5 pages essay about what I learned about philosophy
garki.
religion_examples_1.docx
Surname13
Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
Religion Examples
Example one
The Importance of Having a Sacred Space for Daily Prayer; http://apostleshipofprayer.org/prayingfromtheheart/2016/8/23/the-importance-of-having-a-sacred-space-for-daily-prayer
Continuing our series on developing a daily prayer regimen, an important aspect of personal prayer is location. What I have discovered is that the location of our prayer greatly affects our ability to open our hearts to God. Personally I pray better in some places than others and so it is important to identify key characteristics that can help foster our prayer life in these different locations.
“The Little Oratory”
The place of our prayer is called our “oratory.” The word “oratory” comes from the Latin word “orare,” meaning “to pray” and is most commonly used to reference a small chapel.
The most typical location for a lay-person to pray in is the home. The average American does not live across the street from a church or chapel and does not have the luxury of stopping by the church on a daily basis. This means that personal prayer is most often done in the home.
Unfortunately, praying in the home or “the Little Oratory,” can be challenging. The ability to have a dedicated room for prayer is extremely rare, which means that prayer usually happens in the bedroom or living room.
The primary challenges of praying at home are staying focused and getting into a disposition of prayer. It is not easy to pray when you sit down on the couch and stare at the turned-off TV or look around and see all the children’s toys scattered about the floor.
“The Traveling Oratory”
Besides praying in the home, a great struggle for many of us is praying while on the road. This can be on the subway to work, in a hotel room, or even at a relative’s home during the holidays. We can’t predict what these other places will be like and we can’t expect there to be a “little oratory” wherever we go.
That is why it is beneficial to carry around with us a “traveling oratory” that can help inspire in us an attitude of prayer. This type of oratory can range from a simple crucifix that you carry in your pocket or a set of holy cards that you always have in your prayer book.
“The Public Oratory”
Last, but not least, it is important to take advantage of the various “public oratories” that are around us. This could be different churches or adoration chapels that we can stop-in to pray. While we will do most of our prayer at home, I will be honest and say the best places of prayer for me are in churches and chapels.
The obvious benefit of “public oratories” is the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. That is not something we can duplicate at home. Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration chapels are strewn throughout the country and are amazing havens of prayer.
To summarize, we are all human and the location of our prayer does affect how we relate to God. To help facilitate prayer, we should be deliberate and design locations of prayer in our home, take with us “traveling oratories” and frequent public places of prayer whenever we can.
I hope these simple tips will help remove some initial obstacles to conversing with our Lord and listening to the words He wishes to communicate to you.
Evidence
1) The little oratory, which includes items such as the home altar and religious artwork
2) The traveling oratory
3) The public oratory
The argument above, about the importance of having a sacred space for daily prayer, is valid. This is because the location where people offer their prayers greatly affects their ability to open their hearts to God.
The article above about the importance of having a sacred space for daily prayer contains a sound argument. This is because the article contains real incidents that can be proven by many people.
Example Two
Faith, Fairness, and Religious Freedom; https://www.lds.org/ensign/2016/09/faith-fairness-and-religious-freedom?lang=eng
Freedom for All
What are we talking about when we refer to religious freedom? I am going to tell you the stories of two people. As I do so, I would like you to think about how you would feel if you were one of these individuals.
The first story is about someone I will call Ethan. He had recently started his job in a career he had longed for, and he wanted to make a good impression. He came early to work and stayed late. He picked up extra projects and did excellent work. He was well liked by many of his colleagues and was enjoying his job. One day at lunch with a couple of co-workers, he felt comfortable telling them he was gay. An awkward silence followed because no one knew how to respond. Ethan was disappointed by his colleagues’ cold response, and he felt hurt and rejected.
After that lunch meeting, things became increasingly awkward for Ethan at work. He began to feel vulnerable and less valued. He found himself excluded from large projects and social activities after work, and his productivity began to suffer because he felt he did not belong and was not wanted. After a few months he was let go because his boss felt he was not keeping up. Despite all the claims to the contrary, Ethan knew he had been fired for being gay.
Now I want to tell you about Samantha. Samantha had just started work in the administrative offices of a local university. She was excited to work in a stimulating environment full of diverse thoughts, ideas, and backgrounds. One day at work a co-worker approached Samantha, said she had heard that Samantha was a Mormon, and asked if that was true. Samantha cheerfully responded that it was, but the question that followed surprised her.
“So why do you hate gays?” her co-worker asked. Samantha was surprised by the question but tried to explain her belief in God and God’s plan for His children, which she said includes guidelines on moral and sexual behavior. Her co-worker countered by telling her that the rest of society had progressed beyond those beliefs. “And besides,” she said, “history is full of people using religious teachings to wage wars and marginalize vulnerable groups.”
Samantha restated her convictions and her understanding of God’s love for all people and then asked her co-worker to respect her right to believe. The co-worker felt compelled to tell other employees about their conversation, and over the next few weeks, Samantha felt increasingly isolated as more and more co-workers confronted her with questions and attacks.
Samantha’s boss, seeing the increase in religious conversations in the workplace, cautioned Samantha that proselytizing in their work environment would put her job in jeopardy. Her work, like Ethan’s, began to suffer. Rather than risk being fired, Samantha started to look for another job.
Fairness for All
two people sitting at table
Our society has become so blinded by its quest to redress wrongful discrimination against one class of people that it is now in danger of creating another victimized class: people of faith, like you and me.
Already some religious schools are being questioned because they require students and faculty to adhere to an honor code that requires fidelity and chastity. CEOs of large companies have been marginalized or forced to resign because their personal religious views are no longer politically acceptable. And some businesses have been forced to close because their owners have spoken their conscience.
Despite what you may have heard or read over the years, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has stood consistently for freedom of choice and conscience. Many years ago the Prophet Joseph Smith (1805–44) wrote, “We believe … that all men are created equal, and that all have the privilege of thinking for themselves upon all matters relative to conscience.”1
He later went on to say: “If … I have been willing to die for a ‘Mormon,’ … I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of … any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves.”2
So what is the position of the Church on religious freedom? I can assure you that apostles and prophets, under the inspiration of heaven, have given significant consideration to this issue. We believe in following the commandments of God, which are designed to secure our eternal happiness. However, “God will force no man to heav’n.”3 We believe in creating a space for everyone to live their conscience without infringing on the rights and safety of others. When the rights of one group collide with the rights of another, we must follow the principle of being as fair and sensitive to as many people as possible. The Church believes in and teaches “fairness for all.”
Protecting conscience is about safeguarding the way someone thinks and feels and safeguarding that person’s right to act on those beliefs. I am talking about someone telling you that the thoughts, feelings, and beliefs you have are not allowed, valued, or acceptable because your views are not popular. A war in heaven was fought for agency, and it is a gross violation of that agency to force you to betray your conscience because your views do not align with the crowd.
Please do not misunderstand. When I speak of being authentic, I do not mean the Lord gives us a free pass to live any way we choose without consequences. We are still accountable to Him for our choices. He has said, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). The commandment to seek perfection implies that we start where we are and seek the Lord’s help to lift us to where He wants us to go. Being true to our authentic self requires continual effort to increase our light, knowledge, and understanding.
Be Actively Involved
several people at a table
This brings me to my final point, and that is the need for active involvement from your generation on this issue. I stand with the leaders of our Lord’s Church when I say that we need your generation’s natural understanding of compassion, respect, and fairness. We need your optimism and your determination to work through these complex social issues.
We have faith that you will turn to the Savior to understand how to live a Christlike life while also showing fairness and love to others who do not share your beliefs. We know that you want to be a part of something meaningful, and we know that you are resilient and collaborative.
Most important, we need you to engage in dialogue regarding the complexities of this issue and find solutions for how to best extend fairness to everyone, including people of faith. These conversations need to be occurring in our schools, in our homes, and in our relationships with friends and co-workers.
When you have these conversations, please remember these principles: see others through a lens of fairness, treat them with respect and kindness, and expect the same treatment in return.
Finally, I want to leave you with my testimony and my witness that as you follow the invitation to reach out to others in a spirit of fairness, you will feel an increase in the Saviour’s love for you and all of Heavenly Father’s children. Your example of respect and fairness will open doors and create meaningful friendships that you will cherish throughout your life.
I witness to you that our Heavenly Father lives, that He knows you, and that He loves you personally. He stands ready to help you. He has revealed His plan to us not only so that we can return and live with Him forever but also so that we can be blessed and happy in this life. As you follow His teachings and as you reach out in love and consideration to others, you will feel even more His power and love.
The Importance of Religious Freedom
We must understand that the faithful use of our agency depends upon our having religious freedom. We already know that Satan does not want this freedom to be ours. He attempted to destroy moral agency in heaven, and now on earth he is fiercely undermining, opposing, and spreading confusion about religious freedom—what it is and why it is essential to our spiritual life and our very salvation.
Support and Promote Fairness by:
1. Viewing others through a lens of fairness.
2. Letting fairness guide your treatment of others.
3. Standing up for fairness if you see another’s rights being impeded.
Evidence
1) The article emphasis on freedom for all people an action which will enhance development.
2) Fairness for all will enhance equality at all levels in the society.
3) All people should be actively involved in all issues concerning the religion for its betterment.
The argument above, about faith, fairness and religious freedom is valid. This is because faith and fairness are important for the religion to develop in any given society. Also, religious freedom is crucial to enhance the growth of religious activities.
The article above, about faith, fairness and religious freedom contain a sound argument. This is because the article contents can be proven in by the use of [people daily activities. In addition, the article highlights major issues that affect the whole society.
Example Three
Holy Communion and the Importance of Marriage; http://www.hprweb.com/2016/08/holy-communion-and-the-importance-of-marriage/
Step one
In order to get clear on what is really at stake, some careful analysis is required. No one denies that someone who gets married, and then enters into another sexual union while his (or her) spouse is still alive, has violated his (or her) marriage vows: the vows clearly hold until death, and the vows clearly require sexual fidelity. Indeed, the Catechism of the Catholic Church describes those who have thus entered into second unions as living in “permanent and public adultery” (CCC 2384).
Another thing no one denies is that someone in a state of mortal sin should not be receiving communion. Canon 916 says (with certain qualifications irrelevant here) that someone who believes himself to have committed a mortal sin, but not yet been absolved of it, should not present himself for communion. Canon 915 goes even farther, saying that in certain circumstances, someone in such a situation should be denied communion by the minister.
Not in dispute, then, is the following pair of propositions: someone who is currently in a state of mortal sin should not go to communion, and someone who has entered into a second sexual union during the lifetime of his spouse has violated his marriage vows by committing adultery. Interestingly, however, that pair of propositions does not imply anything about the issue being debated, namely, whether unrepentant adulterers may go to communion. Whether they may or not depends on a third question, namely, whether committing adultery is a mortal sin. If someone who commits adultery has thereby committed a mortal sin, it follows that he may not receive communion until he has rectified his situation, thereby ceasing to be an adulterer. If, on the other hand, he may receive communion, this can only be because, in committing adultery, he has in fact not committed a mortal sin.
So the central question is whether committing adultery is a mortal sin. There are three criteria that determine whether a sin is mortal (CCC 1857-1859): the act itself must involve grave matter; the person performing the act must be aware of its wrongness; and finally, the person performing the act must freely consent to it. Let us consider these in reverse order.
To avoid going astray in all this, it is important to add some clarifications. First, the fact that it is sometimes too difficult to get a decree of nullity—a fact that the recent Mitis Judex is meant to address—has nothing to do with this issue. As Cardinal Kasper himself has made clear, we are not talking about cases in which the original couple were never married in the first place, but about situations in which they were truly and legitimately married.
Second, it needs to be pointed out that divorce is not, of itself, a bar to communion. In some cases, one spouse has no realistic choice but to separate from the other, and obtain a civil divorce; doing so might sometimes even be praiseworthy. The spouses in such a case are estranged, but being estranged is not the same thing as committing adultery—it’s a painful situation, but not in itself a sinful one.
Third, no one is saying that someone who has wrongly entered into a second union is forever barred from receiving communion, even if a decree of nullity is not an option, and the new partner is still living. Someone in this situation can repent, receive absolution, and, henceforth, live in accordance with the vow he made to his original spouse—i.e., his real spouse. This may involve completely severing the new relationship, or it may involve maintaining the relationship in a way that involves sexual abstinence. How to work this out in detail is, obviously, a question involving tact, discernment, and no little sacrifice. It would be inhuman and uncharitable not to be sympathetic to someone in this situation. But that doesn’t mean that what marriage requires is unclear. (This is the real meaning of “pastoral sensitivity”—not laxity, but kindness in supporting those for whom it is particularly difficult to meet the rigorous demands of the gospel. We will return to this point below.)
Fourth, it is irrelevant to say that there may be some elements of goodness in the second relationship. As Plato pointed out long ago, even the members of a criminal conspiracy observe a kind of justice among themselves. Talk of a “gradual” approach, then, must confront the following harsh reality: whereas a cohabitating couple can grow in awareness, and ultimately convert their improper sexual relationship into a proper (i.e., marital) one, a couple in a second union cannot convert their relationship into something holy without changing it into a non-sexual one. In this way, an adulterous relationship is more radically flawed than a cohabitating relationship is.
Fifth, it is also irrelevant to point out that, in many cases, the original relationship has wholly broken down. In some cases, of course, this will be true: things will have gone so badly that reconciliation is, at least humanly speaking, impossible. But this sad truth is not relevant. The deepest reason why adultery is wrong is not that it may hurt one’s spouse, but that one has pledged oneself not to commit adultery. One has pledged oneself to a life of faithfulness to one’s spouse, no matter how difficult it may be, and no matter how wrongly that spouse may act. A failed marriage is not a “dead” marriage, but only a marriage that is very, very sick. Dealing with illness is difficult, but that doesn’t justify pulling the plug. Spouses must be as true to their vows as they can, and in extreme cases, they must content themselves with the minimum: not entering into a sexual union with another. This may not seem like much, but, in fact, it is the difference between faithfulness and betrayal.
Finally, it is no objection to say that faithfulness in a failed marriage can be excruciatingly difficult. Christianity is about the cross. To suggest that ordinary Christians just can’t be held to the standards of their proper calling because “heroism is not for the average Christian”2 is clerical condescension of the worst sort
Those of us who have committed ourselves to the married way of life, and taken on its burdens, should not want the option of moving on to another relationship. Marriage is the form of our lives. Our living out of this covenant—for better or for worse, for the whole of life—is the chief means of our sanctification. It’s good that Cardinal Kasper and his friends want to show us pastoral sensitivity. The best way for them to do this is to take us at our word—to take us at our vows. They should hold us to our commitments, and help us live them out. We aren’t second-class Christians, and we should not be treated as if we were.3
Evidence
a. When someone enters into another sexual union while her spouse is still alive violates the marriage vows.
b. Anybody in a state of mortal sin should not receive Holy Communion.
The above argument about the Holy Communion and the importance of marriage is valid. This is because both the conclusion and the evidences are true and brings into limelight a problem that has been observed by many married people.
