• Home
• About

Subscribe

Ten Signs That You Might be a Fundamentalist

Presently, fundamentalism is a hot topic. Many folks have been astonished at the level of evil perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists, the most notable example being the events of 9/11. Those events are indelibly etched on the American psyche. Recently, news stories of the fall of Ted Haggard, a prominent evangelical, have attracted attention. After years of railing against homosexuality and assorted other sins, Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, was “caught” committing the very “sins” he so railed against. More recently, Americans have been shocked at revelations of events happening at the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints compound in Texas.

All of these groups and individuals involved would likely be viewed as fundamentalist. Is there some common denominator they all share? I have recently noted that some fundamentalists, who once proudly claimed the title, are presently reticent to make use of the label. Some American Christian fundamentalists have been opting for the title “Bible-believing,” although their belief system hasn’t changed. Once again the question is raised, is there any common denominator(s) among the variety of fundamentalists?

Two come to mind. First, there is the idea of absolute certitude. This is certitude that is unequivocal. On the points of doctrine on which fundamentalists groups claim certitude, they are highly unlikely to think they may be in possible error or that these points should ever be examined. The second characteristic is the importance of the fundamentalist culture from which their fundamentalism emerges. This culture supports adherents and discourages asking questions or incubating doubt. These two characteristics they have in common.

From these two commonalities, some signs that one might be a fundamentalist come to mind. I thought it might be instructive to construct a list of “Ten Signs that You Might be a Fundamentalist.” Bearing my all too apparent fallibility in mind, here is an attempt at such a list (note that I speak here of Christian fundamentalism, although the signs apply, with a little tweaking, to all varieties):

1. You tend to see the world in terms of dualities. Everything is black and white with little in the way of shades of gray. If someone is not right about the essence of your faith, he is wrong. Period!

2. Going along with that idea, the other’s “wrongness” doesn’t only extend to matters of faith. You begin to think that the other person is at her core a “wrong person.” She is flawed in some way.

3. This leads to the notion that there is a basic “them and us.” There exists two basic groups of people, the subgroup with which you identify and the rest of the world.

4. The “rest of the world” is under the control of the Dominion of Darkness. The world is not only different and wrong in what it believes; it is basically evil. You are part of the righteous ones. Those unlike you are most certainly not.

5. The basic character of “the world” is everywhere. It is in the public schools. It is in the libraries. It is on the television (Well, there might be something to that one!). It is in the government. It takes in the folks on your street.

6. Your task is to get out of the world. Find alternative books, music, schools, friends, associates, etc.

7. If you can’t escape it completely (Who can?), it is your task to launch a mission to make the world match the fundamentalist subculture. You must work to make the schools more Christian, for example. You must work to make government godlier. It is your task to change society in the direction of your religious beliefs.

8. Generally, you associate with conservative causes. You may not agree with the policies of all conservative politicians, but there are always issues that take on major importance. In the US, these usually amount to abortion and gay marriage/rights. The view is myopic and only the “hot button” issues matter.

9. You will usually “follow the leader.” There are several well-known fundamentalist Christian leaders in the US. The fundamentalist faithful take their cue from them. They set the agenda. It is difficult for you to do much other than walk in lock step to the beat of their drummer.

10. Finally, if anyone should ask, these are not your ideas. You must follow them because they mark out God’s agenda. To be a fundamentalist is simply another term for being a follower of God. Those in churches that disagree with the basic tenets of fundamentalism are lost. They don’t know God. In short, they aren’t really Christians at all.

Do all ten of the characteristics apply to all fundamentalists? In reality, folks are probably fundamentalist by degrees. However, the two elements of certitude and a supporting, indoctrinating subculture are universal characteristics. I want to end with an assignment. Go back over the list and write the inverse of each point. What would such person or society acting on reverse characteristics look like?

James C. Alexander, Ph.D. is an education professor at a church related college and a bi-vocational minister who publishes regularly in the areas of education and religion. His latest book is Stories of a Recovering Fundamentalism: Understanding and Responding to Christian Absolutism. His blog site is located at Repentant Fundie.

Church Chairs a Long Due Makeover

A few centuries ago, in the 1600’s you may not have been likely to find chairs in all churches. If you did find seating, chances are good it would not have been in good shape because money was not readily available and churches often had their congregation stand rather than sit. Today, however, church chairs are a necessity. Very few people are likely to attend a church that doesn’t give them somewhere to sit!

Frequently in the 1600s and 1700s, and even the 1800s, those churches that did have church chairs or pews for the congregation chose to rent that seating out, so in order to have a place to sit on Sunday, you paid for your family to have a pew or chairs reserved for them. Unlike today, that means that your family could be the last ones in the door, but you would still have a place to sit while others who arrived before you may have had to stand. Obviously, if your family was financially well-off, you were more likely to have pew space, and less-wealthy families who could not afford it would have to stand.

Later, near the end of the 1800s, churches began to rethink their church chairs and seating arrangements. It became more important to offer pews or chairs to the congregation, and it was becoming more important to allow everyone a place to sit regardless of their ability to pay for the privilege. Typically back then, and still today, church chairs and other church furniture is expected to match; that is, they should be made out of the same kind of wood. Today, that is not as difficult to accomplish as it was a few hundred years ago. Back then, building church chairs was time consuming and required the skill of many workers. It was also more difficult to get “matching trees” to have matching furniture. Usually, a church would buy all the same type of lumber all at the same time to ensure that the wood would all be the same. So, once that was done, the church had wood but no stacking church chairs, regular church chairs, or pews. All they had was raw wood.

Once the lumber arrived, it was time to get the wood in the best possible shape for furniture making. It had to be put somewhere out of the elements and the best place was a place that could be heated so some of the natural wetness in the wood could evaporate and the woodworkers could work with wood that had been dried a little. Then, the wood had to be cut to the right size and any natural blemishes had to be removed. Then, the woodworkers could begin their skilled carving of the church chairs or pews.

They would carve out the individual pieces of the church furniture first; for example, they would make the legs and arms, then the seat, then the back. Once those were carved, all the pieces could be put together to form complete church chairs. They could be held in place with special types of glue and/or jigs. It was important that the church furniture be finely crafted so that it would last a long time and also remain intact with its beautiful and pretty looks. So, you can see what a time-consuming and difficult task it used to be to make church furniture! To keep those church chairs looking their best, they needed to be waxed and/or oiled on a regular basis, as well, so upkeep was important also.

Today, most church furniture is manufactured by machine in factories, so it is less time-consuming and takes a smaller percentage of the church budget than it did a few hundred years ago. Some fine wooden church furniture is still oiled, but for the most part modern church chairs and pews have a lacquer coating or some other kind of wood finish that simply allows the furniture to be dusted to look its best.

As evidence of the difficulty in getting a lot of church chairs or pews in a church, you can look to St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. The Basilica itself is huge, but the seating is very limited. That probably has to do with the complicated and time-consuming method of church chair building that was necessary several centuries ago.

Nowadays, it is not nearly so difficult to furnish a church. Church furniture is mass produced, and even if it is not, shipping of lumber and improvements in furniture making equipment have made the task of providing church furnishing so much easier. In fact, if you ever find yourself with the task of furnishing a church, you can probably get everything you need from the Internet. What could be simpler than that?

Seomul Evans is a seo copywriter for a leading Church Chairs manufacturer specializing in affordable Church Chairs.

Church Pews a Historical Perspective

Picture this scenario. It is about 8:00 am on a Sunday morning and you have stumbled out of bed knowing that it is your responsibility to wake up your other family members, feed them breakfast, and get them dressed in their “Sunday best.” Even though you are tired an might just like to pull the covers over your head, you live up to your family’s expectations and prepare them and yourself for the Sunday services at your local church. You cook bacon and eggs, find some stockings that don’t have a run, get out your pumps and flowered dress, and the do all those same things for your daughter. You find your son’s tie that he can’t find for himself, and tie your husband’s tie straight because he can’t do that either. You are not even out the door yet, and already you are tired and your feet hurt. You pile everyone into the car and are careful to bring Cheerios for your toddler to snack on and a coloring book for the older kids so they won’t misbehave during the sermon. You can’t wait to get in there and slide into your favorite pew. What would happen if you got there only to discover that your church was no longer having the congregation members sit? You discover to your shock that the church chairs and pews have been removed and you are expected to stand for the entire service. Chances are, you would be distraught, and thankfully that is not likely to happen.

Anyone who has ever walked into a modern church knows that there are either going to be church chairs or church pews to sit on. Not having any kind of seating would be unheard of in our society today. Several centuries ago, however, most churchgoers were expected to stand rather than sit, so churches did not have pews. Most churches were built around a dome or central area where priests or preachers would preach, while the congregation stood around. It worked well for standing parishioners, but around the seventeenth century, the congregation began to be expected to participate more, and the need for seating increased. Still, however, there was not much seating, and the pews or church chairs that did exist were typically reserved for the wealthier people who could afford to pay the church rent money to hold their pew open for them until they arrived. In the 1700s it was common for pews to have a family’s name on them and everyone knew that those pews were reserved for that family. Even if a family did not arrive for worship, the pew was still theirs and remained empty while others stood.

Then, around the mid-1800s, church seating began to evolve further. It became uncommon to pay for a reserved spot on a church pew, and church pews were filled much as they are today, on a first-come/first-serve basis. Still, though, it was uncommon to find adequate pew space in churches.

As pews began to become more mainstream, there were different areas of pews for different people. Generally, the more affluent people sat closer to the altar or pulpit, while the poorer people sat farther away. There would also be special seating for black people, children, and sometimes widows. They may or may not have been labeled with the proper designation, such as Negro Pews or Widow Pews. When slavery was still the custom in the United States, slave owners could pay for pew space in order to have their servants close to them to tend to their needs, or sometimes there would be a separate galley for slaves.

Most pew reform in the United States began around the 1930s. Black people and white people, at least in the northern states, sat next to each other if they so desired. There was no special seating for widows or other special groups of people. Children began to sit with their families, for the most part. Also, pulpits changed during this time. Pulpits began to be more important, and pews were arranged so that everyone could see the preacher behind the pulpit and the altar.

Over the course of time, some churches have come up with various ways of setting up the pews or church chairs. At one time, it was even common for members of the church to face each other. In the Catholic tradition, before the Vatican II Council changed many elements of the Catholic Mass, the priest did not face the parishioners and had their church chairs facing the same direction as the parishioner’s pews faced—most likely toward the altar and/or crucifix.

Today, the world is different and all cultures and colors, both the sexes, the young and old alike, and the wealthy and less affluent are seen as equals in most churches, and the seating arrangements have accommodated that belief. Anyone can sit anywhere they want, and only on the most crowded of days will there not be enough pew space to give everyone a place to sit.

Seomul Evans is a seo copywriter for a leading Church Chairs manufacturer specializing in affordable Church Chairs.

How to Choose the Best Furniture For Your Church

Church furnishing can create the atmosphere you desire the most in your particular house of worship. Carefully choosing what will work best for you and your congregation can make your church comfortable and homey, fancy and ornate, or any combination of the two. You can go with classic, simple styling or look for an old-fashioned motif, or design your church to look contemporary or bold. Whatever church furnishings you want to choose for your particular church, you have a few options available to you on how to buy altars, pews, communion tables, kneeler’s, pulpits, and whatever else your church might need.

The first option is to look for used church furniture. Sometimes, churches will close down, and if they do, they typically want to sell their church furnishings. Obviously, buying your church’s furniture from another church that has already paid the retail price can save you and your parishioners money. Sometimes, though, there may not be any church closings scheduled in your area, so that option would not be available to you. If not, there is no need to fear.

Just like when you want to buy anything else, you can always go online to search for your church furniture. You can find both used and new church furnishings online. Simply type used church furniture in the search line to get to online sites that have used furniture to sell. Thousands of hits will likely pop up for you. If you don’t like the idea of using used furniture, you can always type new church furniture into the search line and get a multitude of online stores pop up right in front of your eyes.

All churches need somewhere for the congregation to sit, and you can choose individual seating or group seating in the form of pews. Individual chairs can be wooden, which is probably the most popular, but there are other options available as well. The chairs can come with cushioned seat bottoms or just wood. You can choose to have arm rests on all of your chairs or just on the chairs near the aisle or no arm rests at all. The options are multitudinous. The same is true if you prefer pew seating. Some pews are all wood, and some have red or green or tan cushioning for comfort. You can choose plain pews or look for some that have intricate details.

Altars, too come in a variety of styles, sizes, and prices. Some churches like a simple altar, while others prefer fancy altars. If your church uses any special items like incense burners or oils, you may want to look for an altar that has special compartments built in to house these types of items. You may want your altar to match your pews, or you may decide that your altar should stand out and be made of a different material than your pews. For example, you may choose wooden seating and a marble altar.

Most churches need a pulpit of some sort as well, and those can be as plain and simple or as intricate and ornate as your church prefers. You can find pulpits made of light or dark wood, covered with angels and doves, or made of metal and Plexiglas. Whatever would best suit your church’s budget and preferences can be found online.

If you are not furnishing a brand new church, but rather are updating your preexisting church, you can sometimes trade in your old church furniture, much like you trade in your old car when you buy a new one. In that case, you could get more for your dollar, and you might choose to keep some of the old furniture and replace only certain church furnishings. If you choose to purchase used church furniture, you could also choose to refurbish or upgrade what you buy and add your own unique touch to what you buy for a small cost. That is an option that you might prefer so your church feels like yours rather than someone else’s.

No matter what size your church is, it needs to be furnished, and like almost anything else, you can likely get everything you need via online stores. Just sit down at your desk, in the comfort of your house or office, and search for what you need. Browse until you find just exactly what suits your church’s personality and funding. The sooner you begin what can seem like a daunting task, the sooner you will have a place for your congregation to sit and a place from which to deliver your sermons or homilies.

Seomul Evans is a seo copywriter for a leading Church Furniture manufacturer specializing in affordable Church Furniture.

Are All Fundamentalists Extremists?

In this article, we wish to explore the nature of two words, fundamentalism, and extremism. What connotation do we arrive at when we hear these words? Are they essentially the same? In other words, are we to construe fundamentalism as a variety of extremism? Does the equation work the other way as well? What we are about here is a definition of terms.

One could give considerable space, either directly or indirectly, to defining the term “fundamentalism.” After a careful examination, some conclusions may be reached. There are two major characteristics of fundamentalism. The most apparent facet of this ubiquitous term is certainty. Fundamentalists are very certain people. Further, it is certainty that cannot be entreated. Fundamentalists know that they know that they know. Case closed. The popular bumper sticker gets at the heart of this: “God said it! I believe it! That settles it!” Evidence is largely irrelevant. In the sense used here, one might view certainty as an attitude.

The second dimension of fundamentalism to consider is the subculture. The subculture supports the fundamentalist, befriends him or her, and supplies the certainties into which the absolutist is inducted. We see this in Christianity when we consider alternative music, a closed society into which only the initiated are invited (unless others are visiting and viewed as potential initiates), and a Christian jargon, including the rhetoric of the right. Even when the adherents are separated from the subculture, the sacred memory of the teachings of the subculture help the adherent maintain membership in the society of the certain.

These components are true of all types of fundamentalism. They are true of all types of religious fundamentalism as well as political fundamentalism (often the two blend). As Alistair McGrath points out, one might even speak of an atheist fundamentalism such as represented in Dawkins’s, The God Delusion. Even in this case, careful investigation indicates these two features are present.

What then is extremism? The dictionary feature available on my handy little MacBook which I am using defines an extremist this way: “a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, esp. one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.” That’s a mouthful! There are certainly some terms we must “unpack” if we are to make use of this definition. First, we must define what “extreme views” are made up of.

Of course, that is a question that is heavily dependent on culture, at least on one hand. Many Europeans view the United States as very (overly) religious. In reality, the US is a church-going nation. Is that extreme? Not really. In the context of the definition, extremism must drive someone to extreme actions. When we speak of “extreme sports,” we know that we are all referring to sports that usually involve some danger. I propose we take the notion of extreme views as views that might be dangerous to individuals, society, or the progenitor of the views. Therefore, we will define extreme views as dangerous views.

The next term we need to get at is “fanatical.” I propose that a fanatic is someone who is so consumed with something that they cannot divorce their thinking from the object of their fanaticism. They must always talk about it, practice it, and promote it.

How do fundamentalists hold up when it comes to rejecting the label of extremism? Certainly, at least in the Abrahamic Faiths, there is a missionary imperative. That is why fundamentalists cannot take no for an answer. In the case of Christian fundamentalism, adherents will spend considerable time evangelizing, even if the objects of their evangelism are not interested in what they have to offer. If they “slack off” in promoting fundamentalist Christianity, the subculture moves in with a heavy dose of guilt to enforce evangelization. Say what you will, but a true fundamentalist surely qualifies as a fanatic (somewhat akin to the sports fanatic whose team is the best and greatest and who tend to lose through poor calls and bad breaks rather than bad plays - although the analogy quickly breaks down).

Of course, there are degrees to which one adheres and embraces certainty. We have to think of it as a spectrum. Somewhere on that spectrum, folks cross the line and become fanatics. To the extent that someone is truly fundamentalist, relative to any action or belief, s/he will be a fanatic.

But, what about the “extreme” side of things? It has been stated that being extreme involves an element of danger. When has that line been crossed? What constitutes danger? Physicality? Or, can danger be psychological as well? There is little actual danger done by becoming a Yankees fan. Still, think of the rioting that often breaks out after soccer matches in otherwise civilized Europe. When is an idea dangerous? Or maybe we should ask, When is an idea too dangerous? Certainly, polygamy is dangerous. Surely, Christianity so opposed to abortion that it is willing to resort to violence against abortion providers is dangerous.

Where do we leave this question, then? Fundamentalism may fairly be called fanatical. But dangerous? That is a question that we must answer for ourselves, perhaps on a case-by-case basis. Is fundamentalism extremist? I think all that we can say is it depends.

James C. Alexander, Ph.D. is an education professor at a church related college and a bi-vocational minister who publishes regularly in the areas of education and religion. His latest book is Stories of a Recovering Fundamentalism: Understanding and Responding to Christian Absolutism. His blog site is located at Repentant Fundie.

Are the Terms “Fundamentalism” And “Cult” Equivalent Terms?

In my mind, the term “cult” is an ugly word. It acquires that connotation by its usage. In a quite literal definition, the term refers to religion and religious practice, especially ceremonial practice. Therefore, we might refer to a bar mitzvah as part of the cult of Judaism. We might likewise refer to the Eucharist as being bound up with the cultus of Christianity. In its barest definition, the term “cult” is neither good or bad, evil or benign. It is a quite generic and non-specific word.

However, we all know that there is an entirely different meaning of the term “cult.” When we think of that meaning, we usually think of some aberrant form of an established religion. Since there are so many varieties of belief within any given religious faith, it’s a lamentable term - maybe not very useful. But, for the sake of argument, we must muddy the waters even further. It seems that many Christians use the term to refer to non-Christian religions in general. Many churches speak of Hinduism as a cult. Or they might refer to Zen as a cult. I’ve heard “A Course in Miracles” devotees called cultists. Even some techniques, such as transcendental meditation, which may be practiced completely apart from a belief in any sort of god, are often labeled cultish, despite the fact that many medical practitioners recommend meditation practice.

In its lamentable usage, it seems as if there are various defining characteristics assigned to the concept of a cult by those that use the word, a few come to mind quite readily:

1. Cults are authoritarian

2 Cults usually separate folks from mainstream society

3. Cults often use mind control methods

4. Cults brainwash people (This is a slightly nuanced version of number 4.)

5. Cults cause adherents to do illogical things

6. Cultists cannot be reasoned with by conventional methods

Usually, when cults are discussed, the discussion occurs in conservative churches, often churches that might be labeled fundamentalist or evangelical. (For the sake of this discussion both will be regarded as funadmentalist - although I know some evangelicals might object. “Evangelical” is a quite fluid term, historically identical to the term “fundamenatlist.”) It would appear that fundamentalists have some need to “contend for the faith.” It is rare to see many books written from a religious perspective dealing with cults that was not produced by a fundamentalist.This being the case - that they are the most likely to label alternative religious movements as cults - I am compelled to make a surprising observation. Usually, the characteristics ascribed by fundamentalists to cults - characteristics such as those listed above - are highly descriptive of Christian fundamentalism as well. This can be easily illustrated.

The characteristic of authoritarianism attributed to cults is surely true of fundamentalism. It is true on two counts. First, fundamentalism is a movement largely directed by charismatic figures. I’m not talking about the Warren Jeffs or similar folks here. I refer to the televangelists, megachurch leaders, and leaders of the religious right. Leading figures direct the faithful and teach them what to believe. Adherents “follow the leader” often blindly. This leads to the second source of authoritarianism. Here I am referring to the Bible/Bible interpretation package that directs fundamentalists. The Bible becomes a “paper pope,” the fundamentalist interpreters regared as virtually infallible.

On the charge of trying to separate the faithful from mainstream society, surely the fundamentalist leaders must plead guilty. Adherents are encouraged to break ties with family and friends that get in the way of their belief system. They sometimes are forced to cut ties with friends in churches they attended before becoming fundamentalists. Alternative schools flourish to separate fundamentalist youth from “the world.” Fundamentalists maintain separate institutions for arts (recording companies and labels, and publishing concerns, all adhering to the fundamentalist outlook) separate organizations teaching authoritarian ideas for husbands (Promise Keepers, for example), and distinct political action groups (guided by quasi-religious opinion).

Mind control methods? Yes, even here it must be noted that fundamentalists meet the qualification for cultists. Members of fundamentalist churches are taught to deny their questioning and maintain a mantra of “God said it! I believe it! That settles it!” Doubting and questioning are discouraged. “Proof texts” from the Bible are memorized for use when a church member might have a question. When taking up questions with church leaders, members are not enouraged to think things out for themselves. Just as when I was a fundamentalist, members are told the “right” answers for troubling questions.

Do fundamentalists brainwash people (remember, we are talking about the fundamentalist church down the street, not the Moonies)? They bombard them with many meetings each week. They often work themselves up into emotional frenzies. Even if that is not always so, one must admit that fundamentalist leaders know how to work emotionalism to arrive at their desired outcome. They threaten those who don’t believe the “right way” with hell. They de-construct reality as we see it and create an alternate reality filled with devils, demons, and flaming perdition. Some have been able to get very sick folks to stop taking medicine to prove they have faith worthy of being healed. It would certainly appear to be a form of brainwashing.

What about logic? Is the fundamentalist’s version of “science” logical? Is faith healing logical? Is it logical that mental illness is caused by demon possession? Is the fundamentalist world view logical?

What about reasoning with a fundamentalist? All I can say is forget it. We don’t have enough time to review that question. Just give it a try some day.

It is a sad state of affairs that there are dangerous cults in our world. Certainly any fair-minded person would agree that white supremacist religious groups, polygamous groups, the Branch Davidians, Reverend Moon and his followers, and many others fit the negative use of the word cult. But, apparently so do fundamentalist Christians. They may not adopt the extremes that the “far out” cults embrace. They may be more socially acceptable. They may share many characteristics (perhaps negative) of Christianity in general. Nevertheless, the similarities remain. I have discovered all people are inconsistent (including yours truly). Maybe in one sense fundamentalists are no more inconsistent than the rest of us. But is fundamentalist Christianity a type of cult? We must agree, the similarities are striking.

James C. Alexander, Ph.D. is an education professor at a church related college and a bi-vocational minister who publishes regularly in the areas of education and religion. His latest book is Stories of a Recovering Fundamentalism: Understanding and Responding to Christian Absolutism. His blog site is located at Repentant Fundie.

You Don’t Have a Soul

What would you do if you were told that you don’t have a soul? What if you were told that you must develop your soul in order for you to live on past this life?

Most of us have been conditioned to believe that we have a soul and that if we live a decent moral life our soul will continue to live on past this life and into the next. Whether it is in the form of Christianity or Buddhism or any number of religious faiths, we have been conditioned to believe that our soul is immortal and will always live on. There is another thought on this that is interesting to say the least.

The thought is that in order for your soul to continue on after this incarnation it must be spiritually developed to the point that it retains its vibrational identity after you die. That would shed a whole new light on the complacent attitude most people have when it comes to their spirituality and developing their dimensional consciousness. No longer would you be able to delude yourself into believing that because you go to church and are a good person you will live on for all eternity.

No longer could you justify your lack of work on your spirituality. Your daily activities would take on a whole new meaning. Instead of filling your days with meaningless activities and being so caught up in the Matrix that it becomes your only identity, you will begin to explore the endless possibilities your life can have. Your life would take on a renewed sense of meaning and urgency. You will begin to unravel the mysteries of life and see the real beauty and love that can be found in your life.

If you just opened your eyes and did some serious work on yourself.

Imagine that at the point of physical death your soul is absorbed into a large energy melting pot. No longer recognizable from the millions of other lost souls. No longer do you have a soul with a distinct vibration that sets you apart from the masses. You are lost to a vibration of indistinguishable energy patterns. How sad and unnecessary. How lost, and irretrievably non-existent you will become. This is a scenario, which is a real possibility and should not be taken lightly.

Now imagine the opposite. At the point of physical death your spiritually developed soul is free to move on to the higher energy planes and retain its newly evolved spiritual vibrations. Not quite ready to merge with these heavenly energy planes you are able to reincarnate back to the physical plane where the continued work of evolving can take place. You get to continue your journey to reach the ultimate goal of spiritual enlightenment and re-uniting with the One Source, God, Universal Consciousness or the Zero Point Field.

It is difficult to understand, given our limited multi-dimensional consciousness, what the ultimate sacrifice will be for a life devoid of spirituality, however the potential consequences of this lifestyle should be enough to motivate you to explore your spiritual side. It’s time to wake up and get to work on increasing your energy and vibrational levels. It makes no difference how old or young you are it matters that you start now.

Don’t take for granted that you have an immortal soul.

Your life and eternal existence will ultimately depend on it.

What will you do?

Don’t get trapped into believing you will live on past this life you must expand your consciousness and seek a Higher Balance http://www.higherbalance.wordpress.com

Palm Sunday’s Tradition Traverse Many Cultures

Palm Sunday is the last Sunday of Lent. It is always the start of Holy Week and the last Sunday of Lent. It is one of the events that is mentioned in all four Canonical Gospels. It would seem according to the Gospel of John that just a week prior, Jesus was in Bethany having dinner with Lazarus, Mary and Martha and systematically the Church has the the Cycle A gospel for the 5th Sunday of Lent is Lazarus Sunday.

While in Bethany, Gospels describe how Jesus had sent two disciples on ahead to find a colt. Some say that Jesus had this already prearranged with Simon the Leper while others say Jesus found this particular colt to ride back through the gates of Jerusalem. The Gospel all go on to say how some lad down palm branches in order to make the ride more comfortable. There was also the description of people singing Psalm 118.

Although depicted in art though the ages of Jesus passing though the Golden Gate of Jerusalem, there is nothing concrete in the Synoptic Gospels that would support this. However, the reciprocal though and why the belief is held that Jesus did pass though the Golden Gate is because as the Messiah this would be the only way He could enter Jerusalem. There are some scholars who want to say that he entered though the southern part of the city that had the stairs that lead directly to Temple Mount because that makes more sense.

Though history , there have always been reenactment of the events of Jesus triumphant returned. The custom of the use of pals has a long history and harkens back the Old Testament. According to the Hebrew Bible Joshua also made a similar ride and was treated to the same way.

Even more interestingly is that many of the Pre-Christian religion also have similar stories of their central figure returning to the holiest city and be greeted in this manner. A prime example of this was Dionysus/Bacchus , the Greek god of Wine. There are several parallels that can be drawn between Dionysus and Jesus, including Rustic Dionysia, or Christmas on December 25th. And in Euripides Bacchae, there is a similar story of how Dionysus was arrested and questioned by Pentheus, very similar to how Jesus was arrested and brought before Pilot. In this story Dionysus returns much the same way Jesus returned to the Holy City in a triumphant manner on Palm Sunday.

The palm branch itself that was used was also symbolic. It was deeply rooted in Jewish tradition and is mentioned in the old testament book of Leviticus (23:40). The passage says .And ye shall take you on the first day the fruit of goodly trees, branches of palm-trees, and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before Jehovah your God seven days.. This addresses the use of palms as well as the seven days between Palm Sunday and the Resurrection/Easter Sunday. Its though this act of waving palms and making a path for Jesus with the Palms that Palm Sunday has gotten its name.

Beth has a full line of Lent Decorations and Easter Decorations

How Do You Become Catholic

How does a person become Catholic? The short answer is to contact the local Catholic Church in their community and ask to speak with the RCIA director or the Adult Education Dept. They will explain the process and periods. The process can take about a year unless you have some type of issue that will not allow you to complete your sacraments. Those type impediments would be former marriages that need to be annulled, use of birth control and co-habitation. Additionally if you have a strong background and understanding in another faith, it may not take as long. Along the way you will hear the word Journey and that.s what the conversion to the Catholic Church will be, a spiritual journey.

So what is RCIA and what is involved with that process? First, RCIA stands for the Rite of Christian initiation of Adults. The year is divided into several parts and each person who are first known as inquiries, will travel though these periods. The Pre-Catechumenate is the first stage. It.s also known as the Period of Inquiry.

Once you have decided to proceed, you will go through3 other periods. They are the Catechumenate, Purification and Enlightenment, which are the 6 weeks of Lent, and Mystagogy, the period after you make your sacraments that runs right though Pentecost.

For now let.s review the Pre-Catechumenate because at this point there is still discernment as to whether or not to go through the process. This is the point that the Inquirer will work though the process and work to become Catholic. So what is involved with this period. The first thing that you can expect is an interview with the RCIA director. This interview will have you tell your story as to why you are seeking out the Catholic Church. It will also identify issues, like above, annulments, co-habitation are serious impediments to coming into the church. Don.t be upset with these questions. It is just a matter to of seeing where you are at and what processes need to be put in place for each person to complete their sacraments should they decide to continue.

The RCIA Director will also ascertain if you have been baptized or not. If you are baptized in a Trinitarian manner, in other words, in the name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit, your Baptism will be accepted by the Catholic Church. If you are unbaptized or Baptized in a faith such as Mormon, you enter the Catechumenate as a catechumen and will be baptized and confirmed at Easter Vigil.

Now is the time for questions. Each of the Pre Catechumenate meetings will give the inquirer the opportunity to challenge the Church and learn from the Catholic Perspective. This is the time to review the Bible and start finding out what the Church Laws or Canon says on topics and how everything in the Church is rooted in the Bible.

You will find you are not alone and that there are others in this group going through this process with you. Reaching back to the early days of the church, you are in a group with other inquirers now. This is rooted in the early church because just as the Apostles went to small communities they worked with small groups towards their conversion to Christianity and you with your parish RCIA team will work towards your conversion.

Beth has a full line of RCIA Gifts and religious medals

Evolution Vs. Creationism

The idea that evolution (macro evolution) is anti-God or anti Christian is a falsity too often purported by the creationist movement. Evolution is soundly grounded by science and is accepted by many mainstream Christian faiths most notably the largest and oldest Christian denomination the Roman Catholic Church. Charles Darwin himself attributes the evolutionary process to a creator at the end of his book The Origin of the Species “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one”.(Darwin 1872 p. 459)

Evolution is easily observable and simply proven in three basic premises as shown in the article The Short Proof of Evolution by Ian Johnston. The first point the article gives is the fact that every creature must have had a living parent at some point in its existence. The second point is that not all living creatures are alike and in fact many are completely different (for example vertebrates vs. invertebrates). The third point substantiated by the fossil record is that “simple animals and plants existed on earth far before complex ones”. The article ties it all together stating “If all living creatures must have a living parent, if living creatures are different, and if simpler forms were around before complex forms, then the more complex forms must have come from the simpler forms.” (The Short Proof of Evolution by Ian Johnston)

Creationism takes a literal interpretation of Genesis and tries to make science fit. The bible is not a scientific document, it is religious text written by human authors who are subject to making scientific mistakes. The basic premise of Genesis 1 is true; God is the creator; but God is just as capable of creating through the evolutionary process as science exhibits as through the story of creation in six days as Genesis tells us and science contradicts. What we know of science contradicts the literal interpretation of Genesis but does not contradict the idea that there is a creator. The bible was never meant to be scientific or explain things in scientific terms. It is divine interpretation and no human can ever come close to interpreting the true nature of God. As Father George V. Coyne the director of the Vatican Observatory stated “science and religion are totally separate pursuits”. (Intelligent Design Belittles God by Mark Lombard)

Today Copernicus and his solar system are accepted by all educated people. When he first released his ideas he came across similar objections as Darwin did. His ideas contradicted literal Old Testament scripture. For hundreds of years afterward both Protestant and Catholic leaders condemned him citing biblical scripture that the sun and moon revolve around the earth. The book of Joshua 10:12-14 states “On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord in the presence of Israel: ‘O sun, stand still over Gibeon, O moon, over the Valley of Aijolon.’ So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies. The sun stopped in the middle of sky and delayed going down about a full day.” (Joshua 10:12-14, New International Version) Furthermore scripture if taken literally implies that the earth is flat, not round “After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth” (Revelation 7:1, New International Version). Not all scripture is intended to be taking literally and surely should not be taken as a basis of scientific knowledge. I found it interesting while reading Gerald Schroeder’s book The Science of God that “the Talmud stated explicitly that the opening chapter of Genesis, all thirty-one verses is presented in a manner that conceals information.” (Schroeder 1997 p.10) (Babylonian Talmud Hagigah 11b, 12a, 500 A.D.)

Religion and science are not always and do not have to be at odds with each other over the Creation vs. Evolution debate. I believe that there is conclusive evidence for evolution and that the creation story in Genesis is not meant to be taken as a literal scientific sequence of events, but as a way to articulate the core idea that God is the creator. Eventually as science continues to fill the holes in Darwin’s theory with solutions (for example genetics) the theory of evolution will become as widely accepted as Copernicus’s theory of a sun centered solar system.

References:

Darwin, C. (1872). The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or

the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life(6th ed.).

New York: Mentor.

Schroeder G.L. (1997). The Science of God. New York: Free Press.

Johnston, I. (2005). The Short Proof of Evolution. Retrieved July 17,

2007 from Malaspina University-College Web site:

http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/essays/courtenay1.htm

Lombard, M. (2006, January 30). Intelligent Design belittles God, Vatican

Director Says. Catholic Online. Retrieved July 17, 2007, from

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=18503

John Schlismann has an interest in religous studies and how they relate to modern day science. For more information on the Evolution vs. Creation debate check out http://www.icr.org/ for the Creationism point of view and http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ for an evolutionary point of view.

Next Page »