Thank you to the readers who have posted words of appreciation. I especially thank David Fisher for his kind comments, since his lucid articles helped to crystallise my own ideas.

Foyle: Interesting post, but I’m afraid I don’t see the relevance to my article.

Bushbred: I agree about knowledge of science and history being essential to making the world a better place. I know you’re very keen on Thomas Aquinas. Have you ever read Matthew Fox’s book “Sheer Joy!”? It’s an unorthodox and inspiring insight into the more mystical side of Aquinas that churches and theologians have rarely given attention. I recommend it heartily.

David G: < No religion = no war! Simple really. > Are you serious?

Secular Guy:
< But hey, we're back in the REAL world now, where false religion dogma is still being forced into young minds, as it was in yours, it seems. > My parents never went to church and never talked religion, just sent me along on Sundays. Dogma was not heavily expounded in my church environment, and I don’t think I ever felt that I was being force-fed. (Of course society in general in the 1950s was still pretty moralistic, with a kill-joy attitude towards youth. But we showed ‘em the new ways once Elvis and Bill Haley started rockin’ us in the aisles of the local cinema!) My most vivid memories are of the beauty of the church architecture, its stained-glass windows and carvings, and the music. To quote John Keats, “Beauty is truth.”

<I can understand how some can let go of their rationality and be seduced by the "loving" fellowship of believers, but honestly Stephen, have you seen how these same believers carry on when you're NOT one of their own flock? It's not pretty!>
Yes, I know it happens in some churches and religious communities. But it has been very, very rare in the parishes of which I’ve been a member. It isn’t necessarily a part of religious life. My church is very inclusive, joins in activities with other denominations and in secular projects with the wider community.

Stephen
Thank you for a thought provoking article and for baring your personal journey so honestly.

"Put a little differently, truth is the eternal demand that we accept that the ground of our being is beyond individual ego-life and common to all humanity. I call that ground of my being "God". God is not a supernatural entity, does not exist. But God insists in the collective unconscious, and from God I (ego) came."

It might sound absurd but your final words ring very true for me as an atheist. There are many ways to accept that our being is beyond individual ego and common to all humanity. No matter our culture or belief systems all humans share a common bond - a universal sisterhood and brotherhood (humanhood if you like).

That connection can be pursued or manifested in various ways. Some people find that connection or understanding as you have through Christianity (in your case through the Anglican Church).

Thank you for being able to put your view without negativity and witout casting aspersions on the different paths to achieving a similar understanding of universal humanity that goes beyond the indidvidual.

i hesitate...to/say..that-most...that claim..to/be athiest...
arn't..as much/rejecting..god..as..much/as..rebelling religeon

it seems/those...who claim/christ..died..so-they..can sin
have much-to...account for..

[is/it..forgive..them/lord..they/know-not..what they/do?]

any claiming to-be...god/incarnate..clearly/are..decieved
even jesus..didnt claim..that..

yet its/like..some..so/need..the/christ...to..'be'...god
how/to correct..the clear-blasphemy...?

god is god..full-stop
[thou shalt-have..no god/but god]

then/there..is/the..graven-image..issue
and hanging..the christs/dead-corpse..on the wall
[a thing..demons..do/with..their..'trophies..]

demons..also/drink..blood...and eat..flesh
and if the..real/thing..cant-be gotten..
faux/blood...and..crackers..will-do

its..so/clear..as the/messiah..predicted..
by their..works..will/you..know-them

but what/can..one do..to..one/who..knows/they are forgiven
for such/is the truth..so far..as god..[good]..goes
for/he forgives..us-all...

but/then..you..have/victims..
who also/know..they-are forgiven...

and so..they dont/forgive..[nor forget]
and sadly...it/is many..of them..[other-wise..good]..that dwell/in hell

but then..the name..[hell]..is wrong
see good..gravitates/to..the place..where good dwells

and vile...dwell..in..a place..where vile/accumulates

and n'er..the two/shall meet
[for our/fathers-house..has many-rooms]

in fact..the place..where those/who..love vile/dwell
has many rooms/too..seems the..lovers/of vile..often detest..
each others..choice/of..vile

thus there is..a hell..[heaven]..
for those/who..love..murder

and..an-other...hell..
for those who/love..greed

each...'love'..however vile..[or good]
..has its/own...'place'/..[room/realm..sphere]

where the..lovers..[of a particular-vile..
can spend..eternity..doing that..specific-vile..[or good]..
..only/to/with..each-other

thus we/have-been..gifted..free-will..in this/realm
[the only realm..where the purest/love...
lives equally..beside..the/most..impure-vile...

so in the/next...'life'..
they..can/be cater-ed for
,...without hurting others..not into/that..per-version..of love

thus we/let..the wheat/and the chaff..
come..to harvest..[here]..in its-own..time

thus we/let..the sheep/mingle..with the goats
thus let..the good/bad..live in common/facility..[ear-th]

knowing we are/all equally...fallen..
to even/get..a life-sentance...[h-ear]..[here]

none..here..is/..or was innocent..[spiritually-speaking]
but then/got gifted..the innocence..of a child

till we took...enough rope..
to reveal..the true..us..[u/me]

our/every..deed...creates..the astral-body[soul]
which will/be our body..in the next-life

that will-be revealed..in the light
or obscured..in the darkness

every good we do ...earns,..our place..in the light
every good..we rejected to do..earns us a spot..in the grey-zone

every injury..we did to others[thus god]..
drags..us into..the dark-sphere

high..on this list..is decieving..gods/own..away from good

but what/the-use..of words
there is nothing..hidden..
that shall-not..be revealed

[not judged]..only revealed..by our/own..soul
obvious..to all...

[i just thought..i would pass that-on]
know..every bit/of good..we do/..for others..helps

and also-know...we can*..redeem..ourselves..out/of hell
anytime..we chose/to..see..the light..[love/logic]

[ie..reject..the lust/to sin]

simply/by..seeking to help-others
is the..first-step..to an/amasing eternity

which..we/all have..before us

believe-it..or not

ahhh-men
let..ye without-sin..
not cast..the first-stone

Dear Stephen,
thanks for a very nice little parable that I can relate to deeply, though with an important qualification.
I too love "Dover Beach", what's not to love? But since my discipline is English Literature, I also know Arnold for his prose, his apostasy, and his conservative influence. Arnold projected his crisis of faith onto canonical literature, so that in the popularising new secular age the masses (not to mention India) would be regulated by their indoctrination in the classics. This was taken up by T S Eliot and F R Leavis for the conservatives, even while they indulged their modernist elitism, and by Raymond Williams for a Marxist version. That is, canonical literature took over where religion left off, as a means to subject the masses.
I also read Carl Jung deeply years ago, as clearly you have. But in my less romantic moments I much prefer the rigour of Freud, and I see art as cultural production rather than aesthetics.
I've also had, and have, remarkable dreams and insights, which seem to defy any logical explanation, but yet I'm far too savvy in the ways of human duplicity to draw any conclusions from that, or other life experience, especially if it flatters.
But I do like your poetic distinction, that God "insists" rather than exists (rhetoric is next to Godliness) and you seem modest enough.
Yet naivety is a sin--an indulgence--and a God-sent to our masters.

Pelican:
I appreciate your response. It's heartening to find that my writing forges some deeper understanding and friendship between individuals who may seem, on the surface of their utterances, to be enemies.

Squeers:
Thank you. I read Arnold's "Culture and Anarchy". I felt some empathy with his position towards "Barbarians" and "Philistines"; I too valued both "sweetness and light". But my empathy was just as strong towards the general thesis of Raymond Williams' "Culture and Society 1780-1950". I could therefore be accused of understanding neither of them, but I think I reached a point of view beyond the conservative-Marxist or right-left dimension that they represented. Still, your remarks have nudged me into dipping into both books again.

I also understand your preference for Freud over Jung at times. There were some periods some years ago when I felt the same -- usually in times when I was bent on social-political action. Freud's prose style is of course far more pared and so easier to digest. But Jung's very different view of the unconscious (for one thing) definitely tilts me in his direction.

but/then..you..have/victims..
who also/know..they-are forgiven...

and so..they dont/forgive..[nor forget]
and sadly...it/is many..of them..[other-wise..good]..that dwell/in hell

OUG: thank you for the reminder and one in which I must pass on to someone I know struggling presently as a victim.

I loved your words.

Kindest wishes.