Hey, thanks Judy for the reminder. However, his last statement you quoted was an explanation of his feeling that the Catholic/Christian lineage was empty of power now, ala the Abbey 0f Monte Cassino. The key words being ... "it is as if".
His view is characteristic of a vacillating mind, a ghostly belief system and an over-emphasis upon one's own separate individuality. In essence it encapsulates the Western Christian historical drama and demonstrates a real need for an austere but corporate worship - one was the original norm in Christianity before it became a political favored group/system with people joining just to gain imperial favor. This was one of the reasons that monasticism started in the first place ... dismay at the lack of true faithfulness among the 'joiners". I doubt RWC knows much about all this ... thus his snap-shot view about his self-declared tradition. This is all part of the casualty-range from converts who try to fill old wine skins with new wine ... to use an over-worn "bibul" analogy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" emptybill@ wrote: > > > > So, looking back, what is your judgement of RWC's previous > > claims to "enlightenment" and his current conversion to > > Catholicism? > > It's no longer "current," emptybill. He did convert, but > he's said at least a dozen times here--including at least > once directly to you, quite forcefully--that he's given > up on Catholicism as well as TM. > > From his post 295520, November 15: > > > I appreciate the vehemence of your beliefs, emptybill. At > least you are taking me seriously. but you must take me > at my wordand I challenge you to find a single iota of > proof to the contrary in all my posts at FFLthat I am > not a Catholic*in any form whatsoever*. It may just be > that my not defining myself as such, but alluding to > Catholicism and Thomas Aquinas, has just about driven you > out of your mind. WTF? This guy is bizarre. And you might > have a point there, emptybill. But believe me I am > sincere and only interested in strengthening my own > understanding of what this is all about; I post on FFL in > order to elicit just the kind of response that you have > given to me here. Because I am thus forced back upon > myself and have the opportunity to once again confirm > what I know is the truth of my experience and my own > philosophy. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/295520 > > And from a follow-up in response to your reply: > > For me, emptybill, it is as if there never was a God, > never was the Incarnation, never was heaven or hell, never > was sin and judgment and grace and Mary and the sacraments > and the salvation of the soul. > > Those are just two examples of *many*. >
