Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Spirituality & Polyamory

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-15-2013, 04:03 PM
Garriguette's Avatar
Garriguette Garriguette is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: California
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
I didn't ask why Althaus-Reid was Christian/Catholic. I asked why you were.



But, your mother is a "minister," which means she isn't Catholic. Why would Catholic theology about "liberation" (from.... something, but not from the Catholic Church) or "indecency" have any affect on her making sense of polyamory?

Personally, I would just question why anyone puts their faith in a 2000+ year old book to such a large extent. I saw through it when I was 12. Only my brainwashed fear of actual eternal hellfire kept me going to church, and praying for my soul, on and off til I was 16, then I was done.

Of course, Kevin, putting one's faith in the ridiculous Book of Mormon (gold plates in a top hat, my ass), written much more recently, is even more silly.
I find happiness and meaning in gathering together to talk about spirituality and ethics, in singing together, in sharing joys and concerns with each other, and in reading and talking about texts, biblical or not. And when I experimented with not going to church in college, I missed it. There aren't a lot of secular institutions that offer that kind of fellowship yet.

I may be making a mistake in responding, because I think what I'm hearing is not that you're asking me why I believe as I do but instead telling me I should believe something else. Part of the reason I've been happily dating an atheist for nine years is that we don't do that to each other. The reason I posted about this book is that I know there are other people on pdc who are interested in reconciling their faith with their live and/or the lives of the people they love, or this subforum wouldn't exist. If that shoe doesn't fit you, that's fine. I am not asking you to put it on.

Also, as the mono partner of someone who is poly curious-- something I do not anticipate will change-- I have no concern that the congregation I worship with will see me as doing anything wrong. (I am out as bi among them.) I do have concerns that some members of the congregation I worship with-- like my choir buddy who discovered in adulthood that her father had another family he never told her about-- would see my position as worrisome or as a cause for pity, because they would have trouble grasping that someone could be happy in it.

I think there's some value in being able to say, "I'm okay; you don't need to worry" in language that other people will understand. And for some people in my life, that language is going to be theological.

As for why my mother in particular would find a Catholic's perspective valuable, despite not being Catholic: My dad's theologically systematic, but my mom's theologically pragmatic and a bit of a magpie. She's not Lutheran, but she loves Dietrich Bonhoeffer's writing because she knows what's at stake when he writes about ethical quandaries. She's not Episcopalian, but she agrees with John Shelby Spong that it's perverse to use the bible as a weapon. She's not Catholic, but she finds Matthew Fox's suggestion that maybe it's time to rethink the doctrine of original sin pretty persuasive.
__________________
Mid 30s, mono.
Partnered with Xicot (poly-curious) since 2004.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-15-2013, 07:21 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,013
Default

Re (from Magdlyn):
Quote:
"Of course, Kevin, putting one's faith in the ridiculous Book of Mormon (gold plates in a top hat, my ass), written much more recently, is even more silly. "
Indeed it is. The Book of Mormon (as has the Pearl of Great Price) has been shown to be obviously in error (sometimes even offensive) on many levels. And the Mormon church bids its members to put their faith in that 2000+ year old book called the Bible as well. But the friends/family I spoke of really don't put their faith in either. They realize the Scriptures are Earthly books written by Earthly mortals (yay confidence men even), without the divine inspiration necessary to make said books literally -- even figuratively -- correct. It is in fact this insistence that the books are literally (and figuratively) correct that is one of the things my said friends/family hope to help reform in the church. Their hope is that someday people will sort of cherry pick from the Scriptures and turn only to those occasional verses that are well-spoken and useful in life.

All of this of course is strictly their quest. I respect it but I wouldn't engage in it personally. It's enough for me to know that most churchmemebers will probably realize their errors in some future generation, and that my efforts to speed that process along wouldn't hasten things much or at all, certainly not enough to make up for the psychological damage, church-wrought exploitation, and damage to my reputation. I don't want to be known as a church supporter, even as a reformer. So, I'm content to watch other people's efforts from my seat in the sidelines.

Re (from Garriguette):
Quote:
"I find happiness and meaning in gathering together to talk about spirituality and ethics, in singing together, in sharing joys and concerns with each other, and in reading and talking about texts, biblical or not. And when I experimented with not going to church in college, I missed it. There aren't a lot of secular institutions that offer that kind of fellowship yet."
... and:
Quote:
"I think there's some value in being able to say, 'I'm okay; you don't need to worry' in language that other people will understand. And for some people in my life, that language is going to be theological."
I think my friends/family feel likewise. They're actually largely atheist/humanist. But, they've family of their own who'd be badly hurt if they quit the church, which they're willing to help stave off. I guess they're more compliant/diplomatic than myself.

Re: the book that is the topic of this thread ... sounds like a good book to me.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"

Last edited by kdt26417; 12-16-2013 at 03:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-16-2013, 01:55 AM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,629
Default

Sorry to go off topic a bit, Garriguette, but your answers were helpful. I find the idea of church reform interesting, as Christian writers, as well as Jewish prophets and rabbis, started doing it while the religion was still in its earliest days. Ie: Deuteronomy rewriting and reinterpreting other older "Old Testament" books, even before the canon was official. And of course, things just got crazier after the time Christ was considered physically dead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garriguette View Post
I find happiness and meaning in gathering together to talk about spirituality and ethics, in singing together, in sharing joys and concerns with each other, and in reading and talking about texts, biblical or not. And when I experimented with not going to church in college, I missed it. There aren't a lot of secular institutions that offer that kind of fellowship yet.
Well, if Christianity is so outmoded and now being hardly involved with actual Belief, why not go to a UU Church? Why hang in there with Christianity when it's got such a record of hatred and wars?

Quote:
I may be making a mistake in responding, because I think what I'm hearing is not that you're asking me why I believe as I do but instead telling me I should believe something else.
No. I don't want anyone to believe anything. Unless it really speaks to your heart or intellect. If it's just habit, I find it a bit... hypocritical? "I'm Christian but that just means I like hanging out with my Church friends," is what I am hearing.

Quote:
Part of the reason I've been happily dating an atheist for nine years is that we don't do that to each other. The reason I posted about this book is that I know there are other people on pdc who are interested in reconciling their faith with their live and/or the lives of the people they love, or this subforum wouldn't exist. If that shoe doesn't fit you, that's fine. I am not asking you to put it on...


I think there's some value in being able to say, "I'm okay; you don't need to worry" in language that other people will understand. And for some people in my life, that language is going to be theological.

As for why my mother in particular would find a Catholic's perspective valuable, despite not being Catholic: My dad's theologically systematic, but my mom's theologically pragmatic and a bit of a magpie. She's not Lutheran, but she loves Dietrich Bonhoeffer's writing because she knows what's at stake when he writes about ethical quandaries. She's not Episcopalian, but she agrees with John Shelby Spong that it's perverse to use the bible as a weapon. She's not Catholic, but she finds Matthew Fox's suggestion that maybe it's time to rethink the doctrine of original sin pretty persuasive.
OK, that makes sense. Not really that one NEEDS to explain ones polyamory in specifically Christian theology friendly ways to any religious loved one we might have, but since you like to toss around theology anyway, despite not being a believer, per se, you do it for fun.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:55 AM.