The New Age and Universal Love

The designation ‘New Age’ was first formulated in a pernicious document called ‘A Prospect for Universalism’ which was devised by a conspiratorial coterie of power-hungry money moguls in 1926.  The latter recognised that if their machinations were to have any hope of success they had to break down the strong family ethic, as well as the work ethic, which were then prevalent in Western society.  This they did by many devious and subtle ways.  However, the intervention of World War II revitalised the flagging emotions of family and national pride; consequently it was several decades before the demoralising influences could begin to prevail.  Our present state of society is indicative of their ultimate success.

The facts relating to the methods used have been well documented and many books have been written in the hope of enlightening people. Readers are urged to look into these things, for they are certainly pertinent to the times. 

Within the New Age movement are many genuinely good people, unwitting pawns in the devious game.  It is tragic to see so much that is good, so much idealism and high hopes for humanity exploited for treacherous ends.  This is an age of transition when a lofty transmutation of the world is taking place, but there are awesome powers working to bring it all to naught.

Among the advocates of the New Age there is much talk of spirituality, of ‘consciousness-raising’ and of love, but if one delves under the appealing surface of these concepts as understood by ‘new agers’, one finds a most unsavoury brew.  The form of spirituality proclaimed is one based on individual interpretation by people who have little understanding of personal responsibility, commitment and obligation.  Consequently their concepts are formulated to accord with personal convictions of convenience, of self-concern and of ‘getting’.  In other words, there is more ‘take’ in their brand of spirituality than ‘give’, therefore it cannot be called spirituality.

The prophets of the New Age, who promote the philosophy of pseudo-spirituality, generally speaking have great spiritual potential, but they stifle this under an overlay of instability and shiftlessness, of character inadequacies and egocentric concern.  They are incapable of commitment to a cause or of dedication to something outside the orbit of their self-concern, consequently they fail to meet the requirements of true spirituality. 

The spirituality they proclaim so vociferously generally turns out to be something they have gathered from snatches of information taken from here and there.  They are usually great readers and will often go from group to group, ‘expanding their knowledge’.  They will attend seminars and workshops ad infinitum, but from all they gather they select only that which accords with their own preconceptions or convenience.  If they are prepared to make concessions it is when there is something in it for them, hence their interests generally lie in matters which benefit their health or psychological state, as well as their material wellbeing.  There is nothing wrong in aspiring to these providing it is not sought to buttress pseudo-spirituality.

Many New age concepts are based upon Eastern philosophies which are less demanding of commitment and dedication and require less effort of co-operation with other people.  This is not a condemnation of such philosophies which can be seen as suitable for Eastern people and those in the West with a passive mentality. 

With regard to ‘consciousness-raising’, which is talked about so much among the disciples of the New Age.  In actual fact this is not a common phenomenon.  The passive consciousness-raising techniques propagated by New Age literature, which require little or no effort, have the effect of making the practitioners feel that they have accomplished something, have made some contribution.  In fact they have benefitted no one and achieved nothing other than the enhancement of their self-esteem.  It will be found that those who talk most about the raised consciousness of the New Age are in many ways inadequate personalities.  They will be more interested in promoting their various pursuits than in making some general contributions to the common Good.

Spiritualised people understand the concept of consciousness-raising as being a means of attuning with Higher Spheres and Higher Beings, and also a means of developing a social consciousness.  It is very much a state where giving predominates, where participation is the rule and where consideration for others supersedes self-concern.

While love is a much trumpeted word in New Age circles, the concept of what it entails is not generally understood.  The commonised, devalued form of love which many ‘new agers’ refer to is contaminated with carnality.  As conceived today in many places it is an on again off again sort of thing, a shallow emotion, the flame of which quickly subsides, leaving nothing but ashes.  True, idealized Love capable of withstanding the hammer-blows of life, which increases with familiarity, is something many find difficult to comprehend.  The test of True Love is whether one is capable of loving the unlovable.  The prophets of the New Age talk of spreading love around, but it appears that what they refer to is a sequence of ‘meaningful relationships’.

The ‘Universal Love’ that is being hawked around today is a delusion, a cheap, artificial substitute for the real thing.  This is indicated by the unsubstantial, unstable and uncommitted nature of the personal relationships of its advocates who claim to love everyone but are in fact incapable of manifesting True Love to even one person.  Love flows from a central point outwards and that nucleus is either an individual or a family unit.  The concept of universal love is a worthy one but let us first make a success of loving one person or one family before talking about loving everyone.  There is an ancient proverb who says, “He who loves all loves none”.  It is also written, “Nothing tarnishes quicker through being handed around than love”.  Today the disciples of True Love are few indeed and they receive little encouragement.

Love, in its higher aspects, cannot be divorced from spirituality and both are being offered today in attractive but unsubstantial and delusive forms which satisfy nothing but the shallow and self-centered ego.  They do not nourish the Spirit, although they are palatable enough to the undemanding and undiscriminating who are probably unaware that there is something very much better on offer.  The self-satisfied find satisfaction in themselves, and all that is beyond the immediate circle of their self-concern is viewed through coloured glasses which merely confirm their own beliefs. 

Read More

« The Mastery of Life | The Challenge to Spirituality »