So I’d like to begin by stating I have nothing wrong with religion in a grand sense, anything that makes an individual or group of individuals feel secure in the universe is wonderful and I’m willing to accept that regardless of what I think on the particular belief.
The biggest issues I have with the Catholic Church, is well…11,000 allegations against the priests of these establishments for, well you guessed it! How does this not bother you? And sure I know not all of them are like this, but…that’s a lot, and that number is only what I found in the USA, and I did only use Wikipedia. I am supposed to be “working” so it’s the best I can do for now.
Aside from that, the Catholic Church does not view women very kindly either, nor abortion which I understand can be made into a big debate but we don’t need to do that here.
It’s also my belief that “good deeds” will not get you into “heaven” if and it does exist. We are made in the lords image, and all of us sinners. To think that I could do anything to tip the scales away from sin is ludicrous. Sure I can seem like the best person in the world, but if god does exist he knows my soul, my thoughts, my desires, and he can see the things no one else can. I was raised (not that I follow it) as a Presbyterian who believe that when Jesus died on the cross, he assumed all of man’s sin. If you ask Jesus to save you and truly believe that he is the light and the salvation, that you will be saved.
I like that line of thinking better, if I am going to be judged for my actions after I die, why did god send his only son to die on the cross bearing the weight of the worlds sin? It would have been for nothing if his suffering and punishment wasn’t carrying the weight of the world. I guess I did a pretty bad job of including any real questions, but hopefully it can be a start for some conversation!
Of course it bothers me; this is probably only the tip of the iceberg. WHATEVER YOU DO, DO NOT DONATE AT THIS POINT. That being said:
1. In America it is possible to attend Mass without donating anything.
2. Truth and character aren't logically dependent in a strictly logical sense (albeit this sets up a rather bizarre situation like if many climate scientists and mathematicians were sadistic pedophiles? What the is going on?)
3. Being almost always ignored with my disabilities and an amateur criminologist I tend to be very hyper-cynical. I personally believe in something like asymptotic total depravity (see below).
4. (This one isn't exactly related to Catholicism, but Presbyterianism descended from Calvinism, which teaches a doctrine of total depravity, which claims that EVERYBODY (minus Jesus) is as bad as sadistic pedophiles. So what you mention shouldn't be any more bothersome than being a human judging by Presbyterianism.)
TO BE CONTINUED
By the way, what the heck is going on with the universe and something rather than nothing? Its an exceedingly queer occurrence if you think about it and it predisposes me to be rather curious and to be what modern people like to call "spiritual".
(Why being "spiritual but not religious" is so popular these days is because 1. Human depravity tends to be rather high 2.Religion is an axiomatic so perverts/bullies/charlatans OFTEN like to seek out religious leadership positions in order to avoid any suspicion/criticism) so I'm doing this by myself FEELS a lot better usually.
I so happened to have been born and raised Catholic and have studied it somewhat deeply; consequently, it makes more logical sense to me than any other -ism I have heard of although there are many paradoxes and it is exceedingly hyper-complicated/confusing/hard-to-practice/rarely-practiced. Having a scientific mind (or at least trying to with what hyperPTSD hasn't burned away) this is sort of what I would expect a real religion to have.
TO BE CONTINUED
"Aside from that, the Catholic Church does not view women very kindly either, ..."
Here there are only two possible ways one might hypothetically suggest this
1. The Incarnation
Well, the cross is not exactly a throne of honor so to speak.
2. Formally ordained clergy
Well, I guess I would argue that this is like God’s version of equity so to speak; equity is not prejudiced against one group or another in the event of an essential difference.
"nor abortion"
certainly, but I would say that is a good thing. Would you say otherwise and if so why?
TO BE CONTINUED
"To think that I could do anything to tip the scales away from sin is ludicrous."
True; this is what the Church teaches actually "we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification" (Council of Trent Session 6 Chapter 8)
The only difference here is one of timing, whether my own free-will efforts can catalyze God's grace to arrive sooner rather than later.
I'll be joining the discussion on some points if that's alright.
1. The Incarnation
Well, the cross is not exactly a throne of honor so to speak.
I don't understand what that is supposed to mean, can you please elaborate?
2. Formally ordained clergy
Well, I guess I would argue that this is like God’s version of equity so to speak; equity is not prejudiced against one group or another in the event of an essential difference.
What 'essential' difference do you mean, and how does it impact clergy?
Here there are only two possible ways one might hypothetically suggest this
Arguably more. One way to view this would be to point out how the church has always been a tool of patriarchal power structures, reinforcing strict traditional social and gender roles and thereby heavily restricting everyone, but especially women and non-conforming people, in their activities or even existence.
3. Being almost always ignored with my disabilities and an amateur criminologist I tend to be very hyper-cynical. I personally believe in something like asymptotic total depravity (see below).
I have learned a lot about disabilities in general, and concerning my own experience, in the last years, so I think I can empathize to an extent. Though I can't say I share the same conclusion. But just to be sure, you believe (in simplified terms) that every person is an evil sinner by nature and can only find redemption through belief in one specific deity?
"nor abortion"
certainly, but I would say that is a good thing. Would you say otherwise and if so why?
How is it a good thing that the Catholic church (together with most Christian institutions and groups, to be fair) continues to lobby worldwide for the imposition of their own beliefs and the complete disregard of individual bodily autonomy?
I find the feminist argument amusing. I get the point, but at the same time, the churches have always been grandma clubs. Sure, priest's a man. But most of the community is female. Even half the men who are there are were driven [as in oxen] there by their wives.
@sciller45
The people in charge of the church are men, and the institution as well as the values it imposes are inherently patriarchal and hierarchic. It doesn't really matter whether large parts of the community is female; noone is immune to internalizing and repeating values that ultimately hurt them more than help them. In the end it's always men dictating over certain women's issues, usually men who don't know a lot about those issues to begin with and are guided mostly by dogmatic tradition.
What I was trying to say that was only a masochist would want Jesus' job. This forum is my own search for truth not a popularity contest so it might take a long time even years or decades for me to respond.
"Arguably more. ..."
I would call that logically equivalent to objection 2 though.
TO BE CONTINUED
Well I guess I would say a different Divine Axiom called them into existence. Without commonly agreed upon axioms there is only endless circular reasoning/argument. What is the essential difference amongst the 5 axioms of Euclidean or the 9 axioms of Peano number theory? Men are called into existence by the Axiom of Essence ("It is what it is." and women are called into existence by the Axiom of Benevolence ("To exist is to have goodness."
TO BE CONTINUED
This forum is my own search for truth not a popularity contest so it might take a long time even years or decades for me to respond.
Don't worry, take all the time you need. I'd rather you take years to reflect and reply rather than jump to conclusions
As for me, I also want to clarify, just in case, that I am not here to be hostile or "win" an argument. You wanted challenging questions, and that's what I try to offer. Any issue I have is mostly with the church as an institution, not every single practitioner.
"Arguably more. ..."
I would call that logically equivalent to objection 2 though.
How so? Social norms and values are not exactly the same as fundamental differences. Speaking of, I have no idea what the 'axioms of essence and benevolence' are, you'll have to elaborate further.
Last but not least, where do gender nonconforming and intersex people fit in with your axioms?
"How so? ..."
I guess I meant for all practical purposes (FAPP).
What exactly is an axiom? Its sort of a weird idea to begin with. In mathematics, axioms are the building blocks that you can't go any deeper than. Basically, they are the answer to their own question. Why Axiom A? Axiom A of course. St. Thomas Aquinas said that when you can't ask why any deeper then you have found God (sort of like the bottom bedrock in Terraria expect with asking why?).
So by axiom of essence ( "It is what it is" ) I meant God the Son; without such an axiom no syntax of any kind is possible ("Climate change is real" would mean the same thing as "Trump won the election in 2020" ); indeed, creation itself is not possible (John 1:3).
By axiom of benevolence I meant God the Holy Spirit ( "To exist is to have goodness" ); St. Augustine wrestled with this himself much throughout his life as he details throughout the pages of his Confessions.
The difference between men and women proceeds from this difference in Divine Personhood; every rational creature is called into existence by one of the three persons of the Holy Trinity. Modern society does not currently (almost entirely at least) believe this and so there is thought to be no difference between men and women.
"... and intersex people fit in with your axioms?"
This is a little bit more tricky, but every individual either had at least 1 Y chromosome at the beginning of their life ( usually conception but it can be different for twins ) or they didn't. Its a logical bifurcation of sorts so to speak. So people with intersex bodies (as well as gender nonconforming people) would either be men called into existence by God the Son or women called into existence by God the Holy Spirit.
I'm making progress on understanding the Incarnation better. Since the Crucifixion unlocked TWO main things (transubstantiation and forgiveness of sins) BOTH of which involve continuity jumps (see previous posts about the Axiom of Essence) it is most fitting that the Person of God the Son ought to accomplish it. The persons of the Holy Trinity are ordered (like the integers) and the properties of the Trinity ensure that women and angels can receive grace from the Crucifixion as well.
TO BE CONTINUED
