I went into the Labour party just afore John Smith died.  There was a man of integrity.  Then came the most blatant puppet of the new career politicians whose only pursuit through the corridors of power and the troughs of plenty, was their own elevation.  Tony Blair and Cherie, King and Queen of Misrule. Whilst they “stood” for Labour values it was only the facade they used to self-propel.

Where do we get this notion that they embodied the principles of the Labour movement?  This was, and is, pure facade.  Irrespective of their IQs and cleverness, their only desire was to enrich themselves through the machine of the new government and “new” Labour.  Indeed it was “new” as it was just the old coat over what was really a complete new creation (marketing psychology used widely) of the new elite – who actually believe that they are worth it.  Genius itself is not even a reason to rely on a politician, as it does not necessarily follow that he or she will work for the greater good.

So Tony Blair gave us huge smiles, good-lad antics and war.  Cherie gave us a good try at appearing to be sophisticated because she is a barrister and “has done it all” in terms of working and career life and having all those kiddies to boot, rising to the top of the realm, because she assuredly deserved it. Perfect Mum, wife, career woman and coming from ordinary origins as if that, in itself, is supposedly the role model that should be aspired to by us all.  The only messages being conveyed to folk that through hard work and the requisite cleverness you may “escape” your humble origins – the assumption that escape is the be all and end all has been so long prevailing that it is our given in the UK these days, as is – or was – the given that the peoples of the Middle East should be under police state control.  The women MPs, from Blair’s Babes era, gave us no reason to respect them, even the clever Harriet Harman (a supposed espouser of a more fair society) choosing to follow her Tony in the placement of her son in a better school – directly against Labour policy.  The arguments were futile and this level of public servants merely find that their children deserve the very best whilst they work hard to try to get that for everyone else.  Hmmm.  Leadership by example then?

And, with all of this going on, war was the hugest “present” given to us by our “noble” leader of the nation and his party.  What else could we reasonably expect from a leader of a party which had sold out its values along with creating a dreadful environment for people like Mow Mowlem, whose respect from the public was earned, so that she was sidelined;  not because she was a bad politician but because she commanded more respect within the party and certainly outside of it, than her own leader.  So, she had to go.

War and its precedents, experience and aftermath is given to us not by a mature and evolving government – even if our Parliament is the Mother of all parliaments it doesn’t mean to say that it is the best by default – but by self-seeking, self-serving leaders and machinations of the system which attracts and supports that type of person.

This is as much a spiritual issue as it is a political issue.  And it is high time that we all took responsibility for at least acknowledging the truth about war and foreign policy, even if we do not seek to change things.  Just to face the truth is a starting point.

I was in some desperation;  my son’s illness had come back again.

So, I asked him “What do I have to do?”  I was desperate for instructions.

And I startlingly got an answer.  From somewhere inside – but they weren’t mine – came these words:

“Eileen, it is not what you must do, it is what you must be”.

That was a bit of a shock. My name was spoken, it was a direct response to my question.  It made me wonder what on earth it meant.  But, I had asked and I had got an answer.

Quite startled that these words came up inside of me, I was left dumbfounded.  So away I went and pondered for a long time on this message.  What did it mean?  I mean, living is about doing isn’t it?  Isn’t it about what we do?  Blah, blah etc. etc.  but I began to realise that there is a very clear distinction between doing and being.  Easy to confuse are they and I hadn’t really discerned the difference between the two verbs before.

Eventually, during the same year some months later on I was back at the abbey and I went to the shrine and I said this:  “Ok, then, I have pondered the differences between doing and being, so what must I be?”  And this answer came back:

“Be still.  Listen.  Be a vessel.”

Dumbfounded, off I went again and just pondered upon this message for a long, long time and I remain pondering on both messages to this day.  But, gradually, it came through to me that by being still and listening I was actually becoming a vessel for presence.  This means that without interfering and “doing something” about something, I was just becoming aware and being there without thought, without judging the situation and without providing a solution.  Just being there and being aware.

Part of the changes in my life included taking positive steps towards keeping in contact with people that I had hitherto dismissed;  that is doing but it is directed from the source, the spirit, the real being of who you are and when this facet directs your actions, it is different and not judging, not trying to persuade someone to do something different, but just by being in contact, listening and speaking of things of common interest.  No, if and then, just being.

Similarly, with the whole situation around my son, I began to detatch from the situation insofar as not giving opinionated thoughts and judgements, I just was fully there in the present and lived each moment thus whilst being aware that I was following the discipline, the messages which came via that shrine.

So there I had it.  A fundamental shift in my ‘being’.

God speaks to us;  we just have to listen.

This occurrence was so baffling, so new to me that I have pondered it ever since.  But I know that it happened and I know also that I could not have come up with either response.

Miracles are not necessarily with divine lights and seeing images and witnessing a change from the normal order of things around us. They are subtle, gentle avenues to changes in our perception.  Mine began to change after I’d desperately sought an answer.  but I had thought it would be an answer of “do this, that and the other”.  And it wasn’t.  It was a call to reflect inwardly, to ponder, to be.

The miracle remains.  I am changing in a way that having read such a thing in a book might not have “spoken” to me.  But in the way that I have been encouraged to look further within at my own being, at my own witnessing and at my own presence being a conduit to the sublime, as opposed to blocking it by my “doings”.

To be; to recognise oneself as being without doing.  To come from the being and not from the doing, elicits ultimate enlightened doing instead of thought-directed doing;  as in cause, effect.  If I do this then that.   It is about learning to be still within instead of trying to control through action and doing.  So the quotation from Descartes “I think, therefore I am” is challenged and overcome.  ”I am” is about the being, and “I think” is about the doing.  Thinking is of itself the beginning of the problem, the process of thought as in philosophy leads us down to sorrow and depression.  Being takes us to the place of quietness, stillness, the place without doing or thinking.

It is a hard lesson and one which continues; I often fail, but I keep trying and I have those words within my heart  for ever now.

Thanks be to God.

(© 2010 Eileen Baker)

I am with the sinners. Straight up, might as well face it. That is, to be aware of being a sinner and that being saved has nothing to do with how good we judge that we are, or can become. In the gospels: MAT 10, 9-13 MRK 3, 15-17 LUKE 5, 27-32 Matthew (also known as Levi) the tax collector was an outcast in his own community and he frequented with other outcasts (sinners). He knew that he did not live in the ways of God; neither do I.

But it is not something that you can gain overnight, it takes time and discipleship and, anyway, there will be the element of not having that completeness – we remain  imperfect – even if we spend all of our lives trying; if we ever judge ourselves to be what Christ asked us to be, then we have already failed because we do not have the God given right to judge ourselves or anyone else on earth. And that means anyone from any family, village, city, race, nation or religion.

Matthew felt that he was an outcast because he had done wrong in the eyes of other Jews and they judged him to be a sinner; I feel this way but I also am guilty of judging others. And Matthew did that too. The others – who judged him -were sinners too but they didn’t judge themselves that way, yet they judged Matthew and his crowd. At a behavioural level we judge people and let ourselves off the hook with our comparisons. Christ saw Matthew’s self-honesty.

Herein lies the truth then. It is in becoming knowledgeable that we are living without  God in our Spirit , we are aware of some of our flaws, so we can begin not to judge others. This truth is liberating to ourself and to others. To put it into practice though takes time and patience with oneself. Yet, herein is the path, the way.

There is absolutely no religion, including Christianity, that requires anyone to “defend” it. By forcing views or forcing arms we pretend it is our defence of something Holy, but it isn’t. All we have to do is live it out. Live it. Instead of telling everyone else what to “do”, we become our own best teacher and pupil and save everyone else from hearing our boring views of the world including our damning judgements.

By doing this, we become aware of our own block to God  and thereby are given a lifeline and a life time to heal the disconnections. That’s it. We do not need to turn into the Christ or even into a Saint, or into even an orthodox Holy person. We simply are required to look within, to try hard to be honest with ourselves and to allow the honesty and its truth to work within. There is no need to judge anyone else according to our behaviours and our opinions – upon whose prejudices indeed, do we base our opinions? Picking out the plank in our own eye, is preferable indeed to seeking to pick out the splinters in others eyes.  We have more than enough for a lifetime’s work in attending to ourselves.

So Saint Matthew gives all of us the hope of personal honesty, truth and the beginning of becoming non-judgemental. To judge is to sin and yet we do it all the time and make our excuses. But still, when we become aware of what we are doing , then we are becoming honest with ourselves. That is a great act of the beginning of healing and wholeness. Even though we may still fall a thousand times a day by finding ourselves judging again, but that we are aware that we do this, is part of the healing process. To be aware. To be honest with ourselves and not to pretend that we are good or Holier than thou or him or her.

In this then, I feel a unity with Saint Matthew; I can be a right mess; highly misguided; fallen; in denial; pretending to try to be “good” in my own judgement; defending my behaviour by comparing it with others. But still enabled to find my way, however many times I might make another right mess of it. Just being aware is an enlightenment. A small flicker of light that might now be enabled to grow.

So I’m with the sinners.  On fear of death?  No.  On accepting life as it is. Yes, and a right bloody mess I am too!

(© 2009 Eileen Baker)

(© 2009 Eileen Baker)

It can’t ever be about the truth because where ever you have two people pursuing political aims, you have the beginning of the deceit; where you have three, you have the beginning of siding with the one most able to press your own buttons. The truth gets lost in the interests of self-interest.

If there is a politician who is capable of standing up impartially for the truth, then their party will get rid of them as they are of no use to party-interests and narrow national interests.

So those who are left are the ones who will act in self-interest, party-interest and national interest, in that order.

There are always people looking for a podium upon which to place their particular inadequacy or “chip on their shoulder”, so that they can ‘become’ “something important”. Clubs with members and political parties are good places to do this as you can practise on all kinds of people, press buttons, get alliances, build walls (or bridges) and generally give yourself a reason to live. Which means that they are sad people; politicians who get ‘somewhere’ in national politics are the cream of the notoriously inadequate with good suits on and expense accounts.

Don’t be deceived by their education, intelligence or presentational skills.  But then perhaps we do get the governments we deserve and, if that is so, there is more to this than just determining that politicians are a sad, bad bunch.   The other side to this has to be considered and shall be as in do we really determine the type of people who become our politicians because our own desires and truths are other than those that we profess to hold?  If that is so then there is a whole different story to this and it shall come as the counterbalance to this one.  Pondering as ever. . .(© 2008 Eileen Baker)

We spend so much time deluding ourselves and others that it is no wonder that we haven’t a clue what ‘truth’ is.

We have our own truths. We have our family sanctioned ‘truths’, our social ’truths’, our group ‘truths’. But how do we know what ‘truth’ is?

We are more deluded than truthful. We are programmed and ultimately prejudiced and through these narrow definers we spout our ‘truths’.
Our nationality, our town, our family, our origins can give us our ‘truths’. Are these ‘home truths’ then?

These are delusions of what and who we are. We are not free to see and to hear because we are deluded.

The truth is that we do not know what truth is.