I don't mind Jesuit's, my brother graduated from John Carroll, a Jesuit college ;)

VS, I think you must wear a gorilla suit and I can dress as Diane Fossey (she is a Theta, it only makes sense!). I don't have a "Geology Rocks" t-shirt, but I DO have a shirt that says "Back off, man. I'm a scientist." Either are appropriate.

I think the issue is with Notre Dame rather than the Jesuits, but then again many Catholics have some issues with the way Notre Dame does things.

ETA:

This thread is particularly interesting to me because I'm fascinated with how people form their faith, especially in relation to the faith of their parents. My entire family is Catholic, and both my parents are very faithful people - my Dad more so as he gets older. However, faith was never something we talked about much it was kind of just something we did. As a result my sister and I are pretty solid Catholics (or at least trying to be). The same thing happened with political views - my parents NEVER spoke about politics with us, yet we both have political views fairly similar to those of our parents. I often find that the people who are very vocal and strict about faith often have children who move away from the faith of their childhood. So I guess all that rambling is me saying I would love to hear more stories about faith formation - lol.

Oh yeah, my grandparents have season football tickets, and my grandma has refused to go ever since Obama spoke there. Football is too important to my grandpa though! (Hey, when your dad played for Rockne, you tend to look past the politics of the college and just focus on football!)

No, it's just that, except for the people who went there, everybody hates Notre Dame. :D

And the Obama speech was really just the most prominent of many things people like my Grandma were up in arms about. However, my Dad is a football coach, so I understand that football is an entirely separate religion!

1-even if a professor THINKS that, what educational benefit is there from saying it? And what the hell does that have to do with human sexuality?
2-Maybe they shouldn't address human sexuality directly for junior high kids or MAYBE high school kids, but a professor who doesn't have the stones to address the topic directly at a public university seriously needs to find a new career field.

At Iowa you could take Sex (Human Sexuality) Drugs (intro to pharmacology) and rock & roll (the history of rock and roll music in America) all in the same semester. And I think a lot of kids did just so they could say they're studying sex, drugs and rock & roll. HA! But that's off topic. That professor is a douchecanoe, my favorite new insult these days, and just inflames the evolution/creation argument.

And yes, I lived in Kansas for awhile and speaking of douchecanoes, these people were nuts, but ID got a lot of play there for awhile.

I like the word DubaSis...I'm adding it to my vocabulary bank, but I don't think I'll be teaching it to my 8th graders just yet..Probably pointless anyway. I'm sure they know it already. I agree - being nervous about teaching human sexuality at a university - particularly this university - was odd. Clearly, many things about her were odd. My daughter thinks she just had an unusual attachment to monkeys (LOL).

MysticCat - Yes, you are right about the Notre Dame thing. My father gave me a lot of room to discover my faith and figure out what I believed, but when it came to football teams - not an inch. We were raised to hate Notre Dame and root for ANYONE who played them. I do have to admit that I secretly broke down last year and rooted for them when they played UW (I hate them more), but I never told him. :D

I do understand your viewpoint, although scientists in the field disagree and see and show a lot of evidence for evolution as a process that occurs from macro to micro.
Well first, creationism isn't science at all, it's belief. Intelligent Design is the "fudge science" which is basically creationism wrapped up in the trappings of the scientific method without actually being processed through them. People in Kansas, and elsewhere, propose Intelligent Design as an equally plausible scientific alternative to evolution when really, that's not true in any way shape or form. And while there are scientists who support it, we're not talking about a 50/50 split here, we're talking about something the US National Academy of Sciences, The US National Science Teacher's association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science all call psuedo or junk science. It's an overwhelming consensus.

The base problem with Intelligent Design is that there is no way to test the theory. Most of its components, irreducible complexity and the fine-tuned universe for example, mostly say "hey this is so unlikely there's no way it could have just happened, right? So someone must have made it!" You can't actually test that. We can't say that life would never have existed under different universal constants for example because we haven't the foggiest idea.

There is, unfortunately for proponents, not a lot of other arguments than that. Most "evidence" comes down to the equivalent of the "hey there are monkeys still around so we couldn't have came from them" quality.

That's not to say that a belief in religious (or alien, or FSM or whatever) creationism is wrong just that it's not science.

Eh this thread will go where it will. And while side swipes are common among 'friendly audiences' they're not conducive to understanding.

I think of it this way, if you present the "well other people think differently" on every subject where there's dissent, you'd never teach anything. There are people who believe the earth is flat, or hollow (and we're on the inside), there are people who believe we never landed on the moon and so on. It's important to handle the issue if the question is raised, and it's important to teach all widely accepted views of an issue within the field, but I don't see a reason to bring up religion in science class unless a kid asks about it. (And there is no other widely accepted scientific view on evolution.)

The difference, in my head, is that you need to address the issue in advance with a book like Huck Finn because there are differing viewpoints that are widely held within the community. And it is inherently difficult because of the language used and the time period it's in. I would encourage you to think particularly of any minority students in your class and how it's going to feel to them to be hearing the N-word repeatedly. Huck Finn has a lot of value, but I'm not so sure it's necessary to be required reading for kids, particularly when their own self image is going to be impacted by the book and probably not addressed well by the teacher.

As a teacher it is your job to decide what they're going to learn in class. You will always have to make decisions about what is appropriate and what is ideal and every subject has its own standards. No one's asking science teachers to tell kids not to read things at home but you know as well as anyone that class time is limited.

Damn them and their reasonableness ;)

Gusteau, I think you're onto something here.

I was raised in a very strict Catholic family. My father is such a strict Catholic that my mother has told me that she's surprised he didn't become a priest. I was baptized within a month of birth - I'm surprised they didn't just bring the priest and the font into the delivery room. Mass every Sunday (or Saturday vigil), confession every week once I was old enough, no meat on Friday even if it wasn't Lent, Catholic school from pre-K through 5th grade and then CCD until I was confirmed at the end of 8th grade. I was Catholic and that was that.

After having Catholicism rammed down my throat for my entire childhood, I rebelled big time. Long story short, Judaism resonated with me, so I converted.

The same thing happened with politics. I'm left-of-center but not exceedingly so. My parents are so far to the right they make Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin look like screaming liberals.

Sometimes the apple not only falls far from the tree, it falls so far away that it ends up in a different orchard.

It's funny because you and I have a similar faith upbringing on paper (add Catholic school to my resume, and subtract weekly confession - eek!) with very different results. I think the difference is that yours may have a had a repressive bend to it where my parents were never super strict, but then again I don't think they had to be with my sister and I. So I always saw Catholicism as a naturally occurring phenomenon in regard to how one lives. Like I said, this fascinates me!

This was more how I was raised as well. And it meant I've always looked positively on the religion itself. My reasons for leaving it have primarily been personal and/or disagreements with the hierarchy, not objection to the dogma or the cultural application of it.

I was sent to Catholic school through 5th grade inclusive. However, the public schools where I grew up are excellent, and my father reluctantly admitted that I would get a far better secular education there. (He himself attended Catholic schools up to and including college.) So I was enrolled in the public middle school and CCD starting in 6th grade. And weekly confession was expected (my father still goes every week) - even if I were not conscious of having sinned in the previous week, he instructed me to tell the priest that I had come for the grace of the sacrament.

My objections have been to both the hierarchy and the dogma.

~~~

I have two major problems with Catholicism. One is the inherent inequality of women and men. Women cannot be priests - if you want to devote your life to God, the highest position you can aspire to is a nun. Married women are expected to submit to their husbands (see Ephesians 5:22-24). The structure is set up so that women cannot be leaders. (Aside: This is why I am a Reform Jew and not an Orthodox Jew. Reform Judaism is egalitarian; Orthodox Judaism is definitely not. I belong to a congregation where both the rabbi and the president are women.)

The second is the prohibition against asking questions. The Catechism is full of questions, of course, but they all have neat pre-defined Vatican-approved answers. My parents always encouraged me to question the world around me and use the scientific method - except when it came to religion. I actually got kicked out of CCD for asking a question. When it came to religion, what the Vatican said, went. By contrast, Judaism has the Talmud, which is full of conflicting opinions.

I agree with you about the treatment of women and the equality of women in Reform Judaism is something I've always admired.

And I was not raised with a prohibition on asking questions. It's one of the things I liked so much about the Jesuits. I do believe that that aspect has a lot more about where you were raised and the priests/nuns/lay people involved in teaching.

I can't quite phrase what I mean about the objections I have very well. the beliefs, no problem per se, i always questioned but there's nothing I find "wrong." The attitude of the hierarchy towards abuse victims is a huge problem and the social teachings about sexuality, in particular among other things are also a big problem for me. The treatment of women was almost an afterthought, and "submission" was never much of a value in our diocese/schools/etc. I always objected to the idea that I couldn't be a priest but other than that I was not treated nor expected to act differently as a woman than a man.

Why did you end up choosing Judaism AEPhi alum? Just the egalitarianism? If so, what set it aside from the various denominations of Christianity?

And the parents.

I'm more than happy to share the story of how I got kicked out of CCD. I was in 7th grade. We were given an assignment - we were given a list of saints and told to choose one and write a paper on him/her. One of the "saints" on the list was Sarah. I asked the teacher, "Is Sarah a saint? I thought she was a matriarch." (I was right.) So the teacher chewed me out for questioning her. How dare I question an authority figure blah blah blah. She got the head of the CCD program into the classroom to berate me. Sister Peggy chewed me out in front of my classmates, formally ejected me from CCD, and then went on to berate my father on the phone (she called him "young man" and he had at least 5 years on her).

So the pastor had my father teach me from the catechism for the remainder of the academic year. And my parents and I investigated a nearby parish. We went to Mass there for a couple of months, including Easter. We were on the point of calling the parish office to enroll as parishioners when we learned that Sister Peggy was being transferred to our potential new parish as head of CCD. We went back to the old parish so fast we left skid marks.

The whole experience left such a bad taste in my mouth that I seriously doubted whether I should get confirmed. I went through with it largely because I knew I'd be in for a world of pain if I didn't. It was the beginning of the end of my being a Catholic.

And then my life led me to Judaism. And here I am.

Which is why when he was giving the sermon on the mount and people were like "Hey man we're hungry," he was like "It's cool, you've got me, you don't need food. Oh and let me finish my tuna sandwich before I finish speaking."

I did investigate Protestant Christianity as part of my search for a faith that felt right for me. I know that some Protestant sects, including Church of England, embrace egalitarianism and ordain women. My mother was raised Anglican and converted to Catholicism... and her parents did not speak to her from that day until the day I was born. :(

In Judaism, there is a belief that someone who converts was really Jewish all along - it just took him/her a while to figure it out. In my case it's true. Many of my childhood friends were Jewish; I gravitated to the Jewish sorority on campus; I fell in love with a Jewish man.

On the matter of egalitarianism - the rabbi I studied with told me that I should go to an Orthodox service to see what it was like. I refused, and I told him why. He agreed.

aephi alum, I remember you saying that your parents live on Long Island - did your father go to Chaminade by any chance? I went to Kellenberg.

Anyway, another interesting thing is that many Catholics who convert (that I know of at least) usually don't convert to a Protestant denomination. I think it has a lot to do with tradition and ceremony. I know that my Catholic mindset finds a lot more resonance with Judaism that it does with most Protestant denominations - although this might just be from growing up on Long Island and having a lot of Jewish friends and almost no Protestant friends.

Very interesting belief. Though from what little I know of Judaism it makes sense.
ETA: Actually something I was wondering. Does Judaism have a concept of a baptism like Christians do?
Interesting point. One of the things that attracted me to the Episcopal Church after years as a lost Christian was the fact that the liturgy was so close to what I knew growing up, but the doctrine was different enough for me to embrace. Granted both Episcopal churchs I have been a member of have been distinctively High Church, but judging by the BCP, even without all the pomp the liturgy is similar enough for me.

Lifted from LJ's Metaquotes.

Purely anecdotal, but there are more than a few former Catholics in our congregation -- including one of the ministers. In an odd sort of way, I've always thought of Reformed Christianity/Presbyterianism as the most "Jewish" of the strands of Christianity.

Yeah, I know so many people who have this mentality.

But I feel like if someone is hungry or has some other need, before you go talking to them about Jesus, you should meet that need.

I hope you get what I'm trying to say. :)

LOL - I just KNEW people were going to tell me about all the Catholic converts they know! I think a big reason I don't know any is because on Long Island Protestantism is definitely in the minority already. Everyone you know is Catholic, Jewish, or Eastern Orthodox - I could count the Protestant friends I had as a child on one hand. This obviously colors my experience with the issue.

@deepimpact and KSUviolet, call me crazy but I think Jesus would want me to give a hungry man a sandwich. I think good work like that shows people Jesus, and makes a bigger impact than talking their ear off ever could.

Not to mention that people usually don't CARE whether there's a God and what He's all about when their basic human needs aren't being met.

:)


I completely agree. I've said this before and was met with odd stares by some fellow church members. :rolleyes: Go figure.

*bump*

Bumping this for a question that frequently bothers me:

Prayer - the type where you pray FOR someone/something. Does it work? If so do people who have people to pray for them deserve better outcomes? If not then why do it?

I always got caught in a recursive "can't just pray for one person why not everyone in the whole world well what's the point then" thought process.

/overthinks things, I know

This was my facebook status a few days ago:

"God is always much better than the most loving person you can imagine, Jesus is saying. It is not that we pray and God answers. It is that our praying is already God answering within us and through us." — from Wondrous Encounters

So, in answer to your question DF - I don't think prayer triggers some "Jackpot!" with God. I think prayer opens us up to what God is already doing.

And I do think you can pray for everyone - I know my parish does, along with those we know. Heck, we even make a point of "praying for those who have no one to pray for them". Covering all the bases, I guess!

It also depends on the type of prayer - meditative, gratitude, intercession . . .

Yes I agree with what SWTX has to say. By praying for others, it is a very real way to express our love for them, even if not something that is always visible or always produces a tangible result.

I've never been comfortable with prayer that asks for something specific. My prayers tend to be for assistance in accepting God's will or simply putting a problem in His hands. For example, I was struggling with finding funds for my kids' Christmas presents and I was really stressing over it. One night, I thought to myself "I am just putting this in God's hands". The next day, we got a surprise bonus at work and my dad sent me my own Christmas gift, an A_mazon gift certificate. Between the two, I was able to get each of my kids the gift they really wanted. It's like my own personal worry jar. When I let go and stop worrying, things work out as they should. Would I have received those two things if I hadn't put it in God's hands? Yes. But I would have kept worrying until the next day.

Yeah I specified "asking" rather than intercession but that's really what I'm looking at here. But if intercessory prayer doesn't really have an effect then again, why bother? And if it does, how DO we conscience only praying for specific people at any given time?

If I see it as "I took some thought for you today" I see the point, but if the only benefit is the person appreciating the thought then why prayer? Isn't it just a self fulfilling prophecy then?

This part of prayer doesn't confuse me so much, although I see it more as self-talk ultimately at this moment. It's more the intercession, the 'please help _____' that I'm struggling with.

My own take - praying for others is as much for YOU as for the others. It is a way of directing your energy towards others, and focusing less on yourself. It's a way of opening up to what God's will is - of course the ultimate prayer is to be accepting of that. But from a Christian perspective, we are told specifically when 2 or 3 are gathered in His name - and I think the point is that we are to be a community. That community in and of itself is able to act - and thus prayers are fulfilled. The support of the community is a good - and it expresses itself through prayer.

*nod* I acknowledge that prayer can be beneficial to the pray-er, I just.. obviously not every community prayer is fulfilled, even if they do everything they can for themselves so it seems like why bother to make those community connections through prayer and not through some other format.

That's where the whole "God's will" thing comes in - and of course you don't stop at prayer. (Faith without works is, after all, dead.)
I think it may relate to intentionality - just voicing your concerns and asking for the strength to bear your burdens and the ability to overcome helps. In that way it's a sort of positive affirmation.
Too often prayer becomes a case of telling God how He should do things, instead of trying to discern His will.

This is what I was going for in my post. I didn't say it nearly as eloquently though.

And I do understand the 'point' of prayer in that sense, just not in the intercessionary sense, I think.

I wish I understood what these terms meant: Episcopalian , Evangelical, Methodist, Baptist, etc. (Time to break out the Wikipedia, I guess). Whenever I see the name of the church on the church signage, I don't really know what these words actually mean. I do, however, (feel that I) know what Catholic and Anglican mean.

PS In writing this "stream of consciousness", I came upon this helpful diagram (you will need to scroll down a ways...)
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_d...nity_are_there

LOL @ one of my all-time favorite topics:

http://blog.beliefnet.com/stuffchris...rsecution.html

Christians are persecuted? Yeah, right. At least not in the United States.