Jesus, The Pope, The Eucharist and Revolutionary Magick.
Pope Benedict The Last addressed a huge crowd in Germany at the weekend. He said particularly interesting things when he urged his congregation to stick with traditional Catholic values. He said that the do it yourself religion of modern spiritual approaches could not replace the living God of christianity.
The living God of christianity is of course the dead man Jesus. Catholic mysticism turned this human spiritual revolutionary into a glass of wine and slice of wafer but does not, in any real sense, keep this “God” alive. Jesus was, like all genuine spiritual leaders, a DIY person: “know thyself”, “the kingdom of heaven is within”, etc, etc.
It is this turning of truth on it’s head that Jesus railed against: Had he been present, he would, I suspect, have turned over the altar upon which Benedict took Eucharist, thrown the wine to the floor and stamped on the wafers. Then he might have turned to the crowd and shouted “If you don’t do it for yourself, who will do it for you?”.
It is this magick lie that is at the heart of christianity and Catholicism: Jesus was no more “God” than you are or I am. Neither he nor his name can save you, only you can do that. The attempt to make him into God rather than letting his life be a living example of a human life lead well is a political act. It may be an act of long ago and forgotten, but it was designed to reduce the revolutionary imperative that is at the heart of all true spirituality and it has successfully achieved this and continues to do so.
That is the heart of problem with christianity and catholicism: it’s all lies. And this why Benedict will be the last pope: He is a hard-liner when it comes to spiritual doctrine, which means he really believes all that nonsense, which in turn means the lies are coming home to roost.
Listen to this post
Comments
2 Responses to “Jesus, The Pope, The Eucharist and Revolutionary Magick.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Haiti
Hi,
I am not sure how this is actually a Buddhist response to Catholicism and/or the Eucharist? While Jesus found the temple moneychangers and food vendors annoying, he did not desecrate the temple or the ritual actions (animal sacrifices) within. Buddhism certainly has its share of comparable practices, in Theravada one finds merit-working ceremonies, Buddha relics, holy ointment/water and related sacramental practices. In Mahayana (particularly Tibetan) one finds drilbu, holy “pills,” blessed substances and Eucharistic practices in which water and other substances are consecrated. It is easy to attack Christian Eucharist because the premise is so anti-empirical: The bread and wine become in substance the body, blood, divinity and soul of Christ, while the appearances remain as bread and wine. I am not a Christian, but frankly such an intimate relationship with a holy being (Jesus, Buddha who ever) is attractive and humbling–at the least it is benign. Regarding Jesus, we have no way of knowing what his reaction to Eucharist would be in that he asked his disciples to perpetuate this very ceremony. I share your sentiments, in effect that power breeds tyranny, but fear that burning down the house to save the occupants is not a good approach. It should be possible to examine all our egos and karmatic hindrances without desecrating particular practices and cultures. Interpreting differing yana as silly or unreasonable is a slippery slope. Buddhism could just as easily be criticized for such inscrutables as “karma,” the “Mind,” “rebirth” and “enlightenment.” Seeing Jesus in a “wafer” or cup of wine in the end is no more bizarre than seeing the Buddha or universe in a single atom (as discussed in the Buddhaavamtasakasutra). Your point regarding the Roman church’s difficulty with compassionate, kind loving morals and ethics is interesting, with much truth, but it would seem from a Buddhist point of view one must apply the criticism to oneself first to make oneself a worthy vessel and then find compassionate and holistic ways to teach/pass along this kind of introspection. Oddly in this respect Paul warns Christians that eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ (as bread and wine) unworthily (with hate anger unkindness) will lead to sickness and death. In the end I do not know, it just seems very insensitive to demean the Eucharist when in fact it is the only real powerful focal point for repentance, confession and redemption in Catholicism. Rather than the Mass (or Buddhist meditation), it is not Eucharist that is the problem, but who and what is done afterwards. Anyway, very interesting and provocative article. Thank you, Ocean Stream.
Thanks for your long reply. I’m called the Irreverent Buddhist because I do not revere any myth, legend or tradition that is not bare bones practice and compassion lead. That excludes most of Buddhism.
This response is political rather than Buddhist per se, however, telling the truth is always something a Buddhist aspires to always.
Matthew