Search the Community

Continuing from another thread (No Religion): What is the difference between a religion, a philosophy, a practice and a church. I think this could be an interesting conversation.

"Death added nothing to the intellectual possession or to the spiritual endowment, but it did add to the experiential status the consciousness of survival."1 A Personal Philosophy of Religion An idea is only a theoretical plan for action, while a positive decision is a validated plan of action. A stereotype is a plan of action accepted without validation. The materials out of which to build a personal philosophy of religion are derived from both the inner and the environmental experience of the individual. The social status, economic conditions, educational opportunities, moral trends, institutional influences, political developments, racial tendencies, and the religious teachings of one’s time and place all become factors in the formulation of a personal philosophy of religion. Even the inherent temperament and intellectual bent markedly determine the pattern of religious philosophy. Vocation, marriage, and kindred all influence the evolution of one’s personal standards of life. A philosophy of religion evolves out of a basic growth of ideas plus experimental living as both are modified by the tendency to imitate associates. The soundness of philosophic conclusions depends on keen, honest, and discriminating thinking in connection with sensitivity to meanings and accuracy of evaluation. Moral cowards never achieve high planes of philosophic thinking; it requires courage to invade new levels of experience and to attempt the exploration of unknown realms of intellectual living. Presently new systems of values come into existence; new formulations of principles and standards are achieved; habits and ideals are reshaped; some idea of a personal God is attained, followed by enlarging concepts of relationship thereto. The great difference between a religious and a nonreligious philosophy of living consists in the nature and level of recognized values and in the object of loyalties. There are four phases in the evolution of religious philosophy: Such an experience may become merely conformative, resigned to submission to tradition and authority. Or it may be satisfied with slight attainments, just enough to stabilize the daily living, and therefore becomes early arrested on such an adventitious level. Such mortals believe in letting well enough alone. A third group progress to the level of logical intellectuality but there stagnate in consequence of cultural slavery. It is indeed pitiful to behold giant intellects held so securely within the cruel grasp of cultural bondage. It is equally pathetic to observe those who trade their cultural bondage for the materialistic fetters of a science, falsely so called. The fourth level of philosophy attains freedom from all conventional and traditional handicaps and dares to think, act, and live honestly, loyally, fearlessly, and truthfully. The acid test for any religious philosophy consists in whether or not it distinguishes between the realities of the material and the spiritual worlds while at the same moment recognizing their unification in intellectual striving and in social serving. A sound religious philosophy does not confound the things of God with the things of Caesar. Neither does it recognize the aesthetic cult of pure wonder as a substitute for religion. Philosophy transforms that primitive religion which was largely a fairy tale of conscience into a living experience in the ascending values of cosmic reality.2 I would be delighted for you to share your personal philosophy of religion/living. Peace,Rev. Bill 1 From Morontia Mota [ HERE ] 2 An excerpt from The Urantia Book. See it in its original context [ HERE ]Important: The Urantia Book is in the public domain, and the original holder of the copyright, The Urantia Foundation, has granted permission to reproduce or copy the standardized English text without permission. TIN: UF-ENG-001-World-2009-0.19.SRT

I became ordained as a minister about a month ago. (I was raised Mormon but when I was 16 (so... 6-ish years ago) had a series of events that happened that made me not interested in following the normal conventions. Since then I've followed my heart to different paths and I'm currently an energy therapist/life coach with an emphasis in spiritual counseling, running my business to help clients in one-on-one situations and writing a book. I have struggled with the concept of religion and after delving into many, I've decided I don't like any that I've seen because I would benefit from something that has a few significant guidelines and almost no strict/specific rules.) I was guided to the ULC site and upon reading the quote on the front - "Do only that which is right" - and I literally felt like this was the best place for me to be right now and went through the ordination process immediately. I kind of forgot about it until I was adding the event to my Facebook timeline the other day and I've been told that it's a bit inappopriate for me to call myself a minister if I am not a Christian. Now, I know I'm treading the line of sounding like I am letting them convince me that doing what I feel is right is actually wrong, but they bring up a good point. Since I haven't been a minister for long, I don't feel like I can appropriately identify what it means to me to be a minister - all it means to me right now is being able to say I'm registered to perform spiritual rites including marriage with an actual church behind me. What does it mean to be a minister? What does it mean to YOU to be a minister? How have you dealt with people who express distaste because they don't think it's appropriate or fair that you have gone on this path?