I cannot speak for all doubters, but my main problem with churches changing doctrine is that they originally sold themselves as having all the answers and, in the catholic faith, being infallible (or inflatable!). So when someone says “stop thinking, I know everything” and then they change their mind (which is a good thing!) then I have to doubt what they originally claimed.

The thing that always puzzled me though is that you seem like a nice person, you have a group of people you like and who like you, yet you all gather round an institution that you disagree with on some fundamental issues.

The need for something bigger than yourself I understand, but why not make that your country or humanity? Why the need for something beyond, something you cannot change and which cannot* change you? You have an opportunity to change your country, to delve into humanity and discover a set of ethics for the betterment of everyone, not just the chosen or the saved. Surely that is a much better use of your time than listening to some (male) pastor tell you that contraception is wrong (a pope decided that) or that homosexuality is wrong but eating shellfish is okay (the Bible forbids both).

The idea that you get your beliefs from a book is fine, many great thinkers have written books, but be able to defend the ideas you personally hold. Have knowledge, empathy and reason at hand to say why women are equal to men, or not; explain your position on abortion without resorting to one man’s interpretation of an ancient man’s writing; explain and convince others of your views without resorting to authority, without saying “the creator of the universe decided this, who are we to argue?” This will further the human condition and make you a better person, and you can still believe in life after death, reuniting with your dead loved ones etc. if you so choose.

*I know some people claim god changed them, but not in any objective sense, it could just as easily been democracy or communism that caused the same change if they beoeved in it enough.

From what I can see, you’re not really acquainted with the ways in which mainline churches make decisions and doctrine changes. Maybe these systems are peculiar to the US, but when the ELCA decided to endorse gay marriage and clergy in same sex partnerships, it was an intense but democratic process similar to a town hall in which people voted, got to introduce resolutions, and got to speak their opinions. The assembly meeting reminded me of the ways in which the Democratic Party chooses candidates, what the party platform is, etc. The United Methodist Church and Presbyterian Church USA also have similar processes. Furthermore, the church I attend does a lot of interfaith work; we acknowledge that there is more than one path to God, and have more than one type of worship service. If someone attends a nondenominational church, I think they can find the lack of set doctrine or dogma liberating, but I don’t know how church accountability works in those situations.

Some people do lose their faith in the church when it changes dogma, and they leave and find somewhere else to worship, or stay and understand the changes. It’s a matter of humility and understanding that we aren’t perfect, that ultimately we have to recognize that enlarging the space for others isn’t our task: the space is already enlarged through the love of Christ, for all people through grace, we just have to recognize it.

The church has always been reforming and reshaping itself, even the Catholic church, throughout history. Even if it is about God, it’s a human institution, and therefore has human flaws. I can see that, many Christians can see that, the people who seem to see that the least tend to be the people on either end of the atheist/fundamentalist spectrum, and it puzzles me.

You cannot compare government with church. No-one has ever said that a politician was the perfect, and only, person able to run the country/city/town and they cannot be wrong. Politics is about opinion and compromise. Church is patently not about opinion (other than theirs) or compromise (it’s their way or the highway).

I like your governmental system, I like the Constitution but I hate the way politicians are so affected by lobbyists and pressure groups rather than representing the people (their job!). So I agree that it needs reform, even the politicians know it needs reform. However the government doesn’t put itself forward as the perfect way to run a country, the founders insisted that each peoples had to find their own way but that they’d offer any assistance if requested.

Churches, by comparison, assert that their way is correct. Even the most liberal Christian churches will only go so far as to point you towards another Christian church “as long as you accept Jesus as your saviour” that’s alright. How can people not lose faith in their church when it reforms on matters of dogma? When your church changes its opinion on gay people, female clergy or divorce, how can you not wonder what other issues it is wrong on?

I understand you wish to keep your community, that’s important, but the church isn’t. If you can find your own path to Jesus (I’d rather you didn’t) or morality and happiness (that’d be great) without your paternalistic, authoritarian church then perhaps you could encourage other people who have some doubts about church dogma and start your own meetings. Perhaps a community getting together to discuss their feelings and faith without someone to tell them what’s the right way or the wrong way to worship would make for a better community that could also encompass different faiths and people of no faith at all.

We will see how much of a scope I get. My churches are a lot more liberal than most, luckily, so my work will be more welcome there.

I’m sorry you see this as an impossible task, but I really don’t understand why abandoning a community I love when it is starting to make these changes in earnest is going to make a better difference. Christian churches have a habit of splitting over every minute change of detail, and for once, I’d like to not choose that route.

I appreciate you have found yourself a niche, but if that is your faith, your salvation then do you not think you could do more if you were allowed more scope, more than a niche?

My problem with your view is that you hold your Church to be the correct Church and yet proclaim it to be wrong and so you want to change it. Either it’s right or it’s wrong…

You can take all your spiritual tachings from Christ, read the Bible, believe in God, all that, without going to a Church.

As far as I can see churches are mostly social places and that’s why people go there to worship together. But the church, whatever brand you choose, has someone interpreting the owrd of God for you, giving you their insights, not in a friendly way but in an authoritarian way. If you believe in the Bible and Christ’s teachings then gain your own interpretation, don’t be spoon fed by a person or oganisation that is, however benevolently, pushing their own agenda.

Full disclosure, I’m an atheist, for entirely different reasons than the [perfectly good] reasons of feminism.