ammachi the nice Indian woman who hugs everyone is not enlightened. A lovely heartfelt person for sure, but most who see her have a higher level of consciousness than she does.. FACT. Calibrations can be used judgementally but I liken it to more like a temperature gauge. We use Celsius here. Water boils at 100 degrees and freezes at 0 degrees. A hot day here is considered anything over 35 degrees, but that is just an opinion. A hot day is not better than a cold day. The temperature just is what it is. Calibrations like the temperature measurements are just a numbers and can be used for comparative purposes. I was in Prague a few weeks ago and it was just a few degrees above freezing most days. To me this was incredibly cold (compared to Sydney) but to the locals it was only autumn; and mild conditions; winter was still coming! I could complain and disagree with the cold but it just was what it was, 3 degrees C �brrrrr!!!! Comparatives and what looks likes rankings will always cause controversy and friction. I prefer to use calibrations as distinctions. Heavy metal music makes people go weak when muscle testing, even the most ardent fan of Metallica will go weak if tested.  Classical music you will hold strong. This does not make people who listen to heavy metal bad or evil but prolonged exposure will eventually start to have some effects which may not look pretty. So you can empower yourself and make an informed choice. �. That�s what�s it all about. Michael PS.thanks for the cosmic egg | ||||
|
Thanks Michael and "I" for your informative responses. I do understand what you're saying so that's not my problem. It's more about what it implies and how much meaning and significance ought to be accorded to the calibrations. That's where I'm "stuck," quite frankly, and I don't think my own experience with AK would make any difference here as I'd have the same questions. More research with controls would be lovely, as noted above. In the meantime, it seems that believing Universal Mind is being invoked calls for just as much an act of faith as anything people in organized religions do. What seems more likely to me is that some kind of psychic processes are being tapped, and that's by no means a trivial matter. I'd be happy to explain aspects of the Cosmic Egg that you might have questions about. | ||||
|
Another follow-up on your post, Michael. You note: When calibrating a diverse group it is similar to calibrating a movie or a city. It�s the whole thing. . . Do you need to have conscious knowledge of this? Do you have to have seen the movie, for example, to calibrate it? Can one calibrate 13th C. Swahili religious practices without knowing anything about them? I know you say you don't fully understand how this works, even as you express appreciation for some of the benefits, but I think I'd have a better understanding of what's going on after the questions above are answered. The calibrations are all Dr Hawkins. Somehow I overlooked that very key statement above. Corroborating results from other AK users would go a long way to establishing credibility. Only, I wonder what would happen if their results were significantly different from Hawkins? As he and his fans seem to consider him to be the one who sets the "standard," as it were, for calibrations, would there be a tendency to view his results as definitive and others' as a measure of their proficiency in callibrating? We don't know the answers to these questions at this time, but if Hawkins results do become the standard, then we really do have something akin to an AK magisterium of sorts. Until these kinds of questions and issues are dealt with, I don't see how Hawkins' calibrations and even using AK to make these kinds of evaluations can possibly be considered scientifically credible. They may be beneficial to some, but maybe in the manner that placebos are to people who think they're getting the real deal. What one is left with, as noted above, is an act of faith in Hawkins work and results in a manner akin to what religious people do with the teachings of their tradition. (Note, I'm speaking primarily of the AK dimension to Hawkins' teaching, which attempts to provide a kind of objective backing for his map of consciousness.) ----- There now, I'm pretty much done with this topic, although I'll check in on it and interact with new directions of discussion that might arise. | ||||
|
Thanks Phil, these questions are great. They are forming my database of FAQ�s for Hawkins work.. Hope you don�t mind.  No you don�t have seen the movie or be or have knowledge of what you are calibrating for it to work. As long as what you are referring to is clear. For instance some movies have been made twice. Oceans 11 for instance was made in the 1960�s and another version a couple of years ago. So you would have to differentiate the two so as to be clear. Kinesiology is a non-local response. Just as a temperature gauge is just a measuring devise it has no intrinsic knowledge or awareness of temperature. It just responds to stimuli (heat/cold) and gives a number. The number is meaningless in and of itself. It only derives meaning when we put it in some sort of context. A calibration is essentially meaningless as well, just a number. We use our consciousness and awareness and put that number in some form of context that can use it for comparison, discernment and/or just perspective. Your other concern � credibility � I�m with you all the way on that. It�s the biggest stumbling block to his work at present. I have written extensively on this very topic on other forums and in private emails with various people. I�ll see if I can dig one of them out. Thanks � Michael PS ..notice the others have gone quiet �disappeared or bored with this maybe???? | ||||
|
Hi All, In one of the trilogy of Hawkins books this issue is talked about as well as several studies about groups calibrating the same questions without prior knowledge of Hawkins calibrations. Supposedly, the calibrations of the last book "Reality and Subjectivity", in which each chapter is calibrated separately, was done by several groups in different locations before it was published. The Chapter named God calibrates at 1000(calibration theirs), which represents the top of the scale of such writing. Try the website Hawkins website and see if there is some mention to the groups that do separate calibrations. As I've said before, i'm not sure about the accuracy of AK, nor is it really important to me. Probably the explantion of levels of consciousness and how such levels causes the actions of people to be what they are, is what makes me relate to his books in a strong way. It helped me to drop the judgment of good and bad, which causes me to seek to understand with compassion. Its kind of like the catch phrase "hate the sin but love the sinner", which is what most Christian people strive to do, but that was something that WAS very hollow in my life. Now I see that those who act in unlawful ways do so out of ignorance due to a consciousness level which is self imposed. Any level can be transcended but I think you would agree that it is up to the individual. If you can understand how a person acts at a level of shame, then one can have compassion for that person. This just gives me something else to be grateful about. Love you all. Grateful, I | ||||
|
Hawkins seems to be making use of the Akashic record player. Kids, don't try this at home. It's nothing really new, as the idea has been around for a long time, and the Soviets and C.I.A. have done extensive research projects on "remote viewing,"etc. Some law enforcement agencies have made use of psychics from time to time.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akashic_Records http://skepdic.com/akashic.html http://www.som.org/9intuition/akashicrecords.htm I like the Cosmic Egg, Phil, and have referred to it often. I'm not particularly interested in exploring astral realms, but I know people who do.caritas, mm <*)))))>< | ||||
|
PS ..notice the others have gone quiet �disappeared or bored with this maybe???? Some have recently stomped away in frustration, others probably feel pretty much "caught up" on the discussion. We've really covered this topic in depth on this and the previous thread -- well over 250 or so posts, by now. Nevertheless, I'm all for continuing the exchanges, and especially hearing from those who have experiences to share. Re. Akashic records . . . mark me a doubting Philip on that one as well. | ||||
|
Corroborating results from other AK users would go a long way to establishing credibility ------------------------------------------------- Sounds fair and logical, however it does not seem to reslove the calibrating integrity dilema. This was a rsponse on another forum from a thread called - What is the most important factor in kinesiology success? The idea of a group of people calibrating something posting it on a forum and seeing what we come up with seems like an interesting exercise but I�m not a big fan of the consensus approach to calibrations. This approach seems like a stop gap measure due to the fact there is no reliable and agreed on calibrations outside Dr Hawkins. The intent is fine and is most likely integris, but the TRUTH is not a democratic process, it just IS�.a calibration just IS ..it is accurate or it is not. Without sounding like a broken record as I have said this on several occasions on a few forums; I have had over a year's kinesiology training and have muscle tested going on nearly eight years quite successfully. However calibrating accurately, is for the moment, out of my reach.. I have found in my own research in conjunction with a kinesiology practitioner that when calibrating and the slightest presence of ego or positionailty is there an accurate weak/strong muscle response will go out the window. Sure you can continue and just fudge it. However you cannot search for TRUTH and kid yourself at the same time. It also helps also to have people and friends around you who will kick your arse without hesitation if you try. Until established methodologies and protocols are established and agreed with all non Dr Hawkins calibrations will be viewed by most with suspicion. Sorry to bring the party down ��..but TRUTH will initially piss you off before it liberates. Thanks Michael | ||||
|
Well, there you go! The clean, fresh air of honesty is freeing indeed! When I spoke of "corroborating results with other AK workers," I wasn't meaning to suggest consensus. In fact, as long as what's being evaluated is stuff like the energy in movies, bibles, the Jesuits and so forth, there can really be no controls. It would be interesting if, say, a Japanese adept in AK who knew nothing about the Jesuits came up with a similar calibration to someone who did, but I'm not sure what that would really say. A true control would be to test something that can be objectively determined, but I don't know if AK can really do that. When Hawkins did a test to see if the earth was really warming, I found that significant, as we can approach an objective answer about that one. He says no, most scientists say yes and have data to back it. This sort of comparison between the results of AK and verifiable information should be done in many other areas -- preferably those where the one doing the calibration knows nothing about the issue and so has to rely completely on AK for the answer. | ||||
|
Discussion of the evolution of concepts of consciousness (Including Dr Hawkins ) by Robert Jahn, Director, PEAR, Princeton University. http://www.newthought-apps.net...1b_models_consc.html Well put and outlined. | ||||
|
Thank you michael, I just spent a couple of hours reading through the site, and found it interesting. Fritjof Capra's The Tao of Physics and Gary Zukav's The Dancing Wu Li Masters come to mind. This is the world view that is shaping up now, and mystical Christians like Merton, Arraj and Griffiths as well as theologians like Wolfhart Pannenberg are working very hard to come up with an alternative framework for Christianity. Most people I have met in Centering Prayer groups are adopting this view, which is probably why I haven't been to one in a year or so. I tried to get a discussion of "Cultural Creatives" going by tagging it at the end of one of the Spiral Dynamics threads, but so far have not had so much as a nibble. That may change. More to Hawkins than meets the eye. Since reading several of the books and listening to over 50 hours of radio talks, I have gained some knowledge of his weltanshaung. Thanks again, mm <*))))>< | ||||
|
Busy times, here, but I've purused this page and it looks very interesting. Thanks much, Michael. | ||||
|
I've been examining the page listed above and also doing some reading in Daniel Helminiak's Religion and the Human Sciences. As those of you following this thread have no doubt observed, in addition to my questions about the validity of AK, I've had problems with Hawkins' treatment of reason, and of the way people have affirmed Hawkins' work using the limitations of reason as a means for discounting my critiques. So here are some additional observations: 1. Hawkins places anger at 150, reason at 400 and love at 500. What is implicitly discounted here is that the anger would be motivated by love or reason, which is sometimes the case. Same goes for courage, which is a measly 200. 2. None of this meshes in any way with well-established theories of moral, cognitive, ego and faith development. 3. Placing reason on a continuum with emotions and mystical states implies that we are ranking the same phenomena, and that is not the case at all. Mystical consciousness is not "above" reason or cognition as it's not a type of cognition at all. Mystical consciousness is a different way of knowing, but so is emotional knowing and rational knowing, and each has its place in the overall human experience. Each also has its unique continuum of development, as does the body and its systems, for that matter. 4. Hawkins schema, more than Wilber's, Spiral Dynamics or Helminiaks (or even my Cosmic Egg) does not amply recognize how higher levels build upon and presuppose some development in lower. Neither does there seem to be any recognition of the experience of mystical consciousness pervading and informing reason, feeling, intuition, and even the functioning of the body. To the contrary, Hawkins' system strongly suggests that one must "move beyond" those "lower levels" into the purity of non-dual consciousness to experience pure spirituality. 5. What Hawkins calls ultimate consciousness sounds like nothing other than non-reflecting human consciousness, which is not the same experience that Christians call God. This identification of non-reflecting (and, therefore, non-judgmental) consciousness with God is an error made by Wilber, New Agers and advaitan Hindus as well. Buddhist do not say this is God, however, and so maintain integrity by not speaking of that about which they know-not. Lots of balarkey, here, good people. Do be careful! | ||||
|
In many ways, Hawkins' system, his treatment of reason and the way his fans have spoken about reason qualifies as what Daniel Helminiak calls "latent irrationality" in his book (cited above). The same critique can be leveled of Wilber's approach and most Eastern systems. | ||||
|
The same critique can be leveled of Wilber's approach and most Eastern systems. I think I see your point � one that could be applied in the realm of politics as well. | ||||
|
Just a couple thoughts to add. As I read this thread I have been listening to Allegri's Misere, the piece of music the Vatican held guarded for so many years from the masses. The contrast could not have been greater. The divine loveliness of the music, which calibrates far higher than the mind according to Hawkins' scale, includes this conversation in subjective awareness, and takes the subjective sting out of the virulent postings several pages back by two_dogs... oops, I meant to say two_BEARS. Then, as I settle down to compose a reply, I put on one of Mozart's mature violin concertos. The story has it that a Mozart heard the Misere played in the Vatican and disturbed the authorities enormously when he managed to copy it out and replay it from memory alone. But if you really look at the music of Miserere, it's pretty simple in structure and takes only a basic musical intuition to recall. But the cat was out of the bag when Mozart could replay it. The truth is like that... ultimately simple and wordless, including the sharp and even cutting intellectualisms of the past pages within divine love, supporting the good and allowing the ill to fall away. And I like to think as I listen to the truly divine and playful music of a mature Mozart that truth is not only jealously guarded behind the vatican walls, but also available in the soul of a drunken, licentious, vulgar, poverty-stricken wretch such as dear W A Mozart... and in fact to all of us who love beauty and truth as dearly as he did. So congrats for a lovely thread... what an entertaining circus this has been. I have greatly enjoyed revisiting and rereading old paths and new here, and my reverence for "modern Catholicism" is tempered only by the sense that it is not accessible nor available in the modern sense - that is, commercially and popularly. This is of course strictly speaking a criticism, but I must say when Mozart is playing it doesn't seem possible that a person could criticise except in the spirit of play, and indeed in the spirit of holiness such play becomes available and transcends the intellectualism of skepticism, "attacks" and "counter-attacks" and "ab hominems". Again, a lovely conversation. Thanks. | ||||
|
Hi Phil, I understand that the roots of our modern arationality lie not in these philosophies themselves, but are only responses to what is at present practiced in society. A little historical context to back up my assertion: The attempt of the British Empire to impose moral constraints through institutionalism under Queen Victoria across the world failed with the Great War. All of a sudden, the attempts of the British at Imperial Universalism, and the moral mythology that went with them, crumbled as the European scene became a bloodbath. The crucial things to remember from the start of this war was that A, the publics of Europe revelled in the fight to begin with, imagining that it would all be over soon, once their side won (with God's help), and B, these were all CHRISTIAN societies, accustomed to public Christianity for many centuries, the very heart of Christianity in fact. It has been asked rhetorically how, after the Holocaust, one can ever write poetry again. The point to this question for me is that public Christendom died a unforgettably awful death in the Great War and the Holocaust. Into the result moral vacuum, America stepped. The US left Britain no choice but to dismantle the Empire and hand the reigns of global power to them. And within that vacuum the latent fantasies of global Christendom have exploded into a thousand perverse versions, cults, and commercialisations. With any vestigal awareness of a Christian and scientific Europe having butchering herself for thirty years it is quite difficult to not flinch from rationality and Christian morals. The German people especially are perhaps the most prudently cautious of folk in matters of the mind for this reason, having suffered the most from the debacle of the Great War. Popular Christianity is cultish and book-worshipping, and commercial Christianity vulgar, and thus the teachers of profound traditional spiritual wisdom of Christianity such as yourself strike many people as an extremely old-fashioned and vaguely suspicious. This is my understanding of the context in which Hawkins teaches. My intuition is that many more people will come to Christ through moderate, postmodern and relativistic-seeming spiritual teachings like Hawkins. They are a great improvement upon Ashtar Command. Let me phrase it another way: Do you suppose Dr Hawkins' work a actual danger to Christian orthodoxy? And if it is not, then the it is quite possibly going to become a boon! Blessings, Paul Bard. PS - I hope my previous post was not perceived as flippant towards Catholicism. I think the infectious silliness of Mozart had got to me for a bit there javascript:void(0)!
 | ||||
|
Thanks for stopping in, Paul. Yes, this was a lively discussion, with a wide variety of issues coming up. You have an interesting perspective on the "big picture" and how the U.S. has received the baton, as it were, from the British. I'm not sure I agree completely, but there's plenty of room for historical analysis on those topics, which would probably be best served on another thread. I think it's important to distinguish between Christianity, the Church, Christendom, etc. Christianity, as a message flowing from the life of Christ and gift of the Spirit, always transcends its historical and institutional manifestations. That the Church perennially falls short of living up to the implications of the message it is entrusted with is unavoidable, given fallen human nature; documenting these shortcomings can be helpful unto reformation, but when this is done to denigrate Christianity per se, there's something else going on. FWIW, I don't see much of a connection between the wars in Europe in the 20th C and Christianity. How did Christianity influence German imperialism? Naziism? I just don't see it. There are other developmental forces at work involving the enlightenment, industrialization, and, as always, rotten political leaders preying on the fears of people. Again, another thread, if you're interested in purusing . . . Popular Christianity is cultish and book-worshipping, and commercial Christianity vulgar, and thus the teachers of profound traditional spiritual wisdom of Christianity such as yourself strike many people as an extremely old-fashioned and vaguely suspicious. As Tevia says in "Fiddler on the Roof," "It's not every day one receives a compliment like that." My studies of Spiral Dynamics during the past year has taught me to be a little slower in judging popular expressions of religion, politics, etc. I suppose that for some people, fundamentalist Christianity really speaks to them and even gives them a better life than they would have otherwise. Perhaps this is the best they can do, or maybe it's the beginning of a journey that will lead them elsewhere. Stephen, on this web site, for example, is an outstanding example of a deeply spiritual and open-minded fundamentalist. I think most of them know the difference between God and the Bible. What seems to be the case is that you and many others don't connect with fundamentalist, evangelical and televangelical Christianity. Then there's the Catholics' sex abuse scandals. I can understand the skepticism toward "organized religion," but I hope that one can see that without it, Christianity would have not spread throughout the world. And, yes, I think the world is much better off for it. My intuition is that many more people will come to Christ through moderate, postmodern and relativistic-seeming spiritual teachings like Hawkins. They are a great improvement upon Ashtar Command. Let me phrase it another way: Do you suppose Dr Hawkins' work a actual danger to Christian orthodoxy? And if it is not, then the it is quite possibly going to become a boon! Hee hee. I miss Ashtar, at times! I think Hawkins can help people who are turned off by organized religion to become more open to spirituality and even some of the great spiritual teachers of the ages. That it's all presented as something scientifically verifiable by AK will also attract some. Whether they will come to appreciate the wisdom that orthodox, classical Christianity has to offer is doubtful, however, Hawkins being too ecclectic and anti-intllectual to be able to make the necessary helpful distinctions. This all leads to New Age religion, which might be better than no religion at all, or maybe not . . . - see http://heartlandspirituality.o...m/slideshows/newage/ . . . I have been listening to Allegri's Misere, the piece of music the Vatican held guarded for so many years from the masses. . . I wasn't aware of that. Do you have a source for it? The Vatican has generally been supportive of the arts and of beauty being a leading toward God. E.g., their commissioning Michaelangelo and Rafael to pain in their chapels. The sacramental mentality in Catholicism has also encouraged great music in liturgy, artwork in churches, etc. So what you say sounds most out of character with what I know of Catholicism. | ||||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Spirituality Issues Applied Kinesiology and David Hawkins' Map of Consciousness