HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Cal33 » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »

Cal33

Profile Information

Member since: Sat Jun 13, 2009, 06:39 PM
Number of posts: 4,725

Journal Archives

SmileyRose: Crossing Over is a new birth, like a flowerbud blossoming out in all its beauty & Glory



Dear Rose:

Thank you for such a warm, loving, sincere and generous message. It
is a gift that comes right from your heart, since each and everyone of
us will be facing the same thing you are going through -- the
difference is only a question of time. My sister is receiving hospice care
at home. She, too, doesn't have much time left.

To tell you something about myself: I follow no particular religion, but
I do have a philosophy of life which is sometimes called "Spirituality."
There are no dogmas and no doctrines. We only accept what resonates
within ourselves. The reason is this: What resonates within us is what
we are ready to accept at that particular time. We each are at some
level of spiritual development. At age 20 I thought differently from the
time I was 10. At 40 I thought differently from the time I was 20, etc...
The same thing applies spiritually. We are all growing and continue
changing at our own pace -- hopefully for the better. We come across
new ideas every now and then. What we might not accept today, we
could very well accept another time. Unlike fear-based religious sects,
there are no threats of any kind -- ever. The emphasis is on love.

I believe that we all are souls using a temporary physical body to
experience and learn whatever we came on earth to experience and
learn. Our physical body comes with, or soon acquires, an ego -- the
selfish human part, which we have to learn to deal with. Our souls
are all portions of the One Spirit -- God, if you will. The major
religions do teach that we are made in the "image and likeness" of
God. Hence, we are all One. There are no "others." Whatever we do
to "others" we are also doing to ourselves.

When asked what is the opposite of life, most people would answer
"death." But isn't "birth" the opposite of death? The minute one is
born, each further minute one lives is a minute closer to death, when
the body finally dissolves and returns to the elements of nature.
Spirit, on the other hand, does not die. Life or spirit has no opposite.
Spirit, without a body, returns to its true home.

I also believe that while on earth, the way we think, feel and behave
is greatly influenced by our body's wants and needs. When separated
from the body, the soul is freed from those not always pleasant wants
and needs. It probably will feel a great big relief -- like getting rid of a
millstone from around one's neck.

I think it would be of benefit to frequently remind yourself that you will
soon be in that state where all earthly pains and difficulties are over;
and that you will be where all of us would like to be, and will be, some
day. Soon you will already have made it! Soon you will be reborn into
the world of spirit, our true home, where we all belong.

For those of us still on earth, it will take a little while longer, and then
the real we, all our loved ones and friends, will be together again, and
much more intensely and consciously together than we are, and have
ever been, on earth. When you cross over, it will be like a beautiful
flower-bud, a beautiful blossom opening up and unfolding in all its
glory and splendor!!! (Please click the link below).

http://www.flixxy.com/life-of-flowers.htm#.UGsuc5jA82y

Peace, love and blessings,

Cal33

Fat chance of this ever happening. I voted both times for Obama, but

I don't regret it. Just look at the alternative. It's even worse.
A complete Fascist takeover has been prevented until 2016, at
which time, we'll see how the elections will go.

It seems to me that Hillary Clinton will not be too much unlike
Obama. I'd rather take my chances and vote for Sen. Sanders,
Elizabeth Warren, or Alan Grayson. It's high time that we get a
real Democrat -- for a change. I've had it up to here with
Centrists. No more Centrists for me!!

And both are likely to be Dems., since the Dems. average out to be quite a lot older. Or do you

see other reasons for two of them to leave?

By the way, both Nostradamus and an Irish mystic and saint of the 12th century

had made a list of future popes. This new pope is the last one in both
their lists. They simply named no other.

Now, what's that supposed to mean? Your guess is as good as mine.

An excellent post, and welcome to DU. Will pass on your post to friends.

It's too early for me to be saying anything about Pope Francis, but Obama seems

to overvalue his idea of bipartisanship. In fact, he seems to be
obsessed with it. Having bipartisanship with an extreme rightist is
like having Al Capone as your business partner.

In general I'd agree bipartisanship is an excellent idea. But one has
to choose one's partner carefully. Of all people, Obama has chosen
a sociopath -- and sociopaths are known to be incapable of change!
But Obama is so obsessed with bipartisanship, that he doesn't see this.

I anticipate that the coming 4 years will be like the past 4 years. The
good news is that, a possible change of our country to becoming a
dictatorship has been delayed for the moment. It remains to be seen
what the elections of November, 2016, will bring.

Returning to Pope Francis, I like to remain optimistic. I hope that
he may turn out to be like another John XXIII, and with more than a
mere 4-1/2 years.

By the way, this present pope is the last one mentioned by both
Nostradamus and a 12th Century Irish mystic and saint (whose name
I can't recall). Both of them ended their lists of future popes with him
as the last item on their lists.



Yet it is only through this committee that change can happen. This is how things

are done in the Church. To come to any educated guess as to how
progressive this new pope will be, it might help to know something
about each of the 8 cardinals he has appointed to be members of
this committee.

In the same vein, to have an idea how Obama will handle the economy,
just know something about the economists he appoints to advise him.

Why not do them a favor and spell it out for them? Below is what I learned in catechism class

as a kid in school:

The pope is infallible only when he officially announces as Head of the Church
some doctrine concerning faith or morals for all Catholics to believe in. Those
who don't accept it are no longer Catholics (automatically excommunicated,
even when no official excommunication has ever been issued by church
authorities). The doctrines are mostly something that the Church has been
following for centuries anyway. The pronouncement, usually already accepted
by Catholics in general, and recommended by the pope's advisers in particular,
makes it formal. Needless to say, new pronouncements are something very
rare.

Examples to allay some common misconceptions:

1. Let's suppose the pope is teaching religion to a group of adults, or of
children. He could make mistakes. He isn't making any official pronouncements
for the whole Church to follow.

2. A doctrine concerning faith: There are three Persons in one God - the Father
the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Those who don't believe it are no longer Catholics.
It is an article of faith.

Jesus ascended body and soul into heaven. This, too, is an article of faith.

3. About morality: The Inquisition was practiced by the Church for six centuries.
It certainly was immoral. But the popes never made any official pronouncements
about all Catholics having to believe in it as a doctrine. The Catholic Church
simply practiced the Inquisition for six hundred years. This has nothing to do with
the popes' infallibility whatsoever.

Some popes did keep mistresses and have fathered children. This, too, was immoral,
but it, too, has nothing to do with the popes' infallibility whatsoever. It was the
personal immorality of the popes concerned.

I personally think that many of the doctrines are about matters that are
important in the eyes of the Church, but are of not much value to people, or
perhaps not important to God Himself. Does He really care much one way or
another if you believed He is made up of three persons (Father, Son and Holy
Spirit), and would He condemn you to hell for all eternity if you did not believe
this?

I think it's much more important to Him that human beings treated one another
with kindness and respect. Jesus Himself said of the Commandments: The
greatest of these is: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, thy
strength ...... and the second is equal to this, thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself.

The Inquisition certainly was not an example of acts of kindness and love! Jesus
would have condemned it, if He had been on earth at that time. These Church
clerics had become mad with power, and their sadism showed through.

As with politics, it was often the ambitious and sick ones lusting after power, who
got into the top positions within the Church. Things became better when the
people rebelled, and Church clerics have far less worldly power today than they
used to have in the past. Their behavior improved correspondingly. "Power
corrupts. And absolute power corrupts absolutely." This adage applies to all
humans, whether in politics or in religion.


I agree that term limits for the Curia would be a great idea, but it's unlikely to happen. It

looks as though Francis I will make a good pope -- perhaps a great one.
Remember John XXIII? I think of him as a great pope, the best one of
the 20th Century. It's unfortunate that he had only 4-1/2 years. Just
imagine how much he would have accomplished if he had had 20 years!

For those who feel racialy superior, know this: there is little to feel superior about.

How many of us would readily admit that we've practiced genocide against
Native Americans? In 1800 the estimated population of Native Americans
in North America was 20 million. Today, more than 2 centuries later, Native
Americans in North America number less than 5 million. And during these
2 centuries, the population of every other racial and ethnic group has
increased by at least 10 to 20 times.

Guns vs. bows and arrows -- How fair a fight was that? It was sheer
slaughter! The Native Americans were defending their own land, the Europeans
were the aggressors. It was a question of might is right. This, too, is human
nature. Throughout history bigger and stronger nations have always conquered
and colonized weaker and more "primitive" ones. What percentage of our schools teach the truth as it really was?

England had been a colony of ancient Rome for 400 years. Today, northern
Europeans (the English in particular) feel superior to the southern Europeans
(and to everybody else), when it was the Romans and the Greeks who gave them
their written language. Some people have never noticed that all the languages
in Western Europe use the same Roman alphabet, and in Eastern Europe the same Greek alphabet -- with some additions and variations. Central and northern Europeans had never developed a written language of their own.

If we looked at history, over the millenia, nations do rise to the top and
fall to the bottom. Each one has its turn at being Numero Uno. Then they
fall and rise again. The position of Numero Uno is a very temporary one!

The Germany of today tells its school children all about what Hitler had done:
how he had connived and succeeded in grabbing power, his wars of aggression,
concentration camps, mass murder, genocide, the likelihood of Hitler himself
having been one-eighth Jewish ..... the whole ugly works ..... no hideous
details spared.

On the other hand, many Americans don't even know that the American Indians
had come close to becoming extinct. During the Frontier Days, local frontier
governments were paying $25 for every Indian scalp (man, woman and child)
brought in. It was barbarous! Nothing to be proud about, is there? Perhaps the Indians learned about scalping from us? Nobody wants to even think about this -- let alone admit anything. We are all too eager to point our finger at the other guy. I think I'll stop right here.

How long will it take us humans to evolve into something less greedy and vicious still remains to be seen -- if we don't self-destruct first, that is.


































Go to Page: 1 2 Next »