“I felt that the Anglican priesthood was now totally unable to channel spiritual power. The Roman Catholics used to be able to do it, but were now a bit ashamed, it had become vaguely ‘non-U’ to be miraculous. You were just meant to be a socialist and be very good to everybody. This is true, it is what Christ taught them to do, but few of them were very good at it. The Methodists wee wonderful with their singing and healing, and the Hindus were past masters at it all but rather despised the psychic realm. They were into higher spirituality but I thought that the higher spirituality wasn’t doing them much good as regards social reform. They have the caste system, which I found to be very deep when I got to know them better. They have the poor old untouchables, whom nobody seemed to care about except Ghandi, whom I admired immensely. The Sufis are wonderful, but they don’t seem to be very tolerant of idolaters like the Hindus.
I was interested in the Quakers for a long time. They were very good with social work and the material plane, but then they said ‘the Holy Spirit has left, we don’t get the Holy Spirit any more’ so I suppose my attitude was that I’d go with the establishment, the Church of England, although they didn’t seem to have much spiritual power, because they were good and respectable. One settled for Jane Austen and respectability. So I did try with orthodoxy.” [1]
No comments:
Post a Comment