|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 24, 2009 11:56:41 GMT -7
The Faith and Obedience Conundrum
All organized religions have their core beliefs, teachings and rituals. However within any religion the level of "obedience" to the teachings and requirements of membership if you will, are more often than not (IMHO) adhered to only as convenient to the individual member.
I have had the discussion with friends, who were trying to understand my agnosticism, that in my opinion that when one claims membership in any organization, they have an obligation to adhere to the "rules" of that organization, especially in religion. For example, in the Catholic Church, abortion is taught to be sinful, yet many Catholics vocally support choice. On a lighter note, weekly attendance at Mass is also taught as a requirement.
If one professes to hold a specific faith as defined by an organized religion, does one not have an obligation to make a firm effort to conform to that organizations beliefs and ritual requirements more than simply in the breach? If one does not, especially on the bigger issues, are they really members of that church or just visitors?
One of the reasons I left the Catholic Church was because I disagreed with their "Profession of Faith" in particular the "One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church line" I did not accept that The Catholic Church was the one true faith. So I left.
Perhaps, as dangerous as this might be to the world, Fundamentalism, no matter to which creed, is the only way to reach my standard of faith.
The question then is if you are not in 100% agreement with your chosen religion's teachings and requirements - can you claim to belong?
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Mar 24, 2009 13:14:26 GMT -7
Ah Snil, now this is a discussion I can really sink my teeth into, just not right now. I'll be back for this one and bringing with me some pretty close to fundamentalist beliefs. First though, if I may ask you a question. I think I understand what it means to be agnostic but could you tell me what you mean by it? I want to see if we're on the same page.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 24, 2009 13:18:07 GMT -7
Ah Snil, now this is a discussion I can really sink my teeth into, just not right now. I'll be back for this one and bringing with me some pretty close to fundamentalist beliefs. First though, if I may ask you a question. I think I understand what it means to be agnostic but could you tell me what you mean by it? I want to see if we're on the same page. An Atheist says with conviction "There is no God" An Agnostic says "there may very well be a God, but I have not seen any proof as of yet."
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Mar 24, 2009 15:47:34 GMT -7
does anyone know someone who has attained perfection? we are fallible, in our beliefs as well as our actions
I can't speak for anyone else but I know how hard it is to try and live up to absolutes, and I can't (and don't want to) do it.....I lived the "wannabe perfectionist" from my late 20s to my mid 30s....have never felt farther from my own standards, let alone those prescribed by the church I was raised in
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 24, 2009 16:00:43 GMT -7
does anyone know someone who has attained perfection? we are fallible, in our beliefs as well as our actions I can't speak for anyone else but I know how hard it is to try and live up to absolutes, and I can't (and don't want to) do it.....I lived the "wannabe perfectionist" from my late 20s to my mid 30s....have never felt farther from my own standards, let alone those prescribed by the church I was raised in It is not a search for perfection, but a rejection of the belief that one can pick and choose which beliefs to obey within the framework of a religion. Can you be Catholic and disavow the Holy Trinity?
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Mar 24, 2009 17:38:24 GMT -7
but I don't know that for many, it's as simplistic as "picking and choosing" at all....it's a very personal thing
some more general scriptural teachings make more sense than do others, same with doctrine
if we could all "obey" without question, there would be no need for the confessional; it's part of human nature to disagree with rules or in your words, to disobey....nobody "obeys" 100% of the time
this doesn't mean they reject doctrine; you are intersecting faith and obedience to doctrine?
and by the way, I am not including myself in this...like you, I found it quite difficult to call myself a Catholic when there was so much I disagreed with-felt was no part of my life or my faith
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 24, 2009 18:17:57 GMT -7
but I don't know that for many, it's as simplistic as "picking and choosing" at all....it's a very personal thing some more general scriptural teachings make more sense than do others, same with doctrine if we could all "obey" without question, there would be no need for the confessional; it's part of human nature to disagree with rules or in your words, to disobey....nobody "obeys" 100% of the time this doesn't mean they reject doctrine; you are intersecting faith and obedience to doctrine? and by the way, I am not including myself in this...like you, I found it quite difficult to call myself a Catholic when there was so much I disagreed with-felt was no part of my life or my faith No I do not mean to intersect Faith and Doctrine. In simple terms what I am saying that if you choose to be a member of a church or any organization for that matter, then you should abide by their rules, or not join. I am not seeking perfection, but at least basic acceptance of the rules - not an ability to pick and choose, OK I like the communion thing, but hey confession - nah he is just a man in a box. I prefer my religious to be at least firm in and understanding of just what it is they signed up for.
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Mar 24, 2009 19:31:34 GMT -7
I don't know that I could live up to your standard of faith if you truly feel that the inflexibility--even zealotry of fundamentalism (in any form) is the ideal I understand the point and in some ways, I even agree...you cannot be "on" when you choose, and "off" when you choose--it's not like picking out tomatoes but accepting doctrine is sometimes a struggle for some and we are all prone to error--it's human nature, and some interpret "error" as questioning doctrine during critical times the hard line of fundamentalism is a mandate to accept without question what is faith, if it hasn't been questioned, snil? if it's not tested, well then.....?
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Mar 24, 2009 19:41:26 GMT -7
example: I was taught that Mary conceived and gave birth as a virgin. All of my experience challenges this, yet for many years, I still accepted it as a matter of course, rather than of faith. Is it possible? Yes, I believe that God makes everything "possible". Is it logical? No
it used to be heretical to reject major tennets of the Catholic teachings.....in the end, it doesn't matter to me all that much if she was or wasn't. She remains pure to me, regardless, because faith also teaches me that God chose her to bear, raise and love His son. But it matters a great deal in the teachings...one version is correct, the other isn't
so, does that make me a "bad" Catholic--theoretically speaking?
who gets to draw that line?
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Mar 24, 2009 19:56:16 GMT -7
I don't know that I could live up to your standard of faith if you truly feel that the inflexibility--even zealotry of fundamentalism (in any form) is the ideal In Topix, we're called "fundies." ;D
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 25, 2009 4:38:45 GMT -7
example: I was taught that Mary conceived and gave birth as a virgin. All of my experience challenges this, yet for many years, I still accepted it as a matter of course, rather than of faith. Is it possible? Yes, I believe that God makes everything "possible". Is it logical? No it used to be heretical to reject major tennets of the Catholic teachings.....in the end, it doesn't matter to me all that much if she was or wasn't. She remains pure to me, regardless, because faith also teaches me that God chose her to bear, raise and love His son. But it matters a great deal in the teachings...one version is correct, the other isn't so, does that make me a "bad" Catholic--theoretically speaking? who gets to draw that line? IMHO - it does not make you a "bad" Catholic. It makes you either a non-Catholic, or an emerging Catholic. (Assuming Virgin Birth is a required tenet of the Faith). The Church Hierarchy or tradition dictates what MUST be accepted. That is the essence of "belonging" a shared core of belief
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Mar 25, 2009 6:48:26 GMT -7
I think it's interesting that in this discussion between the two of you, you seem to be conflating Catholicism with Christianity. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely believe that Catholicism is a Christian religion and I've even considered converting. I can't though because there are just some tenets of the Catholic faith that I can't accept (and I think this goes to your point, Snil). I don't get the idea of praying to Mary or the saints or anyone other than God and His Son. Snil you asked if one could be Catholic if they rejected the Holy Trinity. I don't think one that does that can consider themselves Christian (and why would they want to). I also don't understand confessing to a priest and him being able to absolve you. I think that's the province of God.
Yes Rosa, crucify me if you must but I admit to being a Bible literalist if not a full on "fundy" (I've never intentionally handled a poison snake nor spoken in tongues, of course I'm talking more about the Pentacostals here). The reason for that is, if I have some belief that the Bible contains the word of God to at least some degree, I don't know what criteria could be used seperate what's to be believed and what's to be ignored. Can we just take the parts we like, the parts that make us feel good but reject the rest? I can't.
Does that mean I'm perfect in my beliefs? Far from it. I struggle sometimes with the harsher parts of scripture (for there are indeed parts that are harsh and hard to accept just as there are parts that are awe inspiring and beautiful). In the end, I'll sum up what I believe by roughly quoting a line from the movie Rudy. In my life I'm sure of two things. One, there is a God and, two, I'm not Him.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Mar 25, 2009 7:12:17 GMT -7
I believe (unless memory fails me) that the boiled down basic required beliefs for Catholics are stated in this prayer:
NICENE CREED Profession of Faith We believe in God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfilment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.
Amen.
The point of my discussion on this thread is if you reject any of these minimum beliefs - can you be a Catholic? For example, if you reject creationism? If you reject virgin birth?
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Mar 25, 2009 7:23:54 GMT -7
I think it's interesting that in this discussion between the two of you, you seem to be conflating Catholicism with Christianity. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely believe that Catholicism is a Christian religion and I've even considered converting. I can't though because there are just some tenets of the Catholic faith that I can't accept (and I think this goes to your point, Snil). I don't get the idea of praying to Mary or the saints or anyone other than God and His Son. Snil you asked if one could be Catholic if they rejected the Holy Trinity. I don't think one that does that can consider themselves Christian (and why would they want to). I also don't understand confessing to a priest and him being able to absolve you. I think that's the province of God. Yes Rosa, crucify me if you must but I admit to being a Bible literalist if not a full on "fundy" (I've never intentionally handled a poison snake nor spoken in tongues, of course I'm talking more about the Pentacostals here). The reason for that is, if I have some belief that the Bible contains the word of God to at least some degree, I don't know what criteria could be used seperate what's to be believed and what's to be ignored. Can we just take the parts we like, the parts that make us feel good but reject the rest? I can't. Does that mean I'm perfect in my beliefs? Far from it. I struggle sometimes with the harsher parts of scripture (for there are indeed parts that are harsh and hard to accept just as there are parts that are awe inspiring and beautiful). In the end, I'll sum up what I believe by roughly quoting a line from the movie Rudy. In my life I'm sure of two things. One, there is a God and, two, I'm not Him. I don't believe in crucifying people for what they believe Web. I may not agree with what they say, I may dispute it or debate it, but one of the reasons why I argue against what I see as inflexibility in mandating that people accept doctrine without question is because I don't think it's my right to decide what others should or shouldn't believe. I don't walk in their shoes. This is something that I've been challenged on for so many years....my supposed "moral ambiguity"
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Mar 25, 2009 7:26:38 GMT -7
I guess I'm the "problem child" here I don't even agree that it is the Catholic church's "right" to determine who is/isn't an "acceptable" or "real" Catholic how's that for heresy? the church doesn't know what is in one's heart. Only God does
|
|