Hi, Beatrice. Great post! I love the insight around "the Universe" being a safe, secular way to lean on a theological or spiritual concept. What did you think of your study of the theosophists?
Thank you! Every time I read the theosophists, I always find myself anticipating that I will find them more compelling than I actually do. I think I appreciate theosophy as a historical phenomenon that altered the spiritual landscape more than I appreciate the actual intellectual productions of theosophy. What are your thoughts?
I agree with you that the theosophists seem to be a mixed bag. I like the fact that they seemed to approach the spiritual landscape outside of "church."
The more I explore the higher levels of consciousness the better I'm able to imagine the future on a longer time scale; meaning, it helps me think deeply about how humanity might approach spirituality in 500, 1000, or 5000 years from now.
If I had to make my best guess, churches will mostly be gone in 500 years, at least in the West. But Spirituality will be alive and well!
Despite what we see on the news or social media, there is a massive consciousness shift taking place in the West. People are outgrowing the Obedience-level churches (which is where nearly all churches are at.)
And even if these individuals are now agnostics, or even atheists, that's still a step up in consciousness (Ambition level.) While this appears to be a spiritual regression, it's actually progress. And an incubation period while they're being prepared for a greater revelation of the Divine.
All that said, I believe the new leaders and organizations that arise to meet the spiritual needs of these individuals will resemble the Theosophists (and other related movements) in that they'll approach spirituality in a more holistic, spiritual-science manner.
There are a lot of my colleagues in religious studies and theology who still treat the term “spirituality” with a lot of skepticism, which I think is a hangover from Christendom. But it does seem to me that outside of this field, and even among some scientists, there is a growing curiosity to explore what it might mean to think about spirituality as part of our biocultural life, which is a conversation that interests me and seems in line with your speculations.
Definitely! One of my interests is in "how to live." Not from the position of imposing our view on others, but simply the question of "how should I live my life to best contribute to the health of myself, my family, and society?" I just typed up the following in a draft post:
"In 500 or 1000 years spirituality will no longer be relegated to churches and Sunday mornings. Societies and their leaders will rise beyond the current rational levels of consciousness and into stages that allow us to view all of reality as a continuum.
Scientists will embrace spiritual truths as a way to better understand the material Universe and the dimensions that lie beyond our current sight.
From the earliest ages children will be taught these concepts.
But until then we should probably just focus on love."
And I think for most of us, even if it's cliche, we should probably just focus on how we can be more loving. Loving ourselves. Loving our family. Loving our neighbors. Loving those we disagree with. Loving nature. Loving the animals. Loving our experiences. And even loving the uncertainty of existence.
Definitely some of the best conversations that are happening in public are those take seriously our desire/need to be more loving. And also that take seriously the way people and institutions can turn this desire against us (manipulate us accordingly…)
I really enjoyed this one Bea. For me, it comes down to acknowledging that there is no "Divine Plan" but regardless of the chaos and randomness that surrounds us, we have the agency to "choose life." And create our own meaning in the process.
Hi, Beatrice. Great post! I love the insight around "the Universe" being a safe, secular way to lean on a theological or spiritual concept. What did you think of your study of the theosophists?
Thank you! Every time I read the theosophists, I always find myself anticipating that I will find them more compelling than I actually do. I think I appreciate theosophy as a historical phenomenon that altered the spiritual landscape more than I appreciate the actual intellectual productions of theosophy. What are your thoughts?
I agree with you that the theosophists seem to be a mixed bag. I like the fact that they seemed to approach the spiritual landscape outside of "church."
The more I explore the higher levels of consciousness the better I'm able to imagine the future on a longer time scale; meaning, it helps me think deeply about how humanity might approach spirituality in 500, 1000, or 5000 years from now.
If I had to make my best guess, churches will mostly be gone in 500 years, at least in the West. But Spirituality will be alive and well!
Despite what we see on the news or social media, there is a massive consciousness shift taking place in the West. People are outgrowing the Obedience-level churches (which is where nearly all churches are at.)
And even if these individuals are now agnostics, or even atheists, that's still a step up in consciousness (Ambition level.) While this appears to be a spiritual regression, it's actually progress. And an incubation period while they're being prepared for a greater revelation of the Divine.
All that said, I believe the new leaders and organizations that arise to meet the spiritual needs of these individuals will resemble the Theosophists (and other related movements) in that they'll approach spirituality in a more holistic, spiritual-science manner.
Hope you have a great weekend!
There are a lot of my colleagues in religious studies and theology who still treat the term “spirituality” with a lot of skepticism, which I think is a hangover from Christendom. But it does seem to me that outside of this field, and even among some scientists, there is a growing curiosity to explore what it might mean to think about spirituality as part of our biocultural life, which is a conversation that interests me and seems in line with your speculations.
Definitely! One of my interests is in "how to live." Not from the position of imposing our view on others, but simply the question of "how should I live my life to best contribute to the health of myself, my family, and society?" I just typed up the following in a draft post:
"In 500 or 1000 years spirituality will no longer be relegated to churches and Sunday mornings. Societies and their leaders will rise beyond the current rational levels of consciousness and into stages that allow us to view all of reality as a continuum.
Scientists will embrace spiritual truths as a way to better understand the material Universe and the dimensions that lie beyond our current sight.
From the earliest ages children will be taught these concepts.
But until then we should probably just focus on love."
And I think for most of us, even if it's cliche, we should probably just focus on how we can be more loving. Loving ourselves. Loving our family. Loving our neighbors. Loving those we disagree with. Loving nature. Loving the animals. Loving our experiences. And even loving the uncertainty of existence.
Thanks for the awesome conversation!!
Definitely some of the best conversations that are happening in public are those take seriously our desire/need to be more loving. And also that take seriously the way people and institutions can turn this desire against us (manipulate us accordingly…)
I really enjoyed this one Bea. For me, it comes down to acknowledging that there is no "Divine Plan" but regardless of the chaos and randomness that surrounds us, we have the agency to "choose life." And create our own meaning in the process.