Recent comment exchanges on the topic of doubt got me to thinking that we don’t agree on the meaning of the term.
I found this discussion in the Catholic Encyclopedia quite helpful in that it let me see where some of my disagreements are coming from. If you are already tired of the topic of doubt, do not bother to read the link. If – like me – you want to wrestle with the topic of doubt further, the entry is worth your time.
I am a part-time local pastor serving Wesley Chapel United Methodist Church and a participant in the Indiana Conference's Wesleyan ConneXion. I teach business communication at Indiana University in the Kelley School of Business.
I also blog at Luc means light and contribute to The View from Here blog at Next Step Evangelism.
My wife, Lisa, and I have been married 23.5 years. Luc, 8, lives with us. Zach, 22, and JillAnn, 18, are off at college much too soon for my liking.
Contact me at johnmeunier at Gmail.
The doctrine of original sin is surely more humbling to man than the opposite: And I know not what honour we can pay to God, if we think man came out of His hands in the condition wherein he is now.
— John Wesley
‘Methodist’ news The Methoblog
RNS blog
Whew, confusing! I think I’m a fan of “negative, theoretical doubt” but I’m not sure!
I disagree. Doubt can be a positive force. When I was at DYA there were some kids there, mostly evangelicals, who had never heard alternative theologies. It shook their faith deeply to find out that God could be understood in different ways. But those periods of doubt opened them up to God and new beliefs, enabling them to discover Truth.
Especially in adolescence, I think a time of doubt is essential because if you come out the other side, when the grown-up problems come later on, you have already wrestled with the concepts of God and faith.
MD, did you mean to respond to my other thread? I don’t think I wrote anything on this one to disagree with.
But, I do not disagree with you. As I have so poorly written in many comments now, I don’t think doubt is avoidable. I just think it is a transitional place. The key phrase to me is “if you come out on the other side,” which implies that coming out of doubt is the goal.
As Katie Z helpfully said in a comment on my other thread, what I’m reacting is a kind of Christian agnosticism that says perpetual doubt is a good thing. Temporary doubt might be useful or necessary. Perpetual doubt is an invitation to inaction and passivity.
Or, so it seems to me.