R
R_McGeddon
Guest
You’re not wrong on that particular event, but what religion were the Spanish Conquistadors following and forcing on the native people of the Americas in the middle ages, while also stealing their gold?
- Status
R
reason
Guest
People, religious of whatever persuasion, have got to be out of their minds to think they would be better off under a religious theocracy - and this is what you get if you don’t have a secular state that the religions live within. I know where I would be. Dead. The medical advance which saved my life a number of years ago would never have happened. As in anything else, you need some checks and balances to keep any extreme from becoming the rule - and throughout history, we have seen that there’s no extreme like a religious extreme. And we don’t even have to go back in history to see this. We can see it right in our own time.
I think some of the people here aren’t so much Catholics as they are right-wing conservatives using religion to further their own ends.
Luckily, judging by the Catholics I’ve known over many decades, most would not agree with the premise of this thread anyway. The extremists make a lot of noise, but they are comparatively few.
I think some of the people here aren’t so much Catholics as they are right-wing conservatives using religion to further their own ends.
Luckily, judging by the Catholics I’ve known over many decades, most would not agree with the premise of this thread anyway. The extremists make a lot of noise, but they are comparatively few.
F
Franciscan
Guest
There were soldiers-Conquistadors
and there were priests/missionaries.
One represented the crown.
One represented the Church.
One went to conquer their hearts and one went to conquer the land.
If they were “forced” to convert it was for the benefit of the conquistadors’ mission and it was the conquistadors who used the religion for their end.
But as a tribute to both the efforts of the Missionaries and the truth and goodness of the Faith the indigenous population CHOSE to remain Catholic long after those horrible Europeans left.
F
Franciscan
Guest
What are the Catholic ‘Extremes’ that you fear?
T
twiggymoo
Guest
What is wrong with this?:
“All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen. (Matthew 28:18-20)
L
Larry1700
Guest
If you don’t mind me asking, what medical advance are you referring to, and how did would religion have prevented it?
As for being dead due to religion, since Roe v. Wade in 1973, 47 million have died in the United States alone because of the absence of religion.
BTW, I’m still awaiting your answers in the other thread.
D
dessert
Guest
I think we could say the wolves are in the fold with the sheep.
When I was into other faiths I considered the secular world to be like football on sunday.
Or listening to someone other than Amy Grant.
I was going between the secular and the other back and forth eventually giving equal time to both as that seemed fair?
I felt I had to be fair. I did not feel fair if I tried to push my religion on anyone. And my life was just dancing around and they say it is bad to go to a dance and go home with a different partner that you danced with?
Coming back to the Catholic Church I have found a unified belief and it is the same universally as compared to the other faiths were always changing and it was more of a socialization than worship of Jesus as Lord. So I thought I had Jesus as Lord but I didn’t. I think in a way I had made an idol of myself, one and only, the Lord was really me having my own individual identity without the church. That tends to happen when you have lost the shepherd as Jesus is the gate and we do need a shepherd becuase you see when you have churches that are just in and out here and there now and not it is like having parents that change partners all the time . I tended to feel like a lost child or abandened, I know I didn’t spell that right I haven’t used that word in a long time. But my faith in the RCC did not drop me I did it and what does our society tell us about that. Look what are usually the most pop movies and shows the ones that show the reruns and the oldays. We are nostalgic somewhat so let’s get back to the furure so to speak. does this make any sense anyways thanks for listening.
Put the LOrd’s Prayer back in your churches. that is my advice . Dessert
S
Syele
Guest
Easy. They removed Christianity from the schools and textbooks and then made it mandatory for all children to go to those schools.
J
junk
Guest
And which religion offered human sacrifices to idols?
I never suggested theocracy. And when 35% of people here deny the existence of God, as opposed to 44% who affirm it, I think I can safely say that Christianity has been overthrown.
Britons’ belief in God vanishing as religion is replaced by apathy
K
KarenNC
Guest
I’m afraid you are misinformed. Compulsory school attendance laws went into place (on a state by state basis) between 1852 and 1918. infoplease.com/ipa/A0112617.html
Are you suggesting that Christian references were removed from the texts used for public education before 1852? If so, I suggest you may want to do a few searches here digital.library.pitt.edu/n/nietz/
It is not a requirement that all children must attend public schools, simply that they must be provided access to an education. Private schools (religious and non-religous) and homeschooling are perfectly legal in the US (homeschooling was not always so, but it is now as long as one meets any minimum requirement set forth by one’s state–varies quite a bit).
law.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/compulsory-education
J
junk
Guest
I think Syele may have a point, however. Secular public education has certainly been the main method of educating young people for a long time now, and it is probably not the most conducive environment for deepening Christian faith, even if there are Christian references. Nowadays, it is virtually devoid of them, especially in any sort of positive context, here, anyway. While it may not be a requirement that all children attend state schools in the US, just over 10% attend private schools, religious and non-religious, and less than 2 percent are homeschooled, of which one half are born-again Christians. Homeschooling requires a stay-at-home parent and private education isn’t cheap, especially if you have several children.
We do have a situation where children, to a significant extent, are being educated by the State. And it is in a largely atheistic/agnostic educational system of a secular state.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
since Christianity is still going strong, I am unable to understand the question in your title.
L
Larry1700
Guest
You have to wonder how many were saying the same thing during the first hundred years after Jesus started the Church.
S
Syele
Guest
I didn’t mean in that order only that both were in place (sorry I was in a hurry). And Homeschooling and many private schools were outlawed for long enough to get the result. The 1980’s saw many children removed from their homes for homeschooling. People found themselves in jail for running private schools not overseen by the state. The combination of compulsory attendance and removal of Christianity from the schools gave control of the education of an entire generation to the government instead of the parents. It’s really not surprising that we got a generation of non-Christians.
I’m aware that homeschooling is now legal… but it is a relatively new development. (I homeschool my own dd BTW)
J
junk
Guest
Well, it’s largely true in the UK, where a minority believe in God, and an even smaller minority would believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ and anything resembling traditional Christian beliefs. Christianity is a minority religion.
J
John_Hiner
Guest
I think the best understanding of “secularism” is based on its original Etruscan meaning, which remained part of the Latin concept of “saeculum.” That is “the ordinary lifetime in the human species, a lifetime.” (See, perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?layout.reflang=la;layout.reflookup=saeculum;doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3D%2342211.)
The gist of “secularism” is reasoning that regards death as the end of meaningful considerations. This limited view perverts many aspects of ethics and morals. By ignoring the consequences of judgment after death, the quality of relationships and meaning are devalued. People, seen as lasting only a few decades, are treated as both disposable and “relatively” unimportant.
The other consequences of savagery and shortsightedness flow from this essentially perverse perspective.
“Secularism” is thinking limited to the “saeculum,” the period from corporal birth to corporal death. As such, it is too limited to be considered either human in scope or sufficient for human society.
Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.
John Hiner
K
kellie
Guest
awwww you guys always forget down under
J
junk
Guest
John Hiner:
kellie:
I wonder also what sort of role the mass media have played in the last fifty years or so. I discussed this recently with a friend, who believes that the media have played a large role in promoting relativism and socially liberal ideas. I’m inclined to agree, because those are the ideas I myself once held, to an extent against my conscience, and even if I hadn’t acquired them from the media directly, I would have acquired them from friends, family, teachers who were influenced by that sort of thinking. One belief that figured highly in my thinking was one of unlimited freedom as the highest value, and that is how I could justify my support of abortion, despite the fact that my conscience objected. What say you?
Thanks for that. It’s a good way of looking at it.
Forgive my eurocentrism. How are things there in Osstrallya?awwww you guys always forget down under
I wonder also what sort of role the mass media have played in the last fifty years or so. I discussed this recently with a friend, who believes that the media have played a large role in promoting relativism and socially liberal ideas. I’m inclined to agree, because those are the ideas I myself once held, to an extent against my conscience, and even if I hadn’t acquired them from the media directly, I would have acquired them from friends, family, teachers who were influenced by that sort of thinking. One belief that figured highly in my thinking was one of unlimited freedom as the highest value, and that is how I could justify my support of abortion, despite the fact that my conscience objected. What say you?
K
KarenNC
Guest
I fully agree it is not the most conducive environment for any religious education, but then that is also not its purpose. Why would you or I or anyone else want to trust the State in teaching religion to our children? That is the reason I belong to a religious organization and do so at home, so that I can pass on my religion to my child. Even if the public schools were set up to teach Christianity, it most likely wouldn’t be Roman Catholic Christianity.
You are correct that neither private school nor homeschooling is a viable option for many. It is for precisely that reason that the public schools exist, so that all children have an opportunity to receive an education, not just those of the right religion, the right socioeconomic class, etc. This is not the case in many areas of the world and we should be grateful that it exists, even with all its problems.
K
KarenNC
Guest
Given this, in a country with a state religion (Anglican Christianity) and state-supported churches, why in the world does anyone think intertwining Christianity and politics (more than it already is in practice) in the US would be a good thing for Christianity, or especially for Catholicism? The US has twice the number of non-Catholic Christians as Catholic Christians according to adherents.com/rel_USA.html.
- Status