The bottom line is that according to the Church we have separated ourselves from God. This is utter nonsense. We cannot be separated from God. Nothing is separate from God, as He is in everything that exists, ever has existed and ever will exist. In condemning ourselves we are therefore condemning Him. This must surely be the ultimate heresy.
The whole idea of repentance seems to me a bit of a misnomer anyway. If God does not judge, then why do we have to repent our sins in the first place? This is simply a way of assuaging our own guilt. All we are really doing is asking permission to forgive ourselves.
Religion then is an institution based around particular ideas of how things are. These ideas have become hardened and set in stone, becoming dogma and doctrines. These are largely unchallengeable, as religion requires you to believe these teachings. Gumble's insistence that religion is the only true path to God is nothing more than a tool to help the Church acquire and keep new recruits, thereby continuing its existence. However, the fact that Christianity has existed for so long is an indication of its failure rather than its success, as the moment an organisation serves the purpose for which it was created, it becomes obsolete.
Spirituality is not an institution, but an experience. In stark contrast to religion, spirituality encourages you to set your own beliefs, based on personal experience. It also teaches that you can communicate directly with God, without the need for intermediaries, calling into question the need for Priests of any kind. No wonder the Church finds this whole concept so threatening.
These experiences become your own authority, rather than something that someone else has told you. These beliefs are not limitless, but are bounded by the concept of only acting for the highest good of all concerned and the harm of none. Whenever I am preparing myself to do healing work I say a short invocation to this effect. I find that the human mind has an amazing capacity to set its own limits and boundaries when allowed to do so, without the need for defined rules as to what is and is not acceptable behaviour, dictates by Churches and other organisations. God has never set down rules governing how we should and should not behave, for to do so would be an infringement of the free will that He has given us.
It seems to me that many Christians seem unable to make up their mind as to what kind of being God is. On the one hand they teach that God loves us, and has given us free will, but on the other hand, if we do not do as He asks, then when we die we will face judgement and damnation. This seems to me to be somewhat of a paradox, as a loving God cannot also be judgmental. The two are fundamental opposites, and simply do not go together.
Gumbel stated that he believes there is no such thing as white magic, only black. At the start of the course, one of the helpers relayed a story about how he came to Christianity. He had been seeing his girlfriend, who was a Christian, for some time. As the relationship deepened, he realised that this was the woman he wanted to spend his life with. As he was not a Christian, this threw up all kinds of conflicts. He realised that in order for the relationship to work, he would need to understand Christianity more, and so started going to Church. For a long time he struggled to understand, until one day he had a sudden revelation. He was later told that the rest of the congregation had been praying for him, in other words, attempting to influence his decision.
I see this as a direct infringement of his free will, as his own journey to Christianity would have taught him a lot more, had he been left to his own devices. It is the journey that is important, not the destination. In a way I see this as black magic, as the effect of prayer is very strong. Since he did not know about this, their prayer was altering and possibly disturbing his life path. Maybe on the other hand, he was meant to experience this and become a Christian. It is always preferable however that the person reaches this understanding on their own, without interference from others, no matter how well meaning they may be.
Christians equate God with love, and the Devil, or Satan with fear. We are taught to view the Devil as an opposing force, external to ourselves, that must be kept in check. As this force, like God, surrounds everything in the universe, it is in fact both internal and external. The Devil is therefore a force which is both equal and opposite to God.
The Devil, or darkness as I prefer to call it, is the voice of fear, or negativity, the voice that tells us that we are weak and unworthy, and tries to sabotage our efforts. The light, or God, is the voice of love, the voice that says we are worthy, and the voice that encourages our efforts. Many people believe that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same, but I am not one of these. I believe that Lucifer is merely the light twin of Satan. As Satan stands in the light, keeping it in check, so Lucifer stands in the darkness keeping that in check, striving to maintain balance. It's a tough job - but someone has to do it!
This reminds me of the force in the Star Wars films. This is described as 'a force that is neutral, but can be used for good or evil purposes'. Luke Skywalker is depicted as working for the light, whereas his father, Darth Vader is seduced into working for the dark side of the force. At the end of the sixth episode, Return of the Jedi, Luke refuses to kill Darth Vader, as he knows that if he does, he too will have been seduced by the darkness.
Although the force itself is neutral, like us it has two polarities. Everything has its opposite; wherever there is light there is darkness, and wherever there is darkness there is light. This is perfectly illustrated in the Yin Yan symbol. Neither is intrinsically evil, they are simply striving to maintain balance.
God is in fact the only force in the universe that is completely balanced. Before we can return to God, at the end of our series of lifetimes, so too must we be. Therefore we must strive to incorporate both the light and dark aspects of our being, reaching a point of neutrality. If we work wholly for the light, and ignore our negative emotions, then we will be unable to return to God. If we work wholly for the dark, then the same thing happens.
The Devil or darkness is not a force to be conquered into submission, but a force to acknowledge and work with. It is a force which exists in each and every one of us, whether we choose to admit it or not. Ultimately the only way to transcend the darkness is to embrace it. This does not mean that we must ignore our light side and work only for the dark, for all this does is create a state of further imbalance. What it does mean however, is acknowledging that it exists, for by failing to acknowledge that part of ourselves, we are merely giving it more energy. Pain does not decompose when buried, but continues to fester beneath the surface, waiting for an opportunity to express itself, and burst forth. Ignoring this aspect of ourselves is therefore a very dangerous and selfish thing to do, for everyone around us.
In conclusion, I would like to say that I found Gumble's comments regarding my chosen path to be offensive and discourteous in the extreme. They showed a complete lack of respect and tolerance for the views and beliefs of others. Spirituality encourages us to take things at face value, fully accepting seemingly different views without judgement. The intolerance and prejudice fostered by Gumble's views leads to a lack of communication and understanding. It is precisely this attitude that starts wars.
I resent the assertion that the things I believe in are evil, and that by implication I too must be. I believe that all paths are equally valid, and no one is better than any other. Our views may be different, but they are just that, different, neither one is any better than the other. What makes Nicky Gumble think that he has the right to foist his views upon others, and tell them how they should live their lives? We live in a free society, where we should be able to make up our own minds. This is a direct infringement of the free will that we have been given. It is obvious to me, from these comments, that the Church is working from a point of love of power, rather than power of love.
After careful consideration I have therefore decided to leave the group, as it obvious that there is no room for my views here. When the leaflet about this course came through my door, I saw this as an invitation, and sign that I needed to explore Christianity in more detail. My intuition told me that I could be in for a difficult ride, and I am saddened to say that the discussion on Wednesday only served to confirm this view.
Shortly before the millennium, another leaflet came through my door, entitled Jesus 2000. On the back of this leaflet were words to the effect that we should not listen to our intuition, as it cannot be trusted, and may be seeking to divert us from our path. The leaflet suggested that God knows better than anyone how we should live our lives, and we should instead turn to Him. The irony is that intuition is one of the many ways that God uses to reach us. Intuition equates to inner tuition, or teaching from within, in other words, tapping into the higher self, or soul, which is in itself part of God.
Finally, I would like to wish you all well on your journey through life and thank you for being such good teachers. You have shown me many things about myself which I did not wish to acknowledge or look at, not least of all the fact that I can be as judgemental in my views as you, and the religion that you represent, appear to be. Having said this, at least I have had the opportunity to make up my own mind, and not take someone else's words and views as my own. For this I remain eternally thankful.
Yours,
June Austin
