Half-Heartedness in Religion?

[Frigga]

What are your thoughts on being a half-hearted practitioner of your faith? Is it a good thing or a bad thing? Would you think that just believing in your faith without the follow through is alright because you at least believe in something? Or is it something that is to be looked down upon? Would it be better to be half-hearted, or hot or cold in regards to your faith? What are your thoughts on the beliefs of others of your particular faith? This is open ended, any religion is able to chime in on this question.

[Siegfried]

I suppose half-hearted in the sense that you accept that you might be wrong is OK. But when you proclaim to belong to a particular faith, I believe you should either be for or against: there is no between.

[Sally]

If I recall, Christ had harsh words for the lukewarm. ;)

This is a First Commandment issue, I think. One has a responsibility to protect and nourish their faith, and to reject everything opposed to it. One can sin against faith in a variety of ways. But it's necessary to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary doubt, for instance. Then there is the issue of neglecting revealed truth or the willfully refusing to assent to it (incredulity), which takes the form of apostasy, heresy or schism.

While I am a proponent of religious freedom and that freedom of conscience should be legally recognized, I nevertheless believe that the one true religion continues to exist in the Catholic and Apostolic Church (Declaration Dignitatis humanae I, Second Vatican Council).

[Quorra]

I think being anything more that half-hearted when it comes to religion turns you batty.

It's simply unhealthy to focus too much on something so abstract.

Doing unto others.. etc is the important part. But faith is believing in something which may not exist. It's best to be light hearted and not think much about it otherwise you turn into one of those people.

[Absinthe]

To be honest, I think that countries that have become secular have flourished and prospered whereas theocratic nations remain underdeveloped and backward. In that sense, thank goodness for half-heartedness. :p

I am all for religious freedom as well, but I think that too much preoccupation with religion tends to bring down a nation.

[Sally]

To be honest, I think that countries that have become secular have flourished and prospered whereas theocratic nations remain underdeveloped and backward. In that sense, thank goodness for half-heartedness. :p



I certainly think Christian attempts at theocratic government have been disastrous, and Calvin's Geneva and the Puritan movement in North America and England come to mind.