'Soul force' is a term used throughout the film to describe that which motivates a spiritual conscience toward temporal action, in an effort to make the world a better place to live in. Such action may take the form of participating in marches with the aim of seeing to unjust laws changed for the good, or rallying to the defense of the oppressed. 'Soul force' is therefore to be differentiated from 'spirituality,' even though, ideally, it shouldn't have to be. Whereas the latter is commonly known for its detachment from the affairs of the world, often as a pseudo-noble attempt to transcend (that is, escape) it and its many problems, those with 'soul' regard their physical selves and their wanting to improve the world in some (even small) way as a natural extension of what it means to be human.
Indeed, I would think that the greater conscience a person has would only want to impel a spiritual mindset toward positive action and a direct engagement with the world, and that anything less would be remiss of one and amount to a warped, schizoid view of spirit's relationship to matter.
Which brings to mind something I once read on an online forum; this from a site, of all places, claiming to be totally spiritually oriented and devoted to discussing all things spiritual-related...so as far as discussion does not involve any talk of politics or social causes whatsoever, something which the site administrator/moderators restrict forum members from entering into, considering it as they do out of place and taboo, and using the distorted justification for such a restriction that it's not our responsibility to be concerned with changing the world, since spirit, we are told, is all about living separate from it, on a detached level, or something to that effect. This is a specious argument and nothing more than a cop-out; a shameful excuse to live as do-nothing navel-gazers; a frame of mind that makes a mockery of what it means to be spiritual, in its promoting of an actual anti-spiritual attitude, one that ultimately plays right into the hands of the powers-that-be.
Commendably, none of the spirit-driven activists featured in FIERCE LIGHT can be accused of living with their heads buried in the sand, as if indifferent to oppression and injustice in the world. Several of the men and women whom we hear from in the film speak of their ardent compulsion, an indwelling need to act as ones guided by 'soul force,' whether in the form of community service, performing charitable deeds, participating in peaceful protests, standing up for civil rights, etc. These are people who walk the talk, perhaps no better exemplified than as was demonstrated in the historic Selma march, here highlighted.
The only two-part quibble I have with FIERCE LIGHT is its apparent lack of focus and unexpressed intent, as it meanders somewhat incoherently in its documenting one activist cause after another, at times crossing continents in doing so, without clearly explaining or defining what this 'growing movement' is exactly, which it says is sweeping the world; whether it is organic in nature and motivated by true individual 'soul force' alone or whether this movement is gaining momentum via (worrisome) mass indoctrination, equivalent to a worldwide cult, which to me would be of great concern. There *are* some strictly and entirely partisan-based (read: occasionally misguided) causes, after all, fueled more so by seeing to the implementation of an extremist or globalist agenda than by a genuine regard for either the environment or the welfare of humanity, and that tend to have as spokespersons influential celebrities and other mediagenic figures, employed as they are with the intent of manipulating the masses, as mouthpieces beholden to their socially-engineering handlers.
In the end, I simply do not know what to make of FIERCE LIGHT. That spirituality and activism go hand-in-hand is a given (a principle akin to the Christian teaching of how 'faith without works' is a spirituality rendered useless/meaningless) and so I like the fact that this isn't a film applauding the lives of, say, monks or yogis. And yet, as admirable as 'soul force' is, for me it is only so when clearly differentiated from an ideological-collectivist imposter.
Indeed, I would think that the greater conscience a person has would only want to impel a spiritual mindset toward positive action and a direct engagement with the world, and that anything less would be remiss of one and amount to a warped, schizoid view of spirit's relationship to matter.
Which brings to mind something I once read on an online forum; this from a site, of all places, claiming to be totally spiritually oriented and devoted to discussing all things spiritual-related...so as far as discussion does not involve any talk of politics or social causes whatsoever, something which the site administrator/moderators restrict forum members from entering into, considering it as they do out of place and taboo, and using the distorted justification for such a restriction that it's not our responsibility to be concerned with changing the world, since spirit, we are told, is all about living separate from it, on a detached level, or something to that effect. This is a specious argument and nothing more than a cop-out; a shameful excuse to live as do-nothing navel-gazers; a frame of mind that makes a mockery of what it means to be spiritual, in its promoting of an actual anti-spiritual attitude, one that ultimately plays right into the hands of the powers-that-be.
Commendably, none of the spirit-driven activists featured in FIERCE LIGHT can be accused of living with their heads buried in the sand, as if indifferent to oppression and injustice in the world. Several of the men and women whom we hear from in the film speak of their ardent compulsion, an indwelling need to act as ones guided by 'soul force,' whether in the form of community service, performing charitable deeds, participating in peaceful protests, standing up for civil rights, etc. These are people who walk the talk, perhaps no better exemplified than as was demonstrated in the historic Selma march, here highlighted.
The only two-part quibble I have with FIERCE LIGHT is its apparent lack of focus and unexpressed intent, as it meanders somewhat incoherently in its documenting one activist cause after another, at times crossing continents in doing so, without clearly explaining or defining what this 'growing movement' is exactly, which it says is sweeping the world; whether it is organic in nature and motivated by true individual 'soul force' alone or whether this movement is gaining momentum via (worrisome) mass indoctrination, equivalent to a worldwide cult, which to me would be of great concern. There *are* some strictly and entirely partisan-based (read: occasionally misguided) causes, after all, fueled more so by seeing to the implementation of an extremist or globalist agenda than by a genuine regard for either the environment or the welfare of humanity, and that tend to have as spokespersons influential celebrities and other mediagenic figures, employed as they are with the intent of manipulating the masses, as mouthpieces beholden to their socially-engineering handlers.
In the end, I simply do not know what to make of FIERCE LIGHT. That spirituality and activism go hand-in-hand is a given (a principle akin to the Christian teaching of how 'faith without works' is a spirituality rendered useless/meaningless) and so I like the fact that this isn't a film applauding the lives of, say, monks or yogis. And yet, as admirable as 'soul force' is, for me it is only so when clearly differentiated from an ideological-collectivist imposter.