Marc Andrus, the Bishop of California With Rupert Sheldrake: Detoxifying Christianity

This dialogue between Andrus and Sheldrake is interesting because it accurately identifies why there is a taboo on Christianity in the so-called educated classes in the United States, Britain and so many other places these days.  I was especially interested in how Andrus, who had welcomed a prominent Tibetan Buddhist to speak at Grace Cathedral, when the invitation was reciprocated and he was to talk to a large group of Buddhists, was requested to not mention anything to do with God, Jesus, the Church or Christianity for fear of arousing the hostility of the audience of those on the way to enlightenment.  

You can hear that here,

Detoxifying Christianity 

beginning after 8:45.

As someone who studied Buddhism very seriously for a number of years and found that Metta was one of the best things in it, I was surprised that this one venue of hate was common enough with serious practitioners to warrant a request that it not be mentioned.  Andrus tells how he handled the situation, which was good, but it would have been far better if it had not been an issue.  The Buddhists might want to remove that hang up from their practitioners if it is that big a deal for them.

There is enough in the real history of Christians behaving badly to address without the add-on lies and distortions that are current.   Some of those, especially in the English language, are the Britatheists' adoption of anti-Catholic invective whipped up by some of the most hypocritical of people.   The Tudor Anglicans and their successors who went on and on about The Inquisition served monarchs who killed many tens of thousands more people than who were ever killed in the centuries that the Inquisition was in existence, but they've never had that fact lead to the condemnation of civil authority, the law, courts, or the rule of law.   As Sheldrake points out, it is only when the topic is Christianity, these days, that you are permitted to blame living people for things they not only never had anything to do with, but would be the first to condemn them.   I can't imagine any modern Anglican or Episcopalian who would say that it was OK to kill people for religious non-conformity, I can't imagine any Catholic who would say that even Thomas Cranmer should have been burned at the stake, something which he had no problem having a hand in while he served Henry VIII or his son.

If you want to find groups which have put that history behind them, you're most likely to find them among Christian denominations, especially the ones denominated to be "liberals".

The most potent of all powers for the oppression, enslavement and murder of millions and millions, money, wealth, the accumulation of political, police and military power are never held up as worthy of abolition or even discouragement by those modern, educated folk who will buy any lie as long as Christianity is the villain in it.  I can not recall, ever, hearing the kind of sob story that is so often heard among atheists, condemning the force of their quite often exaggerated oppression when it was something like that which was the real reason behind it.   It wouldn't be fashionable or get you the kind of attention blaming it on Christianity would.

I mentioned the other day how the Nazis had beheaded the Blessed Restituta Kafka for putting crucifixes in hospital rooms in Vienna and have mentioned that in the published intentions of the Nazis after their presumed victory in the war would ban crosses, replacing them with the swastika, the Bible, and everything else from churches,  Mein Kampf was to be the only sacred text allowed after their victory.  We are seeing something similar has been achieved by the victors in the war through the use of atheist propaganda.   Especially as seen in movies and TV.