Forget Compassion. Celebrate Modesty as Expression of Genuine Faith

As soon as I read Ms Karin Armstrong's plan for formulating a charter of compassion, I was reminded instantly of the work of Professor Hans Kueng at the Global Ethic Foundation and its comprehensive document accepted at the World Parliament of Religions: Declaration Toward a Global Ethic. (Aside: I had mentioned that document and posted a link to it on this forum over 18 months ago when an atheist blogger, with the username, Acrapist, and I managed to finally agree - it goes without saying we disagreed on every other point all the time - even though God is taken for a completely dispensable entity by all atheists, ethics is not. Since 6 billion people with 6 billion + 1 different ideas of right and wrong cannot not build any kind of international society, there was a need for global ethics in an ever more interdependent world.)

http://www.global-ethic.org/dat-english/index.htm

http://www.global-ethic.org/pdf_decl/Decl_english.pdf

Although the comprehensive document was accepted the World Parliament of Religions fifteen years ago, it would seem that its existence is little known. In my personal opinion there is an urgent need to disseminate that comprehensive document, which has covered every aspect of ethics based on all religions and has been accepted unanimously at the World Parliament. Through the United Nations, it could reach all the religious and secular authorities in all member countries. The religious groups and religious leaders reading this forum could do their part in spreading the good word to their own religious communities.

A new Charter on Compassion should cover new ground, areas that have not been yet covered by the document that already exists, without repeating what has been already accepted by an international body, The World Parliament of Religions.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Well said. Thanks for the article.

Since when are compassion and humility incompatible with one another? In fact I do not see how one can be genuinely compassionate towards others without being humble, and vice versa. Living the good life is about striving for balance among various goods, not choosing one supreme good and exalting it above all others.

Compassion and forgiveness smack of condescension. Humility and the willingness to share, to help our fellow humans when they are in need are values and actions that should be practiced instead.

Humility? Drenched in a surfeit of engorgement, wallowing in a narcissistic mud bath?

Maybe it is something of a quaint notion, not real to many of us who seem to regard a breakdown of civilization as somehow superior to things not American. And so President Bush has chastised the world that refused to do his stubborn bidding. The trick was to awe them with a demonstration of his, America's, superior grasp of economics and governance. There is a lesson in humility, when you educate the world from a position of mighty power.

Or maybe it is the probability of forcing the humility back onto oneself, if that be the trick, through the improbable laws of hubris. The strongest lesson in humility is the one you bring upon yourself.

I applaud any effort to further both compassion and humility but I do not believe that religions (certainly the Abrahamic religions) often provide either. If they did, readers of faith would feel compassion for atheists like me, knowing that we are destined for hell. I predict, however, that my benign belief will provoke more hostility here than concern for my soul. Then again, readers might prove me wrong. If so, I will consider revising my opinion.

I see the good sense in much of what you have said, Mr. Hirschfield; but frankly, the mean-spirited tone of your remarks undermines your credibility as a moral authority. However naive you think Ms. Armstrong's position is, she offered her comments in good will. You, on the other hand, have hardly set a very good example of humility with your arrogant and condescending reply. I think this is one of those times when the physician would be well advised to heal himself.

Rabbi, your first two sentences do not speak well for you or your argument. They echo so much of the lack of respect that is heard all over the internet.

As far as I can tell, a person can have total humility to the "word of god" and because of that, abdicate the kind of critical thinking that is necessary to question the bigotry that goes on in many "holy" places around the world.

I think that you have a good point that "compassion" is often overused and ill-defined, but it is my opinion that humility can fall in the same trap.

As a Buddhist, I have been taught that compassion is the act of relieving the suffering of others by taking that suffering on yourself. One avoids the traps of the ego (which wants to be right) by practicing compassion because the focus is on the link between self and others. To me, compassion is the recognition of the common humanity and holiness of everyone, and as I empathize with my own pain and the pain of others, I become more unable to cause further harm, knowing what that means. In Buddhism, there is also no duality between the mundane world and the divine. We are all one, and with this understanding, I realize that by hurting others, I hurt myself. This is compassion informed by wisdom, which is then informed by compassion.

This practice also requires a sense of humility that says that we as individuals (or raging egos) should not presume to criticize the faults or faiths of others, but should rather look within at our own faults and faith. BUT,this practice, to me, is hollow without the empathy that a compassionate mind provides. Without compassion, my own "humility" is a disguise for self-hatred.

I think it is important to remember that we are all hypocrites at one time or another and that just because folks who preach compassion are not always perfect in their practice, doesn't mean that compassion is not a worthy spiritual goal.

Archarito - since when is it "assault on your beliefs" to insist that other people have the right not to follow them? This is a free society, not a theocracy which only acknowledges "one true God" and "one true religion". Is it an assault on a Jew's beliefs to insist that a Christian has the right to eat pork ribs for dinner? Is it a hate-crime against Catholics for a Protestant divorcee to remarry, or for a Protestant minister to marry at all? Is a Hindu or a Muslim attacking "The Word of God" by not attending your church on Sunday?

No one is going to force you to go against your beliefs and marry another person of your own gender. But likewise, you do not have the right to force another person to go against THEIR beliefs, either. And many of us do believe that same-sex marriages are just as much blessed gifts of God as heterosexual marriages.

As for the key question of this discussion, why are compassion and humility mutually exclusive virtues? Why not cultivate both? Have the humility to understand that your beliefs may not always be the Absolute Truth, that others may have things to teach you, and that others' ways of life are not necessarily inferior to your own because they are different - have the compassion to defend other's rights, families, lives and loves as you would your own. Have the compassion to help your neighbor when they are hurting - but the humility to understand that your neighbor may not want the kind of help you offer, and the willingness to listen to see what it is they really do want and need.

Even though I am not married I strongly believe the line in the sand must be drawn at the humanistic assault on The Word of God who ordained marriage as being that of a man and a woman.

The bigoted zealots against God who advocate same-sex marriage are acting out 'hate-crimes' against believers in the one true God.

thank you for a good article. You are most absolutely right.

"I would settle for a year of teaching the faithful in every community about the sacredness of modesty, humility questioning, and even doubt as expressions of real faith."

Don't post that over in the Stevens-Arroyo discussion - it'll only get you in trouble!

Which maybe says something about its validity.

I believe Ms. Armstrong's Charter of Compassion is merely a place to start in getting "all" to find our more generous side. We as a world are mostly suspicious and aggressive in our interaction with each other and we've forgotten the simplicity of basic human courtesty. Maybe the charter for compassion is a place to start to changing. Grant it there will be those who can't follow through. This is a decision of the heart and not the head.

bevjims1
"The problem with the three Abramhamic religions, Judism, Christianity and Islam, is that they all teach compassion and humility but it does not apply outside the religion."

Compassion and humility does not even apply within the Abramhamic traditions either. They are all at war with each other. Even within each leg of that triad, be it Christian, Jewish or Moslem, each sect is at war with the other sects in their branch with varying degrees of vitrol and violence, depending on how absolutist each sect is, and how many extremists the individual sect attracts.

Then there is the question of zealotry and addiction. Both of these phenom appear to have genetic origins, and there is no doubt that religion attracts addictive personalities.

Therefore, that hubris replaces compassion is not suprising, considering the amount of dissociation many religious people exhibit.

The problem with the three Abramhamic religions, Judism, Christianity and Islam, is that they all teach compassion and humility but it does not apply outside the religion. We've seen the sad state of christian humility in lobbying American government to deny other's rights. We've seen Islamic compassion in the word "infidel". We've seen Jewish compassion and humility for over 50 years in Israel's treatment of the Palestinians both outside Israel and inside Israel.

Only when these religions start recognizing that those outside the faith are equal, truly equal, only then will we begin to see compassion and humility displayed in any real way. Those people in these religions who today express compassion and humility towards all people need to be applauded and encouraged. I would put Jimmy Carter in that category. They are the future of their religions and the continuation of a religious enlightenment begun thousands of years ago. It will not be completed in our lifetimes but the discussion should begin somewhere and these religions need to focus on their selfishness, fear of other religions and why they consider those outside their religion to be something less than themselves. We all know that racism is abhorant, why do we allow religious views of others as being less than equal any ground? It needs to be stopped. All of these religions have the ability. Christ taught both compassion and humility to all, even those who were his worst enemies. That message needs to be revived since it seems lost on many Christians and Muslims today. Jews know the compassion of Solomon. Compassion and humility are within these religions, but fear has suppressed it. Its time to bring it out, in force, through example as Carter has, and at high levels. Leaders in these religions need to stop being afraid, for fear is what drives these religions to suppress compassiona and humility.

It is troubling that even among those professing faith in God, humility is seen as weakness. But there it is, and I do have a remedy...
Because I view and worship God as infinite and limitless, my own position is by default a humble one. Who among us stands any nearer the infinite than another? The more we can get each other to focus on the limitless God, the more it will become clear that all religions are relative efforts to relate, in humanly understandable terms, to the abstract and infinite. Respect, love, compassion all can follow from humility in this way.

I also added a comment to Karen Armstrong's article about religion, basically saying: Religion is not about compassion, but control.

Until we realize that it is not gods and temples that are sacred, but people, the struggle for control will continue.

Once again:
Humans are dear. All of them. Gods, and their religions, are cheap.

So much of this discussion is all about externals. Those darn people out there are causing the problem. Thus we need to teach, persuade, enlighten, or compel them to stop doing bad things and to think nice thoughts. With all due respect, when it comes to the problem of hatred, and violence, no meaningful discussion is possible until we realize that we (not others) are the problem. We all carry these things in us. Unless you have fully comprehended your own anger and violence, anything you do to stop others will be a continuation of the status quo. In this light, sermons, statements of principles, signing things, and public campaigns are of little significance.

Let me give a silly example. I live near Cambridge, Massachusetts where for many years probably 20% of the cars had "Teach Peace" bumper stickers on them. I can't tell you how many times I've been cut off, given the finger, snookered, or otherwise endangered by drivers in cars bearing those ridiculous stickers. The point? That is precisely where the hatred and violence in the world begins: when we run around blatting fine sentiments, but fail to see the problem in ourselves.

Ghostdogmn- you said it1 And for a perfect illustration of how the religious right practices "compassion, you should check out the Mormon thread. It's nice to know the Mormons ae baptizing Jewish and catholic dead so they can come to Jesus after they've gone to rest. Mormons have a very strange idea of compassion and tolerance.

Compassion is a stone moment: “If any one of
you is without compassion, let him be the first to throw a stone at him/her.”

I would settle for slience. I spent the first forty years of my life in the Evangelical Movement. I walked away from the church. Never to darken the door of any congregation again.(Funerals and Weddings being the exception)

I have found the "peace", not in a religion or a congregation, but within myself.

If we could kindly ask all faith communities across the globe to please just, shut up. "Be still and know that I am God."(Holy Bible find it your self) Guess what believers, God doesn't need your help, he doesn't need you to speak for him. He doesn't need you to govern. He just wants you to shut up. Don't say anything. Just put your faith into quite action and shut up.

My daddy use to say; "Clean up your own backyard before you start on your neighbors." I think it fits.

I would settle for slience. I spent the first forty years of my life in the Evangelical Movement. I walked away from the church. Never to darken the door of any congregation again.(Funerals and Weddings being the exception)

I have found the "peace", not in a religion or a congregation, but within myself.

If we could kindly ask all faith communities across the globe to please just, shut up. "Be still and know that I am God."(Holy Bible find it your self) Guess what believers, God doesn't need your help, he doesn't need you to speak for him. He doesn't need you to govern. He just wants you to shut up. Don't say anything. Just put your faith into quite action and shut up.

My daddy use to say; "Clean up your own backyard before you start on your neighbors." I think it fits.

We tend, by nature, to like those who are "like" us, and dislike those who are not "like" us. This behavior probably had, at one point in our evolution, survival advantage. It allowed people to congregate into groups that cared for and protected each other. By shunning or rejecting outsiders who were not part of the group, it allowed the more efficient distribution of limited resources, thus improving the survival chances of the group.

The problem is that now, when most of us no longer need to fight for basic survival, the remnants of this evolutionary trait still persist. Thus, like the appendix, it is a unneeded and undesirable leftover from previous times. As evolution and natural selection take time to work, it is evident that we will face these problems for some time to come. Globalization has proceeded at a rate which cannot be matched by the slow process of natural selection. But, given time, I am confident that those who cannot adapt will eventually die out. Much like the unneeded appendix that serves no useful purpose.

The major obstacles to compassion amongst the religions:

We go into the Muslim mosque and find a call to violence against infidels and oppression to women.

We go into the Jewish synagogue and find myths and more calls to violence via the trumpets of Jericho.

We go into the Catholic/Christian church and find blood and body and pretty, wingie thingies but no Virgin Mary and a shout of being the only way to Heaven.

We go into Hindu temples and find cows and the lower class/caste cleaning up the dung.

We go into a Buddhist temple and find tributes to an obese and not so obese figurines and then there is that talk about reincarnation into one of ten realms of being.

Solution:

Eliminate the flaws and errors in the historical foundations of the major religions.

"Pink slip" all the bishops, priests, rabbis, monks and imams/clerics who spread the hate and false theologies.

As you correctly point out, the extreme religious faction does indeed consider themselves to be "compassionate". They just feel no need to offer their compassion to those who disagree with them. It's easy to love your friends and those who agree with you, but the true test of compassion is how you treat your enemies.

A Charter for Compassion doesn't work because it allows us all to flip on our light of humanity, get an Amen from the chorus, then go back to where we were. It doesn't change a person, since it's a quality that's already present in the person and it's essentially just a temporary acknowledgment of what's already there.
A more effective exercise would be a World Empathy Day (or Hour, or Minute, or whatever), where people actively project themselves into the existences of those who are different, whether they're religiously, economically, or racially different. That would actually change people, if they fully engaged in the exercise, since they would come out of the experience with a fundamental understanding of something or someone that they did not previously possess.

Having compassion does not exactly require any change in behavior. Anybody can say they have it. Humility does change behavior, but humility is seen generally as a sign of weakness and is punished. As long as narcicism and arrogance are rewarded and humility punished, we can hardly expect to see hate and violence decreasing.

What you call amorphous, another columnist calls mushy, I see as a distinct call to recognize something often overlooked. Our society today seems so afraid of being earnest that we call passionate please for understanding, respect, and, yes, compassion, as not enough. Yet personal worldview is fundamental to action. And if we can revive a conversation about how compassion is more than just a feeling, it is a foundation on which to act, how can that not be good and potentially a major shift in the world.

The idea of using the internet, a platform on which so much hateful writing and conversation is breed, shows that technology can bring people together rather than allow people to find their own niche.

Rabbi Hirschfield;

I was facinated by your comments regarding things you regret in your past as a "warrior for God". One way to help increase compassion to all might be for you to pass on what led you to understand your actions were cruel. If you see this post, please respond. Also, if any body else has have had their ideas of who is deserving of compassion expanded, let us in in on what helped you to grow.

I understand the abuse people of faith have thrust upon others in the name of compassion, mercy, justice and caring. However, consider that modesty, humility, and even doubt beg for definition as does compasssion. Actually, no label will call others to care as care itself must be defined. Perhaps living a life of mercy is the call to others we should be making.

May I say Ouch! I did post my thoughts on her thread and I did sound very kumbyah- which I really don't mean to. I did say that compassion without certain things- like acceptance of other faiths, and understanding was useless. And so it is. I should have qualified more with the very things you ask for, because one of the things I see in these blogs is a great deal of compassionate lip service without questioning, and without accepting other people's differences. Many people really are looking for control or maybe absolutes they can gab on to. Who wouldn't in today's world? It's a scary place.

But I find the world of moral absolutes to be an even scarier place because it is so demanding of adherence to one's own set of rules, and so easy to condemn those who won't. There has to be a reestablishiment of the common ground defined by our Constitution.

And we probably need to redefine compassion- compassion still has to have rules- and compassion without a true belief and acceptance of the equality of others is not really compassion at all, just dogma paying lip service to it.