beatrice_otter | (Reply)

Thank you for your polite comment and I am sorry that I offended you. I was not clear enough in my phrasing and will edit it. I wasn't referring to moral principles. The question of "does this religion teach people that they should follow a set of morals or ethics" is irrelevant. I'm glad your denomination is good at teaching such moral and ethical practice, and I wish more did so; but that is NOT what I was talking about.

The question is, rather, about religious ritual and practice. Here is a question for you: Imagine a person who was quite open in not believing in God, and in thinking that every bit of Scripture was a nice edifying fable but no more. They did not believe a single piece of theology your church teaches and weren't shy in mentioning it. BUT! They came to worship every Sunday and to every special service, sang in the choir, and participated in every religious rite your church hosted. At home, they said grace at every meal and did devotions as a family. They believed none of the spiritualism or theology, but participated in every ritual and observance. Would you call them a Christian? I don't know of any Christian denomination or group who would. And yet, for most religions, that would be perfectly acceptable. You can be an atheist and a Jew in good standing; you can be an atheist and a Hindu in good standing. In the vast majority of religions across the globe, it is possible to be an atheist and a member of the religion and nobody has any problems with it. This is NOT the case with Christianity; you cannot be both an atheist and a Christian, because in Christianity what you believe matters far more than whether or not you perform the rituals correctly.

The converse question is also important: Imagine someone who fervently and deeply believed in Jesus Christ, who affirmed all the teachings and beliefs of your denomination, but who hadn't been to church in years or participated in any Christian ceremonies or rites either publicly or privately. Would you consider them a Christian? Most Christians would. They'd encourage the person to come back to church or find a church home, but they would absolutely still consider them a Christian despite the person having done absolutely no Christian rites or practices in years. But in many religions, this would not be the case. If you never do any of the rites either with your community or by yourself ... then it doesn't matter what you believe; you're not a part of the religion because you are not practicing it.

(If you have any interest in the technical terms for this, the distinction is "orthodox" vs. "orthoprax", literally "right belief" vs. "right practice" and the practice in question is the performance of ritual.)

This is one of many things that sets Christianity apart from other religions, and it is something that people who have been raised in a culturally-Christian area as part of the dominant culture pretty much always get wrong.