SALVATION
SUMMARY
The doctrine of salvation as it is viewed and practiced by the Society is
examined. The attitudes of the Society on this issue are contrasted with those
of its predecessors. An explanation is then given for the indiscriminate
offer of salvation made by the Society to the whole of past, present and future
humanity.
The Treatise on Morality touches on the subject of salvation. It gives a
broad indication of our life following the achievement of the Aim of the
Society of HumanKind. It does not however, discuss the stance or teachings of
the Society on the issue of human salvation prior to that apocalyptic change in
our condition. That omission will be corrected here.
These matters are important only in the early stages of the development of the
Society. The vast majority of the other belief systems, religions and social
theories presently dealing with the meaning and purpose of human existence have
very clear teachings on the subject of salvation and our life after death. It
is likely therefore, that the Society will initially be confronted on this
issue, and have to answer questions about it. Once its views are widely
understood however, it is to be expected that this Essay will become an
anachronism.
The questions most likely to trouble the Society and its adherents are, first;
who qualifies for salvation in the system of thought of the Society of
HumanKind, and second; how do they gain that goal? The majority of
presently existing and previous alternatives to the Society answer the first
question with the bald statement that believers, within their own particular
definition of that term, are the only qualifiers. That attitude has been both
the greatest strength and weakest aspect of the systems of thought of the
predecessors of the Society. The strength lies in the power of that rule to
bind followers to their faith once they are committed to the movement. Its
weakness is the resulting tendency of those belief systems to concentrate on
recruiting the immature and the troubled, so that the fear of the loss of
salvation can operate to retain them if and when doubts later emerge.
By contrast, as the Essay on Evangelism makes clear, the Society of HumanKind
will not consider anyone for membership in any of its categories of adherence
unless, in the full maturity of their adulthood, they have clearly, freely,
openly and deliberately decided to accept the Axioms and have then chosen the
Objective of the Dogma as the purpose of their lives. Only when those
independent acts of faith are firmly in place will the Society then allow
admission to those prepared to take the final step of dedicating themselves to
their own salvation and that of their fellows by a public affirmation of the
Aim, Duty and Responsibility of the Society. Despite this careful process of
admission, the Society will not then seek to bind its followers irrevocably to
its cause. It will not require anyone to remain in the Society, nor will it
impose any penalty on any adherent if at any stage they subsequently find that
they cannot continue to accept all those conditions. To do otherwise would be
to contravene the spirit of the Principles 1.3 and 2.2.
The second question likely to face adherents of the Society is, how do
individuals gain the goal of salvation? Other movements may allow unbelievers
to obtain salvation, but admission to that state is usually hedged with
complexities and difficulty in order to maintain the strength of the grip of
the movement on its existing membership. In any case, access to the promise
of salvation invariably involves some form of conversion to what is held to be
true belief, even if at a very late stage.
It is here that the greatest contrast between the Society and its predecessors
and competitors can be found. By its Aim, the Society is dedicated to the
salvation of the whole of humanity whatever their beliefs or actions during
life. It will therefore extend is promise of salvation to the whole of the
human species, past, present and to come, without reservation or exception.
Indeed, the Society will be anxious to share its gift of eternal life with
unbelievers, detractors, prosecutors and opponents, as well as with those
who have accepted the Axioms and chosen the Dogma, but have found other ways
of giving expression to that faith. There are sound reasons for that unique
stance. In the first place, it will ensure that all and any injustices in
our lives can be corrected at our reunification. More fundamentally, and by a
natural extension of the Principle of Peace, the Society will want to preserve
all the talents, skills, qualities and abilities of the whole human species
into our new existence, in order to provide humanity with the largest possible
reservoir of attributes to meet the unforeseeable difficulties and problems of
the unprecedented epoch that will follow the achievement of Objective of the
Dogma when the Aim of the Society, if not already realised, will be pursued.
The Principle of Peace therefore provides both a moral and a practical
justification for the dedication of the Society to the salvation of all members
of the human species. Its application to the question of salvation is also no
more than a continuance of the general policy of the Society toward the
importance of every individual, and an expression of its self-interest in
seeking to maintain and continue the best possible conditions for the pursuit
of its Aim.
The attitude of the Society in these matters is therefore not wholly
disinterested, nor is it divorced from its efforts to attract recruits and
retain its membership. On the contrary, its Responsibility; its fear of
breaking faith with those whose legacy is the opportunity to pursue its Aim,
and the desire to ensure that succeeding generations do not abandon us to
oblivion when we can no longer help ourselves, will generate strong pressure
toward conformity and continuity within the Society. But the promise of
salvation given by the Society is, in fact, contingent on nothing more than
membership of the human species.
That must surely be a better bargain than any ever before offered to humanity
by any similar movement, and proof, if it be needed, that the Society is solely
composed of those who truly love the whole of humanity without caveat or
quibble.
|