Kind-of changing the way I look at religion

[CAMom]

I think judgment is complicated. On the one hand, we have all sinned. On the other hand, His blood, His grace covers all. What shall separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus?

 

 

 

You have to read Romans 8:38-39 in context.:) Paul has just given the "golden chain of salvation" so when he goes on to verses 38-39 he is talking about those who have been called, justified, sanctified and glorified. Verses 38-39 do not apply to every single person without exception.

[Avila]

I see this argument, but I cannot accept it. As I said earlier, I believe that God has designed a logic of his own that he will not violate. Part of that logic is that the wages of sin is death. Period. There is no special grace that can be dealt out at will--and if there was...why would we venerate that? That would be like praising a man who inherited wealth or won the lottery for being able to buy nice things.

 

Sorry--REALLY--to disagree.

 

How does this violate the "wages of sin is death"? I am really confused here ...

 

Removing original sin removed Mary's natural inclination to sin. That removal also is gifted to us, not at our conception, but at baptism. I am not getting how the logistics of when that gift is given are such a big deal.

 

Once we are baptized, we are given the same opportunity for sinlessness but none of us choose to take it. Mary is praised for her willingness to have the will of God done in her life without fully having it explained to her and without making demands on it. She just said yes.

 

We believe Mary was sinless. Mary had a choice to be sinless. If we don't believe we all have that choice, we move into the realm of automatons. If we have that choice, why couldn't she choose not to sin? Technically we could all choose that part.

 

I am sure your issues are bigger than this, and I am not trying to talk you out of them. I was just trying to clarify a misunderstanding of the original position posted.

 

Best wishes on your journey with all of it.

Edited May 6, 2011 by Asenik

[Aubrey]

You have to read Romans 8:38-39 in context.:) Paul has just given the "golden chain of salvation" so when he goes on to verses 38-39 he is talking about those who have been called, justified, sanctified and glorified. Verses 38-39 do not apply to every single person without exception.

 

Yes, I understand this position. I read it differently. Unfortunately, that is on my list of problems. And...not directed at you at all...but it gets tiresome to go to church & be silent, & it gets tiresome to be assumed to have simply not read something or read it in context, to have people assume that I just started thinking about concepts recently or have simply misunderstood or whatever.

 

I do not disagree that there is Scriptural support for the pov you describe. I'll even give you that combined with tradition, it's more likely that you're right about the way you read it. It is a valid and orthodox position.

 

I read it differently.

[happi duck]

...And he says to me darkly, "I know." :lol:

 

:lol: OT, but I know exactly how this sounds! I get the 'dark' "I know" from my dh...never thought it might be universal!

 

btw, this is an interesting thread. I'm becoming more of a fan of the church universal, the body of Christ of all times and all places. I'm finding God is revealing so much to me through writings of many people from different times, places and traditions. (just to be clear, not replacing scripture...to me these writings are like having a discussion with another believer and he/she shares something and God uses that to reveal/clarify something, kwim?)

[Aubrey]

Isn't it funny that this thread that is supposed to be about the philosophy of choosing a denomination has degraded into specific doctrine w/ people trying to change each others' minds?

 

I love the conversation, generally speaking, but...*sigh* I don't know.

[Scarlett]

Isn't it funny that this thread that is supposed to be about the philosophy of choosing a denomination has degraded into specific doctrine w/ people trying to change each others' minds?

 

I love the conversation, generally speaking, but...*sigh* I don't know.

 

Discussions of religions and doctrine almost always end up that way.

 

I have the opposite problem of you Aubrey....I feel comfortable in my religion....but in the day to day livig there are few that I mesh well with.

[Marylou]

Perhaps you need to do a study of the visible vs. invisible church?

 

I think this life would be a good place to loosen attachments to labels, not cling to them.

 

If you believe what it says in Revelation, then one day there will only be two labels anyway. Those whose names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life and those whose names are not.

Edited May 6, 2011 by dmmosher

[unsinkable]

I changed my mind about having a conversation about this.

 

I'm sorry for any inconvenience.

Edited May 6, 2011 by unsinkable

[milovany]

Isn't it funny that this thread that is supposed to be about the philosophy of choosing a denomination has degraded into specific doctrine w/ people trying to change each others' minds?

 

I love the conversation, generally speaking, but...*sigh* I don't know.

 

Are people trying to change others' minds? If that's how I'm coming across, forgive me. This reminds me of the other thread about changing religions and what I said in the first post. Believing the original church still exists as the EO church is just part of who I am and so I speak from that perspective. But that doesn't mean I am judging the beliefs of others (as I said in the other thread, IRL we hardly every say anything because we don't want to come across that way). Maybe it's easier to say something in a forum but in doing so, it comes across as judging the beliefs of others (so we need to try and change their minds)? Hmmmm....

 

Don't know. But I do appreciate the processional nature of the faith! :001_smile:

 

By the way, I'm functioning on 3 hours of sleep AND I have an all-over-body-ache, sore throat thing happening. So it wouldn't surprise me much if I'm making NO sense.

Edited May 6, 2011 by milovaný

[Aubrey]

Luke 1:28

 

"And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women."

 

To save others the trouble of looking it up. :)

[Cedarmom]

I think I understand what you're saying about splitting community and beliefs. The major beliefs fit, but you don't agree with everything. We are attending a church right now where I feel that way. I switched denomninations, so truthfully I don't even know all the things my new church believes. But, I love the community, and I agree with most of the beliefs. Some things I don't. I think it's partly my nature. I overthink everything. SO every belief I question and have to understand and come to my own conclusion on. So I just don't think I'll ever agree 100%. Right now I'm quiet about what I differ on becasue I'm new, but knowing me I'll start to ask more and more questions and start to irratate people soon.:001_smile:

 

We alos house church which is in many ways a good fit. We dig through the Bible and discuss what we think it says. We have great debates and discussions about it. I love it because we are allowed to have differant views(not on the basics JEsus died for our sins and rose again and forgave us) but on other valid interprations. And I'm allowed to have a differant view. Most churches really don't vibe that way. As I said in the earlier paragraph, I am a little worried that once I start discussing things at the new church I attend , they will not appreciate my constant questions

[Avila]

Isn't it funny that this thread that is supposed to be about the philosophy of choosing a denomination has degraded into specific doctrine w/ people trying to change each others' minds?

 

I love the conversation, generally speaking, but...*sigh* I don't know.

 

Sorry. I got it off track trying to explain that the Immaculate Conception doesn't make Mary's mother a virgin.

 

My philosophy of choosing a denomination changed when I decided that if there wasn't one that encompassed all my beliefs, then I was the one who must have it wrong somewhere. It then became not a match up game but a truth quest where I had to reconsider everything, not in light of what I believed but what historically was the belief of Jesus and the apostles. That changed everything for me. Because it was no longer about me. And I no longer had to decide every little blessed thing for myself, with my limited understanding of it. That was my journey, but I think you will find similarities in it with all converts to EO and RC.

 

Again, we all have a journey with this. It won't look alike. Best wishes finding yours.

[Aubrey]

Are people trying to change others' minds? If that's how I'm coming across, forgive me. This reminds me of the other thread about changing religions and what I said in the first post. Believing the original church still exists as the EO church is just part of who I am and so I speak from that perspective. But that doesn't mean I am judging the beliefs of others (as I said in the other thread, IRL we hardly every say anything because we don't want to come across that way). Maybe it's easier to say something in a forum but in doing so, it comes across as judging the beliefs of others (so we need to try and change their minds)? Hmmmm....

 

Don't know. But I do appreciate the processional nature of the faith! :001_smile:

 

By the way, I'm functioning on 3 hours of sleep AND I have an all-over-body-ache, sore throat thing happening. So it wouldn't surprise me much if I'm making NO sense.

 

No, not judging...just...hotly defending.

 

I really don't blame anyone. If someone were questioning a doctrine in another thread, I might feel compelled to explain what I believe about it, too, & then correct their misunderstandings, etc. (This isn't directed at you--the last thing I want you to do is stop conversing w/ me about faith.)

[happi duck]

Isn't it funny that this thread that is supposed to be about the philosophy of choosing a denomination has degraded into specific doctrine w/ people trying to change each others' minds?

 

I love the conversation, generally speaking, but...*sigh* I don't know.

 

Humans are so caught up with who's right and wrong. People constantly want a cut and dried list and so are willing to defend that list so that they can be 'done' with it, kwim? We'll never reach the 'end' of God and His grace is a marvelous mystery...we'll never be 'done'!

 

We've always been flexible regarding denomination. God has led us many places and has taught us through denominations that some would say 'they're wrong'. We get the oddest comments about our church choices but we just keep following God where He leads.

 

Happy Friday! Off to a field trip...yay!

[milovany]

No, not judging...just...hotly defending.

 

Can we remove the "hotly"? And change "defending" to expressing? :lol: Hahaha, okay, maybe I'll have to work on my humility and delivery. No surprise.

[Aubrey]

Sorry. I got it off track trying to explain that the Immaculate Conception doesn't make Mary's mother a virgin.

 

To be fair, that was my fault.

 

My philosophy of choosing a denomination changed when I decided that if there wasn't one that encompassed all my beliefs, then I was the one who must have it wrong somewhere.

 

Yes--I said that I see this as a likely possibility earlier. Of course, trying to figure out where I'm wrong is just as difficult as finding a church that has it "right." :lol:

 

It then became not a match up game but a truth quest where I had to reconsider everything, not in light of what I believed but what historically was the belief of Jesus and the apostles. That changed everything for me. Because it was no longer about me. And I no longer had to decide every little blessed thing for myself, with my limited understanding of it. That was my journey, but I think you will find similarities in it with all converts to EO and RC.

 

Again, we all have a journey with this. It won't look alike. Best wishes finding yours.

 

I agree w/ the philosophy of what you've stated above, & like pp said, I do tend to overthink things, but...that still leaves the whole process & walking it with both honesty & openness.

[leeannpal]

Humans are so caught up with who's right and wrong. People constantly want a cut and dried list and so are willing to defend that list so that they can be 'done' with it, kwim? We'll never reach the 'end' of God and His grace is a marvelous mystery...we'll never be 'done'!

 

We've always been flexible regarding denomination. God has led us many places and has taught us through denominations that some would say 'they're wrong'. We get the oddest comments about our church choices but we just keep following God where He leads.

 

Happy Friday! Off to a field trip...yay!

 

:iagree:I just don't let doctrinal issues come between me and my relationship with Jesus. Humans are faillable and often interject their own brand (i.e. opinions) in their religion. None of us were apostles from the time of Jesus, and we don't live in the same culture from the time period either. While God never changes, people and societies do.

 

( i hope I don't open up a can of worms here, but I really don't understand the argument between YE and OE either)

[shinyhappypeople]

:grouphug:

 

I'm there with you, Aubrey :grouphug:. I totally separate my personal beliefs from my church experience. There's certainly overlap in what I believe and the evangelical church I take my kids to, but I'm NOT an evangelical and I just keep my mouth shut and appreciate the positive things that this community offers.

 

There is a Truth Ball, but my belief is that we can't really grasp it until we've reached heaven.

 

Everything on this earth is reasoned and perceived through our finite minds and filtered through the sin and brokenness of our lives and this world. (Including what I just wrote. Ha - there's the rub!)

 

"For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known."

 

The only thing that has been truly helpful to me is to learn to embrace the mystery. I walk daily knowing little with certainty, but I walk in a state of perpetual hope.

 

I hope you find what you're looking for. :grouphug:

[8circles]

I'm sorry if I'm dense today.

 

OK, what I'm hearing is that you are conflicted between agreeing with lifestyle/being culturally similar to a certain group of people who happen to follow a certain religion with which you don't agree. The points of disagreement might or might not be important.

 

Do I have this right?

 

I'd love to know which groups you're talking about because I've never read a theological comment by you that I disagreed with. :bigear:

 

I think it would bother me if the other people in my denomination were so different from me culturally. I do have a problem when parenting styles or worldview are significantly different among people at church. If there were no kindred spirits I would have to look elsewhere to worship, I think.

[Carol in Cal.]

It's difficult, and many of us have been there, and have landed, some strongly and some not-so-strongly at convictions. Having been through that, it is easy to project that process and those results onto others, but probably wrong to do so.

 

I believe that God is knowable only because He has revealed Himself in various ways--incompletely through His creation and our morals, and completely through His Son, His Word, and His Sacraments. (I know that this is really, really basic--you might be rolling your eyes it's so basic--but I always have to start from the premises or I get messed up. Bear with me!)

 

The Bible says clearly that we are not going to know everything or understand everything in this life. I used to just HATE that. Now I accept it. I trust more and understand less.

 

I can be grateful to God for showing Himself to me and to so many others without understanding entirely how and why others don't see Him or have that grace. Is it Him? Is it them? (Both, is what I think, but I digress, and I won't debate that point.)

 

I can't read the OT thoroughly without believing in God having genuine wrath and judgment. I can't read the NT thoroughly without seeing His grace. Actually, I see both judgment and grace in both.

 

I can't fit into a church 'culture' that speaks strongly of matters where God has not been all that specific. If that is your church culture, I can see why it would be hard to be in the pews with that, especially if you hear it over and over and over. If it were me, I would react even more strongly if I had young children there, being taught that stuff. That would offend me tremendously. And yet, it's very hard to leave a community behind, especially one that resonates because of your association with it from the earliest days. So I challenge you, if you can't find the teachings that match you exactly, please consider what it will be like to have your children grow up in the community that teaches in ways that you really, truly can't stand. How will you be together in 30 years? What will they believe? What kind of people will they be? What will your relationship be like? If they are convinced of this stuff, and they know that you're not, what kind of relationship will you have with their children, your grandchildren?

 

Whatever community you raise them in is always going to resonate with them, one way or another, whether they stay in it or not. Is this the community that you want for that? This is worth staying with and figuring out, and I respect you for wrestling with it. For you, and also for your family.

 

I'm sorry it's so hard.

[Teachin'Mine]

Aubrey, to go back to the generalities of your first post, I think it's fine to join a group and not believe as they do 100%, and I thought that before I knew which group .

[CAMom]

Yes, I understand this position. I read it differently. Unfortunately, that is on my list of problems. And...not directed at you at all...but it gets tiresome to go to church & be silent, & it gets tiresome to be assumed to have simply not read something or read it in context, to have people assume that I just started thinking about concepts recently or have simply misunderstood or whatever.

 

I do not disagree that there is Scriptural support for the pov you describe. I'll even give you that combined with tradition, it's more likely that you're right about the way you read it. It is a valid and orthodox position.

 

I read it differently.

 

Gotcha! I understand where you're coming from.

 

So, it sounds like you may believe in universalism then?

[Blueridge]

This has been a lovely thread. Aubrey...:grouphug:...I understand completely. Most of my married life I've been seeking the church where I belong. I don't want to always be questioning but I need to. I really want the truth, but realizing that religion is a man-made phenomenon, I have finally come to terms with the fact that nowhere will be perfect, and seated in perfect God truth, because each pastor/preacher/minister/member is reading the Bible through human eyes and interpreting it through flawed human understanding. We've spent countless years in fundamentalist churches, spent years bouncing between Baptist and all it's forms, and Methodist, and Reform, and Adventist, and A of G, and Pentecostal, and several years of home churching because we couldn't stand the thought of not belonging somewhere. Surely God has a special place for us! I'm old now, and tired, and my spirit needs that refreshment of the assembly of fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. My soul needs to be fed beyond what I do in my quiet times. My kids need love and acceptance. It's been an embarrassment to always be the visitor. It's always been a disappointment to hear preaching that you knew was way off track but you wanted to much to belong somewhere. But the longer we've floated around, the more spiritually in tune we seem to be getting. I see the major doctrinal issues as major, and don't sweat the small stuff anymore. We're not going to church to *get* as much as we are to *give*. You're on a journey and it's a good thing. A book I've been meaning for a while to read is one you might be interested in, too. http://www.amazon.com/Sundays-America-Yearlong-Search-Christian/dp/0807072257/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1304700575&sr=8-2 I am praying for peace and clarity for you today. The Lord will help you find the right way He wants you to go. It may not be popular, it may seem crazy, but it will feel just right.

[Avila]

Aubrey' date=' to go back to the generalities of your first post, I think it's fine to join a group and not believe as they do 100%, and I thought that before I knew which group .[/quote']

 

I am still not sure which group. ;). But I agree. I joined the Catholic Church and then spent 15 years truly becoming Catholic. I still have a distance left as long as I live, I suspect. Things this complicated don't happen overnight, and even if you think you have worked out all the details before you commit, I can almost guarantee you haven't!

 

At some point, you will have a tipping point. Something will click, and you will decide that it is enough and you have the rest of your life to work out details. It is a marathon, not a sprint.

 

Pray, read and trust.

[Aubrey]

So I challenge you, if you can't find the teachings that match you exactly, please consider what it will be like to have your children grow up in the community that teaches in ways that you really, truly can't stand. How will you be together in 30 years? What will they believe? What kind of people will they be? What will your relationship be like? If they are convinced of this stuff, and they know that you're not, what kind of relationship will you have with their children, your grandchildren?

 

Whatever community you raise them in is always going to resonate with them, one way or another, whether they stay in it or not. Is this the community that you want for that? This is worth staying with and figuring out, and I respect you for wrestling with it. For you, and also for your family.

 

I'm sorry it's so hard.

 

Well...I think that's a possibility w/ whatever faith we follow. And ultimately, that is a question I'm asking myself *now.*

 

W/ regard to faith...I tend to be Socratic w/ my kids. We will talk about an event in history, a passage of Scripture, whatever. I ask them what they think. I tell them what major players around the issue think. Whether they spout what I believe or not, I challenge them to look at it from another side, so that if nothing else, they will learn that intelligent, sincere people can legitimately disagree.

 

So far, I don't think they're old enough to know most of what I believe. Now...I know a lot of people would disagree w/ that approach. I think dh disagrees w/ it--he's free to share his beliefs w/ them (they're not generally all that different from mine; I just don't want to "imprint" them w/ my faith, if that makes sense).

 

Unfortunately, though, based on their responses, they're turning into way too free of thinkers to fit anywhere any better than I do. Based on that, I think they'll be able to respect any differences that arise between us over the years.

 

I do teach them that they have to forgive, though. I figure once they see my mistakes, that will be one doctrine I want imprinted on them. :lol:

[Aubrey]

Gotcha! I understand where you're coming from.

 

So, it sounds like you may believe in universalism then?

 

I at least see it as a strong & valid possibility.

[Greta]

In the Eastern Orthodox tradition (we don't ascribe to the concept of original sin), I believe it's the understanding that Mary, like all of us, was born with an ability to sin. She was fully human and as such, was affected by the wages of sin (death). She still needed Christ's salvation (see the Magnificat in the Bible; she calls Christ her Saviour). Because of her humanity, she had a choice just like all of us -- she could choose to sin. BUT unlike her prototype (Eve), according to the early church, she chose not to. She was the first to say "yes" to God completely, and is a role model for us.

 

Christ, on the other hand, as God, was not able to sin in His incarnation. That's where he is unique.

 

I'm a little confused because this sounds different from what I have learned in the EO Church so far. It's possible I'm misunderstanding you. Or that I misunderstood something in my catechumen class. But the two don't mesh. I don't want to hijack Aubrey's thread though. Can I PM you later with some questions? Hubby has the day off, so we're going to go see a movie, have lunch out, and do some shopping. Fun! :001_smile: But I will write to you when I can.

[Aubrey]

I am still not sure which group. ;). But I agree. I joined the Catholic Church and then spent 15 years truly becoming Catholic. I still have a distance left as long as I live, I suspect. Things this complicated don't happen overnight, and even if you think you have worked out all the details before you commit, I can almost guarantee you haven't!

 

At some point, you will have a tipping point. Something will click, and you will decide that it is enough and you have the rest of your life to work out details. It is a marathon, not a sprint.

 

Pray, read and trust.

 

This expresses so well how I feel about the group I'm thinking of. My concern is a) dishonoring the group w/ less than 100% agreement (at least on the things they see as big) & b) shoot. 3yo started talking & I forget b.

[I.Dup.]

I think it's wonderful that you are searching and taking your faith so seriously!! A faith journey is life long, there is never a point where any of us (on this side of heaven) will have it all figured out.

 

I think part of the problem can be solved by humility to some extent. We do not have to let ourselves be the measuring line of truth, we are just bystanders. Truth is truth, we may not know what truth is on this side of heaven, but our perception does not change whether or not something is truth. Kwim?

 

We just converted to the RCC from being lifelong Protestants (evangelical at that! :001_rolleyes: ) so the Mary issues were difficult for me to come to terms with. There are still things about the RCC that are hard for me to come to terms with, to some extent. Most of it makes all the sense in the world to me (finally, I could never say that about Protestant doctrine, even when I was a Protestant) But for the minor things I struggle with, I have to believe that I am not the be-all, end-all of truth, and there is a possibility these things are Right and True even if they don't make perfect sense to *me.* There comes an element of trust to where God has led us. I don't mean complete blindness, I LOVE learning about Church history and Church doctrine and feel that is very important. But there's also an element of trust and humility, knowing we may not be able to figure everything out, or that every, little thing has to make perfect sense to us. Like I said though, this is a journey and we are all at different places on our own, individual journeys! Keep being open! :001_smile:

[squirtymomma]

I'm reading Evangelicals on the Canterbury Trail right now, and it is giving me an entirely different perspective on these things. I think the Evangelical church has made faith too much about doctrine and too little about worship.

[Carol in Cal.]

 

 

 

Unfortunately, though, based on their responses, they're turning into way too free of thinkers to fit anywhere any better than I do. Based on that, I think they'll be able to respect any differences that arise between us over the years.

 

I do teach them that they have to forgive, though. I figure once they see my mistakes, that will be one doctrine I want imprinted on them. :lol:

 

The forgiveness imprinting, yup, essential all the way around.

 

The other--I think that you might want to consider which solid beliefs you would like to be really clear about with them. Yes, sure, leave room, but there are those eternal verities. I know you have some, and you're probably already doing this, but I can't just leave it lie there in case you haven't thought about it, but probably you have. It's easier to stay strong when you start rigid and flex a bit than when you start flexible. The second generation falling away completely problem is serious for that scenario. I've seen it, a lot.

 

The other thing is, in discarding a faith or a faith community, I think it's really important to think through what basis THEY have for their beliefs. Informed decision making and all that. We're looking for the Truth, right, not only for a good fit. We don't (and I know you're not saying we do) get to just decide what is true. Something is true or it isn't or we can't know in this life--those are the possibilities for every issue. Not, we like it or we don't like it or we just don't want to think so (I know you're not saying that.)

[Trish]

I'm not sure why it's important to find a denomination with which you "agree completely." The Truth is out there, whether we agree with it or not doesn't change what the Truth is. Same goes with people we hang out with -- if you look for Complete Agree-ers there, chances are you are part of a cult, not a community.

 

So, I think your plan makes sense. Go with a denomination you're comfortable with, and people you like, and continue to pursue the Truth without worrying about what others may be believing/thinking/doing.

 

And be open to God's grace, in case He wants to change your mind on something!

[Aubrey]

I think part of the problem can be solved by humility to some extent. We do not have to let ourselves be the measuring line of truth, we are just bystanders. Truth is truth, we may not know what truth is on this side of heaven, but our perception does not change whether or not something is truth. Kwim?

 

What you said was lovely, so I hope you don't feel like I'm picking on you--I've heard this (the part above) many times.

 

What I hear in that statement is that the act of searching is prideful, as if I think my own point of view is the be-all & end-all of truth.

 

If I were to conclude that RCC was the one true church, then I could absolutely see laying aside my pov for the church's. Until then (or some other act of conclusion), what? And how, other than my pov, to reach any conclusion at all.

 

Of course God leads us. But discerning his leading requires some measure of trusting oneself rather than outside doctrine. And since we see people being led to different expressions of the faith, we can conclude nothing w/out our own pov.

 

So, yes, I believe in humility, VERY MUCH. But I can only open or close my eyes. I can only accept or deny my pov. Yes, if someone says, "Look left," I can do that. But w/out street signs, I'm standing at an intersection w/ maps that are incongruous. *I* have to choose to trust one & thereby passively reject the others.

 

I don't see that as prideful, simply fact. I'm not saying I'm more right than someone else, but I don't see how denying my pov & faith to follow someone else's is any more valid than following my own until the map makes sense. Either one is pretty arbitrary, but the latter would severely limit God's ability to lead me.

 

So...as much as I'd like to get along w/ everyone & say YES to what everyone else believes, just to have a friend on the journey & to have a little less pressure to choose the right path...I cannot do that honestly. I see honesty as being equally important w/ humility; otherwise my humility would be false, & really...that could be described as a kind of pride.

 

So...in seeking, there is the appearance of pride. It takes humility, imo, to stand the pressure of other people's assumptions that I just want to follow my own way. I promise you, there are a thousand easier ways to do things than how I go about them! :lol:

[Aubrey]

The forgiveness imprinting, yup, essential all the way around.

 

The other--I think that you might want to consider which solid beliefs you would like to be really clear about with them. Yes, sure, leave room, but there are those eternal verities. I know you have some, and you're probably already doing this, but I can't just leave it lie there in case you haven't thought about it, but probably you have. It's easier to stay strong when you start rigid and flex a bit than when you start flexible. The second generation falling away completely problem is serious for that scenario. I've seen it, a lot.

 

Oh...yeah, we teach them the essentials. Things like universal salvation, we don't even touch yet. I meant more like...I don't know...Catholic approach to faith vs Protestant or gay rights or...things that I want them to THINK about.

 

The other thing is, in discarding a faith or a faith community, I think it's really important to think through what basis THEY have for their beliefs. Informed decision making and all that. We're looking for the Truth, right, not only for a good fit. We don't (and I know you're not saying we do) get to just decide what is true. Something is true or it isn't or we can't know in this life--those are the possibilities for every issue. Not, we like it or we don't like it or we just don't want to think so (I know you're not saying that.)

 

Ok, if you know I'm not saying that, then I'm confused about the whole paragraph. I agree w/ you, but...?

[milovany]

I'm a little confused because this sounds different from what I have learned in the EO Church so far. It's possible I'm misunderstanding you. Or that I misunderstood something in my catechumen class. But the two don't mesh. I don't want to hijack Aubrey's thread though. Can I PM you later with some questions? Hubby has the day off, so we're going to go see a movie, have lunch out, and do some shopping. Fun! :001_smile: But I will write to you when I can.

 

Of course, and you might want to CC Patty Joanna and/or Mommaduck and/or Father of Pearl, etc. too, perhaps. I'm not an expert on the EO faith (!!) and the understanding and veneration of Mary is still one of "those" issues for me.

[I.Dup.]

If I were to conclude that RCC was the one true church, then I could absolutely see laying aside my pov for the church's. Until then (or some other act of conclusion), what? And how, other than my pov, to reach any conclusion at all.

 

I feel you, it is very frustrating to be in that place. I was there for a loooong time.

 

I'm not saying I'm more right than someone else, but I don't see how denying my pov & faith to follow someone else's is any more valid than following my own until the map makes sense. Either one is pretty arbitrary, but the latter would severely limit God's ability to lead me.

 

Absolutely.

 

I understand what you are saying! I really do. It is frustrating, but it sounds like God has you in a waiting place, just keep being open to where He will lead you. He has you on an amazing journey! Don't discount something just because it may not make sense at face value, that's mainly what I meant. Allow yourself to be stretched if you feel that's what the Holy Spirit is doing.

 

But certainly, DON'T follow something just for the sake of following! God bless you.

[Rosie_0801]

To say this, though, seems to be saying he wasn't fully human--you know, we have a Savior who knows our suffering, etc. Who was tempted, but CHOSE not to sin, who did what Adam failed to do but theoretically *could* have done.

 

Maybe that's splitting hairs.

 

You don't think Jesus had a bit more perspective than Adam? I'll bet Adam would have behaved differently had he an actual comprehension of the future. Seems to me that Jesus had a comprehension that inspired one heck of a sense of duty.

 

You know; how we might feel like locking our kids in a cupboard and emptying our bank account to fly away to a tropical island instead of giving the toddler the twelfth drink in 5 mins, but we don't do it.

 

Anyway, splitting your truth ball sounds sensible enough to me. Sure, there is your long term salvation to think about, but you also have this particular life to live, and that has to be done right now, whereas the former is a work in progress and is expected to be a work in progress. If it wasn't, the time a life takes wouldn't be necessary. Perhaps the people/ denomination you are feeling drawn to are going to provide you with key pieces of truth that you need to continue your quest for more.

 

This expresses so well how I feel about the group I'm thinking of. My concern is a) dishonoring the group w/ less than 100% agreement (at least on the things they see as big)

 

Did you ask them if they would feel dishonoured? Are you sure they wouldn't just clap you on the back and say, "that's between you and God, Dearie, but come and have a cuppa and we'll talk it over to see what happens." After all, I just read in this thread that it is Biblical that no one is going to get it all perfect in this life.

 

If I'm bleating incoherently, pay no attention. I've stressed myself into insomnia and it's 4.15am. I'm just here because I like Aubrey, like people finding the right religious path for them and coz I'm lonely. There aren't many people to talk to in my time zone at present...

 

Rosie

[justamouse]

OK, I'm not sure all of my brain cells are swimming in one direction today, but I have to jump in here to back up what Milovany is saying and something as a new Catholic I grappled with myself.

 

Both EO and RC (and I think others) believe in the ever-virginity of Mary herself, based on both Scripture and Holy Tradition, if that's what you're thinking of?

 

Is it in scripture? no. But you need to remember that Mary was *alive* at the time of the Apostles and probably her house was one of *the* places to hang out. Please-the mother of Jesus and no one came to her house to ask about him or be taught? These verbal traditions have been within the RC church since its beginnings, and perhaps came from the mouth of Mary, herself. Another interesting thing is that in the early church writings or the Gospels, none of these verbal traditions are disputed. (Mary was the step mother of Joseph's previous sons)

 

As far as the concept of hell, I've found that Father Barron had the answer I sought in his vid Is Hell Crowded or Empty?

 

As for myself, I got to a tipping point. Do I agree with everything? I don't want to ask. *g* I agree with 99.9 of it and the rest I'm willing to be wrong or I'm willing to not care about it.

Edited May 6, 2011 by justamouse
ohh da poor kitteh

[twoforjoy]

I think for me the issue would be whether my disagreement with certain church/denominational teachings would be considered acceptable--or at least tolerated--or if it would be something I'd feel the need to hide. It's not like I go around discussing theology with my church friends much, but if I felt like there were "heresy detectives" out there waiting to catch people who disagreed with the church's party line, then that would not be a situation where I'd be comfortable.

 

But if the church/denomination had official teachings that you weren't required/expected to completely agree with, and I disagreed, then I don't think it would be an issue.

 

I wouldn't be comfortable in a church/denomination that expected complete agreement from members anyway, though, so it would be kind of moot.

[Carol in Cal.]

What I hear in that statement is that the act of searching is prideful, as if I think my own point of view is the be-all & end-all of truth.

 

 

 

I'm not who you replied to, but I want to say:

 

Searching for truth is not prideful. It is humble. It is saying, first of all, that there IS truth, and secondly, that you want to know it. That puts you beneath Truth, which is an essentially humble stance.

 

Searching for truth is also worthwhile. It leads to better discernment. It leads to better questions. It leads to prayerful consideration. It leads to Christian fellowship. And all kinds of other good stuff.

 

What it isn't is completely finishable in this life. Yes, I believe that we should find a church that is as close to Truth as we can, and commit to it. No, I don't believe that that means that we will entirely understand everything about Truth this side of Heaven.

 

I know you know this already. I just to address your point about pride.

[Aubrey]

You don't think Jesus had a bit more perspective than Adam? I'll bet Adam would have behaved differently had he an actual comprehension of the future. Seems to me that Jesus had a comprehension that inspired one heck of a sense of duty.

 

You know; how we might feel like locking our kids in a cupboard and emptying our bank account to fly away to a tropical island instead of giving the toddler the twelfth drink in 5 mins, but we don't do it.

 

Anyway, splitting your truth ball sounds sensible enough to me. Sure, there is your long term salvation to think about, but you also have this particular life to live, and that has to be done right now, whereas the former is a work in progress and is expected to be a work in progress. If it wasn't, the time a life takes wouldn't be necessary. Perhaps the people/ denomination you are feeling drawn to are going to provide you with key pieces of truth that you need to continue your quest for more.

 

 

 

Did you ask them if they would feel dishonoured? Are you sure they wouldn't just clap you on the back and say, "that's between you and God, Dearie, but come and have a cuppa and we'll talk it over to see what happens." After all, I just read in this thread that it is Biblical that no one is going to get it all perfect in this life.

 

If I'm bleating incoherently, pay no attention. I've stressed myself into insomnia and it's 4.15am. I'm just here because I like Aubrey, like people finding the right religious path for them and coz I'm lonely. There aren't many people to talk to in my time zone at present...

 

Rosie

 

:grouphug:Rosie:grouphug:

[Aubrey]

I'm not who you replied to, but I want to say:

 

Searching for truth is not prideful. It is humble. It is saying, first of all, that there IS truth, and secondly, that you want to know it. That puts you beneath Truth, which is an essentially humble stance.

 

Searching for truth is also worthwhile. It leads to better discernment. It leads to better questions. It leads to prayerful consideration. It leads to Christian fellowship. And all kinds of other good stuff.

 

What it isn't is completely finishable in this life. Yes, I believe that we should find a church that is as close to Truth as we can, and commit to it. No, I don't believe that that means that we will entirely understand everything about Truth this side of Heaven.

 

I know you know this already. I just to address your point about pride.

 

Ok, after reading this & thinking about what I've said, I think I know where I've messed up the conversation. I listed things I don't believe; I did not mean that at all as a list of things that are not true. I *do* see truth as outside of and above me.

 

"Believing" something is ubiquitous, & I'm not even sure that's the right word. There are things I'm sure I believe, w/out sense or reason. There are things I believe because of sense & reason. There are things I'm not sure about, don't mind talking about, but may not ever feel compelled to stake a claim on one way or the other.

 

But there are things I don't believe. They could be true. They could be untrue. When I approach these things, I do so w/ my heart and my head, reason and faith. I cannot force belief if it's not there, but I can be respectful & open. For this reason, I try to avoid dogma and IS statements.

 

I would say that my feelings toward the denomination I'm considering (& it's really fallacious to call it that, but lack of better terms & all) tend toward...a heart-level pull. If I hear God call, my head doesn't matter much. If I can wrap my head around it & accept it, I'd say that's as good as a call from God. But 1 out of 3 doesn't quite get me there unless I put off my Aubrey head & call the level of agreement I have at present with this group to be Good Enough.

 

Then I get to think about subgroups. Which I'd prefer to be based on distance from my house; unfortunately, it's the same conversation all over again because the subgroups are as vehemently different from ea other as the beginning groups. :lol:

[Onceuponatime]

I like it when you and simka post these types of questioning threads. They really get me thinking about what I do and don't believe. I've been going to the same denomination since I was 12yo, I was 35 before I ever heard an elder/teacher use the term fundamentalist. When I asked if we were fundamentalist and he said yes, I was very disturbed. It's only been about 5years since I first heard or read the term Sola Scriptura, then I found out that is what our denomination follows. These things aren't actually voiced, they are implied.

 

I've been doing loads of studying and searching on my own over the years, but I am still surprised sometimes but what I am "supposed" to believe without actually being taught that. The more I study, the more I question, the more ignorant I feel, and the more perturbed I become at the teachings I hear that no longer make sense. But I love the people I worship with. They love me. We are like family. I can't rip myself away.

 

I've said it before, I envy your freedom to search for a place where you fit. I have to keep my mouth shut a lot. I often wonder what I should do if my husband is ever asked to become an elder. Will it be ethical to keep my beliefs and my doubts to myself? I think I may be even further off the beaten path than you are when it comes to questioning doctrine. Then I wonder if eventually I will come full circle and find myself back where I began, but for different reasons.

[Aubrey]

I like it when you and simka post these types of questioning threads. They really get me thinking about what I do and don't believe. I've been going to the same denomination since I was 12yo, I was 35 before I ever heard an elder/teacher use the term fundamentalist. When I asked if we were fundamentalist and he said yes, I was very disturbed. It's only been about 5years since I first heard or read the term Sola Scriptura, then I found out that is what our denomination follows. These things aren't actually voiced, they are implied.

 

I've been doing loads of studying and searching on my own over the years, but I am still surprised sometimes but what I am "supposed" to believe without actually being taught that. The more I study, the more I question, the more ignorant I feel, and the more perturbed I become at the teachings I hear that no longer make sense. But I love the people I worship with. They love me. We are like family. I can't rip myself away.

 

I've said it before, I envy your freedom to search for a place where you fit. I have to keep my mouth shut a lot. I often wonder what I should do if my husband is ever asked to become an elder. Will it be ethical to keep my beliefs and my doubts to myself? I think I may be even further off the beaten path than you are when it comes to questioning doctrine. Then I wonder if eventually I will come full circle and find myself back where I began, but for different reasons.

 

It's funny--I think I see denominations like style manuals. You want this paper to adhere to MLA & that one to AP? No problem. I can understand & implement both. I personally prefer MLA, but I have no stone carving from God to back me up. Just a strong moral preference. ;) :lol:

 

Iow, based on doctrine alone (& not the murky people stuff), I think I could fill most roles in most churches w/ the respect & dignity & orthodoxy they desire, even going as far as explaining/defending their doctrine.

 

If only it didn't bug me so much sometimes.

[Scarlett]

 

Is it in scripture? no. But you need to remember that Mary was *alive* at the time of the Apostles and probably her house was one of *the* places to hang out. Please-the mother of Jesus and no one came to her house to ask about him or be taught? These verbal traditions have been within the RC church since its beginnings, and perhaps came from the mouth of Mary, herself. Another interesting thing is that in the early church writings or the Gospels, none of these verbal traditions are disputed. (Mary was the step mother of Joseph's previous sons)

 

 

Are you saying that since a verbal tradition has been with the RC church since its beginning that such a teaching/tradition might have come from Mary herself? That seems....like a leap.

 

Also, such traditions would not have been disputed in the Gospels if they weren't yet traditions in the first century.

 

Never understood where the idea came from that Mary was Joseph's second wife.

[Scarlett]

It's not like I go around discussing theology with my church friends much,

 

:confused: Why?

 

Who do you discuss it with?

[missiemick]

I love the way you think!!!

I've changed my whole life because of the disconnect between my faith and church. I'm still confused by your original post -- my brain has been having trouble lately. I'd love to return your books (that I've had for an embarrassingly long time) and have you explain it to me????

[OLG]

These verbal traditions have been within the RC church since its beginnings, and perhaps came from the mouth of Mary, herself. Another interesting thing is that in the early church writings or the Gospels, none of these verbal traditions are disputed. (Mary was the step mother of Joseph's previous sons)

 

Think I must have missed the post where you reference the 'verbal traditions'and not clear on what a 'verbal' tradition would be. But, nowhere in Catholic church teaching does it ever say that the Blessed Mother Mary was responsible for any verbal tradition nor does he say or even allude to St. Joseph being married before and having children. There are many who 'speculate' about these things but the Church does not recognize these speculations. I realize you are a recent convert and that it isn't easy to discern the truths with many false theories in circulation. Also know you would not want to spread any false information.

[milovany]

Are you saying that since a verbal tradition has been with the RC church since its beginning that such a teaching/tradition might have come from Mary herself? That seems....like a leap.

 

nowhere in Catholic church teaching does it ever say that the Blessed Mother Mary was responsible for any verbal tradition ...

 

What I took from what Mouse said (and I could be wrong) was that, specifically and only in reference to her ever-virginity, it is possible that it was Mary herself who spoke of this and so the knowledge was transmitted that way and passed on through the early church. I don't believe she was making a blanket statement that Mary had some sort of special role of being the one to verbalize oral tradition.

Edited May 6, 2011 by milovaný

[justamouse]

Think I must have missed the post where you reference the 'verbal traditions' and not clear on what a 'verbal' tradition would be. But, nowhere in Catholic church teaching does it ever say that the Blessed Mother Mary was responsible for any verbal tradition nor does he say or even allude to St. Joseph being married before and having children. There are many who 'speculate' about these things but the Church does not recognize these speculations. I realize you are a recent convert and that it isn't easy to discern the truths with many false theories in circulation. Also know you would not want to spread any false information.

 

I was just reading about them in a book (Catholic)-And in all honestly I'll have to look through them to find which one (I haven't stopped reading in the past few months).

 

No, I wouldn't want to spread any misinformation, that's true. In my defense, it was a Catholic apologist because Mary has been my biggest hurdle.

 

On Tradition and Mary's Perpetual Virginity,

 

Perpetual Virginity cannot be made explicit by Scripture alone. However, for the confused Catholic and curious Protestant alike, it is important to demonstrate that this Church teaching is not in conflict with the inspired text, lest Mary’s Perpetual Virginity needlessly serve as a stumbling block for one who rightly venerates Sacred Scripture. In other words, it must be shown that a Church teaching firmly rooted in Tradition (i.e., the oral word of God) and proposed by the Magisterium does not—at minimum—contradict the witness of Scripture. If this cannot be done satisfactorily, the Catholic view of divine Revelation lacks plausibility.

my bold

 

On Joseph and his prior children (a link from Scott Hahn's site) The Catholics teach that the children Joseph had could have been cousins, and it was the EO church that teaches that they were from a previous marriage.

 

Sorry for the hijack, Aubrey.

Edited May 6, 2011 by justamouse