"I'm not religious, I'm a Christian"

[DrWahoo]

Julie aka Color_Me_Sulky
Hit the nail on the head. A lot of defintions of religion, include the word ritual and laws. For me Christianity is about relationship and the motives of your heart, not about rules or laws. For example Christ talks about kosher law and says that it is not what goes into to a person's mouth that defiles him, but what comes out of his mouth. And of course just because you are not in the physical act of committing adultery, if your heart is lusting after someone you are still committing adultery. One of the best passages that goes against "religious" or ritualistic practices is 1 Corthinians 13. Giving to the poor and self-immolation means nothing if do not have true love in your heart. Alot of religions want to save you or do good deeds to secure their place in heaven, not so with Christianity. It is clear that more than anything God wants a relationship with us that is why He created us (Genesis 1,2) and Christ said that the most important commandment is 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'

I can understand wanting to creat you own relationship with your own God, but I'm sorry, that still falls under the category of religion.

The one expression I heard that for some reason made more sense to me, was: "I wouldn't say I was religious, I would call myself more of a spiritual person." That seems to take the emphasis off religious rituals and laws and allows for more wiggle room, but then again that might be too loosey-goosey 'new age' for most Christians. What do you think?

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: "I'm not religious, I'm a Christian"

For example, they find the use of the rosary to be an affront and they do not like liturgical services (to them, that is about the rote, unthinking practice of "religion," not Christian freedom).

If I'm reading that correctly, I find it fascinating in light of the discussion in another thread that was started by the 11-year-old article talking about how the "stricter" religions are gaining members when the more "liberal" ones are losing them... but I'm having trouble coming up with how it really would fit in, since my experience with liturgy is pretty minimal. Do they go to church? Does it have traditions?

They do go to church...religiously!...that is, every Sunday, without fail (well, she does; he goes when he's not on-call at the hospital). It is a very big part of their lives. Their church, however, is not a liturgical-style church. It is a congregational-style. They have a preacher and a general "format" (opening prayer, songs, message, songs, "altar call," doughnuts). However, there is no formal entrance, no candles, no incense, and the prayer is more of a "free-form" prayer lead by the pastor (as versus the Our Father or something like that). And there is definitely no Catholic/Anglican aerobics (kneeling, standing, sitting, etc.).

However, they are definitely NOT big into tradition. Aside from an annual potluck supper, I can't think of any tradition they have, either on their calendars or in their dogma. They are 100% Bible-based--"If it's not in Scripture, it's not reliable." Accordingly, they do not affirm long-held traditions of the apostolic Christian churches, such as the perpetual virginity of Mary or the immaculate conception of Mary.

They are kind of "anti-Mary," actually. She is never, ever mentioned. I think they are afraid that they might become slightly Catholic if they even talk about her. It's very odd to me. I walked down the aisle at my wedding to "Ave Maria" and my in-laws still had not forgiven me for that. I don't think I even realized at the time how deeply it distressed them.

[GrayMatterWife]

I can understand wanting to creat you own relationship with your own God, but I'm sorry, that still falls under the category of religion.

The one expression I heard that for some reason made more sense to me, was: "I wouldn't say I was religious, I would call myself more of a spiritual person." That seems to take the emphasis off religious rituals and laws and allows for more wiggle room, but then again that might be too loosey-goosey 'new age' for most Christians. What do you think?

I agree with you on the "but it's still a religion" point. I personally have no problem saying, "Christianity is my religion." I strive to be a religious, prayerful person. As for the whole "I'm not religious but I am spiritual" thing, I think that's a different than "I'm not religious; I'm a Christian." I think the former refers more to the idea that "I don't really affiliate with a particular religion, but I like the idea that there's something bigger than me out there, and I do what I can to experience that Greater Thing...but I don't thing 'traditional religion' is the way to do it." That's not Christianity, so I'd think that most Christians would not describe themselves that way...

Abigail,

You might find Alan Schreck's book "Catholic and Christian: An Explanation of Commonly Misunderstood Catholic Beliefs" very interesting. Its appropos in relationship to this thread. P.S. You could give it to your IL's as a Christmas gift. Seriously though, I think you'd find it engaging and well-written. And it's cheap on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Chris...5902447&sr=1-1

[GrayMatterWife]

Abigail,

You might find Alan Schreck's book "Catholic and Christian: An Explanation of Commonly Misunderstood Catholic Beliefs" very interesting. Its appropos in relationship to this thread. P.S. You could give it to your IL's as a Christmas gift. Seriously though, I think you'd find it engaging and well-written. And it's cheap on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Chris...5902447&sr=1-1

This is a GREAT book! I own it already. I own a couple others that are similar in theme. In terms of ever really getting my ILs to engage in a conversation on this: it's pretty hopeless. They are good people, but very, very set in their ways. After 14 years of knowing them, I've completely given up in this respect. I just try to be the best Christian I can be and let the rest roll of my back...

Abigail,

I've owned it for a while and was just flipping through it the other day. I was only joking about the ILs. Yet I think the book is written in such a way that persons who really are interested and open wouldn't find it offensive. I think it would create a lot of cognitive dissonance - perhaps too much - for others who have been set in their ways to read it. No one can claim he doesn't know his Scripture that's for sure.