This post has to do with the belief of a church I have attended

[Digit]

Or at least one of the ordained Ministers. If it matters, this is a Church of Religious Science I have attended only the past 2 Sundays.

I guess I consider myself an activist of sorts, even if a disabled one since I don't get out and march these days. Maybe more of an email/petition activist! :-)

I had mentioned that I felt this administration was hurting people and she said that things tend to work out in the end. I was taken aback by this, thinking that if you just sit back and let things HAPPEN, then why bother voting or anything else.

I feel you just can't ignore what is going on and go to your happy place and pretend everything is right with the world. If people felt that way, why would they even donate to the homeless or get involved at all outside of their families?

I realize you can't exactly mix politics with religion...whoops, the RW already HAS!

Is it wrong to be bothered by that attitude?
Am I expecting too much?

BTW, I struggled with where to post this, but thought that the Spiritual aspect was close enough, and beside, you guys know me better!

[Punkingal]

1. Religious Science is the church I go to when in Las Vegas,,

(Not to be confused with Scientology, Tom Cruise's cult)

The philosophy of the Church of Religious Science is not to get politically involved. Our minister is gay, his significant other sits in the front row, and I happen to know at one point he was torn about getting involved publicly because of gay marriage issues, and he opted not to. Which is not to say he does nothing...he just doesn't do anything publicly, like march or join protests. He does, however, perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples (or anyone else who wants one.)

I don't think what she said necessarily means what you think, although it may. The church philosophy is that "things are the way they are supposed to be," but my church has a monthly Meditation for Peace service that is separate from regular services. The belief is using the power of the mind to change the universe for the good, rather than activism. They basically believe each individual is part of a whole, we are not separate from each other, and that includes George Bush, et al. That has been difficult for me, when I have a visceral dislike of him and his cabal, but when I take the time to remind myself of the church's teaching, I can actually pity them, because after all, look what they are doing to humanity, and thus themselves, if you accept this philosophy.

[Maat]

3. Since when?

I'm a Religious Scientist, and my pastor is a proud progressive, who calls attention to issues. Now, a church cannot endorse a campaign or a political candidate, or it will lose its 501-c-3 tax exempt status.

[Punkingal]

7. Well, that's what they told us in the new membership class....

So what can I tell you?

[Maat]

8. That's weird. I never heard of such a thing.

In fact, the Religious Science churches around here, including a huge one in San Diego, are very much a part of social activism.


Take a look at all that is going on in this church, for example:
http://www.agapelive.com/index.php?anchor=ministries .
(It's a really neat church, and I recommend it to my GLBT friends, for instance.)

'Course, we are out here in Southern California.

Where is this minister who stated that - in which state is she or he located?

[Punkingal]

10. The church is in Las Vegas...

But he was originally in LA. It really wasn't the minister who said it, it was one of the practitioners.

I have been to Agape. I love it...and Reverend Dr. Michael is just the best, isn't he?

[Maat]

12. Yep. Practitioners ...

Practitioners ... I could tell you stories ... Let's just say that a certain pastor I know and a certain practitioner I know (kind of an associate-minister/trained-prayer-partner for those unfamiliar with it) had to part ways. The practitioner in question made constant references to the 'Father' and traditional man/woman roles. That practitioner went to another church; she would be better off in a fundamentalist church. How she ended up in a Religious-Science/New-Thought church is beyond me.

I was going to visit one of the Vegas churches one time, too. It's probably still an interesting church.

[bliss_eternal]

18. In Science of Mind magazine--

there were several articles prior to the election that advocated involvement in political issues. It spoke of (and recommended) voting, volunteering, donating to issues we believe in, jury duty, etc., etc. The magazine has had articles on glbt rights, how to view abortion, etc. I read it whenever I can get one at the local bookstore.

After the election, I was so distraught--I called the science of mind prayer line. The person I spoke to shared that her candidate had not won, and she was sad too--but told me that the other guy really needed our prayers for many reasons. I liked that. ;)

Reading these posts has jogged my memory in regard to some practitioners though. Not all are created equal, unfortunately.

I had a friend that found out she was pregnant. At the time, she was taking medication for a health issue and didn't feel right about carrying full term. She loved metaphysical studies and was working with a practitioner at the time. She had shared this information w/her practitioner. This particular practitioner called her a murderer after her abortion. :eyes: :puke:

So, apparently as I stated in another post, some do compartmentalize their spiritual beliefs and differentiate those from their politics.

From what I've read in thier magazine, and what was shared with me on the prayer line I do believe science of mind is progressive and encourages activism and support of progressive issues. Possibly the church in the original post has chosen a more passive approach, hoping to bring in more people maybe? Not wanting to "turn anyone off" perhaps?

:hi:

[Maat]

20. I hear you, bliss_eternal.

It never ceases to amaze me how hardright conservatives, such as the practitioner that was against abortion, find their way into this progressively-minded church and stay there. But ... everyone sees what they want to see in it.

I think that we have to be VERY careful who we select for a prayer partner (practitioner).

[oxbow]

2. I prefer an attitude of nonattachment to one of non-involvment

"To practice non-clinging does not mean forsaking what you value; that would be indifference. Instead, it means practicing nonattachment to outcome. There is a subtle distinction between indifference and nonattachment, and it is crucial to understand this distinction if you are to have genuine happiness in your life. If you are indifferent, you have no value base; you literally don't care how life unfolds. This is cynicism disguised as "cool" or karmic apathy. Nonattachment means that you act from your values but are not fixated on the outcome. This perspective is taught in most spiritual traditions."

more at: http://www.lifebalance.org/articles/2000-07_08.shtml

[DemExpat]

4. Excellent point, oxbow

I need to remember this vital difference.

Thanks,

DemEx

[oxbow]

15. It's the only way I know to be happy

When you are not attached to specific outcomes, life becomes more of an adventure. You get to wonder what's next, instead of worrying about it. Mistakes become smaller things and you are freed to act from your deepest self/values.

[DemExpat]

5. Yes, a remark like that would put me off too....

if you are interested in staying there then perhaps you can have a talk with this Minister before proceeding further.

DemEx

[Digit]

6. I am invited to a pot luck tomorrow night.....

I am having a pelvic ultrasound in the afternoon and I am not sure how I will feel in the aftermath.

If my bladder is not having spasms from being stretched beyond capacity, I may attend.

It would be nice to meet some of the other members and I could possibly talk in private with the minister. I want to also let her know that I am planning on attending a UU service this coming Sunday. Afterall, I attended a UU church at my former residence in Arlington, Va, which I had already mentioned, and a church where I can feel comfortable is important to me.
The latest increase in gas prices has not helped, either, and her church is quite a distance from my home.

Oh, and you may find it amusing that the only dollar bills I had for the first collection plate were, um, "marked" bills. Since there were only 3 of us in attendance besides the two ministers, ya think they know where they came from? :eyes:

[Maat]

9. Well, I've been a Religious Scientist for over 3 years now.

So, if you can use my two cents' worth in any way, I'll be glad to give it to you.

I belong to both a Religious Science church and a Unitarian-Universalist church. I'm kind of a Unitarian-Universalist of the Religious Science variety.

I'm definitely the activist - just ask my hubby (I'm supposed to be studying my law stuff).

The UU church is not spiritual enough for me, and the Religious Science church is probably not activist enough for me (I live in a highly fundamentalist-dominated area, so my progressive pastor treads carefully, even in her role as an individual citizen). Ministers are always free to address ISSUES (whether or not one wants to call them social or political issues), from the pulpit, and mine does; however, mine is very careful to obey the law, and not electioneer (e.g. mentioning a campaign, party or candidate while in the pulpit).

[Digit]

11. They all can vary in flavor I suppose....

But for me, PERSONALLY, I want to hear social issues addressed within my congregation and prefer a more involved mentality.

What it will take is gathering some more information, and not judging too hastily.
If they truly are as unconcerned as she stated, it is not the congregation for me.
It may be for others, and that is their choice.

I am sure I will find the right fit eventually.

[Maat]

13. I'm sure you will, too.

Because many pastors in my area (no matter how progressive the church in question) fear saying so much in my VERY conservative area (I think that they do not want to offend semi-conservative members), well, read the PM I sent you.

[bliss_eternal]

19. I wish we were attending a church

like yours prior to the election. Knowing someone that was as peeved as us would have been nice. ;) We've experienced some "out there" Christian churches to say the least. lol.

Dh comes from a Catholic upbringing. My family was Christian and Catholic so I attended both churches. We married in Catholic church.

Both of us had issues with the churches of our families of origin. We found a local non-denominational church and went there. When one of the pastors took it upon himself to work into the service what a "great guy" he believes shrub is, we knew it was a matter of time for us and that church. lol.

The last straw was the week the very same pastor not only worked shrub into his service, but went on to talk about gays just needing the "right counseling" to be "normal." I'm still surprised dh didn't get up and walk out right then. LOL! Dh has had a good friend for many years this is gay. Neither of us believes in people trying to brainwash anyone to believe they are something other than who they are...it's just sick to think that, imo. We never went back there.

We left a few years before the election. I can only imagine the crap that pastor tried closer to the election. :puke: So glad we left there.

We have a couple of science of mind churches near us, but they're in rather conservative areas. Well at least one is. I haven't been into church really, so just didn't seek them out...

[Maat]

14. I sent my pastor a link to this thread and received a wondeful reply.

**Quote**
I think what the person in question meant was that, in RS, we do not put our energies on the world of effect, but rather on cause. In other words, we do not try to fix the problem at the level of the problem, but rather on the thought/belief/consciousness that caused the problem.

I am sure the minister or practitioner (who ever it was) meant that right action was taking place, regardless of the appearance. And isn't it true. For all the ignorant (and I do mean ignorant) stuff of George Bush, it's coming back at him, isn't it? The right wing is looking pretty darn stupid right now, 'eh?

When we believe in Cause and Effect, we can trust that "it all works out in the end," because we are trusting the Law.

.... (I deleted some personal stuff.)

But mostly, I see my job as teaching others how to be true to themselves, use their thoughts consciously and on purpose, and go out and change the world.

**Endquote**

[hvn_nbr_2]

16. That was a very good reply

I would like to add a few comments, based on my own experience in Religious Science.

There is a fine line between compassion and self-reliance, which Religious Science walks delicately and which is easy to slip toward one side or the other. The idea that our thoughts determine our reality is a difficult one and one that can appear to newcomers to be either a get-rich-quick-scheme or a blame-the-victim crassness. In fact, I have been to Religious Science churches where I thought that even the minister treated it much too much as a get-rich-quick-scheme. I have seen some people of conservative bent use the idea as a cudgel to blame the victim. But in fact, whenever anyone casts judgment on someone else based on their circumstances, they are completely missing the ideal of Religious Science.

I attended a Church of Religious Science for about 8 years at one time. I never noticed a political slant in any of the messages, although it would be possible to put one on things if you're so inclined, as I already mentioned that a few people did. This was during a time when I was not politically active or involved.

Anyway, one day during the sermon, the minister mentioned that a church member had come to her, irate about a perceived siding with one party or the other in some comment the minister had made. The member was irate not because of a perceived political point of view existing, but because the perceived point of view was opposite of the member's.

The minister said that she never took a political stand for one party or the other as a minister, and that in fact her party was the *same* as the offended member's party, so it was kind of ironic. She never told us which party she belonged to, never told us what the supposedly offensive comment was or was about or how the member interpreted it, and I never could determine for myself which party she was, even though after that I paid close attention and tried.

The church that I attended never did any kind of social activism. It didn't do much "typical" "charitable" work, but it did do things like holiday gift drives for families that most people would call "needy." But it did those things with a very different attitude than such things usually happen, and I think the attitude toward the gift drives and the recipients sheds some useful light on the philosophy, so I'll describe it a little:

We gave to those who had less not because we had more than they or because we had more than we needed or especially not out of any kind of sense of obligation. Rather, we gave as an expression or affirmation of our connection with Spirit, the source of all our good and of all good. In fact, it was not even we who gave; rather, we merely acted as a conduit through which Spirit gave.

Although the people we gave to were ones that you would typically call needy, we avoided thinking of them in those terms. Rather, we thought of them as magnificent beings of Spirit, just like us; they were in some way currently not connected clearly with the source of all good, but how or why that was so wasn't anything we ever thought about. If we had thought about it, it would have just seemed to be none of our business, and also it would be clear that we too were disconnected from our source in our own various ways, but just not so much so materially.

Finally, when church members did the delivering of gifts to the recipients, it was never with the attitude of giving to the needy or the haves giving to the have-nots or of making a nice Christmas for those "less fortunate." Rather, it was a celebration of the spiritual magnificence of all, givers and receivers, and of the divine flow of goodness from Spirit to wherever it is needed at the time. Based on the thank-you letters that we received from people, they appreciated the things they got but they mostly noticed the attitude of holding them in high esteem and recognizing their spiritual magnificence.

Finally, there is also a point of view that if I don't believe that my thoughts can determine (or at least influence) my reality, then I make myself into a victim of circumstances and I make myself helpless in face of reality. Perhaps if "thoughts determine reality" seems too harsh or seems judgmental, you could (I do this myself) substitute "influence" for "determine" to move a bit away from helpless victimhood.

[Maat]

17. Nice post! Well-said!

Yes, I believe it is my responsibility to work with the "God-System" so-to-speak (engaging in meditation and affirmation - or affirmative prayer - when I need to, along with making things happen in the physical realm).

[cassiepriam]

21. Seems like people go off on tangents, or to extremes.

Yes theoretically, it will all work out in the end. Even if Bush nukes the planet, humans will eventually re-populate the earth and continue with their evolution. It may take hundreds of thousands of years for all of us to totally evolve but it is supposed to happen. And yes we have to accept that we cannot always control things, they happen for a reason perhaps.

But to use this as an excuse for people to bury their heads in the sand, doesn't seem right to me. We have to have a conscience. We have to pay attention to what is happening to ourselves and each other. And we have responsibility for what the government is doing in our name; they are our representatives.

We are all interconnected, what Bush is doing in Iraq will come back to us in some way. So we should be paying attention to it.

[Maat]

22. I don't think anyone is arguing that we shouldn't pay attention to it.

See my pastor's reply above. I believe the point is that we need to focus on what we can do, take responsibility, and do it (as opposed to dwelling upon what we can't change). We need to take on the responsibility of creating a peace consciousness now.

[cassiepriam]

23. I agree 100% with what you are saying.

But first people have to face reality and admit that there is a problem.
That is half the battle. The second part you have summarized very well.

[Maat]

24. Well, you're right about that. (n/t)