Really good post on religion (huffington post comment).

[Rageaholic]

My google fu brought me to this article on new age religion. I don't remember much about the article, but one of the commentors said something that I really agree with.

Many traditional religious adherents love to knock the New Agers for being too focused on "feeling good".

But "Feeling good" as in: at peace with oneself and the world, feeling purposeful, joyful, able to love and receive love, having hope about the future, freedom from pointless fears and thus empowered to be a productive and positive force in the world is the WHOLE POINT isn't it?

If one's beliefs (whatever they might be) are not helping a person do that, then it does not matter how much the belief system claims to be the ONLY true way. A person who is still feeling unsatisfied, fearful, powerless, depressed within it will eventually seek elsewhere. That is why people switch beliefs until they find one that gives them all the above.

And since we are dealing with "faith", "unprovables" and "subjective experiences" no matter the belief system, I don't know why we cannot be more tolerant of the fact that what works for someone might fall woefully short for someone else.

Frankly, if you are manifesting all the fruits of the spirit- love, joy, peace, kindness etc. and it is making you a force of good in the world, I don't care HOW you managed to gain access to these higher qualities, just so long as you have them.

This is so true. A lot of the staunch traditionalists hate the idea of "feeling good" because they equate it as some kind pleasure which is a sin. Either that or they buy into that bunk about feelings being unimportant and cold hard facts being key (a very dangerous way to think).

And yeah, a lot of it is unprovable so anyone who says "my way is the only way" is probably full of it. I'm not into any religion myself, but I like this way of thinking.

[TheHuckster]

One big point I want to make, although I pretty much agree with your sentiments:

One must be able to differentiate between selfish hedonism and a more fulfilling pursuit of happiness. The former will achieve short term happiness but will ultimately cause a crisis when that runs out. The latter, while more difficult to find, will grant a far better life in the long term.

Feeling good and achieving peace in one's life should be the goal of any person, regardless of faith, or lack thereof. However, there are many ways to feel good now that could lead to problems later on.

[Sleepwalker]

...why will hedonism cause a crisis, but 'pursuit of happiness' won't? Perhaps you should explain what hedonism is, and what pursuit of happiness is, to you.

[Kheldarson]

...why will hedonism cause a crisis, but 'pursuit of happiness' won't? Perhaps you should explain what hedonism is, and what pursuit of happiness is, to you.

Hedonism is typically associated with a pursuit of physical happiness, with examples lying in an abundance of food, drink, sex, etc. That's gratification, not true happiness. It provides a momentary joy.

Compare to a life which focuses on enjoying what you have or pursuing long term goals.

[s_stabeler]

...why will hedonism cause a crisis, but 'pursuit of happiness' won't? Perhaps you should explain what hedonism is, and what pursuit of happiness is, to you.

basically? hedonism is where you need increasing amounts of something to feel happy. So, for example, an adrenaline junkie might need to do increasingly dangerous things to feel the same thrill. That inevitably causes a crisis because ultimately, you will eventually get to the "too much" stage where you physically cannot derive any more satisfaction from it. ( for example, when a drug addict is taking drugs merely to fend off withdrawal symptoms rather than for the high) pursuit of happiness is trying to find a situation where the mere maintenance of the existing situation would make you happy.

[Sleepwalker]

Ah. So enjoyment of food, sex, etc, is not inherently problematic, just the pursuit of unsustainable MORE MORE MORE.

/deeply suspicious of philosophies that promise happiness by denying the body.

[Kheldarson]

Ah. So enjoyment of food, sex, etc, is not inherently problematic, just the pursuit of unsustainable MORE MORE MORE.

/deeply suspicious of philosophies that promise happiness by denying the body.

Right. But don't knock paths that deny the body, either. Those tend to focus on improving one's mind/spirit (like any type of monk or nun). Even in small doses (like for those of us participating in Lent this season), it can be rejuvenating.

[s_stabeler]

Right. But don't knock paths that deny the body, either. Those tend to focus on improving one's mind/spirit (like any type of monk or nun). Even in small doses (like for those of us participating in Lent this season), it can be rejuvenating.

yes and no. situations like monks and nuns, fine. (albeit I disagree that the vows should be binding for life) But where the religion more or less considers anything fun as a sin? (I'm thinking puritans here, but I have no doubt there are modern religions that do the same thing) that i have a problem with.

[jedimaster91]

But where the religion more or less considers anything fun as a sin? (I'm thinking puritans here, but I have no doubt there are modern religions that do the same thing) that i have a problem with.

That depends. Is your idea of "fun" derogatory, demeaning, or cruel to your fellow humans? If so, it's probably not something you should be doing whether you subscribe to one particular religion or not. If your fun is uplifting and doesn't detract from one's spiritual renewal, most religions are likely going to be ok with it.

[s_stabeler]

I mean religions where if it is fun, then it is a sin. Like the Puritans (from the English Civil War)

[jedimaster91]

Unless you're meaning the feeling of enjoyment is a sin, "fun" is a rather broad term. I happen to enjoy sorting things into categories for stress relief. Most other people find that incredibly dull, tedious, and/or frustrating. Admittedly, I don't remember much of what I learned of the Puritans from way back in the day, but I seem to remember they frowned on dancing maybe?

I don't know of any modern religion that classifies the feeling of enjoyment as a sin. It's more what action one is participating in that gives that feeling.

[Hyena Dandy]

I mean religions where if it is fun, then it is a sin. Like the Puritans (from the English Civil War)

That still requires you to define what's "Fun" to say it considers a fun thing a sin.

[Rageaholic]

Responding late (but better late than never?). I don't think the author of the post is advocating for hedonism. I think they are advocating for the pursuit of happiness. The problem is that the traditionalists talked about in the post take it so far that the mere pursuit of happiness is considered at odds with what their church teaches.

-They attack modern psychology (particularly the idea of self esteem) because they see it as "self focused" and not "God focused".
-They make people feel like crap for doing things that hurt no one. Masturbation? SIN. Sexual Fantasies? SIN. Doing anything fun when you could be doing "Godly" things? SIN SIN SIN.
-The constant reminder of Christ's suffering and how we can never live up (this was talked about even at my liberal church). Some even go as far as to straight up tell you that you deserve to burn in hell for your sins.

I don't see how anyone can find inner peace when bombarded with the above. Unfortunately, the ones who preach that toxic guilt ridden theology are the ones who think their way is the only way.

[s_stabeler]

Responding late (but better late than never?). I don't think the author of the post is advocating for hedonism. I think they are advocating for the pursuit of happiness. The problem is that the traditionalists talked about in the post take it so far that the mere pursuit of happiness is considered at odds with what their church teaches.

if you mean my post, then that's exactly right. When a religion basically says you must suffer on earth constantly? I don't see how it can be of any benefit.

[Panacea]

yes and no. situations like monks and nuns, fine. (albeit I disagree that the vows should be binding for life) But where the religion more or less considers anything fun as a sin? (I'm thinking puritans here, but I have no doubt there are modern religions that do the same thing) that i have a problem with.

Monks and nuns, at least in the Catholic faith, make this choice freely. And they can actually rennounce them and leave. Even those who do stick with it, many are not cloistered any more but work actively in their communities.

One really good friend of mine was Brother Jeff. He was my preceptor when I started working for hospice, and we had a lot of discussions on theology that (much later) helped me decide to finally finish a process of conversion to the Catholic Church I'd started many years before. He was a fun guy and never talked about sin or being miserable.

IIRC, in many Asian countries, becoming a Buddhist monk or nun is a ritual of childhood/young adulthood. Those who stick with it are highly regarded in their communities.

if you mean my post, then that's exactly right. When a religion basically says you must suffer on earth constantly? I don't see how it can be of any benefit.

There is often a lot of differing opinions on this even within a sect. I don't have much use for the "life is misery" crowd. As a Christian, I take joy in the fact Christ died for my sins; not because I think it's cool he suffered on the cross (I don't think that) but because I'm awed by the great love he has for us, and the message of hope and redemption I find in Christianity.

A book I would recommend is "Between Heaven and Mirth" by Father James Martin. He gives a lot of great examples of why people of faith should be joyful about their religion/sprituality (he talks mostly about Catholics, but some other faiths as well), not grim. He argues that laughter, fun, joy are a healthy and desirable part of everyone's spiritual life.