Survey: Americans switching faiths, dropping out

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by Paladin

I'm pretty sure they do, at least our dear friend Path Of One does. It was to her that sentence was directed.

LOL. I don't think one particularly needs social skills to talk with God. For that matter, one doesn't necessarily need social skills to do social science, either!

I'd agree that going from one denomination to another within a religion should be statistically different from a shift from one religious paradigm to another. Though I recognize that, at least in Christianity, there would be a lot of debate on where to draw the line. My Quaker inspired version of Christianity seems to be really different in many ways from the Baptist version, for example. (I'd guess there are parellels with other religions- Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism, for example, always seemed very different religions to me.) But even the liberal Quaker or Unity view, that still considers Christ central to the journey, is very different from those that do not. So it seems there could be some reasonable categories that are better than lumping all religious shifts together under one statistical umbrella.

I found your and flow's thoughts about shifting around intriguing, as well as Thomas'. I think there is some truth to both sides. Some people probably do switch faiths because they want an "easy" way (but is there one, really?) or something new and exciting. I personally have not found many religions that are more or less easy than Christianity (in fact, Christianity seems to be one of the easiest to follow), so while people may think it will be easier or more feel-good in another religion and start seeking as a result of this, I don't think that's why people genuinely convert. I know more than a few Jews and Christians who converted to Buddhism, and all of them find Buddhism more difficult to practice than their first religion (and a lot more work).

However, most people I have met who converted to something else or switched churches did so because they could not overcome the cognitive dissonance between their own beliefs and spiritual experience and what their religion and/or church said/did. I tried for a few years to be a good conservative Christian. That's what my friends and husband's family were. But no matter how hard I tried and how much I prayed, I am just not a conservative Christian. Many of the beliefs just don't fit with my own spiritual experience at all. It was like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. I felt like I was being dishonest- playing a role, and at the same time I felt like I was turning my back on my own experience of God. It caused a lot of emotional and mental stress, and was non-productive as far as spiritual growth goes.

I am not sure what is productive about staying in one religion or church if it is so far removed from your own beliefs/experience that it requires you to be someone you are not. While some people are fortunate enough to find one religion or church that fits with their own spiritual journey, others are not. I do not like to stagnate. God changes me constantly, molds me, reveals new things to me. As I learn and grow spiritually, my beliefs shift to accommodate new information and spiritual experience. Of course, this is "me"-oriented in the sense that my spiritual journey is the central part of my religious life and I do avoid religions/churches that don't fit with my beliefs (don't we all). Yet, I don't see how forcing myself into a religion or church's box for my entire life is productive, if that is not true to my actual experience and belief. I don't see how my own spiritual journey is any more or less challenging than that of someone who chooses one church/religion, rigidly adheres to it, and manages to not change at all over the course of their lifetime. It is likely that for those that stay in a single religion or church, that is most comforting and most rewarding. And for those that do not, likewise.

[Thomas]

Hi Ciel —

Originally Posted by Ciel

If you were not seated in your own truth would you have found the omniscience of the Catholic church as connective truth?

One can only determine the truth of oneself according to an external point of reference.

Thomas.

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by path_of_one

I think it is interesting that Hindus have such a high retention rate. As a social scientist, I wonder why this is. Is it tied to ethnic enclaves? Or that Hinduism is very diverse internally, so it allows for everyone to do something that fits with their spiritual experience? Hinduism always seemed to me to be very inclusive, so perhaps it's hard to leave if you're included no matter what your spiritual path is!

I do think it has a lot to do with wider family structure and the support it offers.
Or..
Maybe its because they party a lot, are allowed to be happy and dont need to feel guilty?

[wil]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Maybe its because they party a lot, are allowed to be happy and dont need to feel guilty?

Ah, guild, fear, it seems the religions/denominations that resort to this the most have the most retention issues. Interesting how they are also the ones gaining new converts.

Once you see the man behind the curtain....

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Does someone with blind faith?

I know that a blind person can have faith and can place faith in others, but it does require some form of communication.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Thomas

One can only determine the truth of oneself according to an external point of reference.

Kindest regards, and forgive my intrusion,

I can agree with this sentiment, but I must first ask if "an external point of reference" must needs be an institution or tradition? I mean no insult by asking, and I doubt it is any new revelation that I might believe that "external reference" source to be other than institution or tradition.

I see no need to go around my a$$ to get to my elbow. Which is another way of saying "why complicate matters?" Why not go directly to the source?

[Ciel]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest regards, and forgive my intrusion,

I can agree with this sentiment, but I must first ask if "an external point of reference" must needs be an institution or tradition? I mean no insult by asking, and I doubt it is any new revelation that I might believe that "external reference" source to be other than institution or tradition.

I see no need to go around my a$$ to get to my elbow. Which is another way of saying "why complicate matters?" Why not go directly to the source?

With all respect Juantoo........... agreed.

- c -

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I can agree with this sentiment,

Actually, it's not sentiment ... it's philosophically the case.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

but I must first ask if "an external point of reference" must needs be an institution or tradition?

It needs be a vehicle of transmission, of some sort.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I mean no insult by asking,

None taken.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

and I doubt it is any new revelation that I might believe that "external reference" source to be other than institution or tradition.

What is it then?

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I see no need to go around my a$$ to get to my elbow. Which is another way of saying "why complicate matters?" Why not go directly to the source?

Because the Tradition is the source?

If you mean, why not do it yourself, that I believe to be founded on sentiment.

Thomas

[wil]

7 directions we may choose.

like the seven sides of a die.

North, East, South, West, Up, Down.

All external.

Seventh direction is within, like the seventh side of the die the in-side.

We can look wherever we wish for guidance, the answer is within.

Six days of external creation, spend the seventh working on the internal.

Look neither high, nor low....

Trying to change others is futile, or changing external circumstances, however changing perception is relatively easy, and it occurs by keeping the sabbath holy.

peace

wil

[Ciel]

No Thomas, the tradition is not the source.

God is.

And God is a free agent able to respond to all when their "sentiments" rise.

- c -

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Thomas

What is it then?

G-d. Between fervent prayer and listening to the still small voice, it is possible to go directly to the source. Jesus showed us all how, if we will only listen.

There is value in tradition and institution. There is also abuse of the trust that is required. Some need the safety net of tradition and institution, and don't mind the accompanying fetters. Some of us don't need a safety net anymore...we garnered what we needed to point us in the right direction, the same direction Christ pointed, and loosed ourselves from the fetters and stepped out in faith to reach for the outstretched arms of our Heavenly Father.

It is not a path for everybody.

[path_of_one]

The Buddhist imagery comes to mind...

First, to be careful that we do not forget that our finger points at the moon. The moon is the source, the goal, the truth. The finger is just a means of communication to point us there.

Second, that if we consider life to be a river, and the opposite shore our goal, and our tradition the raft that brings us to that shore... once we have reached the farther shore, we must step out of the raft and onto land. I do not think this means we must abandon our tradition, but rather we see it for what it is- a vehicle, not a destination.

I believe that Christ gave us a means to go directly to the Father. He taught us how to pray, how to behave, and how to love. I am not sure there is need for more than right thought (prayer), right action (ethics) and right consciousness (love). For me, it is a lot more simple than most traditions make it.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Ciel

No Thomas, the tradition is not the source.
God is.
And God is a free agent able to respond to all when their "sentiments" rise.

Indeed He does — and every good man and woman in the world will get their just reward in God, according to their sentiments.

But the Path that is Tradition goes beyond that, it is "the narrow gate" into an engagement with the Mystery itself, and transmitted by, through and in the Tradition (this is the aspect everyone fails to see) are the graces by which man might transcend himself.

Thomas

[Thomas]

Hi Juantoo —

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Jesus showed us all how, if we will only listen.

That is what Tradition is. But as ever, we pick and choose the bits we like, and discreetly ignore the rest.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

There is value in tradition and institution.

The Christian Tradition is a body: a physical body, a liturgical body, a sacramental body ... without an understanding of that, one doesn't begin to understand what the authentic Christian Tradition is — nor have any grounds on which to truly appreciate its real value.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Some need the safety net of tradition and institution, and don't mind the accompanying fetters.

So you see the Way of God as a safety net and a fetter?

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Some of us don't need a safety net anymore...we garnered what we needed to point us in the right direction, the same direction Christ pointed, and loosed ourselves from the fetters and stepped out in faith to reach for the outstretched arms of our Heavenly Father.

So you don't need Jesus anymore? You've outgrown Him? In effect you're saying, I'll have God, thank, you, but He comes to me on my terms.

Doesn't work, Juantoo — by 'fetters' you imply you're above all that, you're too good for Scripture to apply to you. God gives you gratis what everyone else has to work for.

Read the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew Chapters 5-7, and come back and tell me you've got it all covered off ... you don't need the seven Beatitudes, the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit, the seven petitions of the Lord's Prayer.

Sure they're fetters — if you want to see tham that way. But they're also freedoms — if you want to see them that way. It depends which way you want to see them. It depends what freedom you really want.

Christianity is a holistic thing. It's all or nothing, Jesus Christ Himself was most explicit about that.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

It's not a path for everybody.

That's the point. Everyone wants the rewards, but on their own terms. Even Christ Himself lost followers by the tough lessons he taught. It's many things, but easy it ain't ... it'll test you to your limits.

If one truly understood the truth of oneself, then one would begin to understand tradition, and know that without it ...

Thomas

[Ciel]

Originally Posted by Thomas

If one truly understood the truth of oneself, then one would begin to understand tradition, and know that without it ...

Thomas

.............. there is freedom to love and accept others without hypocrisy.

- c -