The road to atheism: Meeting “the needs and preferences of the times"

[Mornac]

• Tweet

Catholic Europe / Catholic America	Small | Large

[ivanm]

If I remember correctly Voris states that people in Europe go from Catholic directly to atheist where in America they go from Catholic to Protestant to atheist. 

Whichever way they lose their faith it tells me that your vaunted Catholic dogma is not hacking it.  Blaiming Protestants for your demise not only ignorant, it is also a cheap shot. 

There are a lot of Catholics in this town as  well as up and down the river valley, and I drink coffee with one of them and his lady friend.  It is a peculiar arrangment in that she is from a fundamentalist Methodist group and he is Catholic.  If he were a prick like Voris he wouldn't have any friends to drink coffee with. 

We sometimes talk a bit of religion and he handles it very well.  She is also a very open minded lady to be a fundie.  There comes a time when you are simply glad you have a friend or two regardless of their religious beliefs.

Grow up Mornac, your bigotry isn't buying you shit but scorn.  Sugar will attract a lot more converts than salt if you are really interested in drawing folks to Christ.  And you need to realize that the Catholic Church and its dogma is not the end game in Chrisitanity.  No, Christ's forgiveness is th end game so
you don't rot in Hell. I think that one of the disciples had something to say about bigots.


Another thing you conveniently forget is that the Chrisitan philosophy existed for a number of years, perhaps decades, before a bunch of folks met at a place, and that signaled the formal start of Christianity as an organized religion.  I think the meet took place somewhere in ancient Israel, and most of the NT was penned years after that.

So you need to get off the tack that Catholics were the only true Christians.

[Mornac]

If I remember correctly Voris states that people in Europe go from Catholic directly to atheist where in America they go from Catholic to Protestant to atheist.

--That seems like an accurate observation.

Whichever way they lose their faith it tells me that your vaunted Catholic dogma is not hacking it.

--The unchanging dogma has held up well for two millennia. I’d say it’s more the Novus ordo hierarchy that is not hacking it. Dogma is the constant whereas hierarchy is a variable.
 

Blaiming Protestants for your demise not only ignorant, it is also a cheap shot.

--That’s why I’d never do it.

There are a lot of Catholics in this town as  well as up and down the river valley, and I drink coffee with one of them and his lady friend.  It is a peculiar arrangment in that she is from a fundamentalist Methodist group and he is Catholic.  If he were a prick like Voris he wouldn't have any friends to drink coffee with.

--Not sure what you’re getting at here.
 

We sometimes talk a bit of religion and he handles it very well.  She is also a very open minded lady to be a fundie.  There comes a time when you are simply glad you have a friend or two regardless of their religious beliefs.

--I’ve always been glad to have my friends regardless of their religious beliefs.

Grow up Mornac, your bigotry isn't buying you shit but scorn.

--Exactly what bigotry is it that you’re always going on about? I’m not bigoted about anything.
 

Sugar will attract a lot more converts than salt if you are really interested in drawing folks to Christ.

--No, sugar will attract a lot more converts than salt if you are really interested in drawing folks to sugar. Christ has something a little different in mind for us:

“And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved.”

Not very beguiling, I know, but that’s our lot here on earth. Many have not been satisfied with it so they went over to the sugar. I think I’ll stick it out here and be called a bigot like I was told to.
 

And you need to realize that the Catholic Church and its dogma is not the end game in Chrisitanity.  No, Christ's forgiveness is th end game so you don't rot in Hell.

--Yeah, but you first have to merit the forgiveness. That’s why He gave us the Church.
 

I think that one of the disciples had something to say about bigots.

--That might be interesting. Do you think you could find it for me?

Another thing you conveniently forget is that the Chrisitan philosophy existed for a number of years, perhaps decades, before a bunch of folks met at a place, and that signaled the formal start of Christianity as an organized religion.

--The day of Pentecost signaled the formal start of Christianity as an organized religion. That was the day that Christ fulfilled His promise to send the Holy Ghost to watch over His Church:

"But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you."

That was ten days after Christ ascended into heaven. The only Christian philosophy that “existed for a number of years” prior to that day was the philosophy that Christ was imparting to His Apostles.

I think the meet took place somewhere in ancient Israel, and most of the NT was penned years after that.

--Exactly. That’s a big problem for Protestants. They either have to admit that Christ’s Church was founded on the day He sent the Holy Ghost and thrived on the traditions taught to the Apostles, or they have to write off every soul that lived between the time Christ rose from the dead until someone decided that literacy and the written word were going to be the sole path to salvation.

So you need to get off the tack that Catholics were the only true Christians.

--No thanks. I’m staying on that tack. My soul depends on it.

[ivanm]

As to your last statement, does your soul also believe in Christ's power of forgiveness?   I doubt the church can save your ass.

"Yeah, but you first have to merit the forgiveness. That’s why He gave us the Church."

This attitude is what Judaism teaches, and is what the apostles rebelled against.  Forgiveness from Christ is free and not dependent on deeds or offerings.

[Mornac]

As to your last statement, does your soul also believe in Christ's power of forgiveness?

--Yes.

I doubt the church can save your ass.

--Doubt noted.

This attitude is what Judaism teaches, and is what the apostles rebelled against.  Forgiveness from Christ is free and not dependent on deeds or offerings.

--It is dependent on asking for it.

[johnhp]

Why would the church save him?  Mornac has left it.

[ivanm]

--That seems like an accurate observation.
--The unchanging dogma has held up well for two millennia. I’d say it’s more the Novus ordo hierarchy that is not hacking it. Dogma is the constant whereas hierarchy is a variable.
 --That’s why I’d never do it.
--Not sure what you’re getting at here.
 --I’ve always been glad to have my friends regardless of their religious beliefs.
--Exactly what bigotry is it that you’re always going on about? I’m not bigoted about anything.
 --No, sugar will attract a lot more converts than salt if you are really interested in drawing folks to sugar. Christ has something a little different in mind for us:

“And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved.”

Not very beguiling, I know, but that’s our lot here on earth. Many have not been satisfied with it so they went over to the sugar. I think I’ll stick it out here and be called a bigot like I was told to.
 --Yeah, but you first have to merit the forgiveness. That’s why He gave us the Church.
 --That might be interesting. Do you think you could find it for me?
--The day of Pentecost signaled the formal start of Christianity as an organized religion. That was the day that Christ fulfilled His promise to send the Holy Ghost to watch over His Church:

"But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you."

That was ten days after Christ ascended into heaven. The only Christian philosophy that “existed for a number of years” prior to that day was the philosophy that Christ was imparting to His Apostles.
--Exactly. That’s a big problem for Protestants. They either have to admit that Christ’s Church was founded on the day He sent the Holy Ghost and thrived on the traditions taught to the Apostles, or they have to write off every soul that lived between the time Christ rose from the dead until someone decided that literacy and the written word were going to be the sole path to salvation.
--No thanks. I’m staying on that tack. My soul depends on it.

The bit that sugar attracts converts is a take off of the bit  that sugar draws more flied than salt.  I think you surely know that much and are being oblique about my statement.


"--Exactly what bigotry is it that you’re always going on about? I’m not bigoted about anything."

I realize that you are very sincere about your beliefs and that is where the bigotry comes in.  You are unyielding and closed minded about the beliefs of others who want the same thing you want, salvagion.  The word "bigot" can be used to refer to your intensity of belief as well as what you believe.  Let me try to bring in a definition that google found for me.

This is from wikipedia.


"A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own or intolerant of people of different political views, ethnicity, race, class, religion, profession, sexuality or gender."

This is from the online Merriam-Webster dictionary.

 a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance


If the link is needed then the reader can google "bigot". Knock yourself out.

[ivanm]

Prior to meeting you Mornac I had never had an occasion to speak with a Catholic in detail about his or her beliefs.  As I have previously mentined, the ones I associate with on a regular basis do not usually express their religious views, which is ok as I respect their privacy.  I think it would be rude to put a Catholic on the spot while in a crowd by asking him the sort of pointed questions that I ask you.

If it is any comfort to you, let me explain why I am so down on bigoted believers. I was married in a Southern Baptist Church full of bumpkins, and the inlaws kept after me to go down fron for the altar call. The crowd just couldn't accept a Methodist being in their midsts until they humiliated me with their ordeals.
So in time I did that just to shut them up. I had attended that church with my fiance a number of times and saw some people go down front nearly every Sunday morning, like a Judas goat.
 
Back then I wasn't so firmly set against fundamentalist Christians but that experience just lit my fire of ire.  I have also spent some time participating in at least two fundie Christian forums, and it was unbelievable how some of the idiots interpreted the bible.  I am no expert on the bible  but my interpretations are usually in keeping with mainstream thinking.

What I am saying is that people need to use some common sense when determining what they believe.  You may differ, but blind unquestiioning faith can
do as much damage as good at times. My Methodist preachers were good about answering my pointed questions and were not afraid to speak out of the box when the occasion indicated the need to.

You speak of the truth. Well, I associate truth with honesty, and don't like being handed a snow job.

[Mornac]

Prior to meeting you Mornac I had never had an occasion to speak with a Catholic in detail about his or her beliefs.  As I have previously mentined, the ones I associate with on a regular basis do not usually express their religious views, which is ok as I respect their privacy.  I think it would be rude to put a Catholic on the spot while in a crowd by asking him the sort of pointed questions that I ask you.

--I agree that this sort of discussion isn’t the type of thing that you strike up at the bowling alley. It has its place and this happens to be one of those places. That’s why I have absolutely no problem discussing it here to whatever extent anyone wants to get into it.

If it is any comfort to you, let me explain why I am so down on bigoted believers. I was married in a Southern Baptist Church full of bumpkins, and the inlaws kept after me to go down fron for the altar call. The crowd just couldn't accept a Methodist being in their midsts until they humiliated me with their ordeals. So in time I did that just to shut them up. I had attended that church with my fiance a number of times and saw some people go down front nearly every Sunday morning, like a Judas goat.

--Yeah, that sort of behavior sickens me too. I think you made an error by giving in to their badgering without full consent of the soul, but I don’t need to tell you how to feel about your decisions. It appears like you have a handle on it. While we Catholics are encouraged to marry among our own, there is no restriction. Some people are pretty apt at being married to others of substantially different faiths. I know of Catholics who are married to fundamental Protestants, Jews, I even know a guy who is married to a Muslim. For others, it doesn’t work out very well often because of in-laws or other members of the “opposing community”.  In any case it is not tolerable for Catholics to goad anyone into the Faith. Our best means of converting is to know our Faith well and be able to defend it and also setting a good example by how we live it.

Back then I wasn't so firmly set against fundamentalist Christians but that experience just lit my fire of ire.  I have also spent some time participating in at least two fundie Christian forums, and it was unbelievable how some of the idiots interpreted the bible.  I am no expert on the bible  but my interpretations are usually in keeping with mainstream thinking.

--I can’t speak to personal interpretation of the Bible because I think it’s folly on its face. The Bible has only one meaning. Whomever had the idea (and I’m not going to name names here) of tossing it out to the illiterate masses telling them to make of it what they will and use whatever that is as a guide to salvation did more damage than can be made up for over centuries.

What I am saying is that people need to use some common sense when determining what they believe.

--That’s what I’ve always said, only I usually refer to common sense by it psychological name: logic. If everyone used logic, they’d all arrive at the truth and there would be no need for all of these battling cults.

You may differ, but blind unquestiioning faith can do as much damage as good at times.

--I don’t differ at all. On the contrary, I agree wholeheartedly. No one should believe a thing until they have vetted it through the filter of logic and reason.

My Methodist preachers were good about answering my pointed questions and were not afraid to speak out of the box when the occasion indicated the need to.

--I’d be interested in posing a few questions to them to see if everything they taught was logical.

You speak of the truth. Well, I associate truth with honesty, and don't like being handed a snow job.

--I’m with you 100% ivan.

[ivanm]

"I can’t speak to personal interpretation of the Bible because I think it’s folly on its face. The Bible has only one meaning. Whomever had the idea (and I’m not going to name names here) of tossing it out to the illiterate masses telling them to make of it what they will and use whatever that is as a guide to salvation did more damage than can be made up for over centuries."

I can see where a layman might benefit from the guidance and experience of a trained theologian or pastor. However, if one can accept the idea that Christianity promotes free thought and a democratic view of its premises versus the rather strict terms ok Judaism, one can see why folks are encouraged to read the bible, at least Protestants are encouraged to read the bible.

If I did not have a paraphrased bible I would read it even less thatn I do now because in something like a King James version it is hard tro see the forest for the trees. Perhaps the mystery of the older versions is what attracts people too it, sort of a challenge to understand what it means. In the Methodist churches where I have gone a few passages of scripture are read, and then the pastor's sermon usually builds on that or at least incorporates it into his message.  That technique helps lay people to understand what the scripture verses mean.

As to your remarks about the masses and salvation, Christ baptized illiterate lay people, as did John.  So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what is required.

[Mornac]

I can see where a layman might benefit from the guidance and experience of a trained theologian or pastor.

--Me too.

However, if one can accept the idea that Christianity promotes free thought and a democratic view of its premises versus the rather strict terms ok Judaism, one can see why folks are encouraged to read the bible, at least Protestants are encouraged to read the bible.

--That’s true. And therein lies the illogic of “promoting a democratic view of its premises”. Christ brought us Truth which by its very definition is unique and unchangeable. He gave us His Church to protect that Truth and distribute it to the whole world for the salvation of souls. It was a sad day when “reformers” decided that the Truth should be left up to a consensus of the masses or worse yet, individual discretion. The Protestant Rebellion gave its adherents  something they didn’t need: The burden of trying to figure out for themselves how to attain salvation. Since all of their sects differ from one another on matters of what each of them deem to be “Truth”, they have to nervously navigate life hoping that they hitched their wagon to the right rebel.

If I did not have a paraphrased bible I would read it even less thatn I do now because in something like a King James version it is hard tro see the forest for the trees.

--Now perhaps you understand what I mean in the above paragraph.

Perhaps the mystery of the older versions is what attracts people too it, sort of a challenge to understand what it means.

--I can only speculate as to the level of confusion faced by sola scripturists when it comes to making decisions about what publication to trust holds their salvation. This is a problem that is unknown to Catholics. We’ve known what our texts meant from the very day we took ink to parchment and wrote them down.

In the Methodist churches where I have gone a few passages of scripture are read, and then the pastor's sermon usually builds on that or at least incorporates it into his message.  That technique helps lay people to understand what the scripture verses mean.

--No, it helps the lay people to understand what the pastor thinks the scripture verses mean. The sola scriptures pastor on the next street may have an entirely different idea about it. Pity the poor Protestant congregant who has to decide which one is right and which will lead them on a path to Hell.

As to your remarks about the masses and salvation, Christ baptized illiterate lay people, as did John.

--Contrary to what your redacted Protestant Bible may say, Christ never baptized anyone. Given the time and place, I assume that the majority of those whom John baptized were illiterate.

So it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what is required.

--No it doesn’t. It takes only the desire to be baptized, unlike in the Protestant world where it also takes the ability to read. It’s too bad that there weren’t any Protestants in John’s day to tell him he was wasting his time.