Let me share my previous experience in the church where I went while I was growing up. During Mass, there was the First reading, the Second reading, and the Gospel reading. The first two Readings were from the Old Testament, the Gospel was from the New Testament. The readings were surrounded by ritualistic prayers, standing up/sitting down, etc. It all seemed very pre-canned to me.

Fast forward to the present. I go to church at 9:15 AM. The preacher speaks on a topic, almost always one that is important in my daily life, citing the Bible to back up any claims. The advantage here is that you are hearing teaching from someone who knows what they are talking about and can read along with the Scripture. “Aha!” you say, “You are still only getting the opinion of one person, no matter how informed they think they are!” Again, you would be correct. This is where the second and crucial part of the equation comes in.

The second part of the equation is small group discussion, sometimes know as Bible fellowship. Megan and I are in a class we attend at 10:45 AM with about 20 or so other couples. We will take a topic, along with verses from the Bible that deal with the topic, and have a discussion about it. This is the step that allows you to grow in your faith. Going to church is always good, Bible fellowships are more of an “advanced” education where you can grow your faith.

It is not always true that all people at a church believe the same thing. For example, here is a hot topic that came up a few weeks ago: the topic of women needing to cover their hair while praying. See I Corinthians 11:4-6 for a passage that seems to be in favor of the practice. However, also see next passage I Corinthians 11:16. Paul writes that it is not a big deal, that no churches have a practice such as women covering their heads. Which one is right? As I said in one of my previous posts, you are responsible for your own actions, only. If you think it is wrong, cover your hair, but you cannot judge your friend who does not feel the same way (and vice versa). It is through small groups that discussions can be had and viewpoints expressed. It also help to have someone who can tell you a little about the context in which a verse might have been written. What was happening at the church in Corinth at the time?

I guess what I am getting at here is that it is possible to find a church where you can grow in your faith by further understanding of the ways of God. This understanding can only be gained from reasonable discussions, never from close-mindedness. That is why I say to you that you need to look around for a better church before you abandon Christianity because of bad experiences. I have learned a lot about the ways of God and I know you will too if you will give it a chance.

Eric, I admire your faith, but I’m not sure if I could ever share it in the same way. Regardless, the most shining examples of Christianity I’ve seen have been those simply behaving in a manner that would make Jesus proud. Ironically, some of these people attend services every week, some don’t attend services, and a few are self-proclaimed atheists or agnostics. (Maybe some people are Christian in the truest sense without knowing it? A controversial idea to be sure.) In regards to insights from organized religion, I’ve found that I get more insights from a diverse group of people having an open discussion, rather than a single leader expressing his viewpoint. Really, what’s there to talk about? Ostensibly the people in a church all believe the same thing. One opinion is a start, but real insight comes from the friction of opinions, not necessarily with the goal of convincing one another. The best example of what I think a good “church” would be is a small group of people I knew who met once a week at a member’s house and just talked about things. It was an open exchange of viewpoints, with one person acting as a moderator so that we didn’t step on each other’s toes. Sometimes the topic was a commonly accepted aspect of God, sometimes it was just free discussion about things in our lives. Since we all had different backgrounds and different ideas about beliefs, we had to analyze our assumptions and rethink them. It was much like Kairos but without the Catholic Church overtones. We had some fascinating conversations, and I always came away feeling like I learned something.

And I think I know who the last poster is, you ninja poster you! :)

And as far as this not being the proper venue to discuss such things… I have to disagree. I would much rather do it here, where i can take the time to think about what I want to say and re-read the responses, than have a heated discussion over the dinner table where you know resentment and anger would come into it and feelings would get hurt. Right now… I’m not angry. I don’t resent the education that I had. And at least we are having an adult conversation about it… which is more than a lot of people do. I know that you and mom and Jeff and I will likely never agree on this subject… and that’s fine with me. I can understand what you say and why you say it and still not subscribe to what you believe. That’s what makes us different people, that and the fact that the circumstances were different for both of us, even in the few short years in school we were apart. And drastically different from when Jeff went to school… girl altar servers, the horror! :-p Your conviction is part of what I love about you Tracy. And maybe even envy… you’ve ALWAYS known what you believed in. :)

I do have to say, however, that being confirmed while in 8th grade, as I was, there was no option to ‘opt out’ as you put it. I do not think that a 13-year old is mature enough to make that kind of decision, especially when they haven’t been exposed to ANYTHING at all aside from what was being presented in school and at home. At that point in time, it simply wasn’t an option to not get confirmed, and to be honest most of us didn’t even understand what it was about. Mom and Dad wanted it. School wanted it. Apparently God wanted it. I was never asked if I did. Thankfully, things have changed somewhat, and now they wait until you are older before doing it. So maybe the church can learn after all? :-p

I can go even further than though. People, myself included, always seem to think that salvation is a matter of “If I do the right thing, God will beam me up out of here.” However, reading through the New Testament you will discover that that is not our purpose at all. Our purpose is to bring the Kingdom of God down here to earth by our actions (“Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven”).

Whenever you see a church or group ostracize someone, it is a failing of human nature, not of God. The Bible is very clear on one point: one cannot judge another person. You are responsible for your own actions ONLY. You can try to reason with someone else but you cannot judge them. A person who thinks tattoos are wrong can’t say to their inked-up friend “You are defiling your body.” That person can only choose to not get a tattoo of their own.

The draw of organized religion is not only the sense of community but the insights you gain from being around other people. Think about it: you can learn everything you need for a degree by only reading textbooks. You will likely do much better if you have some other interaction, but it is not necessary. You might miss out on insights. etc.

I am telling you this from personal experience: the Catholic church I attended for the first 15 years of my life did seem to have some of that exclusivity complex to it and it made me feel sour too. That is why I encourage you to try out different churches to find one that truly embraces Christ’s message of tolerance. Read through their texts and see if they measure up to the tests of logic. If God knew you in the womb before you were born, He surely knew about your skeptical nature :)

I would be more than happy to discuss in another format my personal beliefs and sense of faith. I just find it sad to see my brother and sister condemning their education in one sentence and crediting it with their ability to reason in the next. Make up your mind. Was it narrow-minded or did it make you open-minded? You can’t have it both ways.

Furthermore, what do you think happens to those who never have the opportunity to choose to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior? On one hand, you would think that innocent children should be able to get away scot-free. What about Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, and yes, your Atheists too? Most of the people of said religions (along with Christianity) are de facto members; they follow the traditions of their parents. And I would argue that most of them are decent people, just like most Christians are decent people. I would hope we’d all be able to sit around the campfire at the end of everything and share in each other’s company, regardless of our backgrounds or even our prior mistakes. I certainly wouldn’t leave anyone out.

In regards to your experience with the Baptist church, I think that’s the draw of religion, its sense of belonging and in the best cases a real community. That group of people can do some really good things, like set up food drives and helping people get back on their feet. There’s a danger though in regards to how people outside the community are treated, and whether the community is exclusive. How do you react when you invite someone to join you, but they don’t? Are they still invited into your house as brothers and sisters? Simply tolerated? Ignored? Shunned? Pitied? Do you think that there’s something wrong with their head? It’s easy to think in binary terms: WE think this way, but THEY think that way. I think there’s something fundamentally dangerous about that way of thinking.

Mom, in response to your question I would say that within our family we were certainly open-minded. You’ve taught me to be tolerant and accepting of other beliefs. I can’t find any fault there. As for the schools, at first glance they were open-minded. But often in several of the “religion” classes, points were presented as absolute fact which were actually just religious beliefs presented fervently. To an extent I guess that a private school run by a church is designed to indoctrinate kids in that belief system, but I can’t help but feel there’s something wrong with ramming beliefs down a young child’s throat when he doesn’t have the experience, confidence, or debating skills necessary to question what he’s being told. This approach relies on social inertia, the idea that people will keep doing the same thing until they question things, at which point they’ll have to expend considerable effort to stop doing what they’ve been doing. At that point many people simply continue to go through the motions because that’s what they’ve always done, even though they might not believe it on the inside. Or worse, they might keep doing it from a sense of guilt or fear– not just fear of a nebulous deity but of a more immediate community’s reactions to someone who bucks the status quo. That’s awful.

And I don’t want to say that other beliefs were actively stifled, but it’s pretty hard to say they were encouraged in an environment trying its hardest to convince you that one specific idea is the ONLY CORRECT one. That sort of idealism doesn’t lend itself well to open-mindedness. I don’t recall any other students ever openly talking about their religion or lack thereof. It wasn’t suppressed in some ham-handed fashion, it was more insidious than that. It simply wasn’t encouraged. We didn’t, for example, have a comparative religions class offered, or even seriously talk about other religions in class, even though I would have gotten much more out of a class like that than a class called “Social Justice” or “Morality”. Even in high school we never had a Buddhist monk or a Jewish rabbi or a Muslim imam speak to us, because a lot of the staff (and probably quite a few of the parents) would have seen it as counterproductive or even dangerous. And I guess it would be, from the perspective of indoctrinating children in a single belief system.