Intelligence Squared Debate: Is the Catholic Church A Force For Good In The World?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sair
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sair

Guest
Having scanned the recent posts on this forum, it doesn’t appear that anyone has posted about this already, but I think the topic does cut to the heart of the concept of Catholic social justice.

Has anyone seen the BBC news footage of the Intelligence Squared debate on the above proposition - that the Catholic Church is a force for good in the world?

If not, you can find the - edited - footage at www.intelligencesquared.com. There you will also find briefing notes on the issues relevant to both sides of the debate.

A few comments I would like to make on the debate itself before throwing the question out there for discussion (and no doubt opening up a giant can of worms in the process!).

Firstly, if I retained even a tenuous grip on my former faith, I think I would have been bitterly disappointed in the Catholic side of the debate. They didn’t mount a strong case at all, and they said very little of value - certainly nothing that would reassure any wavering Catholic of the efficacy and honour of their church. Their case amounted to little more than a dismissal of the criticisms - without a satisfactory answer - and a flat denial of the possibility that the church could be considered a harmful organisation. It was the emperor’s new clothes all over again.

As for the opposition, whilst I did think that Christopher Hitchens came across as a bit of a bully boy (which is his style, and unfortunately can detract from the validity of much of what he says) I felt particularly moved - almost to tears - by Stephen Fry’s speech. He made the most extraordinarily eloquent and impassioned plea for recognition of the harm done by the church - not only from the abuses to which it has historically turned a blind eye, but from the oppression and discrimination woven into the very fabric of its dogma. And it is important to note that at no stage did he attack faith itself - only the institution of the church.

So, on balance, when you weigh the good that has been done by those within the church against the harm that the church as an institution has either tacitly allowed or actively encouraged, I think the best that can be said is that the Catholic Church is a neutral entity.

So, what do others think? Is the Catholic Church a force for good in our world? And if you think not, what could be done to make it so?
 
You’re kidding, right ?

A force for good in the world ?
Name me one other institution that has a better balance sheet.
 
Bob4BVM said:
You’re kidding, right ?

A force for good in the world ?
Name me one other institution that has a better balance sheet.
Click to expand...
Upon what evidence are you basing the Catholic Church’s ‘balance sheet’? Did you watch the debate or read the briefing notes?

As for other institutions having ‘better’ balance sheets, that’s not actually relevant to the question of whether the Catholic Church is a force for good or not. In any case, I can think of at least some charitable organisations (the Red Cross/Red Crescent and Oxfam spring to mind) that work to alleviate suffering and poverty for the sake of alleviating suffering and poverty, not as a precursor to making people’s minds ripe for religious conversion. It could be said that their lack of an ulterior motive does put them out in front, if this were a race to see whose institution did the most actual good in the world.
 
It must be said that the briefing notes provided on the Intelligence Squared website do provide a much more balanced picture than the debate itself. I would encourage anyone who has seen the debate to read them.
 
My thoughts on anyone that brings up previous abuses of power tend towards positing the same argument on different subjects.

For example: (the inquisition is always a favorite so I’ll use it). The Catholic Church is bad, bad, bad because it had the Inquisition. So the Catholic Church is evil!

Turn it into something else, but sharing the same logic, and you get…

The United States is bad, bad, bad because it had slavery. So the United States is evil!

No one (sane) condemns the current US for the mistakes of its past. We have legacies we have to overcome, but no one goes around saying the US is a force for evil because of what it did. Credible people will say it’s a force for evil (or good) based on what it’s doing.

The same must be said for the Catholic Church. No one who is in the slightest bit credible would judge the Church for its past mistakes. We shouldn’t be judging anyway, but one should always look at the current activities of any body politic to decide whether it’s a force for good or evil.

That being said, the current Church is logically one of the greatest forces of good in the world. And you don’t even have to ignore the Inquisition, the priestly-abuses scandals of a few years ago, the selling of indulgences, etc. etc. We own up to these mistakes. It’s how we grow. Condemning someone or something for past mistakes for all eternity is what the Puritans did. They even went so far as to condemn people for sins they might commit but haven’t yet! Yay! Puritan logic is win! 👍
 
Sair said:
Thanks, Kimmie - guess I was looking in the wrong place! Although I still think the subject is a better fit for social justice than for apologetics :idea:
Click to expand...
Hiyas Sair:)

It prolly does fit here better. 👍 I am reading both threads.

I didn’t get to see the debate 'cause filters and firewalls, but from what I see on that board…I think it would be quite hard to debate in that arena against NINJA show people.

Sometimes, I think, it better to not take part.

It’s good to see you again.🙂
 
Sair said:
I think I would have been bitterly disappointed in the Catholic side of the debate. They didn’t mount a strong case at all, and they said very little of value - certainly nothing that would reassure any wavering Catholic of the efficacy and honour of their church. Their case amounted to little more than a dismissal of the criticisms - without a satisfactory answer - and a flat denial of the possibility that the church could be considered a harmful organisation. It was the emperor’s new clothes all over again.
Click to expand...
The debate hasn’t swayed me away.
I believe; The arguments weren’t new. And should have been anticipated, defended where needed - sincerely apologized where wrong ]. It would seem, The Church was ill prepared for this debate.

Going up against professional actors - debaters who know how to elicit the feelings of their audiences ] was not a wise idea, IMHO.

As always, just my thoughts
 
kimmielittle said:
The debate hasn’t swayed me away.
I believe; The arguments weren’t new. And should have been anticipated, defended where needed - sincerely apologized where wrong ]. It would seem, The Church was ill prepared for this debate.

Going up against professional actors - debaters who know how to elicit the feelings of their audiences ] was not a wise idea, IMHO.

As always, just my thoughts
Click to expand...

Me either. Far from it !
I always wonder about such, what is their real agenda.
So the Church’s side didn’t do so well. So what.
The Church has NOTHING to prove, to anyone.
Neither did Christ.
How do you think He would have done in the debate ? How did He respond to Pilate ?
Did He win or lose his case ?​

“Put all the good works in the world against one Holy Mass;
They will be as a grain of sand beside a mountain”
Saint John Vianney​

 
Bob4BVM said:

Me either. Far from it !
I always wonder about such, what is their real agenda.
So the Church’s side didn’t do so well. So what.
The Church has NOTHING to prove, to anyone.
Neither did Christ.
How do you think He would have done in the debate ? How did He respond to Pilate ?
Did He win or lose his case ?👍👍​

“Put all the good works in the world against one Holy Mass;
They will be as a grain of sand beside a mountain”
Saint John Vianney​

Click to expand...
👍👍
 
Bob4BVM said:

Me either. Far from it !
I always wonder about such, what is their real agenda.
So the Church’s side didn’t do so well. So what.
The Church has NOTHING to prove, to anyone.
Neither did Christ.
How do you think He would have done in the debate ? How did He respond to Pilate ?
Did He win or lose his case ?​

“Put all the good works in the world against one Holy Mass;
They will be as a grain of sand beside a mountain”
Saint John Vianney​

Click to expand...
Why do you suppose the Catholic church has nothing to prove? What about those who have been injured, physically or psychologically, either by those who claimed to following church doctrine, or those who abused the position of authority they held within the church hierarchy?

One of the more compelling points raised against the church in the debate was that if the church claims to hold the keys to ultimate truth, what excuse did its officials have for not knowing better than the general population at any given time in history?
 
Sair said:
Why do you suppose the Catholic church has nothing to prove? What about those who have been injured, physically or psychologically, either by those who claimed to following church doctrine, or those who abused the position of authority they held within the church hierarchy?

One of the more compelling points raised against the church in the debate was that if the church claims to hold the keys to ultimate truth, what excuse did its officials have for not knowing better than the general population at any given time in history?
Click to expand...
Oh , dear.
The Church as an institution is infallable in it’s official teaching (ie, from the Magisterium).
The same Chuch is made up of sinners, 100%, one and all. No Pope, Bishop, Priest, nor any informed Catholic will deny that.
It may have much to apologize for ( which recent popes have done publicly and in great detail.
But it has nothing to prove as far as doctrine is concerned.

As for being a “force for good in the world”, yes I saw the debate. What a bunch of misinformed media morons with who-knows-what agenda.
Have they ever heard of schools, universites, hospitals, charities, … just a beginning of the long list of good things that were first introduced and established in the western world by the Catholic Church.
 
Force for good ?
I suggest you read " How the Catholic Church Built Civilization "
 
Sair said:
…So, what do others think? Is the Catholic Church a force for good in our world? And if you think not, what could be done to make it so?
Click to expand...
Of course the Catholic Church, the Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ Who suffered and died for us on the Cross, is a force for good. In fact, the Church is the summit of source of good in the world.

Through the Church, persons have attained unequaled heights of sanctity. One example will suffice: outside the Church, lepers were shoved away from all society to live and die with little aid and no contact. We recently proclaimed as a saint Fr Damien, who voluntarily went to live with and care for the lepers of Hawaii, knowing full well the likelihood of his catching the disease and also knowing that he would be forbidden to return to society.

And he was not the only one: through the centuries, lepers were cared for by monks who operated leprosariums all over Europe.

The Church is the main force against evil in this world. In the Middle Ages, the theory of government proposed by the Church inspired rulers to rule in a way unequalled before or since. The ruler was to care for the people, to work towards not only his own salvation but their salvation. And thus we have also proclaimed as saints certain rulers: Saint King Louis VIIII of France, {Good} Saint Wenceslaus of Bohemia, Saint King Canute of Denmark, Saint King Stephen of Hungary…

The contrast between these truly Catholic rulers and rulers who believed that they personally owned the entire nation and had the right to do as they pleased with no check whatsoever on their authority, and the more recent “rulers” elected by their people who also believe themselves to be above authority is evident.

I could go on and on, but will just list one more thing: the Catholic Church is *unequalled *in the area of charity. The Church is the largest charitable institution in existence and probably always has been and has spread the idea of charity throughout the world.
 
Sair said:
Upon what evidence are you basing the Catholic Church’s ‘balance sheet’? Did you watch the debate or read the briefing notes?

As for other institutions having ‘better’ balance sheets, that’s not actually relevant to the question of whether the Catholic Church is a force for good or not. In any case, I can think of at least some charitable organisations (the Red Cross/Red Crescent and Oxfam spring to mind) that work to alleviate suffering and poverty for the sake of alleviating suffering and poverty, not as a precursor to making people’s minds ripe for religious conversion. It could be said that their lack of an ulterior motive does put them out in front, if this were a race to see whose institution did the most actual good in the world.
Click to expand...
The Church does not work to alleviate suffering for the sake of conversion; the Church evangelises separately from its physical acts of mercy. However, the Church’s evangelisation is the greatest work of charity as this rescues souls from an eternity of torment to an eternity spent with their Creator in love.
 
I found the debate, it’s posted here:

youtube.com/view_play_list?p=F821DBF3CE3374A3

Please tell me what you think after you have watched it!

BTW, note how the atheist poster of the videos lists the names of the two atheists in the debate, but just names the opposing Catholics as, ‘The Catholics!’
 
Frankly I think the answer to this question depends on what one wants to believe.

EG I’m Irish. The Church is Ireland is currently held in utter contempt by many because of the clerical abuse scandals. Shocking though they were Ireland’s abuse scandal was in no way worse than comparable non catholic countries ( Sweden for example) in the mid century but many Irish “want” to believe the Church uniquely evil since to be frank the scandal has utility for those seeking to break with the church. It, the scandal, is a psychological enabler in removing themselves from the faith.

There is no answer to this question. No objective answer. There are only subjective answers.
 
Sair said:
Having scanned the recent posts on this forum, it doesn’t appear that anyone has posted about this already, but I think the topic does cut to the heart of the concept of Catholic social justice.

Has anyone seen the BBC news footage of the Intelligence Squared debate on the above proposition - that the Catholic Church is a force for good in the world?

If not, you can find the - edited - footage at www.intelligencesquared.com. There you will also find briefing notes on the issues relevant to both sides of the debate.

A few comments I would like to make on the debate itself before throwing the question out there for discussion (and no doubt opening up a giant can of worms in the process!).

Firstly, if I retained even a tenuous grip on my former faith, I think I would have been bitterly disappointed in the Catholic side of the debate. They didn’t mount a strong case at all, and they said very little of value - certainly nothing that would reassure any wavering Catholic of the efficacy and honour of their church. Their case amounted to little more than a dismissal of the criticisms - without a satisfactory answer - and a flat denial of the possibility that the church could be considered a harmful organisation. It was the emperor’s new clothes all over again.

As for the opposition, whilst I did think that Christopher Hitchens came across as a bit of a bully boy (which is his style, and unfortunately can detract from the validity of much of what he says) I felt particularly moved - almost to tears - by Stephen Fry’s speech. He made the most extraordinarily eloquent and impassioned plea for recognition of the harm done by the church - not only from the abuses to which it has historically turned a blind eye, but from the oppression and discrimination woven into the very fabric of its dogma. And it is important to note that at no stage did he attack faith itself - only the institution of the church.

So, on balance, when you weigh the good that has been done by those within the church against the harm that the church as an institution has either tacitly allowed or actively encouraged, I think the best that can be said is that the Catholic Church is a neutral entity.

So, what do others think? Is the Catholic Church a force for good in our world? And if you think not, what could be done to make it so?
Click to expand...
C’mon-altruism was practically an unknown concept, especially on so great a scale, until the Church came along. Hours and hours of giving-donating time and money, relief work, schools, the university system, hospitals, orphanages, advances in science, upholding the pursuit of excellence. Giving people the ideal to love ones enemy-coming from a time when* vanquishing* ones enemy was virtually the only acceptable value in sight.
 
Repost link:

I found the debate, it’s posted here:

click here for debate

Please tell me what you think after you have watched it!

BTW, note how the atheist poster of the videos lists the names of the two atheists in the debate, but just names the opposing Catholics as, ‘The Catholics!’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top