[Buddha-l] secular religion

[Stanley J. Ziobro II]

On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, curt wrote:

> Richard Hayes wrote:
> > On Friday 25 August 2006 16:57, curt wrote:
> >
> >
> >> There is no doubt that secularism arose as a rejection of
> >> religion, pure and simple.
> >>
> >
> > That is not quite the case. As I mentioned earlier, the first
> > occurrence of the word "secular" was in the Catholic church. It
> > arose not as a rejection of anything, but as a way of supplementing
> > what already existed and was expected to continue existing. Secular
> > priests were those who took on pastoral duties. They are still so
> > called. And there are many religious organizations around today who
> > see a great deal of value of being secular, in the sense of being
> > engaged in the world as opposed to withdrawing from the world.
> >
> >
> >
> OK - you've got a point there. And worse yet (for me) - the point you
> are making may be especially applicable to Buddhism. I say that because
> the idea of "withdrawing from the world" is more deeply embedded in
> Buddhism, in my opinion, than it is in Christianity - since Christianity
> did not originally have any kind of "monasticism".

Curt,

Richard's points, and yours here, are well taken.  There were monastic
elements that one might discern in the Apostolic and Evangelical writings,
but there was nothing systematized.  The earliest record we have of
monastic realities, if memory serves, is Jeromes biography of Paul the
Hermit (Paul of Thebes or Paul the Anchorite).  He appears to have been
born around 230 AD and went into the desert around 245.

Stan Ziobro