Wednesday, October 21, 2009

OLiC - Brief things in re: Baptism & Confession

Sadly, the OLiC Archives don't have production notes on everything, so the posts I wanted to do aren't going to happen, because I can't refer to their notes. :p

Anyway, two of the interesting points that stuck in my head:

1. Baptism - specifically, infant baptism. The assumption of Protestants is that below the 'age of reason' children can't sin, so God loves them and should they, God forbid, die, they'll go to Heaven because they weren't yet capable of sinning. However, at the moment they hit the 'age of reason', they're sinners, and are suddenly told that they can't be in God's love until they've made a rational, reasoned decision to love God back. The hosts likened this to a family having a baby, raising it for seven years, and then putting the kid on the curb and telling him that he can come back and be a member of the family when he can make a rational, reasoned decision to be a part of the family. It's...kinda crazy sounding, yeah? They also made arguments for the baptism, chrismation and communion all occurring at the same time, as opposed to being spread out over years as they are in the West. If I'm remembering it correctly, the argument was essentially that the first thing you do with a baby is feed it - you're not going to deny a child food until it's seven or so and can rationally ask for it. You're going to feed it because it needs it, and the child will grow stronger because of this food. As children in the Church (specifically infants here), they need the spiritual food of full communion with the Church. So why wait seven years to chrismate (confirm)? Why wait for communion? Because the parents want to be able to have photo ops? Doesn't seem like a very good reason to me...

2. Confession - Interesting things, interesting things. Apparently (according to the hosts), confession in the Orthodox church is made facing an icon of Christ, not the priest. The priest stands *beside* the penitent to hear the confession, but the confession is made to Christ Himself. (It can also, apparently, happen in front of the whole church, but nobody hears what's being said, or in private). Also, the 'Penitent's Prayer' (which I haven't been able to find on the net as of this moment) doesn't begin like the one in Catholicism (Forgive me Father, for I have sinned...) but rather is directed, again, to Christ. Sadly, again, no production notes, I can't recall the exact wording, but the one they read was from the Antiochian (sp?) tradition.

32 comments:

  1. Interesting.

    Yeah baptism confuses me for the same reason. Although I think you should wait to be confirmed until you can decide yourself that you are 100% sure Christianity is what you want for your life. I was only 12 and had to because "It will be more difficult to do when you are older so just do it now".

    Confession is weird. I can confess to God in my own home. Why do I have to do it in front of a priest? So he can tell me to say 10 hail marys and 3 our fathers?

    ReplyDelete
  2. A lot of your posts remind me I need to educate myself more on Catholicism and other traditions. :) Weirdly, the things you say are Protestant assumptions (age of reason, especially) were explained to me as Catholic beliefs that the Baptist church thinks is weird...though Baptists say they aren't Protestants, too. But Methodists are, and they do infant Baptism. Which specific Protestant tradition did you hear this from/about?

    ReplyDelete
  3. LK,

    Baptism doesn't confuse me, the Protestant's confuse me. :)

    I come from a Protestant tradition (MSLutherans) that practice infant baptism, same as the Episcopalians, and Anglicans. The Catholic and Orthodox churches also practice infant baptism (though, of course, all will baptism adult converts if needed). I view baptism as circumcison - a birth into the family of God. With confirmation/chrismation as a sealing/invitation to the Holy Spirit, and the communion as our spiritual food, helping to keep us in union with the Body of Christ, it makes less and less sense to me for us to delay any of these sacraments.

    I'll admit to my own issues with confession, however, I am beginning to suspect that my church doesn't practice it the way it's meant to be practiced. To be honest, at least in my parish, it's being treated almost like a therapy session. As for confessing in your own home, the question is, partially, does that help you *stop* doing whatever it is you're confession to? Part of confession is getting advice from someone more 'advanced' in the faith than yourself on how to heal the sickness of sin that you're suffering from.

    That being said, as I recall from the podcasts, part of confessing to the priest is an acknowledgment of the fact that our sin harms the Body (church). Once a part of the Body, nothing that we do is done alone. We're surrounded at all times by the 'invisible' church, and, as one of the hosts said, to paraphrase, 'if we really thought about it, would you sin if your mother was standing right there? no. but we find it easy to sin if we forget that we are never alone. Your guardian angel is there, the Mother of God is there, *God* is there, for pete's sake. all those who've gone before are there.'

    Healing is meant to come of confession, it's a 'prescription', a medicine for the soul that the priest prescribes. Penance, properly done, isn't just a 'say 10 Hail Marys and 5 Our Fathers and your sins are forgiven.'

    Okay, that's kind of rambly...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sanil,

    *Really*? *is surprised* The 'age of reason/accountability' has always been explained to me as a Protestant thing (even when I was a Protestant, for the record). Now, the Catholic church confirms/gives first communion around the age of seven, usually, or at least that's when you sort of become 'eligible', and that likely is tied back to the idea of 'age of reason', but for baptism, waiting until the child can rationally ask for it is a Protestant thing.

    I've had Baptists, Methodists, Evangelicals (too many 'denominations' to even remember there...), non-denominationals, Mennonites, (I *think* the Amish, too...) all hold to a 'believers baptism', which can only come *after* the age of reason. Now, they may not agree on an exact age, but they all definitely say that the kid has to ask for it.

    I generalize, but if you aren't Catholic or Orthodox, I call you a Protestant (sorry Baptists...). I know they're not the *historic* Protestants, but what else do you call them?

    ReplyDelete
  5. No no I understand completely what you are saying. To ME it is just saying "10 hail marys and 3 our fathers". Doesn't mean that is what it is meant to be. It doesn't work for me. That doesn't mean that confession doesn't have the best of intentions. It does. I just don't believe in it. I prefer to pray to God in my home, in my own way and ask for his help with my sins in that fashion. Doesn't mean confession isn't a good idea.

    Your priest etc. gives you advice? I've never had one tell me anything but what prayers to say afterward. Advice is good idea if you want it, and ten to one if you are going to confess to a person, you want advice. So confession with some advice makes sense. And I'm sure it makes some people feel better too.

    I do LOVE your explanation. It is the first time any of it made some sense. Thank you for explaining.

    ReplyDelete
  6. My own personal life experience with going to confession as an Orthodox Christian is that this sacrament spiritually breaks some of sin's power in my life and repentance becomes more possible. (As opposed to before, when I was much more in spinning my own wheels mode). I am able to look back over the years and see how I've grown and changed by God's grace. Now, the changes are tiny and incremental, but they are happening. And I do often have to confess the same types of things over and over...The Church calls it the Sacrament of Reconciliation for a reason.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://morningcoffee.blogspot.com/2009/10/order-of-confession-for-orthodox.html

    here you go. I typed up the order of confession for you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Really! :D I know, it's weird.

    I can see part of why, though, maybe, after I read your response. The Baptist churches I was raised in don't do infant baptism, but our reason for that isn't tied to an "age of accountability/reason". They also don't baptize adults w/o them wanting it. It's because baptism isn't a saving thing in Baptist theology, it's an obedience thing you do as a sign AFTER becoming a Christian, sort of declaring your faith and conversion to the world. So then to baptize someone who hasn't made that decision just doesn't make sense to Baptists, not because they're too young and will be saved anyway since they don't know better (there are definitely Baptists who think babies who die go to hell...not a LOT, but they're there.), but because it serves no purpose and doesn't do anything for them anyway. So I think it's more a difference in how each tradition sees the sacraments than about an age of reason.

    I remembered where I heard that was a Catholic belief...not a reliable source. When the Left Behind books came out and were annoyingly popular in my church, people were asking about the age of reason since apparently it comes up in the books. No one in our church had heard of it, and determined it must be a Catholic thing that got passed down into some Protestant churches. Yay, ignorance and wild guesses!

    They like to just be called Baptists. :D But I get that, I did the same thing until I came to a Protestant seminary and realized how very different Baptists are from Protestants. Protestant denominations all more or less share a liturgical calendar and liturgical methods in general that come from their Catholic origins, and those things are nowhere in the Baptist church. It was so weird when I got here and realized I was the only one who had never heard of or celebrated Lent or Advent.

    ReplyDelete
  9. LK,

    Yep. It's not just 'go forth and say these prayers and you're forgiven'. The goal is to help you keep from sinning, so advice of one sort or another needs to be included.

    Glad I made some sort of sense. :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Alana,

    Thank you for sharing that with us. That's my understanding of how it's supposed to work, really. You don't walk away suddenly cured, it's a process that you go through your entire life.

    Also, you are full of win! Thank you *so* much! That's the one!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sanil,

    Hah! Yet another reason the LB books are horrible! I knew they were to blame for *everything*. *snicker*

    Hmm, I didn't mean that the churches baptised as soon as the child hit the 'age of reason', only that it's at that point that they become 'eligible', I suppose is the best word. They're suddenly adult enough to make the choice rationally. Supposedly. I don't know of any church that goes, 'oh, he's seven. to the baptismal font!' :) They all still wait until the child/adult *asks* for baptism. They take the word order of Mark 16: 15-16 (I think that's the one) very literally. So I may have missed that in my explanation, sorry. I just assume everyone knows what I mean, even when I don't quite say it! ;)

    Hee. But not all non-historically Protestant churches are Baptists! I could just start calling them 'the misguided', but somehow I think they might take that badly... :) (and they totally wouldn't get my literary reference, so the joke would only be funny to me...)

    My Dad didn't know what Lent was. Very amusing to me. He was Mennonite.

    ReplyDelete
  12. taking my gloves off...

    Baptists are protestants who don't know they are protestants. Most can trace their history to the Radical Reformation (Anabaptists, Brethren, Puritans) which happened parallel to the Lutherans etc, but who were taking things a step or two further. Throwing out ALL the liturgy etc. and going with the Bible alone. (whereas Lutherans and the Anglicans kept liturgical forms and the denominations which stemmed from them did too: Episcopalians, Methodists)

    And no, they can't REALLY trace their lineage through the Waldensians to the early Church, even if they (some at least) like to think they can. But why would they want to? Such a claim proves that anabaptists and baptists have never studied the heresies of the Waldensians to any extent.

    I get to say all this because I used to be Mennonite. ;-)

    Did the Bible just drop out of the sky for the (Ana)Baptists/Radical Reformers to use? No...it is the product of the Holy Sprit working through ONE HOLY CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC CHURCH.

    So, it's our book, and by using it and claiming it without the fullness of the Apostolic Faith, Ana/Baptists are protesting. ergo Ana/Baptists are "protestant", even if they don't think they are.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Amber - No, no, I got what you meant. :D I was saying there is no point of eligibility, for Baptists. At least not the ones I grew up with. That was my point of bringing up that adults, who have been able to reason for years, don't become baptized till after they've chosen it. What makes you "eligible" isn't your age or your reasoning, but your status as a Christian. A baby could be "baptized", but it wouldn't mean anything and they would be re-baptized if they converted in a Baptist church, because baptism is nothing but a sign to the world of your choice. It's a completely different ritual than in the churches that perform infant baptism, where something important is actually happening in the baptism instead of just being a pretty image.

    (Also, the word verification I had to type in to post this was "sneplity". I like that and will invent a meaning for it.)

    Alana - But they're not "protesting", they're just not doing. That's like saying people living in Canada are protesting America because they don't follow our government. Common sources, common ideas, but we're separate.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "The assumption of Protestants is that below the 'age of reason' children can't sin"

    Well, I've never heard anyone in the Baptist churches I've attended say this. We believe in original sin and that no one is born "innocent." In fact my preacher often says if you don't believe your precious little one is capable of sinning then put one ball between 2 18-month olds and see if sharing comes naturally. So either we aren't Protestants (wink, wink) or your statement is not inclusive of ALL Protestants.

    We believe baptism is a sign of your identifying with Jesus...showing others that you have decided to follow Christ for your salvation (e.g. the Ethiopian eunuch). That's why we have believer's baptism because we think this is a choice people have to make for themselves and not one decided on by their parents when they are infants.

    I DO like the explanation you gave a while back about infant baptism. As long as people don't think it saves them for eternity, I have no problem with either baptism. I just think certain people believe that because they were baptized as Catholics when they were a baby that they can be assured of heaven. As if that one action secures them forever. At the same time, believer's baptism doesn't save people either so if you get baptized later in life, but there is no fruit of salvation later, beware! Your baptism does not save you.

    Good discussion and I'm sorry that we confuse you. :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. P.S. I'm glad for the Protestant Reformation. Even Martin Luther could see the corruption in the Catholic Church at his time. I think any time a group holds all the power, there is much potential for corruption. And when the Church controls both religion and politics it's especially corrupting. (Look at Saudi Arabia!)

    I'm thankful we now can own our own Bibles and read God's Word for ourselves. I know there were good people in the CC in the past and they were Spirit-lead people who gave us the Scriptures. However, there also existed many corrupted people who didn't want the Bible in the hands of the common people. I guess we were too stupid to read it for ourselves. What a better way to control the masses than to tell them what "God" says? (Sounds like the fundamentalist LDS church I've been reading about that tells women their goal in life is to have as many children as possible so they can one day populate their own planet and become a goddess.)

    And then there was the whole thing where the Church was driven by money so they were selling indulgences. I think the Church *needed* reforming at that time. Thank God that He knows how to purify His Church. Aren't YOU glad the Bible is available for you to read on your own? I know I am!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Alana,

    And thus, I shall continue to call them all Protestants.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sanil,

    But how do they determine that the child actually knows and understands what they're asking for? Would they baptize a three year old who asked for it? At what point, or how do they determine that the person is of reasonable enough mind/intelligence to know what they're asking?

    I do understand that for Protestants (not the high church ones) it doesn't really mean anything, and they can get rebaptized over and over again, if they so choose...

    '(Also, the word verification I had to type in to post this was "sneplity". I like that and will invent a meaning for it.)'

    And? What's it mean, oh wordsmith? :)

    'Alana - But they're not "protesting", they're just not doing. That's like saying people living in Canada are protesting America because they don't follow our government. Common sources, common ideas, but we're separate.'

    Refusing to do something *can* be a form of protest. Also, I think Alana's last question is a good one. Where did they get their Bibles? Their 'common sources and common ideas' came from the Protestants, who took them from the Catholics. They just changed/ignored the parts they didn't like.

    Also, hah! Canadians are rebel Americans! *declares war on Canada to bring them back in line* *giggle* All your Canuks are belong to us!

    ReplyDelete
  18. 'Well, I've never heard anyone in the Baptist churches I've attended say this. We believe in original sin and that no one is born "innocent." In fact my preacher often says if you don't believe your precious little one is capable of sinning then put one ball between 2 18-month olds and see if sharing comes naturally. So either we aren't Protestants (wink, wink) or your statement is not inclusive of ALL Protestants.'

    Heh. Proof of one of the things that makes Protestantism so crazy. I can go down to my local Baptist church and ask the pastor this question and he'll give me the age of reason, lack of accountability in kids answer (I know this, because I used to attend a school taught by him...), but I ask you, or another, and I'll get faces of total confusion. There's a confusion of doctrine even within a denomination.

    Since my understanding of 'original sin' differs, we'll just have to disagree on this one. :)

    However, my question is this: If a child can sin, without *comprehending* their sin, their need for redemption, etc., and they are condemned by that sin, what happens if they die before they come to that realization? Or adults who never have the mental capacity to comprehend their need for a Savior and thus never join the church?

    As a note, my understanding has always been that for something to be a sin, counted against you, you have to know and understand that it's a sin. There's an element of will that has to be included.

    'I DO like the explanation you gave a while back about infant baptism. As long as people don't think it saves them for eternity, I have no problem with either baptism. I just think certain people believe that because they were baptized as Catholics when they were a baby that they can be assured of heaven. As if that one action secures them forever. At the same time, believer's baptism doesn't save people either so if you get baptized later in life, but there is no fruit of salvation later, beware! Your baptism does not save you.'

    I stand by that explanation. And I don't know anyone, Catholic or otherwise, that believes that just because they got baptized they're saved. I *do* know some people, however, who believe that just because they answered an altar call, what have you that nothing that they do can take away their salvation. Once Saved, Always Saved. *shakes head*

    While I agree that the Church of the time had corruption (it's made up of sinners, same as any other church), Luther didn't, actually, manage to reform it. He took his toys and went to play in another sandbox. The Reformation of the Church happened without him. Did he spark it off? Sure.

    'I think any time a group holds all the power, there is much potential for corruption. And when the Church controls both religion and politics it's especially corrupting. (Look at Saudi Arabia!)'

    And this is true. Separation of church and state exists for a reason...but there does need to be a hierarchy, a ruling/teaching 'class', if you will. Should it be like it is in the Catholic Church, with one man at the top? Or like the Orthodox, conciliar? I'll get back to you on that one, once I make up *my* mind.

    The corrupt exist everywhere.

    '(Sounds like the fundamentalist LDS church I've been reading about that tells women their goal in life is to have as many children as possible so they can one day populate their own planet and become a goddess.)'

    But only if they're submissive and obedient wives to their husband-gods! You left that part out! A woman can't get to heaven without her man!

    'Aren't YOU glad the Bible is available for you to read on your own? I know I am!'

    And yet I would never dare try to interpret the meaning of the Bible without the background and support of the Church. After all, it's possible to read almost *anything* into the Bible if you want to see it badly enough.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Argh, I can never speak clearly. :D It's a problem. I meant more that a 3-year-old who dies isn't assumed to go to Heaven because they're innocent. The Baptist churches I'm familiar with are big on original sin, and that doesn't start at a certain age or intelligence/maturity level. They might not baptize until they're sure the kid understands what they're asking for, but the conversion is assumed to be real before that. The actual baptism varies by church, I have been to some that will do it at any age, one that made a special exception in baptizing a 7-year-old because her simple answer to "why do you want this?" showed in their minds that she knew what she was doing. ("Jesus told us to and I want to obey him.") But while they might not baptize a younger child, they will believe that if that child trusted Christ, they are saved regardless of baptism or reason. Reason is not required for salvation in Baptist belief (in the churches I know of, again), in fact it's frequently stressed that we all need to have "faith like a child" and not think too much. Reason #1 I had to leave that church, actually.

    Sneplity is an adjective describing the total confidence a child has that everything he says is right and the world is his playground. (Yes, I made that up on the spot.)

    True, refusing can be a form of protest. I just don't think that's what most Baptists have in mind. Where'd Protestants get the Bible? Well, to start, it's not even the same Bible Catholics have. Not sure about Orthodox. The texts that make up the Bible came from a time before denominations and before Catholicism. (I don't know if you'd disagree with this, I know some Catholics say the Catholic church as it is today is THE original church and the rest of us are breakaways. I'm not perfect on the history and I suggest we agree to disagree and will simply point out that this is not what Protestants believe. IMO, the original "church" was a Jewish sect made up of many mini-sects that have never reconciled into one and probably never will this side of Heaven.) Not everyone agreed even at the time of canonization, but because one group came to power, we've lost a lot of possible other books that weren't judged worthy to protect, so we work with what we have left. That doesn't mean we necessarily agree that anyone had the right to choose a canon or that any denomination gets the interpretation right.

    LOL, Canada. Thinking they have a right to be their own people and make up their own minds and stuff. :D

    Related to your comment to Susanne about Baptists not even agreeing w/in the denomination...the reason for that is that they're NOT really a denomination. There is no central board, no Baptist church is accountable to any other, it's a completely congregational independent thing. This is why groups like Westboro Baptist don't get banned from the denomination...there's no one around to ban them. The Baptist "denomination" is mostly just a bunch of unrelated churches that tend to, but don't always, have similar theology, values, and interpretations.

    Good discussion! :)

    ReplyDelete
  20. It happens to us all. The internet is great for communication, but it's also terrible for communication. :)

    So they just assume that all children believe in God and Christ and the Baptist way of things? (I'm not being a smart ass, I really don't get this.)

    'Reason is not required for salvation in Baptist belief (in the churches I know of, again), in fact it's frequently stressed that we all need to have "faith like a child" and not think too much. Reason #1 I had to leave that church, actually.'

    I resist the joke that the first part of this paragraph calls for. :) That 'faith like a child' thing is taken *way* overboard. Have they ever *met* a kid? They question *everything*.

    'Sneplity is an adjective describing the total confidence a child has that everything he says is right and the world is his playground. (Yes, I made that up on the spot.)'

    And it is so. :) Now I just have to figure out pronunciation and how to work this into a conversation...

    *grin* There was no time before the Church! Up until 1054, there was one Church - did heresies arise and splinter groups break off and die off, or correct themselves and be reabsorbed? Yes, but there's always ever been one Church. Now, my own personal issue is, which side of the Great Schism is wrong? Rome or the East?

    And it is, basically, the same Bible. Aside from the Protestants lacking books in the OT that the Catholics have (and yes, the Orthodox have even more), the books are the same. Translations differ, but I can get a Catholic Edition of most translations, should I want to.

    You could go through and ask which text are they using to translate from, yadda, yadda, I'm not saying it's not complicated or important, and I'm glossing over a bunch, because...well...it's a long process, and I'm nothing even remotely like an expert on the compilation of the Bible. But if we're going on overall (which books are included and content of books) the Protestants just took what had already been decided on and pulled out the stuff they didn't like.

    They *could* have set up their own council, take the books that did exist (and we've found more of the gnostic/lost/etc. books since...) and decided on their own canon. But they didn't, and they haven't.

    All that being said, yes, we'll agree to disagree. I'm not Protestant for reasons, see. :)

    'LOL, Canada. Thinking they have a right to be their own people and make up their own minds and stuff. :D'

    I know, silly Canadians.

    'Related to your comment to Susanne about Baptists not even agreeing w/in the denomination...the reason for that is that they're NOT really a denomination.'

    Then what *are* they? What about the Baptist Conferences? I was under the impression that they worked as a sort of governing body(ies), in the loosest sense of the word.

    'This is why groups like Westboro Baptist don't get banned from the denomination...there's no one around to ban them.'

    *spit*

    While they can't be *banned*, and honestly, anyone could set up a church in their basement and call it Baptist and apparently no one would stop them, the WBC cult *has* been explicitly *rejected* by Baptist's of all stripes.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "So they just assume that all children believe in God and Christ and the Baptist way of things? (I'm not being a smart ass, I really don't get this.)"

    No. This is sort of a two-part answer, really... I've always been taught that you have to trust God as much as you can understand. An adult who'd never heard the Gospel but was looking is saved for trying. A 3-year-old who rejects God is condemned. So they think kids can go to hell and there's no extra grace for being kids.

    "I resist the joke that the first part of this paragraph calls for. :) That 'faith like a child' thing is taken *way* overboard. Have they ever *met* a kid? They question *everything*."

    Oh, joke away! :D Wait, maybe I shouldn't say that, since I think you have readers who are still Baptist and might be offended. But I agree.

    "Then what *are* they? What about the Baptist Conferences? I was under the impression that they worked as a sort of governing body(ies), in the loosest sense of the word...While they can't be *banned*, and honestly, anyone could set up a church in their basement and call it Baptist and apparently no one would stop them, the WBC cult *has* been explicitly *rejected* by Baptist's of all stripes."

    Exactly. That's more or less what conferences are, if I understand them. It's sort of a family reunion or meetup group or something. :D Of course, there are like 50 sub-groups of Baptists, and maybe that's just how my churches were. But the way it was explained to me, there is no central power and every congregation can do whatever it wants and still call itself a Baptist, the most that will happen is other Baptists will be disapproving.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 'No. This is sort of a two-part answer, really... I've always been taught that you have to trust God as much as you can understand. An adult who'd never heard the Gospel but was looking is saved for trying. A 3-year-old who rejects God is condemned. So they think kids can go to hell and there's no extra grace for being kids.'

    But kids don't understand this sort of thing! They'll believe what their parents tell them until they get older! *shakes head* Baptists...they makes less and less sense to me as time goes on...

    Nope. Still resisting the joke in the spirit of being nice. :)

    *sigh* So glad this isn't my problem any more...

    ReplyDelete
  23. "But kids don't understand this sort of thing! They'll believe what their parents tell them until they get older! *shakes head* Baptists...they makes less and less sense to me as time goes on..."


    Hehehehe! But I thought YOU were the one who said little children question *everything* as if they wouldn't easily believe. At least that's the impression I got from your statement.

    Anyway . . .


    "*sigh* So glad this isn't my problem any more... "

    Ahhh, but that's where you are wrong, my dear. You have to share the planet - indeed your country! - with many, many, many of us. Mu-ah-ah-ah-ah (rubbing my hands together in glee while I smile and laugh my evil laugh)

    ReplyDelete
  24. 'Hehehehe! But I thought YOU were the one who said little children question *everything* as if they wouldn't easily believe. At least that's the impression I got from your statement.'

    *grin* True, I did. What I meant was that kids are always asking questions, but they'll believe the answers, even if they're not true, up until they learn skepticism. So long as a parent can supply an answer, even if it's wrong, the kid believes. They'll ask *more* questions, but they'll believe the answers, because parents *are* God, as far as their concerned. Never wrong.

    An example from my own childhood: thunder. I was told that thunder was angels bowling (and I'm sure other people got that one too) and I believed it. I asked other questions, lightning, rain (angels crying cause they lost the game, btb), but I *believed* the answers. They weren't true, and I learned that later on, but for the moment, they were truth.

    My issue with the way many people take the 'have the faith of a little child' thing is that they insist that it means we can't question God. And that's just not so.

    One thing that's getting impressed on me as I'm reading the Old Testament is that the Patriarchs were always questioning God, sometimes they even argued with Him. And there was no smiting afterward. :) But once they got the answer, they *believed* it.

    'Ahhh, but that's where you are wrong, my dear. You have to share the planet - indeed your country! - with many, many, many of us. Mu-ah-ah-ah-ah (rubbing my hands together in glee while I smile and laugh my evil laugh)'

    *lives in denial* ;)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Amber, good stuff about the child-like faith. I never took it to mean we couldn't question things only that somewhere along the line we might have to trust God because it's not going to happen that we are going to fully explain God by our logic. (If we do, our God is really small, imo.)

    Yes, the prophets and patriarchs DID question God at times. And I am glad that they did because it shows that I'm OK and, better yet, GOD is OK with my questions! What I hated about my Muslim friend is that it seemed questioning Islam was taboo so even though things bothered him or me, it was just accepted because it was nearly sacreligious to question Mohammed or anything much. At least that is the impression I often got. And, yes, I know this type of attitude exists also in some Christians, unfortunately.

    Oh, you go right ahead and live in denial all you want. And remember the little prince is God and the earth is flat and all that other stuff while you're at it. :-P

    ReplyDelete
  26. Susanne,

    I agree with you. (Try to not collapse in shock....*grin*) If God can be compassed by the human mind, then He's not God.

    It's something that bothers me about Islam as well - you cannot question the Qur'an, the Hadith, anything in many circles. If your faith can't stand up to a little honest questioning, there's something wrong.

    *continues building giant wall around her house* I'm sorry, what? I can't hear you over the massive sound of my own denial... :)

    ReplyDelete
  27. First of, I admit, I haven't read all the comments.

    I just wanted to say, that in the Danish Lutheran church (as far as I know, most of my family belongs there, although I never have). Everyone can take communion, regardless of age.

    In the evangelical church I belonged to, everyone took communion as well. That church, incidentally, didn't practice christening/baptism of babies (so I was never christened), rather having a 'blessing' instead, where the child is blessed in front of the church. Once you're a bit older you get to choose yourself if you want to be baptised or not, and then it's a full body-under-water baptism.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Becky,

    Hmm. That's very different from the way it's done in the Lutheran church I was raised in. And it's possible that even that is different from the more liberal Lutheran denominations over here. I was raised in a strict, high church form of Lutheranism.

    Now the evangelical thing is more interesting to me. In my experience, which clearly does not cover ALL churches everywhere, the evangelicals don't give communion out to everyone. They have open communion, which is very different from the kind of Communion held in Catholic, Lutheran or Orthodox churches, but they don't allow children who have not been through the baptism/ceremony/what have you that they have when the child hits the age of reason and chooses to be a Christian.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Well, obviously I can only speak for how things are done in Denmark, and only the churches I've been to.

    The Danish public church is called the Danish Lutheran Church, and they give communion to anyone who attend service, and who comes forward at the time of communion. As a child I thought it was really special because the 'bread' was this special oblate thing, which was very different to the church we normally went to, which used normal bread.

    The church we went to through most of my childhood belong to the Pentecostal Church (although I get the impression those are very different in Denmark and in the US). Again, communion was for everyone, both children and adults.

    ReplyDelete
  30. No! I demand that you speak for all Danish churches everywhere! :D *lol* I try to remember to qualify my statements about churches, that I can only speak for what I experienced and what I was taught.

    See, in the Missouri Synod (the Lutheran church branch I was raised in) communion is closed. You can only take communion if you are a member of the Missouri Synod and if you are baptised, etc. in the 'correct' faith, i.e. Lutheranism. Children come up and receive blessings at communion time, but they don't start receiving communion until maybe 7 or 8 years old. Because the bread is believed to have become the body of Christ, similar to the belief in the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

    Pentecostals are kind of different. I've never been to one here, so I can't say much about it. They tend to be very energetic, is my understanding. :) I don't know much about their communion practices.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Haha, well, energetic would be about right for Denmark as well.

    It's strange there can be such big differences for communion, even within the same type of faith (i.e. Lutheran).

    ReplyDelete
  32. Yes. 'Energetic' is the best word, I think! :D

    Protestantism = divisions within divisions. It can get very confusing and overwhelming. If you try to generalize that one denomination does x, you'll inevitably run into a legitimate branch of that denomination that very much does not do x.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...