Several years ago the Chinese installed their own "Panchen lama", and recently two Catholic "cardinals". They are trying to control religion top-down. I interprete their actions as acknowledgement that organised religion poses a threat to their order. Is this because religion encourages independent thinking and/or individualism? Are they right?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does organised religion encourage individualism?
- Thread starter bill
- Start date
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
bill said:
Mine certainly does. I can't speak for others however.
I think they probably are;
This says it rather well;(there are a couple of links to other sites as well)
http://www.tibet-society.org.uk/pcurrent.html
Finally, and most worryingly, if the Chinese already have a puppet Panchen Lama installed they can use this fact to select their own Dalai Lama who they can then attempt to turn into a puppet. In this nightmare scenario the struggle for a Free Tibet would essentially be lost. It is no doubt that it is this long political game that the Chinese Government are currently working towards.
On the 14th May 1995, His Holiness The Dalai Lama proclaimed the discovery of the Eleventh Panchen Lama. The new Panchen Lama who was living in Tibet with his parents, however, was quickly condemned by the Chinese authorities and then abducted by the Chinese authorities becoming the worlds youngest political prisoner.
Meanwhile, the Chinese authorities had by now proclaimed their own Panchen Lama, a six year old boy called Gyaltsen Norbu, and had their own installation ceremony on November 30, 1995 with the actual 'enthronement' taking place on December 8th.
The whereabouts of the abducted Panchen Lama were not known until June 1996 when after a year of denying any knowledge of his location the Chinese finally admitted that they were indeed holding him. The reasons given by the Chinese for holding Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was to prevent him from being kidnapped by Tibetan nationalists!
As of January 1997 there have been no further developments and the Panchen Lama is still held by the Chinese.
The admission by the Chinese that they are holding the Panchen Lama at least brings an end to the conjecture of whether or not he is still alive but it does nothing to quieten concerns about his safety. Nor have the Chinese stated when they will release the Panchen Lama.
Regarding the Chinese designated 'Panchen Lama', the Chinese have been using the boy as an icon including unveiling a portrait of him in February this year and plans have been announced by the Chinese to have pictures of him hung throughout Tibet. This is in stark contrast with last years campaign by the Chinese to ban the public display of pictures of the Dalai Lama in Tibet.
The situation is set, therefore, for a continuation of the dispute. The Chinese will no doubt continue holding the Panchen Lama whilst attempting to prove to the world that their choice is the true Panchen Lama and who can then be used as a political weapon against His Holiness The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people in their peaceful and just struggle for an independent Tibet.
This says it rather well;(there are a couple of links to other sites as well)
http://www.tibet-society.org.uk/pcurrent.html
Finally, and most worryingly, if the Chinese already have a puppet Panchen Lama installed they can use this fact to select their own Dalai Lama who they can then attempt to turn into a puppet. In this nightmare scenario the struggle for a Free Tibet would essentially be lost. It is no doubt that it is this long political game that the Chinese Government are currently working towards.
On the 14th May 1995, His Holiness The Dalai Lama proclaimed the discovery of the Eleventh Panchen Lama. The new Panchen Lama who was living in Tibet with his parents, however, was quickly condemned by the Chinese authorities and then abducted by the Chinese authorities becoming the worlds youngest political prisoner.
Meanwhile, the Chinese authorities had by now proclaimed their own Panchen Lama, a six year old boy called Gyaltsen Norbu, and had their own installation ceremony on November 30, 1995 with the actual 'enthronement' taking place on December 8th.
The whereabouts of the abducted Panchen Lama were not known until June 1996 when after a year of denying any knowledge of his location the Chinese finally admitted that they were indeed holding him. The reasons given by the Chinese for holding Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was to prevent him from being kidnapped by Tibetan nationalists!
As of January 1997 there have been no further developments and the Panchen Lama is still held by the Chinese.
The admission by the Chinese that they are holding the Panchen Lama at least brings an end to the conjecture of whether or not he is still alive but it does nothing to quieten concerns about his safety. Nor have the Chinese stated when they will release the Panchen Lama.
Regarding the Chinese designated 'Panchen Lama', the Chinese have been using the boy as an icon including unveiling a portrait of him in February this year and plans have been announced by the Chinese to have pictures of him hung throughout Tibet. This is in stark contrast with last years campaign by the Chinese to ban the public display of pictures of the Dalai Lama in Tibet.
The situation is set, therefore, for a continuation of the dispute. The Chinese will no doubt continue holding the Panchen Lama whilst attempting to prove to the world that their choice is the true Panchen Lama and who can then be used as a political weapon against His Holiness The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people in their peaceful and just struggle for an independent Tibet.
d.
_______
bill said:
not necessarily. in fact, i think certain religions(denominations, at least) discourage independent thinking.
IMHO, i think the main cause of their wish to control organised religion would be that it is a competing power structure.
bill said:
in some cases, yes - but i don't know if that's always a good thing. in many cases, i think that individualistic thinking can serve to alienate the individual from the collective, which i don't think is positive for anyone. i'd prefer the middle path. :bounce
divine said:
Maybe they shouldn't worry too much about religion as a competing power structure. They have introduced capitalism which would have (I suspect) irreversibly undermined the feudal, spiritually oriented state Tibet once was. You see a link for the Chinese between religion and naissant democracy?
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
bill said:
Depends on the religion and its interpreters. IMO, Christianity is a communal religion. Capitalism and democracy force individualism onto it in the West.
Booko
Deviled Hen
bill said:
Mine insists on independent thinking. It also insists we obey the gov't though. Our actions in China are closely watched, as they are with other religious groups. Since we will not do anything to encourage anyone to oppose the gov't, they can watch all they want.
Organized religion can be an impetus to move people in some direction. Every smart gov't knows this. Some gov'ts use the fact to their own advantage, to stay in power.
Raguel
Member
I think that by it's very nature organised religion encourages groups to share and follow the same ideas. I'm sure that there are some religious groups that encourage their members to seek out there own answers, but from my experience this is not usually the case. The majority - those that deliver sermons or speeches on how to interpret passages of texts for example - are clearly telling members how to practice their faith which is obviously not individualism.
Booko
Deviled Hen
bill said:
It's definitely doctrine, and is applicable worldwide.
We're supposed to obey the government wherever we reside. There's one exception that I know of, and that's being ordered to go kill anyone.
Our religion is illegal in Iran, so we cannot elect Spiritual Assemblies at any level. That was true in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, but we have since elected an NSA in that country.
The funniest story I know comes from S. Africa during apartheid. The gov't passed a law making it illegal to have integrated ruling bodies in any organization, even religious ones.
Now obviously this conflicts with the Baha'i principle of elimination of all forms of prejudice. So the white members of the National Spiritual Assembly resigned from that body, leaving the new NSA comprised of entirely black members, which also meant there were blacks in charge of white people. I'm sure that's not exactly what the gov't intended
, but we did adhere to the law and our principles.We have to obey the law, but that doesn't mean we can't be shrewd in how we do so.