How much questioning is "permitted" in your religion before you are labeled a heretic?

[jrtrent]

Shoot now this is just messin’ with my mind. Maybe I’m not as liberal as I or others on CAF think. I believe in the deity of Jesus. His virgin birth. His atoning work on the cross. And in His physical resurrection. Perhaps I’m mainline - liberal.

You left out the first one, but if that was just an oversight, you and Izdaari sound an awful lot like fundamentalists!

. . . a coalition of interdenominational brethren, following a number of conferences, united around the five ‘fundamentals’ of the faith. They were:

1. The inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture
2. The deity of Jesus Christ
3. The virgin birth of Christ
4. The substitutionary, atoning work of Christ on the cross
5. The physical resurrection and the personal bodily return of Christ to the earth.

The adherents to these five ‘fundamental’ truths were naturally labeled ‘fundamentalists.’ Those opposing them were called ‘liberals.’ thriceholy.net/fundamentals.html

Related to the OP’s point, these fundamentals were shared by men from numerous denominations who had many differences between them, yet they recognized each other as Christians and were united against theological liberalism.

 

[Izdaari]

You left out the first one, but if that was just an oversight, you and Izdaari sound an awful lot like fundamentalists!. . . a coalition of interdenominational brethren, following a number of conferences, united around the five ‘fundamentals’ of the faith. They were:

1. The inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture
2. The deity of Jesus Christ
3. The virgin birth of Christ
4. The substitutionary, atoning work of Christ on the cross
5. The physical resurrection and the personal bodily return of Christ to the earth.

The adherents to these five ‘fundamental’ truths were naturally labeled ‘fundamentalists.’ Those opposing them were called ‘liberals.’ thriceholy.net/fundamentals.htmlRelated to the OP’s point, these fundamentals were shared by men from numerous denominations who had many differences between them, yet they recognized each other as Christians and were united against theological liberalism.

Heh, yeah. I sound kinda like a fundamentalist because I do agree with the historic Five Fundamentals… despite being theologically liberal in many other ways.

I post on a fundamentalist board because of IFB friends I’ve made online and want to stay in contract with, but it is very clear from the discussions there how much we differ. The gulf between IFB and “emergent” Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian (even a fundamentally orthodox one) remains wide.

 

[Indifferently]

Open departure from the universal consensus - the Vincentian canon, that which was believed everywhere, always and by all (universality, antiquity and consensus) - is heresy. The Canons of the Church of England taught that preaching must be in line with the ‘ancient bishops and catholic fathers’ of the Church.

 

[Marie5890]

In my journey of faith, I have never felt pressured or discourage by anyone to ignore my sincere questions and concerns of conscience.

If anything I have been encourage to be open and honest with whatever had troubled me. As a wise person once said “Come with your doubts, concerns, questions in one hand wide open, and in the other wide open hand, faith”

God can handle it all. Every doubt, ever concern, every question. And He has never turned His back to me. All it’s ever been is a path of profound love, understanding, mercy.

Christ stood there and took the reviling of His people, of the leadership of the time, all those calling for His death by crucifixion for me. He can handle whatever comes to Him thru me, includes doubts, questions, concerns. I just try to be conscience of not being one of the angry mob, but rather a faithful disciple. Crying with the faithful women rather than screaming with the angry and bitter multitudes.

And He is ever my very kind and loving Shepard of Mercy.

 

[Julia_Mae]

I was wondering how far you feel you can go questioning the customs, practices, even doctrines and dogmas of your faith before you are thought of by others as a heretic?

Depends on who you ask, I suppose. I’ve been called a heretic and a mystic and called both by the same priest in the same forum. (Not this one.) I’m pretty sure I’m not either of those.

I don’t think the problem is “questioning,” I think it’s rejecting. Questioning is fine, necessary, can lead to greater faith. Rejecting closes the door to any further understanding.

To be Catholic you have to be able to say the Creed and mean it. IMO, anyway.

 

[jrtrent]

I post on a fundamentalist board because of IFB friends I’ve made online and want to stay in contract with, but it is very clear from the discussions there how much we differ. The gulf between IFB and “emergent” Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian (even a fundamentally orthodox one) remains wide.

Uh oh, now it seems I may be headed towards liberalism!

I haven’t read it yet, but what I’ve heard about “emergent” author Brian McLaren’s book A Generous Orthodoxy sounds real good to me.

 

[Marie5890]

Depends on who you ask, I suppose. I’ve been called a heretic and a mystic and called both by the same priest in the same forum. (Not this one.)

Agreed.

That was one mixed message you got, though, from the priest.

 

[Izdaari]

Uh oh, now it seems I may be headed towards liberalism!

I haven’t read it yet, but what I’ve heard about “emergent” author Brian McLaren’s book A Generous Orthodoxy sounds real good to me.

I do recommend the book, it’s excellent.

I’ve noticed that Catholics, even conservative ones, tend to like McLaren. Conservative Protestants are more wary of him, and may avoid reading him because of his reputation as a “liberal”.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Agreed.

That was one mixed message you got, though, from the priest.

Sometimes people don’t expect what they “believe” to become what is real, you know? I just got a bit too “real” for a man who was a Canon lawyer. He was a good guy, he posted online all the time to explain and help - like an earlier version of Br. JR. There was no CAF back then, or much of an internet, either. Besides, I was pretty arrogant. Still am.

I forgot the “charity” portion of the program.

To get back to the topic, I think questioning needs to be done with a certain humility that says the questioner has no right to judge, and the responsibility to do the work themselves, as well as the duty to seek answers from Authority. This we avoid heresy, I suppose.

 

[Marie5890]

.

To get back to the topic, I think questioning needs to be done with a certain humility that says the questioner has no right to judge, and the responsibility to do the work themselves, as well as the duty to seek answers from Authority. This we avoid heresy, I suppose.

Yes, I agree. And an openness, too. At least that has been my experience.
The more I observe others and their journeys and how those journeys are expressed, what seems, and I stress “seems” , a different take on God’s dealing with us (and I would say all of creation)

For some, they portray a God who is almost immovable. Hard-liner. “Truth” is a word used frequently, and very hard edges.

My experience has been a God of more the Shepard, the Lamb of God. A very loving, gentle, SOOOOO patient and merciful. I have never experience that hard-edged God others experience. But some do seem to experience Him in that way.

It’s things like that that always have been questioning all sort of dynamics that seem to play themselves out in all of creation.

So the whole “permitted” thing even seems hard-lined, lacking in patience.
I have never felt that God has lost patience with me. Even in all of my questioning. And it’s substancial.