Pelican,
>>it is a stretch for the Pope to equate the Nazi regime with atheism<<
Again, please quote where he "equated" Nazism with (your definition of) atheism.

>>The Pope also advised against aggressive secularism<<
Well, it is not his job, but he could have advised also against aggressive e.g. Christianity (or aggressive anything).

>>Secularism should not be seen as a threat<<
I agree, so does the Pope (please see e.g. the books mentioned in my post to Poirot). Also, please see http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10799#179660 for the difference between pluralist and eliminative secularism referred to in my earlier post to Squeers.

>>The Pope said "There are some who now seek to exclude religious belief from public discourse, … but his claims that religion is not allowed in public discourse is not the reality. <<

Saying that "there are some who seek A" is not the same thing as claiming that A is the reality.

Otherwise I agree.

.

Dear Squeers,

.

Your reflections on "spirituality" appear close to the philosophy of Theravada Buddhism dear to the Sri Lankan intellectual, Walpola Rahula.

The ancient Chinese "spirituality" appears to have been closely associated with an infinite respect for their elders (alive and deceased) together with an equally indefatigable reverence of Confucian rite ("Li", proper conduct).

I find occasion for "spiritual" experience in many aspects of daily life such as listening to classical music, reading, attending exhibitions of certain artists, contemplating nature, visiting (empty) churches and cathedrales (conceived by architects of exception and built by superb craftsmen over several generations), participating in community activities in the local city council, and in an ever deepening relationship with my beloved wife.

None of this is purely material, nor is it "subsitence, procreation or indulgence for their own sakes".

Perhaps living in a city like Paris has something to do with it.

.

Dear Banjo,

I think you are right. I am not "religious", yet am moved by beautiful architecture - especially cathedrals which I like to draw (wished I lived in Paris).
Contemplating this, I can only say that the harmony of form reflected in the lines and the planes, and the light and the shadow inspires me me to try and recreate it.

Dear Banjo,
Do I understand from your glowing assessment of your individual life that you disagree with me?
The rather bleak prospect I outline above of our "spiritual" vacuity is sociological. There is a strong sense in all of us that we are free agents acting independently and "essentially" within a given set of circumstances, that we are motivated from within rather than without, as if our "essential" being was unmolested by the conditions within which it operates. This is surely not the case; however valid the notion of an essential self, it is not an inviolable nucleus; it "was" a singularity and "is" a process of becoming. But its development and "success" or "failure" is socially constrained and culturally defined. We do not abide in a vacuum. Your own "spiritual" indulgences bare me out--that is that such a need exists. That you fulfil it in the exemplary way you do, by way of high culture and conjugal mystification (or how would you describe it), certainly redounds to your credit, that is according to popular "ideals" rather than "norms".
We all conceive qualitative assessments of ourselves, but you surely won't deny that a full and frank confession would be bound to blemish your (or mine) escutcheon?
Cont..

..Cont
I'm also fascinated with cathedrals (and ecclesiastics. I even wrote a would-be novel based on my fascination), but I'm sceptical of my motives. I listen almost exclusively to classical music (as a philistine, without understanding it) to drown out the world in order to think. I also love to walk and think. I read (or used to) "great" literature, but 'twas more for cultural capital than edification. I too love my wife, but I've always found the concept problematic.
On the other side of the ledger: I hardly know my neighbours, yet dislike some of them regardless. I do nothing to help my community, bar offering it criticism and paying tax. I "cheated" on my first wife and had affairs with married women. I'm an impatient driver, occasional lecher and I've said and done many things of which I'm embarrassed and ashamed. I'm altogether typical, in other words, though a little tame, overall, I suspect.
The point I'm making is that the seed's "potential" for growth is "in" the medium--the culture. The culture is impoverished (commodified) and the plants are stunted; so they seek what they lack in intangibles, indeed they make a fetish and a tradition of intangibles--reify them--to support the want of healthy (potential) development.
Prevailing in such poor soil, in competition with one's neighbours (rivals), and sustained by opiates (intangibles), the stunted plant conceives itself a majestic oak as it surveys the tree-tops.
Yet a gnawing hunger, and doubt, abides in all of us. Despite all our bluff and bluster, or professed faith, we are unfulfilled, ailing and timorous, though we rebel against such acknowledgements.

.

Dear Poirot,

.

It is interesting to learn that architecture brings out the artist in you and that it is a source of inspiration.

I imagine it is in painting.

.