Catholic Asks For Answers

[Bradski]

Oxford English Dictionary: a person who does not believe in the existence of God or gods.

Here’s my problem: I believe that God exists, but I don’t believe that gods exist;. Does that make me an atheist? The OED and your definition and that seemingly innocuous word “OR” seem to indicate as much.

Read the following two statements:

A person who does not believe in God or gods is an atheist.

A person who does believe in God or gods is not an atheist.

Does that help?

If the atheist’s answer to the question, "What existed “prior to the big bang”? is “I don’t know” then you have lost the plausibility argument by default.

Darn it. I guess that means you win.

By the way Bradski, you any relation to Brewski?

Cousin on my wife’s side.

 

[Bradski]

But I don’t think any atheist can really say they don’t believe God, god or gods exist without defining the term. My question always was always: what is it exactly you do not “believe in?” Atheists up to this time have always refused to answer. Do you have an answer?

If you’re looking for a snappy answer I’ll say that I don’t believe in the supernatural. That is, there is an infinite number of gods in which I don’t believe who have an infinite number of attributes. I can’t, therefore, list them all.

But if you ask me what is it about your god that I don’t believe, then you have to define him in the first instance so I can decide what it is about the definition that I don’t believe. I can use what definition I was taught as a Christian, but that may not be what you personally believe in.

You will never die. Can you imagine that?

No.

 

[ReachingFaith]

why was it that God made men “better” than women? I don’t, frankly, like that! Why do I have to promise to obey my husband? Why doesn’t he promise to obey me? Why should the woman be less than the man?

 

[Julia_Mae]

If you’re looking for a snappy answer …

No, not at all. I ask the question sincerely and want to hear real beliefs, or, well, you know, lack thereof?

I’ll say that I don’t believe in the supernatural.

That’s perfect, thank you. See, this is what I think most atheists would say honestly if they answered the question.

But let’s look at the supernatural part. You can’t imagine life after death. Yet, there’s rather a large amount of evidence for it. I am not claiming “proof” but evidence.

I’m not much for trying to convert people, but I want to ask another question and ask you to promise something, which I ask pretty much every atheist I meet on a forum:

1. If you were convinced that there was life after death, would that lead you to belief in God?
2. When you pass, you are going to be real surprised and find out you still exist. The promise I want is that at that moment you will call out to Jesus Christ - to God - and ask to be taken Home. If you are right it won’t matter. If I am right, it will make an eternity of difference for you.

Also, does Brewski live up to his name at family gatherings? I imagine the belching can get pretty obnoxious.

 

[Waiting]

why was it that God made men “better” than women? I don’t, frankly, like that! Why do I have to promise to obey my husband? Why doesn’t he promise to obey me? Why should the woman be less than the man?

God didn’t make men better than women, He made them different from women. They complement each other. Obeying doesn’t mean blind obedience. If men cherish their wives, as St. Paul advises, they don’t dictate and the wife meekly accepts. They discuss and respect each other’s views. There always has to be a final judgment. This, God has deemed the husband’s duty, but only after a thorough understanding of his wife’s wishes and agreement between them. St. Paul tells men to love their wives as they love themselves. This doesn’t indicate that one gender is better than another – just different.

 

[PRmerger]

Believing in God is a faith thing, a theological belief.

Well, it starts with a faith thing–that is, an act of the will. But it ends with a Person.

 

[Bradski]

But let’s look at the supernatural part. You can’t imagine life after death. Yet, there’s rather a large amount of evidence for it. I am not claiming “proof” but evidence.

It’s evidence that I don’t find convincing in the slightest. I’m sure that you might be able to point out certain examples that you find reasonable, but you’ll have to trust me on this – I’ve been around forums for a long time and I’ve been given more examples than I could poke a stick at. None of them, and I mean none, have ever come close to me even entertaining the thought.

You might suggest that I am approaching the matter with a closed mind and yes, it’s impossible not to approach it without a preconceived position. But the evidence always falls short by many orders of magnitude.

1. If you were convinced that there was life after death, would that lead you to belief in God?

It would certainly lead me to re-evaluate my position on almost everything, including the existence of the supernatural and hence the possible existence of a deity. Note that I wouldn’t naturally assume (as you imply) that the Christian God was the cause. I would in all probability give up my job and spend the rest of my life looking for more answers. And that would include a serious, and I mean serious investigation of all the major religions.

1. When you pass, you are going to be real surprised and find out you still exist. The promise I want is that at that moment you will call out to Jesus Christ - to God - and ask to be taken Home. If you are right it won’t matter. If I am right, it will make an eternity of difference for you.

Hey, if I find myself at the Pearly Gates, then I’m going to feel pretty stupid. But I think that I’d ask for an honest appraisal of my life. Let’s hope He’s in a good mood that day.

But if I just found myself existing after death, in whatever form, then I’d be doing all I suggested before except in a supernatural setting. Calling out to Jesus might be a mistake if Shiva answers the call.

And of course, I can’t ask for anything from you in reply. I can’t very well say that when you cease to exist you will realise that you were wrong and I was right. It’s a shame we don’t get a few minutes to realise that we’re going forever and somehow get a message back: Make the most of it! This wasn’t a dress rehearsal!

Also, does Brewski live up to his name at family gatherings? I imagine the belching can get pretty obnoxious.

Like you wouldn’t believe. It generally ends up as some sort of competition. My wife kicks his butt every time.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Now, hold on. I know the routine…if you’re not able to answer/don’t want to, please don’t post here. I am dead serious about getting rational, reasonable, LOGICAL proofs to make me believe much more in my faith. Please, please no “opinion” posts. I need real answers, not prayer promises–though pray, if you feel called to! Let me also warn you that I have been put-off by this site in a big way. It makes me doubt more than anything.
So here’s what I basically really believe, for sure and not because I was told to: I believe in God.
Now, here are my questions, one at a time.
When speaking to an atheist (I always take that view point when forming an answer to a religion question), how do I convince him/her that there is a God? This is the big thing the apologetics book I studided forgot to answer. Rather, it sloughed over it with big words that still left me confused. Simple terms, if you can. Just give me some basic ways to prove to anyone that there is a God, who–my resident atheist asked me this just today–came out of nothing, and always was. He said: “Do you believe in evolution?” I said no, that nothing can not produce something. He then said that believing in God makes that statement untrue, as God came from nothing, in a manner of speaking.
Ok, help welcome.

“Aut deus aut homo malus”–“Either God or a bad man”

FORGET the Aquinas “proofs”–He himself didnt care for them, included them in the Summa because they were expected of him, and were probably under what he considered as “straw”

Start and stick with Jesus.

 

[PRmerger]

Well, you are subordinating the woman in the first instance,

Sure.

But where does “subordination” mean inferiority?

You must be aware of how the Catholic Church, among any other Christian religion, proclaims the blessings of children, yes? (In fact, the CC goes so far as to proclaim that bearing children is the PRIMARY reason for the sacrament of marriage.)

And we also proclaim that children are subordinate to their parents.

Do you think this means that we believe they are inferior to us? If so, how do you reconcile this with the CC’s egregious and outrageous declaration that all married couples out to be ordered to having children???

 

[AuditVocemMeam]

Lion of Narnia:

St. Thomas Aquinas’ personal views on those arguments, whatever they were, do not affect the validity of the arguments themselves. I presented a valid argument which is related to Aquinas’ arguments.

The First Vatican Council says: “The same Holy Mother Church holds and teaches that God, the beginning and end of all things, can be known with certitude by the natural light of human reason from created things”.

If we have a way to understand something about God by reason - and we do - then we should use it. God gave us our powers of reason and we ought to put them to use in service of the truth. “For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity” (Romans 1:20).

 

[PRmerger]

Why not start from a position of equality?

I simply am not following why subordinate = inequality or inferiority or lack of dignity or whatever bad thing that is being suggested.

 

[Julia_Mae]

And of course, I can’t ask for anything from you in reply. I can’t very well say that when you cease to exist you will realise that you were wrong and I was right…

The difference is: I know what I know as a fact, not a matter of faith. Can’t prove it to you, of course. You will get a life review. You will be the judge. Trust in god’s mercy, even if god looks like Shiva! (god will actually be that all-encompassing Light.)

 

[PRmerger]

why was it that God made men “better” than women? I don’t, frankly, like that! Why do I have to promise to obey my husband? Why doesn’t he promise to obey me? Why should the woman be less than the man?

Do you have to promise to obey your husband as a Catholic? And that he doesn’t have to obey you?

Can you cite the Church teaching where you must promise this in order to be married?

 

[Bradski]

why was it that God made men “better” than women? I don’t, frankly, like that! Why do I have to promise to obey my husband? Why doesn’t he promise to obey me? Why should the woman be less than the man?

All good questions. Which wouldn’t have been asked even relatively recently when it was accepted that men were to be the breadwinners, a woman’s place was in the kitchen and she was automatically subservient to her husband’s wishes. You only have to look at some of the ‘How to run a Happy Household’ type of books from the 50’s to see how risible those notions are today.

There always has to be a final judgment. This, God has deemed the husband’s duty, but only after a thorough understanding of his wife’s wishes and agreement between them.

Let’s reword that: Even after a thorough understanding of his wife’s wishes and agreement between them there always has to be a final judgment. This, God has deemed the husband’s duty.

So he gets the final say, the final judgement. You are to be submissive. What’s to complain about?

Is my dinner ready yet?

 

[daisybee]

All good questions. Which wouldn’t have been asked even relatively recently when it was accepted that men were to be the breadwinners, a woman’s place was in the kitchen and she was automatically subservient to her husband’s wishes. You only have to look at some of the ‘How to run a Happy Household’ type of books from the 50’s to see how risible those notions are today.

Let’s reword that: Even after a thorough understanding of his wife’s wishes and agreement between them there always has to be a final judgment. This, God has deemed the husband’s duty.

So he gets the final say, the final judgement. You are to be submissive. What’s to complain about?

Is my dinner ready yet?

That passage of Scripture is not to be read as a directive given to wives to wait on their husbands hand and foot–not at all. That part of Scripture is exhorting husbands to make a total sacrifice of their lives to their wives–husbands are to be ready to lay down their lives for their wives, as Christ did for His people–and wives are to respond with equal generosity.

In addition, Scripture scholars point out the emphasis of mutual submission, mutual giving, mutual love (see below). These are aspects of this part of Scripture that are often overlooked as readers quickly take one or two lines as an affront and fail to read the entire passage in context.

From Father Cantalamessa:

In other words, not only must husbands love their wives, but wives must also love their husbands. Not only must wives be subject to their husbands, but also husbands to their wives, in mutual love and mutual submission.

In this case, to be subject means to take into account the wishes, opinion and sensitivity of one’s spouse; to discuss, not to decide on one’s own; to be able to give up one’s own point of view. In short, to remember that both are “spouses,” that is, literally, persons who are under “the same yoke,” freely chosen.

zenit.org/article-16807?l=english

 

[Bradski]

Well, you are subordinating the woman in the first instance

Sure. But where does “subordination” mean inferiority?

OK, you agree that they are being subordinated. Where does it mean inferiority? Let’s look as some definitions:

sub•or•di•nate adj.

1. Belonging to a lower or inferior class or rank; secondary.
2. Subject to the authority or control of another.
   n.
   One that is subordinate.
   sub•or•di•nat•ed, sub•or•di•nat•ing, sub•or•di•nates
3. To put in a lower or inferior rank or class.
4. To make subservient; subdue.

Those are pretty much the common usages of the word that any reasonable person would use. I don’t think that I need comment further on that.

Do you have to promise to obey your husband as a Catholic? And that he doesn’t have to obey you?

How many quotes from the bible would you need?

Ephesians 5:22: “Wives, be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord.

St. Paul: “the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Man is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” (1 Corinthians 11:7-10)

St. Peter: “be submissive to your husbands, so that some, though they do not obey the word, may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, when they see your reverent and chaste behavior.”

How about some quotes from Popes:

Pope Pius XI: False liberty and unnatural equality [in authority] with the husband is to the detriment of the woman herself.

Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Christian marriage: The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man…

So to be a good wife, you have to submit. And being submissive means:

Definition: 1. allowing others to have control over you; 2. willing to submit to the wishes of others.
Synonyms: compliant, acquiescent, docile, meek, obedient, passive, servile
Antonyms: domineering, controlling, oppressive
Tips: Submissive is derived from the Latin submissio, which means “lowering, yielding.” Picture someone yielding control to someone else. Submissive is generally used to describe people who allow others to control their lives.

Usage Examples:

The submissive woman let her overbearing husband control her. (docile, meek, passive)
The submissive servant did exactly what he was told. (obedient, compliant)
Because she had a submissive personality, she always went along with what others wanted to do. (passive, docile, compliant)
I don’t like her submissive manner, and I sometimes wish she would just stand up for herself. (meek, servile, acquiescent)

If women are not to be submissive, then why is there a discussion about it. Just state that it’s not a requirement and that any statements to the contrary are out of date and no longer applicable to the church today.

 

[PRmerger]

OK, you agree that they are being subordinated. Where does it mean inferiority? Let’s look as some definitions:

sub•or•di•nate adj.

1. Belonging to a lower or inferior class or rank; secondary.
2. Subject to the authority or control of another.
   n.
   One that is subordinate.
   sub•or•di•nat•ed, sub•or•di•nat•ing, sub•or•di•nates
3. To put in a lower or inferior rank or class.
4. To make subservient; subdue.

I’m talking about inferior as a person.

Not as an order of duty or position.

 

[PRmerger]

How many quotes from the bible would you need?

I wasn’t asking for quotes from the Bible. I simply was responding to RF’s claim that had to “promise to obey” her husband.

When did she do that? In her Catholic Nuptial Mass?

I don’t recall in my diocese it being a requirement of the Mass.

why was it that God made men “better” than women? I don’t, frankly, like that! Why do I have to promise to obey my husband? Why doesn’t he promise to obey me? Why should the woman be less than the man?

Do you have to promise to obey your husband as a Catholic? And that he doesn’t have to obey you?

Can you cite the Church teaching where you must promise this in order to be married?

Ephesians 5:22: “Wives, be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord.

St. Paul: “the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Man is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” (1 Corinthians 11:7-10)

St. Peter: “be submissive to your husbands, so that some, though they do not obey the word, may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, when they see your reverent and chaste behavior.”

How about some quotes from Popes:

Pope Pius XI: False liberty and unnatural equality [in authority] with the husband is to the detriment of the woman herself.

Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Christian marriage: The man is the ruler of the family, and the head of the woman; but because she is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, let her be subject and obedient to the man…

So to be a good wife, you have to submit.

Amen!

And being submissive means:

Definition: 1. allowing others to have control over you; 2. willing to submit to the wishes of others.

Yeah. So #2 sounds like a wonderful recipe for a great marriage.

 

[Bradski]

I wasn’t asking for quotes from the Bible. I simply was responding to RF’s claim that had to “promise to obey” her husband. When did she do that? In her Catholic Nuptial Mass? I don’t recall in my diocese it being a requirement of the Mass.

So you’re arguing against having to do it.

Amen! Yeah. So #2 sounds like a wonderful recipe for a great marriage.

But you think that it’s a great idea. You seem to be telling ReachingFaith that she doesn’t have to do it, but it is really a neat idea. So why argue against it in ther first instance?

I’ll obviously leave it to her as to whether she agrees with you or not.

 

[PRmerger]

So you’re arguing against having to do it.

Not really.

I’m simply saying that it’s not required, at least in my diocese, that “obey” be part of the wedding vows.

I want to know if she had to say this, and if so, could she provide some sort of documentation to this.

But you think that it’s a great idea.

Sure. Mutual submission is the best recipe for marriage. I can’t think of a better formula for a successful, happy, and holy union.

You seem to be telling ReachingFaith that she doesn’t have to do it, but it is really a neat idea. So why argue against it in ther first instance?

I’m not arguing against it.