Confessio

[axordil]

Seriously, the DVC thread did get me thinking about why I chose the spiritual path I have, given that I started out life as something quite different. I alluded to it somewhat over there, but for me, I think it came down to two things. In the order in which I came to understand them:

1) I needed a belief system where I enjoyed being in the company of co-believers (and I use that term loosely, believe me:)).

2) I needed a belief system where there were no falsifiable elements.

It's the second one that the DVC thread really brought to my attention. While wading through it and rearranging the muck there, I realized that I don't think I could believe in any religion at this point in my life that required I believe in the historical accuracy of a particular religious text, or indeed, any text.

I find that curious. Or it light of my love of Blake, perhaps not:

I must create a system or be enslaved by another mans; I will not reason and compare: my business is to create.

Some words get into your head and never leave. Like those.

The downside: no one else is going to believe exactly what I do. And when people ask me what "I am," the only honest answer I can come up with is "Unitarian" although I haven't stepped into a Unitarian church in years. I might change that soon, primarily so I don't raise my son as a complete and utter iconoclast.

The upside of the downside: Do people, even from the same sect of the same church, really believe exactly the same on everything? My experience tells me if this were the case, there would never be any intramural arguments within churches.

I don't think of what I do as a cafeteria approach, so much as a grocery store approach...I pick the ingredients that appeal to me, that I think I need, and blend them into something that is uniquely mine (and which in theory meets my RDA for spiritual nutrition). So long as I don't write a cookbook for others to adhere to, I think I'm being intellectually honest.

I do know I feel a lot better about myself, spiritually speaking, than I did a couple of years ago. The constant uncertainty has faded. The feeling that I could deconstruct but not reconstruct is gone. So it can't be all bad.

Funny how an argument can make you understand things about yourself sometimes.


EDIT: retitled to reflect other people's additions.

[yovargas]

I pick the ingredients that appeal to me, that I think I need, and blend them into something that is uniquely mine (and which in theory meets my RDA for spiritual nutrition).

I'd be interested in hearing what those ingredients are.

[axordil]

Compassion and forgiveness whenever I can manage it. A lot of religions have that on the menu, as it were, but I culled mine from my Christian upbringing.

A loving and intimate connection to the physical world, pulled from paganism, mostly. I mean, I'm here, we're all here, it's one thing we all have in common, why should physicality be a burden? Besides, it ties in with:

Monism. Thanks, Spinoza. And quantum mechanics class. Energy and matter are different manifestations of the same thing. Mind is composed of energy and matter. If spirit exists, it's not part of the physical universe, else we could detect and measure it.

Tolerance to the tolerant. If you let me be, I have no reason not to let you be. If you choose to act against me, for whatever reason, I will defend myself. This generally pushes me politically towards extreme left libertarianism in theory and liberalism in practice, although I am often unhappy with the range of viable choices I have in either camp.

Reason as a decision-making tool, up until the point where it fails. It is possible to have so many competing goods in competition around an issue that, if one is to do anything, one can only do what feels most correct. I think of this as practical utilitarianism.

There's more, but it gets kind of ideosyncratic. Since I can visualize chakras (well, audialize: I think of them as musical tones) , I find them useful as a tool for personal adjustment. I also have an essentially dualistic view of divinity, that is, with male and female aspects, but I do not see divinity as something separate from humanity, rather as a emination of our creative drives and emotional needs. But that's really getting into the YMMV area.

[nerdanel]

[EDIT: I've said all of this before. I just thought I'd try to get it down as one post so I could save it for myself. It actually worked.]

Ax, that rings fairly true for me.

I realized that I don't think I could believe in any religion at this point in my life that required I believe in the historical accuracy of a particular religious text, or indeed, any text.

Indeed. I came to this realization after taking a college course as a junior entitled, "Religion and History of Ancient Israel." Suffice it to say that at the time, I was a person so different that probably none of you would have "recognized" me - or at least, my views. This was during the period I was seriously interested in conversion to modern Orthodox Judaism, and though still a feminist and grappling (unsuccessfully) with their notions of the genders as "separate but equal," I had accepted most of their other tenets as valid, experimentally speaking. So, I signed up for this class - taught by, of all things, a convert to Judaism - and expected (perhaps understandably, given not just my religious mentality, but my would-be convert's mentality (often a much more fanatical thing)) that it would use the Torah as its prime source of history, and teach me about the historical antecedents of Judaism...religiously speaking.

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that the university didn't consider itself to be a conservative synagogue, and the professor insisted on teaching us about liberal elitist scholarship (e.g. "archaeological research") that often contradicted the Torah - or at the least, interpreted it differently than does traditional Judaism.

Essentially, I made a complete ass of myself, insisting on using the Artscroll Tanach (Orthodox version), citing its footnotes in class (and after class...and during office hours...) to argue with the professor, and answering exams under protest ("Well, the Tanach, which is unfailingly correct, says X, but assuming for the sake of argument that the archeological evidence is right, the answer would be Y." My prof, fortunately, had a sense of humor, and would respond, "Assuming for the sake of argument that you are saying the answer is Y, your grade would be an A.")

Once I shook myself out of that fanatical, nonsensical religious reverie, I felt scared by how easy it had been to place myself in the mindset of believing something just because a book said it was true. How easy, to say that a book was right and even if all the evidence in the world said otherwise, all the evidence in the world would be wrong. Why? Because God gave us the book. And what was the proof of that? The book said God did. The biggest problem? Often, we are not faced with "all the evidence in the world" - we are faced with "some evidence" that has "some credibility" that speaks to the accuracy of ancient texts. Now, a thinking person not under the sway of an extreme religious ideology will be able to give it "some weight" - but one who was as committed to an Orthodox mentality as I was experimenting with being would refuse to credit it. I realized that for me, subscription to Orthodoxy was tantamount to saying, "This text is true, LALALALALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" (to anyone who offered evidence that it was not the unfailing, complete Word of God.)

In other words, for me, belief in the historical accuracy of any text amounts to a commitment to turn off my capacity for rational thought when confronted with evidence that challenges that text. And I am unwilling to make that commitment to any religion for any reason.

The immediate rejoinder is, "Well, you do not have to believe in the historical accuracy of the text; you could choose to embrace the spiritual or metaphorical components of the text." Ah. But (I might be channeling TED here, not sure) then, I feel as though I am a consumer in the marketplace of religion, being offered so many varied and wonderful and utterly contradictory options as to fantastic (i.e. you MUST take them on faith, or not at all) happenings and theologies and occurrences and people. Why pick one? Either they are all wrong, they are all right (in a metaphorical sense), or one is right and the rest are wrong. Or there is some sense in which they can all coexist that we will understand at some later time, but that is not apparent to us given the limitations of the human mind.

Basically, I haven't heard from God - either that God exists at all, or that one of these religious options is, as we say, true and correct. So, unless I myself hear an endorsement from God, then I choose to decline to "place my faith" in any fantastic belief, as I have no way to tell which one (if any) is correct. Most faiths assert that they are right and exclusively so, which is, quite frankly, very tiresome - so I have decided only to explore those faiths which refrain from doing so.

And why explore any faith at all? Well, my declining to believe in any fantastic belief means that I decline all views as to an afterlife (while remaining generically open to the possibility that one exists, and that it can be fun to theorize about). So, for me there is no point to exploring religion with a view to saving my immortal soul (which I actually don't consider to need saving merely by virtue of its infinite fallibility). My interest in religion merely springs from the normative view that it is good to try to do good...and that perhaps religion is a tool that can help me to do more than I would do on my own. (For instance, the Jewish concept of tikkun olam will spring into my head daily, and helps me to reduce the ways in which I act thoughtlessly towards others (although that's still very much a work in progress.))

So here we come to my identification with your second notion - the grocery store. The marketplace of religion. Truthfully, walking into the marketplace is a little overwhelming - kind of like walking into an upscale shopping mall where people are trying to sell you $2500 designer pants (Exclusive Truth In This Life and The Next) when you just want a $50 pair of jeans (Tool to Help Me Act Better Towards People Today.)

I admit to feeling very put off - almost violated in some sense - when people tell me that Their Truth is also My Truth. As though they'd dragged me into their store, tried to force the designer pants on me, taken my credit card, and swiped it, while I was just trying to get out the "But I REALLY don't like your pants."

I know about as much about cooking as I do about finding even my own truth to religion, which is to say NONE. But even if I end up going to the grocery store, purchasing ingredients, and then destroying them in something entirely inedible...at least it's my journey (towards spending less on takeout?), it's my life, and it's my attempt to find (or make) something that I will find real and tasty.

Um, apparently that metaphor hit a bit too close to home in the literal sense. But the point is, in the figurative sense, the grocery store approach works for me. Even if eating out constantly is more tasty and convenient (okay, getting too caught up in the metaphor again), I have to keep trying to learn how to cook. I want to meet my own RDA for spiritual nutrition, not to pick up some readymade dish that someone else cooks up, places in front of me, and tells me that all I have to do is eat. For me, that's the only way it will be authentic.

Just believe (or eat) and you will be saved/fulfilled/made whole/more happy?

No thanks, I've got some greens to burn on my stove tonight.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I worship cats.

[The Watcher]

Once I shook myself out of that fanatical, nonsensical religious reverie, I felt scared by how easy it had been to place myself in the mindset of believing something just because a book said it was true.

See, I never ever found myself in that place. Raised by a mother who had been raised herself as Unitarian, and then by a father whose own father was a STRICT Congregationalist (the predestination and all the other crap) but whose own scientific bent made him much more in the frame of reference of Christianity being a moral code, not a belief system, I can see where I ended up as I did.

As Ethel stated elsewhere numerous times, I never seemed to have the "god gene" if there even is such a thing. My circumstances are entirely different for arriving at that conclusion, I cannot see how "God" would send so many mixed messages down to a little tiny planet in the vast Universe that exists out there if HE?She? really existed as an interfering deity. Therefore, in my own opinion, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism etc. all got some bits right but most of it wrong. If there is a universal need for religion because some of what seems to be that special set of sparks - firstly life itself, and then secondly, self-awareness, which I agree are marvelous things, it then always seems to lead to "what is our purpose, why are we here, and does it all stop when we die?"

I answer that we get glimpses of it from time to time, but that NO religion has it right. I am personally sick to death of the angst and strife that such things cause. The whole concept of faith is one thing, when it is applied to religious dogma, it is an ugly beast.

I fully admit that the Universe itself is enough awe inspiring in its own right to make me not feel the need for anything beyond that - we are connected to something that we cannot ever comprehend. Then the question is "Do we need to feel connected?" My guess is yes, we do. Whether that actually means anything is something we will eventually ALL find out. Punitive/judgemental deities do not enter into it from what I find to be worthwhile so far. That is not saying that I find the ideas of life and self-awareness not fascinating in their own right - but more why we should need such internalized concepts, and why would biology alone have made us this way?

[nerdanel]

Both my "God gene" and my distaste for the "God gene" comes from my father, the ever devout Catholic. His Catholicism has never struck me as particularly...thoughtful; when you ask him why he believes as he does, his response is always (1) because it is what he was taught (2) because his father (now dead seven years) instructed him to be a devout Catholic, and he would not dream of disobeying his father.

I recall distinctly one conversation when he was driving me to synagogue some years ago:
Me: Have you ever even seriously considered the possibility that Catholicism might be wrong in any of its particulars?
Him: No. It's not.

He is a nuclear engineer. He's not stupid. But he is capable of shutting off his ability to think. Broadly speaking, I see two types of faith - "thoughtful and reasoned" and "just because." And his faith has always seemed to be the latter.

My little foray into the world of Orthodox Judaism taught me that I was almost capable of the same - it was the link to feminism that pulled me out of that - and so I understand well the comfort and the certainty in believing that your religion represents God-given Absolute Truth.

Black and white is infinitely easier than the real world, colored in shades of gray.

I may have told this story before, here. I can't remember. My law school section had contracts during our first semester, and the professor was adept at juxtaposing cases that showed courts analyzing similar facts and coming to different conclusions. Many of us, myself included, were incredibly frustrated in the first week or so - we had gone to law school to learn The Law (tm), and instead we were being given this nonsense, about fifty different answers to the same question. Was a given thing adequate consideration for a contract or was it not? Finally, one of my classmates raised her hand and asked the professor, "This is all great, but when are we going to learn what the right answer is? We just want to understand what the law actually says."

The professor stopped the class for a full fifty minutes and gave us the chance to air our frustrations, which all sounded similar: we wanted a rule, a black-letter line - something that we could memorize and follow and apply and label as The Right Answer. Then, the professor stopped us mid-angst and said, "What you will learn is that there is no one right answer. There are only courts asking the question, 'What kind of society do we want to create?' and attempting to answer that question in keeping with the wisdom of other courts who have come before. No one can answer that big a question with absolute certainty. Part of your study of the law will be your learning to live with, and work through, that uncertainty...and maybe later in your careers, contribute some tentative, not absolute, answers of your own."

I think that moment has stayed with me more than any other in recent years, because to me, his answer represented an insight that extends far beyond the legal questions of, "What consideration is adequate for a a contract to sell widgets?" or even the meta-question, "What kind of society do we want our laws to establish?" In life, we yearn for the clarity of bright-line answers to the difficult questions - particularly where life and death, intimacy and procreation, formation and dissolution of friendships, family bonds, and relationships are concerned. And, I think, part of the journey is learning to live with the uncertainty...learning to accept that we may get the glimpses of which you speak, TW, but that there is no one set of absolutely correct messages that give us the Right and Wrong Choices for each situation in which we find ourselves. And so, we return to Ax's grocery store notion - we can strive for an amalgam of insights (drawing from multiple religions, among other sources) that offers us a tool to navigate the uncertainty...and perhaps even break through it in special moments of insight or self-awareness.

[Jnyusa]

Great story, nel! You may have told it before but I hadn't heard it before. Thanks for repeating it.

I had a similar experience during my undergrad days, in a course on Skepticism. The prof was explaining something about the infinite regress of Idealism, and all of a sudden it got through to me that 'facts' are provisional, and what it meant to accept uncertainty as a permanent property of existence. I really felt as if I was falling off a cliff. It was like a hole opened up in the ground in front of me. I still remember the view out the window of that classroom, and that the conference table wasn't large enough for all the students so I had my chair against the wall and was writing on my knees. I think that one lecture was the point at which I became capable of learning science, though I didn't want to rush right out that minute and become an empiricist.

Jn

[Holbytla]

Well I will just add my same old schtick again.

Born and raised a Catholic.
I believe that children learning religion is like children learning anything. Speech etc.
We are in a lot of ways products of our environment. We all react differently to our surroundings. Some embrace it with gusto. Some rebel. Some get confused.

There isn't much in a church interesting to children. An occasional errant bug can provide some entertainment on occasion. An ill worn garment on Mrs. "Whatever" in a hot summer month. For the most part though a child's mind is lightyears removed from the church.

Left the church I was in only because I had to be there.
Married, kids on the way. Felt responsible. Felt I owed the kids a starting point or perspective.
Always believed in the teachings of Christ regardless of the shortcomings of the church and the man made gobbledegook.

Oh 4 or 5 years ago I could no longer come to terms with the religion and the church. I won't speak of the atrocities commited by the Catholic church. Actually yes I will.
How can there be a million dollar mansion two miles away from my church where the priests go to retreat or what have you, while there are homeless and poor walking the streets? How can there be a vow of poverty when they have maids, cooks, cars, etc provided to them? How can there be extra collections....you get the point.

Left the church for numerous reasons.

A few years ago, I experienced one of my most spiritual events of my life.

I was in Hawaii.
I had been there a week or so, and had become familliar with the remoteness of the place. I pored over maps for hours. Its a guy thing.
I had a real good idea of where I was in relation to the rest of the planet, and how far away from everything else.

Went to Mt Kilauea. About 10,000 feet up. In the middle of the Pacific.
Little but ocean all around. The stars were that close.
There are observatories up there. The astronomical stories were abounding. All about remote galaxies and stars. All about the births of stars and planets. The beginning of the universe.
The air is clear. The light pollution is nill.

I gained some perspective.

Here I was about as remote and as close to the heavens as I could get.

I realized how insignificant and important I was.

This tiny planet in an average galaxy will experience a catastrophe.
An ice age. A meteor. Whatever.
This insignificant planet in an insignificant galaxy.

Regardless, the universe will roll merrily along.

We are far from as meaninful as we think we are.
I was no more than the dust at my feet.
No better. No worse.
Just different.

Today a person in Iraq will die unnecessarily.
Today a baby will be born in an overcrowded city in India.

Stars will die. Stars will be born.
Mountains will fall. Mountains will rise.

Somewhere somehow some way, our spirits will endure.
The Secret Fire. What have you, will endure.

It is insignificant, as the grain of sand or me, what religion you are.
Things are what they are. Things always will be what they will be.

Wanna help your kid? Teach him that.

[Athrabeth]

Holby........

You know, it was my father who taught me to look upward to the stars and speak the words of my heart to them. He told me that there was power and truth there for everyone to find, that the whole earth was “wrapped in heaven”. I loved walking with my dad under clear night skies.

I had a very similar experience to yours the first time I went up Haleakala on Maui........the most amazing sunset and then......those stars, and that wonderful, mysterious feeling of "one-ness".......of being an infinitesimal, yet somehow integral, part of a whole.

I pored over maps for hours. Its a guy thing.

Holby-dear......I can pore over maps for hours, and I am no guy.

[nerdanel]

I won't speak of the atrocities commited by the Catholic church. Actually yes I will.
How can there be a million dollar mansion two miles away from my church where the priests go to retreat or what have you, while there are homeless and poor walking the streets? How can there be a vow of poverty when they have maids, cooks, cars, etc provided to them? How can there be extra collections....you get the point.

Left the church for numerous reasons.

Holby, I'm not at all challenging that that was what you saw. But, as an also-no longer Catholic, who ordinarily is ready, willing, and able to pencil in time to talk about the atrocities committed by the Catholic Church, I feel that I should state, in all fairness, that what I saw the priests in my church doing was incredibly different. They lived simply. No million dollar mansion for retreat or daily living. When the building needed repair work, parishioners did it on a volunteer basis rather than incur the expense of calling in outside repair help. No maids. No cooks. I recall distinctly encountering one of the priests in a local park after he'd just been hit by a car and thrown into a ditch while bicycling. The bicycle was his only form of regular transportation, as he had donated his car before joining the priesthood. I believe, wouldn't swear to it, that the three priests and a slew of nuns who lived on the same grounds, shared one car so that they could make shared grocery runs and such. My church also solicits a group of young adult college graduates to live in a small church-owned house (parishioner donated, transported, and renovated) for one year. No compensation; their basic needs (and I really do mean basic) are provided by congregation donations, and they work to serve the homeless and poor in my parents' area. The nuns on the same property belong to a relatively strict sect and live incredibly sparse lives, materially speaking.

I have not the faintest doubt that there are members of the Catholic priesthood that manage the utmost in hypocrisy, as you saw. But my experience was with men and women who took their belief system very seriously, and walked the walk as much as they talked the talk. Even though I am certain they wouldn't respect all of my choices since then, I can continue to respect theirs, by and large.

I'm not sure why I needed to note that. I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just...if there was any reason that I might have STAYED Catholic, it was the examples set by those good Catholic devotees.

Went to Mt Kilauea. About 10,000 feet up. In the middle of the Pacific.
Little but ocean all around. The stars were that close.
There are observatories up there. The astronomical stories were abounding. All about remote galaxies and stars. All about the births of stars and planets. The beginning of the universe.
The air is clear. The light pollution is nill.

I gained some perspective.

Here I was about as remote and as close to the heavens as I could get.

I realized how insignificant and important I was.

This tiny planet in an average galaxy will experience a catastrophe.
An ice age. A meteor. Whatever.
This insignificant planet in an insignificant galaxy.

Regardless, the universe will roll merrily along.

We are far from as meaninful as we think we are.
I was no more than the dust at my feet.
No better. No worse.
Just different.

Today a person in Iraq will die unnecessarily.
Today a baby will be born in an overcrowded city in India.

Stars will die. Stars will be born.
Mountains will fall. Mountains will rise.

Somewhere somehow some way, our spirits will endure.
The Secret Fire. What have you, will endure.

It is insignificant, as the grain of sand or me, what religion you are.
Things are what they are. Things always will be what they will be.

Wanna help your kid? Teach him that.

This is very, very beautiful, and if you shared it before, I didn't see it. Thank you for writing it.

[yovargas]

The immediate rejoinder is, "Well, you do not have to believe in the historical accuracy of the text; you could choose to embrace the spiritual or metaphorical components of the text." Ah. But (I might be channeling TED here, not sure) then, I feel as though I am a consumer in the marketplace of religion, being offered so many varied and wonderful and utterly contradictory options as to fantastic (i.e. you MUST take them on faith, or not at all) happenings and theologies and occurrences and people. Why pick one?

I am still an atheist, sort of. But I had a major revelation, thanks to a patient and helpful Buddhist-leaning poster on Manwë, that helped me see that pretty much any of the succesful religions are saying the same thing. If you listen with the right ears, as it were, Jesus and Buddha don't sound much different at all. [/quote]

[JewelSong]

There is a certain school of thought that holds that Jesus and Buddha were actually the same person.

[Holbytla]

I was and am in no way condeming any religioon or belief. And I should not have generalized.
Just giving my opinion and perspective.
Certainly the Catholic church has accomplished great things.
I just had enough from my point of view.
The point being it makes no difference what you believe.
"It" is there whether or how you believe.

[Holbytla]

And what could be more heavenly than 'Beth honey and stars?
I ask you.

[Lurker]

I haven't been on the boards for months because of "real life" but this is an interesting read.

I was born and raised a Catholic literally, went to a Catholic boy's school founded by the Basilian Fathers from primary to high school. Been there, done that, I was an altar boy, Marian devotee, joined pilgrimages/retreats/World Youth Day/discernment for priesthood, youth parish coordinator, went to a handful of missionary assignments (in Asia) during the summer, you name it I've done it. I rarely missed Sunday mass and even go to church on the weekdays when I used to work for a huge firm downtown (noon mass). People thought I'll go into priesthood but like the bible says many are called but few are choosen. I always have this notion that I help more people outside the confines of the church than inside.

The funny thing is, I'm like Martin Luther, before I accept the church teachings I analyze it. In fact, the youth group has asked me to write a resolution to be sent to Parliament with regards to Gay Marriage in Canada and I've been explaining to them a thousand times there is no need to worry that the goverment is going to ask the Catholic Church to perform it. I've consulted a few older Catholic lawyers about this. (It's a long story and lots of argument. I ended up writing it anyways cause people urged me.) Anyways, what I'm trying to say is I agree with most of the Catholic teachings, others I still question like the death penalty, gay marriage (it's okay with me just as long as the legislators respect the church and other religions' teachings on this), watching the Da Vinci Code (yes, my parish condems it, a priest asked parishoners to burn the book if they see it, heck I'm not burning my copy, who cares if Jesus is married, it's his teachings we have to reflect on not his personal life) etc... I was 50/50 on the abortion issue. It took me years and years to be convinced that a fetus has rights, too, thanks to my wife for explaining it to me nicely. I'm still conservative I guess, I think priests should not get married.

Unlike other people, I have no plans of leaving the Catholic Church eventhough you often hear the atrocities that the church is being accused of since the middle ages to the present day. It's the teachings you should be reflecting on not the physical aspect of the church having a huge Cathedral, money, pedophilia etc... I don't think there isn't a "perfect" or should I say a "true" religion in this world. It's like the bible, we interpret it in different ways, I read between the lines, some people read it literally, so nobody should be saying "we" are the only means to heaven. Like reading the bible alone is your first class ticket to thy kingdom come.

Many Catholics who might be reading this might think I'm a "pick and choose" Catholic, well, all I have to say is, isn't that what we should all do analyze everything, use your brain, listen to your heart, if the Pope says we should all jump in the Atlantic Ocean would you blindly obey it (it's not like the Pope will say that, just an example ) I don't think so. We all have free will, we should use it.